guytdt

Just for those who care, here is the pic of stock HID vs Osram CBI. The result is amazing, but no surprise as it is very expected around the net.

YeuEmMaiMai

lol how about op take the pix at the same time of night and post of the results. talk about some BS here...

Sculldog3

Classic! Like weight loss before and after!

ARascal

Or the before and after "get rid of wrinkles" commercials... He must think he's dealing with a bunch of gullible kids here?


guytdt..... Go to Your Room!

Comfy

I'm sure OP would have other pictures too. Let those also come out, he may have a point after all.
Also what are the specifications of the bulb?

Sculldog3

So...HIDs are popular, and help sell cars, like decorative LEDs on Audi's, it's a statement. Cost of these is still high per vehicle, and you need a design that lasts and is reliable. Customers aren't happy when the bulbs go on a new car within a year. Auto Companies spend a ton on these - read an article recently on Ford going full HID on the new f150, it's a statement - all 700,000 a year or whatever they sell are getting these. If it was as simple as a $100 set of bulbs from a major light manufacturer, (figure ford would get a volume discount) every car would at least offer them, for maybe $500, making the car companies $$ and the customers happy. But this isn't seemingly the case.

It doesn't seem like aftermarket bulbs are a simple plug and play and you beat the factory at their game for maybe $200 and some of your own labor. From what I've read, bulbs like this tend to burn out sooner, run potentially hotter depending on the wattage you run, and I've read at least that the color can shift/change over time. I'm certainly hoping that the lights on my 40k car are essentially unchanged in ten years, and I'll likely complain to the dealer if they don't. I'm skeptical that this would be true for aftermarket bulbs.

Personally, the RDX HIDs are top shelf. Threads on this site speak to folks getting flashed because other drivers think you are running your high beams. Granted that's maybe a bit obnoxious, but these lights are killer, and my older eyes appreciate them. I rented a C63 in Vegas, probably a 70k car, with adaptive xenon's I believe, and I think the RDXs were better. Was driving up mount charlston at night, pitch dark, middle of nowhere, and I used the high beams a bunch with the c63 since regular lights weren't cutting it. On similar roads with the RDX, didn't have to.

Clearly subjective, but they are really good lights. For anyone in the US on the fence for the tech package...ESP if our ar 40 or older..it's worth it.

samrdx15

Doesn't sound like you know what you are talking about. Some of your points are true with aftermarket, cheap chinese bulb, but not CBI.

CBI is stock OEM used on a few Mercedes Benz cars. People are crazy about this is because it is at 5000K but given same or a bit higher lumen than stock 4300K. That's all.

See here for thread started 4 years ago and still discussed until now:
http://www.hidplanet.com/forums/show...l-Blue-Intense

TRSAndrew

Correct. The CBIs are OEM bulbs from newer Euro vehicles. Literally can be bought at the parts counter.

They perform better than the stock 4300K and are even better build quality for years of reliable service.

guytdt

Such a nice person! If you don't like what you see, you don't have to look. If you need additional info/pic, you can ask. No need to be that rude. I don't see any reason to post any additional pic for such a type of people!

ceb

What is obvious from this is that people are clueless about lighting. The OP and the sponsor selling this crap equate "bright" with "better" and neither of them understand how the brain processes light and how colors affect that process.

While some manufacturers (MB is a prime example) has gone to 5000k bulbs from the more standard 4300k, the aftermarket guys (and the "new experts" like the OP) failed to recognize that those manufacturers also redesigned the headlighting unit to accommodate that different bulb.

Acura is known for developing some of the best HID systems available. Why do people think that they know better that the people who throw millions of dollars at these systems in the design phase. Yes, it might fit. Yes, it might "look" brighter, but no, it isn't better. You are just ruining your night vision and introducing glare for yourself and other drivers.

samrdx15

I'm not an expert as you called OP so I just ask you very basic question, do you think car manufacturers create different projectors just for 4300K and 5000K?
What you said:
"manufacturers also redesigned the headlighting unit to accommodate that different bulb" make me think it that way.

And can you prove CBI will introduce glare when using with stock projector HID? pic? This is the first time I heard about this. Hilarious!

ceb

So let's look at these two pictures. As a comparison they are worthless. They aren't taken under the same lighting conditions, the same area or at the same focal length yet they do provide some insight into the two bulbs - but not as the OP intended.

The purpose of headlights is to allow you to see ahead of you.

The first photo allows that. Even given the amount of daylight available, one can see the reflection of tail and headlights in the distance.

The second photo shows an enormous amount of glare. Looking at the photo draws your eyes to the ground directly in front of the car, illuminating the manhole cover quite nicely.

The brain is drawn to the bright lights - do you want to see that manhole cover directly in front of your car or the deer (or pedestrian) a bit farther down the road?

ceb

I wasn't responding to your post when I started my "two picture" post above but it does answer your post.

Yes, manufacturers do design housings for specific bulb designs and yes, it is quite probable that there is increased glare from using the wrong bulb in a housing. All the pictures in the linked thread to HIDPlanet show increased glare.

Remember that the only goal is to sell this stuff and the easiest way to sell it is to convince the masses that "brighter is better." In this case it isn't.

The people who believe that "brighter is better and to hell with oncoming traffic - I'm the only one important" are doing themselves a dis-service as they are really reducing their own vision - even if it looks so much brighter.

Who on this board has done extensive research in how the brain processes light and how it relates to driving? I have.

samrdx15

Oh, I got it. Brighter is not better, dimmer is better. Go for it. I don't see a point of convincing people to believe "your way". It's his money and it's your money, so spend it your way, why coaching them your way.

rosen39

Here is a link to a comparison of CBI bulbs vs, SVS bulbs. I don't know if they consider SVS bulbs "stock" HID units, but it shows the light difference under the same conditions. It does not appear that you can see any further one bulb over the other, but the "color" of the light is very different.

http://www.hidplanet.com/forums/show...omparison-Pics

Joe Las Vegas

How about stock on the left and CBI on the right, then take one picture to actually see if it makes a difference, in the meantime this thread is waste of time.

ARascal

I agree.... Waist of time.

Sculldog3

Key really is capitalism, and the testing that goes into new cars. Sylvania wants to make money, and sell tons of bulbs. Car makers want to maximize profits, meet customer demand, not deal with angry customers upset with the quality of their new cars. I'll use ford again since the hundreds of thousands of f150s alone that are sold is compelling. Working with osram sylvania, (how about that!). they came up with a new led bulb that will go into every truck - and likely spent millions in the process, probably tens of millions. So...the Osram CBI bulbs at wholesale when you buy 2 million bulbs is probably what..$50 or less? And it's a proven, reliable, superior product per the experts on this site...so why didn't ford go this route. I'm not a lighting engineer, but I' guessing...

Performance.....

Reliability...

What's wrong with this argument, what did I miss?

Sculldog3

Sort of reminds me of rims and spoilers and speakers. People have complained of the small 18s on the RDX, and many have swapped in 19s..and likely considering 20s if they could get them to fit. Bigger must be better right? Not always. Unsprung weight, twitchy handling, ride compliance like a brick with 30 series tires... Car makers know customers like them, but engineering hurdles/trade offs exist and sanity prevails.

For spoilers, aftermarket has convinced some that bigger is better. Actual downforce to the rear wheels, god knows but it's very difficult to achieve on a street car.

Stereo stuff is similar. Another thread had someone say that they didn't need the tech, and they could just upgrade the speakers on their own.. ELS stands for a guy, a sound engineer, and an awfully good one. He had time to experiment,mbuild a factory supported setup that carries his name. It's highly unlikely that there are many folks that can improve on the existing.. although crutchfield does make it look easy. Can they make it louder, have bass that shakes the cars around you ... Yup. Better than stock... Nope.

So.. Brighter, louder, better handling... Capitalism will also sell you whatever you want...

Comfy

Mr Bright eyes .....guytdt, you don't have to take everything personally. You can safely post other pictures and all of your opinions. All that matters is what you think of it. Here everyone has there own opinions, nothing else. Remember this is just an information / opinion sharing forum. There are no bigs and smalls. Go ahead.

Acura_Dude

This thread turned for the worse quick. I did read through all the replies and there's more to headlight design than just bulbs as were previously stated. I'm pretty sure the new CBI bulbs have improved night driving for the OP. It's been stated time and time again that CBI's are equal to or brighter than 4300K bulbs (stock color temp for many HID equipped vehicles) over many different forums. For example, the Philips 85122 bulbs have an estimated 3200 lumens at 4300K where as the CBI's are estimated at 3500 lumens at 5000K. Usually when you go higher in color temperature there's a loss of lumens. This is where Osram's CBI bulbs can really shine. These specs came from theretrofitsource.com. And yes Osram's Cool Blue Intense bulbs are used in a lot of higher end cars. I've witness them head-on in a Benz before.

Checking the manufaturer's website CBI's actually start out at 4800K and will color-shift up to 5500K and makes 3200lm, different than what's quoted at TRS.com. http://www.osram.com/osram_com/produ...Id=ZMP_1021022

A lot of people do misinterpret glare for brightness. More glare isn't equal to more brightness. There are many variables at play here. For instance, maybe OP's lights aren't aimed within spec, as well as different photos taken at different times and different locations.

Anywho, I've seen plenty of comparison shots of Osram's own SVS bulbs vs CBI's. The softer light of the SVS bulbs are generally a welcome to many night time drivers and on the other side of the coin just as many prefer the white-look of the CBI's. From judging the comparison shots on Hidplanet, CBI's and SVS have a more intense hot spot plus light up the sides of the beam better, albeit producing a little more foreground light. One thing we all can agree on is the noticeable color difference between OP's OE bulbs that was replaced with the CBI's. If OP is fine with them and they've improved nighttime driving (which I'm pretty sure they have) then that's really all that matters. I'm pretty sure he loves the look of them as well as the better visual he gets with nighttime driving. It would be a different scenario of this were about OE bulbs vs aftermarket.

If I recall correctly there's a comparison thread on TRS measuring the lux of certain bulbs.

Acura_Dude

There shouldn't be any excessive glare considering the bulb is behind a projector and if people are being blinded in oncoming traffic, the headlights may need to be checked to make sure they're aimed properly.

ceb

That won't really show anything either as the left and right sides have different housings and cut-offs.

While the SVS' in the link in a post above aren't stock either, they do illustrate a related point about how color temps affect visibility.

I think most will agree that the CBI "looks" brighter because of the whiter light, but a closer observation shows that both bulbs illuminate equally but that the warmer SVS bulbs have less glare and show detail better.

ceb

Yes, sometimes "dimmer" is better and you would know that if you knew how the brain processes light. Looking at the two pictures in the OP's post (that I copied above) proves that point. The CBI bulbs wash out all detail and introduce glare.

Adding glare inducing bulbs doesn't just affect the person driving the car with those bulbs but affects every driver he comes in contact with - the guy driving in front of him as well as oncoming drivers.

ceb

Huh? Please spend some time reading up on headlamp design.

guytdt

Ceb, who do you think we are? rocket scientist? Why we need to learn how brain process a, b, c...???

If it works for you, then do it. If it's not, then don't. Why do you take over the whole thread with mis-leading, false information? Please stay focus and don't say something could spread false information to other readers.

Glare? Look at the pic and you can tell? Are you god? The only way to tell is to shine it on the wall. If there is light above cutoff line, then there is glare. As people here mentioned, there is no glare if you put a quality HID bulb in HID projector. No glare at all. Got it? If you put HID in halogen projector, then yes. It's that simple and basic knowledge. Please don't try to make it more complicated.

You make people abandon this thread because you put boring, false info and no one want to read. I myself feel boring if I have to read any more info like that. Probably I have to abandon my own thread since now.

samrdx15

I'm sorry but I have to agree. If we are so different, then please stop and don't argue further. I find this thread deteriorate because of you. Just keep what you believe and we don't need to know how brain process light. LOL, make me laugh all day.

ceb

Really? I'd opine that the only people who want to leave are those that don't want to learn about lighting. You continue to bring up more and more examples of why this aftermarket lighting is bad.

Nobody is out to get you, but your mod has not only negatively affected your nighttime driving but will continue to affect other drivers until someone gets pissed off enough and takes a baseball bat to your headlights.

ceb

Are you and guy the same poster?

samrdx15

We are twin. And does that have anything to do with "brighter is not better" or "how brain process light"?

samrdx15

Love to see the second pic (that darkness) with stock HID.
But with a lot of criticism, don't know if he will eager to swap stock HID and take a pic.

I can take a pic with stock, but not quite sure different camera settings will do it any good.

Acura_Dude

Ceb not disagreeing with you, but I know a little bit about lighting and headlight design. If Paperboy was here he'd clear up a lot of things. Definitely not saying you're wrong or anything. Sometimes dimmer can be better, but it also depends on the individual's eyes. The main thing people are missing is that CBI's match or surpass OEM bulbs in lumens at a HIGHER color temperature. That can be considered a win. Go take a peak in the 3G TL section and you'll find plenty of threads where people have swapped out the fresnel lens for ZKW-R lens for a sharper cutoff and CBI bulbs. I know what glare is and how it affects the eyes. It would be totally different if OP used HID bulbs (OE or aftermarket) in a reflector-based housing. That's Glare City right there.

Now you're right about Acura making some of the best HID systems in the world and there's plenty of retrofitter using TSX and TL projectors/lens for their retrofits. 1G TSX had a clear lens and was switched over to a fresnel lens for the 2G TSX. You can tell by the cutoff (I've seen both). It's true that MB did move up to 5000K bulbs that produce a more whiter/higher-end feel, BUT it doesn't sacrifice light output in terms of LUMENS.

Another biggie I've seen is the new Jewel Eye headlights. I've only seen them in oncoming traffic and they're bright and blue. I've read on a forum somewhere that LED color temp is around ~5500K. I've also witness LED headlights on the new Corolla, the Escalade, etc. Granted I've never witness true output from behind the wheel of these cars, but I can say they're probably just as good as HIDs or better.

Yes glare can fool you into thinking the light is brighter, I agree. But if it's been proven by the manufacturer that a higher color temp bulb can produce the same amount of lumens as a 4300K bulb, then I don't see how there's an excessive amount of glare. I can see the cutoff being more intense and that may be what people see head-on when the driver of said car with HIDs hit bumps and dips in the road.

Acura_Dude

Ceb when you get the time go to HIDplanet and look at the comparison shots. Same camera settings, location, and time. Sometimes 5000K can be hard on the eyes at night because of the color temp as softer whiter (a little yellow) on the other hand can be easier on the eyes (4100-4300K bulb). In some of the pics you can see a more intense hotspot and others there's more light thrown out to the sides. That can be seen as a good thing if someone does a lot of night time driving. Here, we have to watch out for deer and other animals that will scurry across the street at night while driving through the country.

Off the record here, but I still say Acura should've included bi-xenon on all it's models instead of the 3G TL only. Doesn't matter now as they're moving to LED tech.

ceb

Aww, gee, now I have to talk about that damn brain again.

There are so many things that go into headlighting design that changing one aspect can have a major impact on the others.

Let's see if we (as a group [you and I are on a similar page]) can agree to a few basics.

Cutoff is produced by a metal shield in the housing. How sharp that cutoff is depends on the housing and lens design.

How sharp that cut-off should be and the shape depends on how the lights are intended to be aimed and the particular laws in the region. E-code lights traditionally have a long "finger" of light illuminating the far right side of the road, something that isn't authorized here in the US. A sharp cutoff isn't always desired but depends on a variety of factors.

The brain processes different colors of light differently and given similar intensity, warmer colors will provide more depth perception and detail that colder (blue) colors even though the colder colors will look "brighter". This is exactly where this discussion derailed. We have been conditioned to believe that "brighter is better" because we equate HID's with better and because they are "brighter" than halogens we "think" that brighter is better - however - studies clearly show that warmer light will allow us to see "better". A brighter warmer light is better than a brighter colder light - even if that white/blue light looks "cool" (pardon the pun).

ceb

As the resident deerslayer here (three to date - none even remotely avoidable regardless of lighting) I'm all for throwing light on the side of the road, but I also know that since the brain processes light differently at the different wavelengths, the reaction time with too much overly bright light slows as well.

Yes, bi-xenons are generally nice but for pure visibility, the warmer halogen high beams are better.

I'm well familiar with HIDPlanet and you summed it up nicely "Sometimes 5000K can be hard on the eyes at night because of the color temp as softer whiter (a little yellow) on the other hand can be easier on the eyes (4100-4300K bulb)."

What happens when we are exposed to bright light? Pupils contract and we only "see" what is brightly illuminated. You lose that peripheral vision that is vital in everyday tasks including driving and your brain starts working overtime. You tire quickly and - even after the bright light has gone away - you still have difficulty.

This is not to say that HIDs are bad and that we should all go back to halogens, but it does show that the lighting unit needs to be carefully designed and all parameters taken into consideration. What effect does increasing light intensity have on the output? What design changes need to be made to allow for the increased intensity?

It takes lots of testing and neither HIDPlanet or any of the vendors hawking this stuff have any clue about what they are doing.

samrdx15

"neither HIDPlanet or any of the vendors hawking this stuff have any clue about what they are doing"

Whao!!! Speechless. Hope HIDPlanet people don't see this.

hand-filer

It's not like they're going to sue him for slander.

Acura_Dude

I'm glad we're on the same page, Ceb. I'm not one to pick arguments on the forum. I like to keep it simple and debate. I'm the one who usually ends up learning a thing or too. Definitely had to thank your last couple of posts.

Comfy

Thanks for all that information bombardment (especially the brain part!!!). I'd like to know what are the specifications of the stock RDX headlights (I mean what color temperature, what Lumens etc). Then we can have a perspective.

Acura_Dude

I think the brand name of the bulbs that Acura uses are Philips. I've seen Stanley or Koito before. But I'ma go out on a limb here and go with Philips 85122. 4300K and 3200 lumens.