harddrivin1le

http://www.consumerreports.org/main/...=1057508800888

"We compared 31 cars and trucks with halogen lights and 10 with HIDs, measuring their ability to light the road ahead and along the sides as well as checking them for glare (see Headlight testing).

Six out of 10 vehicles with HIDs and 9 out of 31 with halogens reached the 400-foot marker on our test course with low beams, compared with an average of 335 feet for all models tested.

The farthest so far: the inexpensive, halogen-equipped Mazda Protegé5. Its low beams illuminated our 600-foot marker without creating a glare problem."

DETAILED ARTICLE ON HID LIGHTS:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...dvantages.html

Z Factor

Misleading thread title.

harddrivin1le

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...dvantages.html

vtechbrain

60% of HIDS reached the marker only 30% of Halogens do. I think those findings are self explanatory. Consumer reports I think is a little off the mark on HIDS. The only factor in lights is not how far they go. Hids have a much whiter light with a much wider dispersion. You can "see" much better with HID light. They do have a point it is hader to design hids that illuminate far yet don't blind oncomming traffic. BTW this issue is only a low beam issue. HID highbeams simply blow Halogens away.

harddrivin1le

And a cheap Mazda with standard halogens out-performed EVERY HID equipped car.

HIDs don't always mean "better lighting." That's the point.

Many authorities on the topic disagree with your premise that "HID highbeams simply blow halogens away:"

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...dvantages.html

svtmike

I think trolling is the point.

Mike

Trollin' trollin' trollin',
HD keeps on trollin'
Keep those long threads going,
Rawhide!

On fogs and HIDs and G35s
No matter that facts aren't on his side
HD keeps on trollin'
Rawhide!

VTEC=happiness

:lol1:

Is there any way for us to take a vote & kick HD the hell off these boards...not sure anyone really enjoys his worthless threads.

harddrivin1le

Why do you consider informative technical articles to be "worthless."

HID headlamps don't necessarily equate to better lighting.

jwaters943

If you think this is bad, you should have been around when he used to post on the Acura TSX forums. The guy loves to stir the pot and be contrary to nearly everyone he comes into contact with.

As far as HIDs, all I can say is that GENERALLY HIDs are going to illuminate much better than halogens. This may not be true in all cases, but I'd still rather have the HID/Xenons.

Bartman_RENAMED

Must be a cold winter in Rhode Island because HD is spending waaaayyyyy too much time talking about a car that he can't afford.

BEAT IT LOSER!!!!!!!!:bigun2: :rocketwho

harddrivin1le

Many of your claims aren't scientifically substantiated.

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...dvantages.html

harddrivin1le

There's a big difference between "can't afford" and "not willing to pay for."

The TL would be a fabulous car if could be had with a FACTORY INSTALLED/RPO A-spec package (minus the useless add on body parts that come with it) @ a negotiated price of ~ $32,500.

I'm not going to drop ~ $33K on a car and then pay the same dealership another ~ $6K to install the parts that should have been installed by the factory to begin with.

All in all, it's a very nice car as it is - until one starts to drive it hard.

Personally, I'd glady sacrifice "bluetooth" and "5.1 DVD" for a set of factory installed Konis.

I simply get amazed by some of the blind statements people make about it without having the slightest bit of actual knowledge to back those statements.

Modeler

Whenever I drive my wifes's 2002 Mazda MPV or my Mom's 2002 Honda Accord that have regular headlights, I feel BLIND after driving my TL! As far as I'm concerned, HIDs make a HUGE difference.

harddrivin1le

How much of that is attributable to the HID "bulb" (i.e. "arc") itself vs. the more expensive reflector design that generally accompanies it?

It might very well be that the TL has nice headlamps.

The assertion is that HID doesn't NECESSARILY equate to superior lighting and that many throw the term around to imply otherwise.

"My car has HIVs so it has better lights than you car which doesn't have them."

teamtl

Wow HD, you just don't get it. From reading some of your posts, I am beginning to think that you are actually trying not to get it. You seem to feed off of provoking the good people on this board. Time and time again you have shown that you are an insecure little boy who wants nothing more in life than for us to tell you that you did a good thing by buying a G35. Maybe this board should adopt you as a pet; someone to be pitied and handled with care until you can grow up a little and stop needing to have others justify your actions.

Regardless of your ability or desire to understand this; HID provides brighter and more visually "usable" light than halogen can. While the distance the light travels may or may not be as far, what falls within the lighted range is significantly more visable with HID than with halogen. The idea is to be able to see what is out there, not just throw weak yellow light at objects that you can't make out until they are too close. HID is simply better lighting and for someone to even suggest that distance is more important than discernment is ignorance in its highest form.

HD you have made some interesting arguments in the past, but this is not one of them. Move on.

lindros2

Maybe if we used e-code lights and not the lights sanctioned by the lazy government imbosiles at the D.O.T., we wouldn't have this problem.

Or if more cars had auto- or manual-leveling features (required in Europe) we could have a longer/stronger beam length.

Norse396

In my humble opinion the lights on my TL blow away any other head light I've ever used.

The lights on the TL create a light that makes it easier for me to see directly in front of me, when I combine them with the integrated fog lights I get better side dispertion.

As to this issue on which is better, every car I've driven with the newer lights "seems" like it lights the road better, if it doesn't I can't tell, I do know that they seem to so I'm ignorantly happy.

TLud

harddrivin-

sooo, your new accord can't take a TL off the line, so you hype up the G35. your new accord apparently didn't come with Xenons, so you have to knock on the HIDs.

don't get me wrong, i like the new accord coupe...in fact, it seems that i like it a lot more than you do and i didn't have to buy one to appreciate it.

if you have to justify everything you have in life to everyone around you, i'm wondering how you deal with other inadequacies...

harddrivin1le

My 1LE Z28 can make the TL and the G35 look SICK.

So I don't care about what my Accord (automatic sedan V6 EX) can or can't "take."

And the lighting articles I posted speak for themselves. I fail to see what you have to gain by substituting personal attacks for objective realities.

harddrivin1le

My LS1 powered 1LE Z28 will make the TL and the G35 look SICK.

So I don't care about what my Accord (automatic sedan V6 EX) can or can't "take." The Accord is intended to serve as a commuter/winter car.

And the lighting articles I posted speak for themselves. I fail to see what you have to gain by substituting personal attacks for objective realities.

harddrivin1le

I agree with that.

Of course, Eurpean speed limits tend to be higher, so they require longer reaching headlamps.

TLud

I'd put money on the fact that most Protege5 owners with their "superior" halogen lamps would switch to a nice set of HIDs if given the opportunity. Why?

Because they look better and they illuminate the crucial area in front of the car much better. By your argument, I could mount a spot light on my hood, which would illuminate a spot half a mile down the road, and that would be the best light available (nevermind that you couldn't see anything in between unless it was directly in front of you).

HIDs are nice because I get a clearer view of the sides of the road at night as well as right in front of me.

You talk about your objective facts, but facts can be just as subjective as opinion, especially when they are used to only tell one side of the story. Somehow, your facts always seem to do just that...

usc

having the HID bulbs does not necessitate better lighting. brighter, yes, but not always better. and even then, it's subjective.

the protege5 may be able to light up the 600' marker, but it does so by sacrificing width. some people are more comfortable being able to see what's on the adjacent lanes and others just want to light up their own lanes. it's a personal preference.

regardless of HID or halogen low beam lighting, you can still easily outdrive the low beams on any car. that being the case, i rather be able see wider than farther.

Skeedatl

Oooooo aging 1LE slomaro. My GN with crap all over your POS chevy. And I'm sure there's someone out there with a low 10s car that will smoke my GN.

So Fing what.

harddrivin1le

But HIDs have some negative attributes by default and as addressed in this article:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...dvantages.html

harddrivin1le

What modifications have you performed to the GN you claim to own such that it would beat an LS1 powered 1LE 6 speed Z28 equipped with headers, a cat back, cold air and some other mods?

Stock for stock, a TL is quicker than a GN.

Pick up the latest issue of HOT ROD. An LS1 F-body in there is in the 10s and the ONLY internal engine mod was the cam. And no, there is no blower or no bottle.

harddrivin1le

It's not "my" argument:

http://www.consumerreports.org/main...D=1057508800888

"We compared 31 cars and trucks with halogen lights and 10 with HIDs, measuring their ability to light the road ahead and along the sides as well as checking them for glare (see Headlight testing).

Six out of 10 vehicles with HIDs and 9 out of 31 with halogens reached the 400-foot marker on our test course with low beams, compared with an average of 335 feet for all models tested.

The farthest so far: the inexpensive, halogen-equipped Mazda Protegé5. Its low beams illuminated our 600-foot marker without creating a glare problem."

DETAILED ARTICLE ON HID LIGHTS:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/t...dvantages.html

adam209

is that all you do? cut and paste whatever you can find? get lost you troll

harddrivin1le

Objective, 3rd party articles should stand head and shoulders above personal insults, but it's pretty clear which of those two you prefer.

jrock65

The man is back at it again to preaching about "objective realities." This after poo-pooing the upper-mounted TL foglights with about 20 posts.

Up next week: DVD-audio is over-rated.

Then: Stability control is over-rated.

Then: Memory seats are over-rated.

So on and so forth until he reaches the holy grail: The TL is "objectively" only worth $3000 more than the Accord.

adam209

no. i'm tired of jackasses like you posting articles finding little faults in the TL. all i know is that i'm happy with my HID's and will take them over halogens anyday. so be happy with your inferior halogens, ok?

harddrivin1le

DVD audio IS over-rated because they're aren't many audio DVDs out there and many people aren't likely to spend big money to replace their CDs.

I'd prefer a set of factory Konis over the DVD audio/Bluetooth duo.

Papaman677

I personally like to tape 2 flashlights to the front of my car and paint the lense blue, move over HID's i've got Duracell's

harddrivin1le

Good.

I'm gald you're happy with them; maybe the TL's HIDS work well.

But I'm tired of hearing people ASSUME that HIDS are superior to halogens because that's not always the case.

Corn

How "objective" is Daniel Stern's so-called "article"? Seems to me that HID's compete against his product line as he offers not a single HID product. His objectivity is seriously in question.

harddrivin1le

You're not all wrong with that; the blue flashlights would look "cool" and that's all that most people care about.

svtmike

Ah, so this thread has nothing to do with the 3rd Gen TL, just HIDs and Halogens in general. Move to Off-topic anyone?

Mike

harddrivin1le

I suppose you'll want to dismiss the CONSUMER REPORTS article, too...

adam209

:lol1: :lol2: that just made my day

harddrivin1le

It should.

That would look "cool."

And that's all YOU really care about.