My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

This is the place for questions about things electrical and mechnanical...or any other automotive-related hardware issue.

Moderators: cgrey8, EDS50, Jon 94GT, 2Shaker

Post Reply
User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:08 pm

This thread is basically a dumping ground for me to put what I've learned and organize my thoughts. If others find it useful, great. And if people can correct some things I'm saying or suspect that maybe I'm saying/thinking something wrong, please elaborate. Or if you just have your own experiences that you'd like to share, bring it on. My apologies for most of the pictures being links. The forum couldn't determine some of the sizes of the images based on URL, so it denied me posting until I just made them links.

I've been curious about HID and LED conversions for quite some time. And for the longest time, they were not recommended for traditional halogen headlight enclosures. HIDs and LED bulbs were better suited to the more modern projectors, not reflectors.
For those not familiar with the term, here's what projector headlights look like:
HID_Projectors.jpeg
HID_Projectors.jpeg (245.68 KiB) Viewed 1266 times
Contrast that with traditional reflector enclosures where the light is broadcast off of the reflective surface you can see:
Clear-lens Mustang reflective headlight

HIDs in projectors is no problem at all. They were specifically designed for HIDs. But trying to run HID or LED conversion bumbs in reflector enclosures generally worked OK for the driver, but due to less focus and control, they caused bad glare for oncoming traffic (a fancy way of saying it's too much in their eyes). Why? Light density.

The source of the light wasn't be as small as a filament which is what reflective enclosures were designed to work with. HIDs produce a right large arc relative to the size of a filament and so some of the light produced by HIDs would be where the bright-filament would be which explains the light in the eyes of oncoming traffic. Adjusting to prevent this often hit the limits of the enclosure's ability to be adjusted or resulted in poor light coverage for the driver. Another side-effect was there wasn't enough room to get another HID emitter to be the high beam so HID conversions usually caused you to loose the ability to have high beams. If you wanted them, you had to add aftermarket auxiliary high beams. HIDs also aren't instant-on. This was the state of things in the mid 2000s.

Somewhere in the mid 2010s, LED technology actually got to the point where you could create an array of LEDs that produce enough Lumens (LM) to be a headlight. But again, light density was still a problem. But that didn't stop conversion kits from coming on the scenes. With lack of real concern for oncoming traffic, people upgraded to get the unique LED-look. But then there's laughable arrays like this where NO concern was put to getting light into the focus:
LED_Array_Bulb.jpeg
LED_Array_Bulb.jpeg (100.74 KiB) Viewed 1266 times
This style bulb works just fine for low-output applications like markers, brakes, and blinkers. My truck has Red LED 1156s for the brakes as well as dual color white/amber LED 3157s for blinkers. They work great and look very similar to this. But it's a joke to think this would actually have value as a headlight.

Then there's the Chip-On-Board (COB) style LEDs which are basically flat-panels of LOTS of tiny LEDs that work as a single unit:
COB_LED_Bulb.jpeg
COB_LED_Bulb.jpeg (28.38 KiB) Viewed 1266 times
These obviously did a much better job of being able to focus, but light density was still a problem. That flat surface is still substantially larger than a filament, but they actually do put out an impressive amount of light. These came in 2, 3, and 4 sided versions with the ones that are capable of a high and low beam most commonly being the 4-sided style where 2 sides were the low-beam and 2 were high-beam. It's a good theory, and in some enclosures, they work OK. But they often don't have the "control" of light and thus cause more scatter and thus glare to oncoming traffic. Parabolic reflectors have a great efficiency at projecting light that's sourced at its focal regions, but the further the light source gets from those regions, the less controlled it is at picking up the light and projecting it where you actually want it. 2-sided designs are better at getting the LEDs closer to that center than 4-sided designs.

As light density got better, you started seeing these:
CREE style LED with built-on lens
These are getting closer, but still not quite as good mainly because the lens is working against the enclosure because it is refracting the light out where the housing is designed for the light to be concentrated in a much tighter region of the housing. Again, they aren't horrible, but they aren't as good as it can be.

But today, complements of a company named Lumileds (since bought by Philips and I think resold), we now have the LUXEON Z ES series LED chips, which allows for designs that very-much mimic the shape of filaments, produce way more lumens than halogen filaments do, all while using less electricity to do so even when compared to COB LEDs:
ZES_Bulb.jpeg
ZES_Bulb.jpeg (59.65 KiB) Viewed 1266 times
The strips with the blocker hood are the low-beam chips.

And like anything, where there's a demand with a high supply price, competition steps in. Unfortunately competition isn't always producing equal quality...nor are they always ethical about their marketing. While Lumileds developed a very high quality LED with tight density, a Chinese company has cloned their design ALMOST exactly. Yay for competition...

The catch is the Chinese versions aren't as good, by about 1/2...or at least that's what Philips claims (but of course they would). Traditional high output COB LEDs, which are popular in auxiliary LED light bars, are around ~5w/chip (for the quality ones). These ZES chips are closer to 2-2.5watts/chip and produce 220-250 LM/chip. I don't know what the knockoffs are rated (probably couldn't trust the specs if you found them), but it's assumed they have a lower LM/watt efficiency and who knows how well they'll last or how quickly their light output will degrade over time even if the chips don't completely fail (output fade is a problem for most high output LEDs).

Here's an article detailing how to tell the difference between genuine ZES chips and the knock-offs:
Beware of Fake Luxeon ZES LED Headlight – Big potential danger to your car
The only "danger" I'm aware of is the loss of profits and brand-damage to Lumileds when inferior brands sell their knockoffs as genuine. Headlights burn out all the time. That's hardly dangerous.

Anyway they aren't wrong about fakes being out there claiming to be genuine. If you go looking on eBay, the market is littered with cheap knock-offs claiming to be genuine. I'm not sure how diligent Amazon is about culling their counterfeit sellers, but I'd guess fakes are over there too.

But getting a counterfeit isn't my main concern right now. My concern is with the design of LEDs and what kind of beam pattern I'll get using LED conversions in my headlight enclosures. Almost all of them orient their chips axially. However my headlight enclosures in my Ranger are designed for 9004 bulbs which orient the filaments transverse.
9004_vs_9007.jpeg
9004_vs_9007.jpeg (380.8 KiB) Viewed 1266 times
Notice that despite the two bulbs using the same exact connector, the wiring is different. Why wouldn't they have keyed the electrical connector to be idiot-proof like they did the bulb-collar and enclosures?

Most OEMs found the 9004 to be inferior to the 9007 due to the "old school" orientation of the filaments. I think 93 is when Rangers swapped over to 9007. Having them axial makes it possible to "clock" the bulb in the housing to fine tune the light pattern produced...something you simply cannot do with a transverse-oriented filament. Almost all LED conversion kits today allow you to clock the bulb to get a light pattern you like.

Early on, I just assumed I'd find 9004 LED conversion kits with LED chips setup transverse. But I didn't. Every brand of 9004 conversion bulb I found looks like that brand's 9007 counterpart. The only difference is the keyed-ring at the base of the bulb that allows it to lock into the housing. And based on before-n-after youtube videos of people doing 9004 conversions, it doesn't matter. The kits evidently detect and handle the wiring difference electronically because I've yet to find anybody that said they had to rewire their connectors.

I did quite a bit of Youtube researching watching both individuals as well as companies doing reviews of the various LED conversions out there. And there are some really good videos available that covera dozen or so different brands and designs where they show not all LED conversions are created equal. After I'd done enough looking to realize the ZES style LEDs were the best thing going today, I decided I'd give them a try.

So I went on ebay and scoured looking for the cheapest kit that had the tiny LED chips and found it.
Pair 9004 LED 1020W 153000LM Headlight Kit High/Low Beam Bulbs Light 6000K White
There are so many 1/2 truths and falsehoods in this listing, it's too many itemize. Many of the specs are copied from legitimate vendors, others just made up. Notice some of the images out-right say they use GENUINE Philips LUXEON ZES chips! Even the title has red flags. It advertises the kit as 1020w/153,000LM (100% BS made up numbers). The legitimate Lumileds ZES kits using 16-chips (8-chips per beam) are spec'd no where near these made-up BS values. Most kits using these chips are rated at 4000 LM. What some listings are unclear on is if that is per bulb or per set. That forced me to dig deeper. Lumileds specs the LUXEON ZES 6500k chip to 220-245LM/chip with a conversion efficiency of 125LM/watt which puts them at ~2w/chip. Given these bulbs use 8-LEDs/beam (4 front+4 back), I calculate each bulb to be 16w(low)/16w(high) and ~2000LM/~2000LM (generously rounding). So 4000LM/set is probably what that advertised number represents. Although this Amazon link for 9008s, not 9004s, explicitly says 4000LM/bulb, 8000LM/set which is annoying given you don't use low and high beams at the same time on dual-beam bulbs. BTW, what I received look just like these:
Amazon>TURBOSII H13 9008 Led Headlight Bulbs Head Lamp High/Low Beam PHILIPS Chip 6500K 8000LM Conversion Kit

For reference, a stock halogen 45w(low)/65w(high) 9004 bulb is rated at 700/1200 LM. From a pure light-output comparison, if the knockoffs can output 1/2 the LMs the genuine ZES chips can, then there's the potential for the knockoffs to be an improvement over stock bulbs...at least for low beams.


Like I said, I knew without a doubt that the listing wasn't for what it was advertised to be. And sure enough what I received were counterfeits...but pretty good counterfeits. Ignoring the counterfeit LED chips, the overall construction is not bad. They look identical to the real ones. The listing is for $35 shipped. I think the genuine kits of this design are $80+. The design is close enough that if these produce a poor beam pattern, I'll know even the genuine ones wouldn't perform any better in my housings. The only difference between these and the real ones would be the brightness and longevity. Again, it's the beam pattern is what I'm more interested in evaluating. If these do actually perform well, I'll run them until they fail and consider replacing them with higher quality stuff.

Now you might be asking yourself why I'm doing all this research into LED conversions when aftermarket 80/100w 9004 halogens with the blue glass (5000-6000k) are significantly cheaper than even the knockoff kits. Well that's exactly what I've got now. I've used the higher wattage 80/100s for YEARS in both my 89 Ranger (9004) and 97 Ranger (9007). But after this latest deer-incident, I replaced my headlights with aftermarket headlights. These new enclosures aren't producing as nice of a beam pattern. The best way I can describe it is splotchy. The pattern has holes in it and when the headlights are shining on a flat white surface, you can literally see the filament windings in parts of the projected beam pattern. The performance at night isn't bad. They aren't to the point of being unsafe to use. And surprisingly, they don't produce glare for oncoming traffic. But I can see the unevenness of the beam pattern on the road particularly as I go up and down hills. The splotchiness of the beam pattern makes me wonder if the housing's reflector design was borrowed from a similar enclosure intended to use axially oriented filaments. Some of this could also be the aftermarket enclosure is a clear-front enclosure where the stock headlights use a translucent plastic cover to further refract and focus light into a more uniform beam pattern.
Here's a stock 89 Ranger headlight:
Image

This is what I have in there now. Notice how the front is clear, not translucent:
Image

Regardless, it's got me curious if I can get a better beam pattern from an LED conversion. So I'm trying it just to see. I'm hoping to get some time this weekend & see how they do. But I won't be disappointed if they are underwhelming. At the very least, the research has been entertaining.

If anybody's interested in the Youtube links I found most useful, I can post them up as well.

Also part of my research included learning why some conversion kits use external boxes and what exactly those boxes are doing. I can include that info if others are curious...an no they aren't ballasts like HIDs require.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:32 pm

Here's what I received:
Box_Front.jpg
Box_Front.jpg (31.55 KiB) Viewed 1290 times
Box_Back_Specs.jpg
Box_Back_Specs.jpg (23.63 KiB) Viewed 1290 times
Removable_9004_Collar.jpg
Removable_9004_Collar.jpg (54.9 KiB) Viewed 1290 times
Decoder.jpg
Decoder.jpg (52.31 KiB) Viewed 1290 times
You can clearly see the chips are fake compared to the picture of a genuine ZES chip. The real ZES's resistor at the bottom of the chip is noticeably wider.
LED_Chips_Closeup.jpg
LED_Chips_Closeup.jpg (74.53 KiB) Viewed 1290 times
BTW, here's the links from Youtube that I found quite useful:
What to look for when buying LED Headlight Bulbs
15 Brands LED Headlight Bulb Shoot-Out! Which one's the best?
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

motorhead1991
Regular
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:32 am

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by motorhead1991 » Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:41 am

Good stuff. Having two '90s myself, I've been meaning to research this a bit. (I also need to rewire the headlights in one of them, I think I have a bad ground some place)
1990 Ford Ranger FLH2 conversion. Ford forged/dished pistons, Total Seal file-fit rings, Clevite rod and main bearings, Clevite cam bearings, IHI turbo, Siemens Deka 60lb/hr injectors, Ford slot MAF in custom 3" housing. Moates Quarterhorse with Binary Editor, using the PAAD6 database.

OpenEEC Telegram Chat:
Telegram

jsa
Tuning Addict
Posts: 440
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2013 7:28 pm
Location: 'straya

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by jsa » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:26 am

An interesting read, Chris.

How do you go with getting the dust boot on the bulb and lens back?
Cheers

John

95 Escort RS Cosworth - GHAJ0 / ANTI on a COSY box code
Moates QH & BE
ForDiag

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:15 am

jsa wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:26 am
How do you go with getting the dust boot on the bulb and lens back?
My truck doesn't have a rubber dust boot. It just relies on the seal of the bulb in the housing and a lock ring to hold the bulb in. However many newer vehicles have a dust boot or a sealed compartment with a screw-on dust cap. This is because the newer headlight bulb designs (specifically H4 and H7) are basically bent sheet metal with a halogen bulb and don't integrate a seal. Thus the seal has to be built into the design elsewhere. They sell universal rubber dust boots just for this purpose...particularly for vehicles where you can't put the factory screw-on cover back in place without cutting off the LED's cooling circulation. Google-search LED headlight dust boot and you'll see numerous places to buy them. I think those Youtube videos I linked to also show this. As for literally how the dust boot is put on, again there are Youtube videos out there showing people having to do this very thing and most do a decent explanation (verbally and visually) as to why it is necessary.

BTW, this newer design using the ZES chips doesn't use an integrated fan because the ZES chips are a much higher efficiency and don't produce as much heat for the same light output. But the older COB style LEDs produce a good bit of heat and either require the braided wire looms or a fan-integrated heat sink to keep them cool. And even with that, they still get nearly as hot as halogen bulbs right at their base. I think that's because they locate the LED resistors in the base where the heatsink is thus keeping the heat away from the LEDs themselves. But I don't know this to be absolutely true.
motorhead1991 wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:41 am
Good stuff. Having two '90s myself, I've been meaning to research this a bit. (I also need to rewire the headlights in one of them, I think I have a bad ground some place)
I've had to rewire mine as well. They just get a bad connection in them. You can touch the connector and the light will spring back to life, but a few days or minutes later, and it's back dimmly glowing. Mine too were the grounds that went bad.

You can always tell when it's the ground that's bad because the affected headlight will glow dimmly AND the high-beam indicator on the dash will also glow dimmly. With no viable ground on one of the bulbs, the low-beam filament's voltage just continues through the high beam filament, through the wiring harness, back through the other bulb's high beam filament and high beam dash indicator to find a ground. Obviously that long-way-around has far more resistance, but it's enough to dimmly glow all the filaments in the loop.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:09 pm

I found a guy using Autofeel bulbs on Youtube and he seems quite happy with them. Someone even asked him about how well they are holding up and after 3 months, he reported they were fine. But that was 7 months ago, so I pinged him again to get another update.

Although his kit was advertised as 16,000LM which like the numbers on my listing are BS. At the very best, they are only 4000LM/bulb and that's both high and low beam added together.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

85GT
Tuning Addict
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:32 pm
Location: NYC

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by 85GT » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am

Hey Chris, I've been a lighting fanatic since high school. Some 40 years now. From original sealed beam to halogen sealed beam, to Cibie's to Hella's etc etc.

I'd like to add a few comment/corrections. Being an engineer i can grasp some of the physics of optics :) You are correct that reflectors are design for the bulb. But it doesn't have to be just a filament. Early HID's were properly fitted to properly designed reflectors. Think early mercedes or porsches with that so new then blueish hue. Incorrect that projectors are ok for HIDs and LEDs Projectors still have a reflector in them made for a certain size, shape and location of light source.

Those H1 mini's at the top are HID projectors. But, there are many OEM projectors that are NOT HID. And HID retro's into the also produce uncontrolled light and glare to the oncoming drivers. They only seem better because of the sharp step they had as halogens is still present but no longer as sharp but still substantial and deceiving.

Regarding the general comment that the HIDs and LEDs are better for the driver but not others is a misconception too. Yes, they are brighter everywhere, but not were you really need them. And this affects your eye pupils, closing them down some making your night vision diminish. And you end up not seeing well what you need to.

Then main issue with using something other than halogen in either style light is the filament. The halogen filament is very narrow in two dimensions with a certain length. Designers make the reflector to focus there thin line correctly. Once you go fatter, you go out of focus. Think a mag-lite when you twist it. The arc in the HID and even those strip led's you show are way thicker and way longer. No good.

There's a very knowledgeable fellow / engineer? forget now, that does a very good job of explaining in better detail on a web page he had or is maybe hosted elsewhere. His name is Daniel Stern or Stein if I remember right. It's a bit dated as at least when I read it was far from the LED era.

To date, I think that even the factory LED's are not as good as quality HID projectors. Think what they have to work with, an outward illuminating LED that really can only be focused properly with a lens. The lens would be very difficult if even possible to have a sharp cutoff. I have not seen any as such. So the put out a wide light in all directions and try to focus with that mini little reflector they have. Not much design space there. Co worker upgraded the infinitly that had HIDs to a new one with LED headlight and he says 'they suck'.. lol

I think your best option would be to stuff those projectors into your new reflector headlights. I've done this on one of my caprices so far and just a few months ago on my crown vic. The light even 35w ballast is just fantastic.
20171215_102903a.jpg
20171215_102903a.jpg (198.63 KiB) Viewed 1240 times
20170916_112728a.jpg
20170916_112728a.jpg (148.33 KiB) Viewed 1240 times
85GT, 302 w/Dart Windsor Jr heads, Crane 2030 equiv. Performer 5.0, 75mm TB, 88mm slot MAF, 34lbs injectors, BBK shorties, 5spd converted to 4R70W with Baumann controller, 9" rear w/3.25s
A9L running A9P bin via Quarterhorse w/LC-1 WB

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:43 am

85GT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am
...Being an engineer i can grasp some of the physics of optics :) You are correct that reflectors are design for the bulb. But it doesn't have to be just a filament. Early HID's were properly fitted to properly designed reflectors. Think early mercedes or porsches with that so new then blueish hue. Incorrect that projectors are ok for HIDs and LEDs Projectors still have a reflector in them made for a certain size, shape and location of light source...
I was generally speaking, but you are right. You can design a reflector housing for whatever your light source is if the specifications of the light source are understood. Good point.
85GT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am
...Those H1 mini's at the top are HID projectors. But, there are many OEM projectors that are NOT HID. And HID retro's into the also produce uncontrolled light and glare to the oncoming drivers. They only seem better because of the sharp step they had as halogens is still present but no longer as sharp but still substantial and deceiving...
My wife's Kia Forte has projectors, and based on the light color, I'm pretty sure they are halogen bulbs in there. So you are correct that just because the headlight is a projector doesn't mean it is automatically HID or LED. Although what I cannot speak to whether HID conversions with projectors are better or worse than conversions on reflectors. From what I can tell, conversions on headlights of either style that are NOT dual-beam are easier and generally give better results than conversions in headlight enclosures designed to serve as the high and low beam. But I'm sure there's exceptions to everything.
85GT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am
...Regarding the general comment that the HIDs and LEDs are better for the driver but not others is a misconception too. Yes, they are brighter everywhere, but not were you really need them. And this affects your eye pupils, closing them down some making your night vision diminish. And you end up not seeing well what you need to...
Interesting point.
85GT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am
...Then main issue with using something other than halogen in either style light is the filament. The halogen filament is very narrow in two dimensions with a certain length. Designers make the reflector to focus there thin line correctly. Once you go fatter, you go out of focus. Think a mag-lite when you twist it. The arc in the HID and even those strip led's you show are way thicker and way longer. No good...
This was my concern about using these axially oriented conversion kits in housing that hold 9004 bulbs. But every video I find on the Internet of people doing 9004 conversions using these has surprisingly good beam patterns despite the difference in light-source orientation. I'll see how successful they are in my housings and report back.
85GT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am
...Co worker upgraded the infinitly that had HIDs to a new one with LED headlight and he says 'they suck'..
I'm not surprised that an HID-to-LED conversion would be a downgrade in visibility and light quality for most people. But when you consider a stock Halogen-to-LED conversion, is that an upgrade? My guess is that depends on the individual's application, tastes, and priorities.
85GT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:03 am
...I think your best option would be to stuff those projectors into your new reflector headlights. I've done this on one of my caprices so far and just a few months ago on my crown vic. The light even 35w ballast is just fantastic...
I seriously considered that years ago when I was researching HID conversions and completely talked myself out of doing them due to loosing high-beams. I even looked at eBay for used projectors that I thought would work well and still look decent. But I never found a high-beam solution that I liked. So I ditched the idea.

Although I did run across a video on youtube of someone that had something I'd never heard of and that was an LED Projector conversion that was plug-n-play. I don't remember what the original bulbs were, but the replacements were literally a tiny low beam projector with high-beams that still made use of the stock reflector. The idea was interesting, but the results were not that impressive. I think even the guy in the video was underwhelmed with the results. But what can you expect from a projector so small it could fit through the hole meant for a halogen bulb?

BTW, I also want to point out that I'm not against competition or other companies reverse-engineering a good product and trying to make a similar and cheaper version. I welcome that, applaud it, and think that's capitalism at it's best. And for all I know these knock-off ZES-based bulbs will work fine for years. After all, Harbour Freight has some stuff that does actually work well, for much cheaper than the name brands, and lasts long enough for the average home owner.

My only problem with what these companies/distributors are doing is advertising their products as something they aren't (e.g. claims of using Genuine Philips Leds and posting absolute BS for specs). If the knock-off is as good as the original, or is good enough, then market it as a viable alternative and build a brand around it. As a consumer, I don't like being lied to and finding that I have to fact-check claims.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

85GT
Tuning Addict
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:32 pm
Location: NYC

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by 85GT » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:51 am

Hmmm, can't seem to quote. I'll try my best to match your reply.

-

Your wife's most likely are halogen projectors. The japanese adopted projectors much earlier than us. Once we and others did, they typically went straight to HIDs as they became more cost effective finally. Even a halogen will have a rainbow effect right at the cutoff line. HID's in those still maintain a decent cutoff. It's blurrier but very present. It's just you introduce a lot more spill over above the cutoff. But still way better than sticking a HID into a plain old reflector light that totally blinds oncoming drivers. If you see a projector coming at you that seem too bright, it's most likely a retrofit.

-

I too contemplated switching to a 9007 in the caprices as the bulb was higher wattage and to see what the filament orientation change would do. You really can't clock either unless you ground out keys in the head lights.

My friend didn't do a LED conversion. It was the factory LED that he found sucked compared to his previous factory HID projectors.

You do realize those HID projectors you showed and mine installed are BI-xenon? The cutoff is a movable shutter that flops down to give you a great high beam. My only comment would be is that I'd like that high beam pattern to be a little more narrower to throw the light further down the road. But guess you really can't do that other than blocking the light some like the shutter does. Might as well use all the light you got.

Beware of some of those video's. Many look 'great' as they show that cutoff line big intensity difference. Well a big difference still isn't enough not to annoy the oncoming driver. A proper housing is practically black above the line. Projecting on a garage wall may show some as it's the reflections of the lows shining off other objects.

I have no qualms with aftermarket either. Like you said, helps build competition. They do love to exaggerate the specs though.

The projectors in the Vic are I believe knock offs of earlier generation Morimoto's. Or even just earlier version manufactured by other now. I couldn't justify the cost difference to go latest gen Morimoto's. In comparison to the actual Morimoto D2S i bought a few years ago, (D2S version are always touted better as they use a factory bulb), they are still better. These are the ones offered by TRS. I just went the whole kit this time.
They are the acme H1 mini's with bulbs ballasts shrouds plug an play harness for 130. I did upgrade to the Super H1 which i think is one gen newer.

Much earlier, when H1 projectors came out, the caprice guys bitched they suck. I found the chinese D2S style ones work very well. So between housing design of the two, and the fact they used 6000K bulbs where I went for best light with 4300K, there was a substantial difference. They commented they were hardly better and sucked in the rain. I commented mine were the opposite, the D2S ones were the first headlight i could really see illuminate the wet road still very good.

Fitting a D2S if pretty easy. You just need to open up a stock 9004/9007 hole just a little bit. A rotary tool makes very quick work of it. Only thing to watch these days is the new D2S's have gotten longer and may not fit all shallow housings. When I got mine for the caprice, the were shorter than the H1, now they equal or exceed. The H1's in the vic have a few mm to spare. OH other tip, the guys complained they were melting the clear plastic of the headlight. Well, the light beam is very intense in heat if you put you hand in front. But it's not an issue with clear lenses. They had smoked ones and we all know how well black heats up in the sun :)
85GT, 302 w/Dart Windsor Jr heads, Crane 2030 equiv. Performer 5.0, 75mm TB, 88mm slot MAF, 34lbs injectors, BBK shorties, 5spd converted to 4R70W with Baumann controller, 9" rear w/3.25s
A9L running A9P bin via Quarterhorse w/LC-1 WB

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:03 pm

If I'm understanding you right, you say there's a shutter in the projector that moves to emulate a low and high beam. If so I thought that only wason the high-end cars where they also have servos to move the projectors as you make turns. I didn't realize that was actually becoming common.

Since I didn't do much investigation into HIDs, I never committed to memory any thoughts on how many lumens they were capable of. How do they compare? Of course discussion lumens is more an academic exercise. What's more important to the average person is Lux...

I do agree with you that 4300k is probably better for rain. The lower frequency refracts a bit better hence why fog light used to all be yellow. I guess the fad of blue pushed them despite the science.

The best set of fog lights I ever owned were yellow Boschs I bought at a Western Auto. With 100w H3 bulbs, those illuminated the sides better than any other light I've ever owned. They had a sweep of ALMOST 180 degrees. I've NEVER had a set of fog lights that covered an area as wide as those. Granted I've never paid Hella-prices for fog lights either. The closest I've come to Hella is a set of Optilux (made by Hella, but not branded as Hella) fog lights I got years ago when Walmart used to sell them for ~$40. They are still on the 97 Ranger today which uses the "better" 9007 bulbs but has always had pathetic light from the factory enclosures. I upped the bulbs to 80/100w and that helped, but of course a brighter bulb won't change the light pattern. Even the Optilux's didn't have as wide of a coverage angle as I'd like from a fog light so I mounted them at about a 30 degree angle left and right to get the full side-coverage I was used to from the Bosch's.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

85GT
Tuning Addict
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:32 pm
Location: NYC

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by 85GT » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:05 pm

cgrey8 wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:03 pm
If I'm understanding you right, you say there's a shutter in the projector that moves to emulate a low and high beam. If so I thought that only wason the high-end cars where they also have servos to move the projectors as you make turns. I didn't realize that was actually becoming common.
Oh yes. It's been very common. Probably 7-8 years now. That's what those wires are for in your picture, it's the shutter solenoid.
cgrey8 wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:03 pm
Since I didn't do much investigation into HIDs, I never committed to memory any thoughts on how many lumens they were capable of. How do they compare? Of course discussion lumens is more an academic exercise. What's more important to the average person is Lux...
35watt HIDs have around a 3200 lumens each at 4300K and drops off the higher you go. 4300K is white, shoplight white. Higher gets you to daytime blueish just like the homedepot daytime bulbs, cfl or led. and bluer yet.

Here's a link to the super H1's. They have pics at the bottom showing the beam pattern both low and high.

https://www.theretrofitsource.com/proje ... er-h1.html
85GT, 302 w/Dart Windsor Jr heads, Crane 2030 equiv. Performer 5.0, 75mm TB, 88mm slot MAF, 34lbs injectors, BBK shorties, 5spd converted to 4R70W with Baumann controller, 9" rear w/3.25s
A9L running A9P bin via Quarterhorse w/LC-1 WB

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:42 pm

Well, I got the LEDs in and they work and look...a lot different. Unfortunately my camera doesn't really capture the nuance and detail that my eyes could see. But I tried to zoom in and get it as best I could. I also marked the signature points that I thought were significant about the Halogen's low beam pattern so I could compare it to the LED low beam. I'm glad I did, because the light patterns look nothing alike so having those markers really helped. Note MOST of these pictures are of the Driver's Side bulb, not both sides.

Here's the Halogen Low vs High:
Halogen_LowVsHighBeam.jpg
Halogen_LowVsHighBeam.jpg (55.03 KiB) Viewed 1188 times
9004s have the transverse filament, and you can see that clearly across the top of the beam pattern...that straight sharp line.


Here's the LED compared to the Halogen:
LEDvsHalogen_LowBeam.jpg
LEDvsHalogen_LowBeam.jpg (53.69 KiB) Viewed 1188 times
You can see the LED produces a significantly different beam pattern and a LOT more light. Notice it doesn't have that sharp horizontal line across the top given the orientation difference between 9004 filaments and the LED's orientation. The thing I was most surprised about is just how "yellow" even my 80/100w blue bulbs are. They are 5000k bulbs so they are a little "cooler" and thus a little more yellow. But compared to the LEDs which are 6000-6500, then they are down-right yellow. Now granted I was taking these pics with the engine OFF. The halogens do brighten a tad when the engine is running.

This picture really shows the inadequacy of my camera to pick up nuance and detail when the gamut of light ranges from bright to dark. The bright parts just blow the areas all around. The LED's pattern just looks like a blotch in this pic, but it isn't. None of these pictures are picking up the visual detail that was really there, but this pic is the worst. It's still valuable to show the difference between the two.


Here's the LED Low:
LED_LowBeam.jpg
LED_LowBeam.jpg (42.85 KiB) Viewed 1188 times
The LED low beam, while obviously different is still honoring a number of they key points that I thought were important to mark...particularly the far left which would be an indication of how much glare these lights will produce.



And the LED High:
LED_HighBeam.jpg
LED_HighBeam.jpg (46.94 KiB) Viewed 1188 times
The LED high beam is completely scattered and just looks like a star burst. That's either going to be a good or bad thing. The Halogen high beams never have been much of a high beam. But these pics really display why. A very slight shift up of basically the same pattern produced by the low beam. I wouldn't be surprised if I could've driven with the high beams ON and never get flashed by anybody. The LEDs widen the breadth of coverage far greater than the Halogen's high beam. The question is if it's going to be TOO dispersed to be useful. I'll have to report back on that one as I just don't know. But you can clearly see the high beam isn't nearly as concentrated with as bright of hot spots as the low beam.

In both low and high, it's quite obvious that the bulb is 2-sided. You can clearly see the two halfs of the beam pattern, each coming from the different sides of the bulbs. Remember, this is a picture of just the Driver's Side bulb.

Another thing I did note is the decoder boxes have relays in them. I could hear them switching as I turned them ON and flipped between low and high beams. Also they prevent driving both low and high beams at the same time. Even when I pull back on the stick to "flash" the high beams, the low beams turn OFF. My guess is this is a heat control issue.

I did not leave them on long enough to shoot the thermal gun at it. I'll report back on that later.

The only other thing I can add that was a significant find is that the LEDs are SUPER bright when looking directly at the lit chips. It's like looking at the sun. Looking at the halogen filaments is bright, but not like the LEDs. They are also instant-ON. I never realized how the halogens take a 1/4 second or so to brighten up.

I did try clocking them back and forth and it did change the pattern some but not like I've seen it alter the pattern on other people's enclosures. For my enclosures, the best pattern was produced with them installed straight-up as intended. I did confirm that IF I do get flashed with the low-beam LEDs, I can clock them to get the left side down a bit. But doing so, alters the rest of the pattern in a way that didn't seem like a positive change. I didn't get a picture of that. If there's any interest in that, I can snap a few. A video would probably be more meaningful that stills so you can see the twisting and what it does.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Mon Feb 19, 2018 8:33 am

This morning, I got to actually try the new LED conversion see how it worked. The low-beams work great. The color is noticeably different and things are a bit brighter.

However the high beams are not nearly as good. They illuminate on the sides, but it's noticeably less light in the center, just as you see in the beam pattern. The road directly in front is illuminated but not well. Part of this is because the dims are so much brighter, the transition from dim to bright gives the knee-jerk reaction that the road directly in front is not illuminated at all. In my opinion, the brights are scattering much of the light into areas you just don't care about like on the ground immediately in front of the truck and way up in the trees all around.

This was one of my concerns from the beginning...how well were these very wide-placed LEDs going to perform. They probably aren't going to be optimal in 9007 enclosures. They more closely mimic H4 bulbs, than 9007 bulbs. Notice:
Image


So I'm suspecting a conversion bulb that locates the high beam LEDs closer into where the dims are would probably preserve a bit more of the beam pattern, reduce the scatter, and get the beam pattern closer to the low beam's shape, just shifted up a tad. And I remembered seeing some kits that did just that. Here's an example:
Lumen9004HLC-G7S.jpeg
Lumen9004HLC-G7S.jpeg (100.4 KiB) Viewed 1127 times
Image

I just google-searched and looked around until I found an example and this was the first I came across. I do have some concerns with this design is notice the bright chips have been moved up, but the dim chips have also been moved down. While this might improve the high beam pattern, it's going to alter the low-beam pattern...possibly for the worse. Also notice the dims don't have a hood covering them. I suspect that's because the circuitboard is curved, not flat, so they've built the "hood" into the design. Now that I know what to look for, I can see that these are legitimate Lumileds and it's not surprising that the website selling them retails them for $130 set!!! No thanks.

After this experience, I feel vindicated to have knowingly bought the knock-offs FIRST. Had I paid $100-plus for what I have, I would've been quite disappointed. And I'm confident that the genuine ones would've produced a similar-if-not-identical pattern. The solace of knowing I got genuine Philips LED chips wouldn't mean much. But for the experience and the value of topic discussion here on the forum, it's been worth $35 for sure. And the dims are enough better, that unless there's a compelling reason to swap them, I'll likely keep these in place for the foreseeable future.

Now the question is if I can find a knock-off version of these. If I can, I'll probably buy the 9007 version and see if the housing collars can be swapped. If they can, and I highly suspect they will, I can use the current set I have in the 97 Ranger. I rarely drive it and it's headlights have always sucked. Anything would be an improvement to them.

I have a set of these on order right now, so the saga continues. Stay tuned...
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

85GT
Tuning Addict
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:32 pm
Location: NYC

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by 85GT » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:13 am

You have a lot of light bleeding above the horizontal cut off. Any light of intensity should be readjusted below the center line of the headlights or you will be irritating on coming drivers if you live in a fairly populated area.
Even that scattered light up higher doesn't look like 'much'. But it is if you're on the other side. Just saying.
85GT, 302 w/Dart Windsor Jr heads, Crane 2030 equiv. Performer 5.0, 75mm TB, 88mm slot MAF, 34lbs injectors, BBK shorties, 5spd converted to 4R70W with Baumann controller, 9" rear w/3.25s
A9L running A9P bin via Quarterhorse w/LC-1 WB

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:30 am

85GT wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:13 am
You have a lot of light bleeding above the horizontal cut off. Any light of intensity should be readjusted below the center line of the headlights or you will be irritating on coming drivers if you live in a fairly populated area.
Even that scattered light up higher doesn't look like 'much'. But it is if you're on the other side. Just saying.
Notice in the side-by-side of the LED and Halogen. Even the Halogen has some scatter directly above the center. So it's not surprising that there is some scatter even with the LEDs. So I'm not convinced this is a fault of the LED design, but rather an undesirable characteristic of the aftermarket housing. I'll get the truck out into a parking lot at some point and get a feel for what oncoming traffic experiences.

The stock headlight enclosure had a rather smooth reflective surface inside and relied heavily on the translucent front face of the housing to focus and redirect the light. But these aftermarket enclosures have a heavily scalloped reflective surface which is essentially a few dozen small reflectors each focusing on a slightly different area in front of the vehicle. My guess is the scatter will appear to oncoming traffic as tiny pinpoints of glare coming off the edges of those scallops, as opposed to solid regions of the headlight obviously pointed in their face as you typically associate with a low-beam adjusted too high or just high-beams blindingly coming at you.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

85GT
Tuning Addict
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:32 pm
Location: NYC

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by 85GT » Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:28 am

cgrey8 wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:30 am
Notice in the side-by-side of the LED and Halogen. Even the Halogen has some scatter directly above the center.
It does, but with much less intensity. Notice the small hot spot right above the very intense center. Then compare how wide and bright that spot is with the LED. You need that spot pointing below the horizon. The halogen is narrow enough that it won't disperse much into oncoming traffic. It be more just the guy in front of you.
cgrey8 wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:30 am
The stock headlight enclosure had a rather smooth reflective surface inside and relied heavily on the translucent front face of the housing to focus and redirect the light. But these aftermarket enclosures have a heavily scalloped reflective surface which is essentially a few dozen small reflectors each focusing on a slightly different area in front of the vehicle.

Same with the aftermarket ones I got for the caprices. And they have some degree of scatter too, but the light on the road is much better that the stockers and the signal to noise ratio is high enough not to be annoying. I got a back to back comparison when I added the second caprice a few years ago that had stock headlight. Thought, hm they're ok, until one time we went out to the east end of long island and came back in the dark. Real dark, no lighting on the expressway out that far. Next day I ordered the aftermarket ones.
The vic to has the small reflectors stock. But a good pattern, tiny bit of scatter if I remember. It and the aftermarket caprice ones provide the clear lens necessary for the projectors to work.
cgrey8 wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:30 am
My guess is the scatter will appear to oncoming traffic as tiny pinpoints of glare coming off the edges of those scallops, as opposed to solid regions of the headlight obviously pointed in their face as you typically associate with a low-beam adjusted too high or just high-beams blindingly coming at you.
Yes with the halogens. Do your parking lot comparison with one of each. While blocking one totally and then the other. Bring a folding beach chair to simulate right height for a driver. And it would be best you sit and then have someone in the car drive up from a distance. And as you'll find eventually, the older you get, the more that light affects you.
85GT, 302 w/Dart Windsor Jr heads, Crane 2030 equiv. Performer 5.0, 75mm TB, 88mm slot MAF, 34lbs injectors, BBK shorties, 5spd converted to 4R70W with Baumann controller, 9" rear w/3.25s
A9L running A9P bin via Quarterhorse w/LC-1 WB

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Mon Feb 19, 2018 8:40 pm

Well, I found both 9004 and 9007 versions on eBay.
9004 Hi/Lo Beam LED Headlight Bulb Kit 60W 8000LM 6500K ZES Chips Pack of 2
9007 HiLo Beam LED Headlight Bulb Kit 60W 8000LM 6500K ZES Chips Pack of 2

They aren't exactly the same, but very close.
Image

As far as I can tell, these are identical kits, with the only difference being the collar that fits it to a 9004 or 9007 housing.

There were a number of cheaper kits out there that have a similar chip pattern, but only use 6 chips/beam instead of 8 chips.



In other news, I did check out the beam this afternoon and the oncoming glare is a little more than just a pinpoint glare. While looking, I realized there doesn't appear to be a single place you can stand and see light from the entire housing. It seems almost every position you stand only gets light from one-three of those scalloped areas. To best describe it, my eyes only see light from 10-15% of the housing at any position that I stand. There' only a very small area right directly in front that has a larger area of light, but it's still only maybe 20%.

With the high beams on standing directly in front of the truck, the light from the headlights look like it should if you were an oncoming driver with the low beams on. There's not a single hot-spot what so ever. The high beams are almost to the point of being useless. It unfortunately, wastes too much light illuminating way up in the trees and the far-extreme edges including directly in front of the truck...so close that I can't see the illuminated area from inside the truck. There's just no control of the light what-so-ever.

What I don't know is how adjustable these housings are. Unlike the stock housings, these housings only have a single bolt to adjust them where the stock housings used 2 adjustments.

In the meantime clocking the Driver's Side bulb 90 degrees to the left puts the low-beam blockers towards oncoming traffic significantly reduces, if not eliminates oncoming glare. It does alter the beam pattern some, but not that bad. High beam is affected on that side, but not nearly as much as I would've expected having the chips pointing up and down instead of side-to-side. I didn't realize just how much glare was being projected to the far left (way beyond what the pictures show) until I just paid attention.

The interesting thing this did tell me is the divide down the center of the beam patterns is NOT because the bulb is 2-sided. That divide is vertical even with the bulbs turned sideways (both low and high beam). I expected that divide to turn with the bulb, but it doesn't.

Ultimately, I'm slowly coming back to my original suspicion that these housings were just meant to work with a transverse filament and axially oriented light just isn't going to work as well. I can't fault the bulbs. If anything, I fault the bulb/enclosure combination. I'm fairly confident the bulbs with the low and high beam chips closer together will work better. Even if I'm right back to the high beams being only a minimal rise as compared to the low beams, at least they'd be usable.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Tue Feb 20, 2018 8:19 am

I contacted Autofeel to see if I can order just the 9007 keyed collars so I can try these bulbs in the 97 Ranger's housings. Being those housings are meant for 9007 bulbs AND that truck still has stock enclosures with the diffusing translucent front, there's a chance they will be able to make better use of these bulbs than the current enclosures can. So far, I haven't heard back from them, but it's only been a day.

Edit:
Autofeel never contacted me. So my guess is they really aren't looking to help. Most reputable companies would be quick to give you some kind of response even if it's not the response you'd hoped for. But this is a company that's already proven themselves less than ethical by marketing a product as using components other than what they really are.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:32 pm

Well I got the new bulbs and they look like the pics.

And as I expected, the rings interchanged so I can run the new bulbs on the old truck and vice versa...almost.

Well the short answer is they work a LOT better. Unfortunately my camera is sucking tonight for some reason. I couldn't get a decent light pattern for nothing. Every picture just looked blown and no detail. In fact the picture over-exaggerated some of the scatter that, to the eye, was not nearly as bright as in my pics. So I don't see any value in posting them until I can figure a way to get a better picture. But what I didn't expect is that the low-beam pattern changed and improved. Both low and high beams gained a LOT more control. And here's why:
Autofeel vs XAutohaux.jpg
Autofeel vs XAutohaux.jpg (93.83 KiB) Viewed 981 times
That's a SIGNIFICANT difference in how much further out the new bulb locates the chips. I won't know how they actually work until tomorrow, but the light pattern is FAR more controlled and concentrated for both low and high than even the low beam was with the Autofeels.

Interestingly, I installed the Autofeels in the 97 Ranger and they worked MUCH better in those housings. Both dim and brights were relatively controlled and worth using. But there was a problem. Both how and high beam settings just gave me a high beam. Evidently the decoder boxes don't use a rectifier to resolve between the 9004 and 9007 wiring the way the newer bulbs seem to do. The only way I could get the low beams to illuminate is to hold the high-beam turn signal stick in which powers both low and high at the same time. For whatever reason, that caused the low beams to come on. So before I can install them permanently, I'll need to get some 9004-to-9007 adapters to get them to work. I don't want to rewire the truck's harness nor install a 2nd plug that won't be connected and will be just left dangling to get wet, corrode, and be a problem when I need it.

Edit:
Another difference between these two bulbs is that the "offset" chips on the newer XAUTOHAUX bulbs are the low-beam chips and the high beam chips are the ones that go down the centerline. I don't know if this is because these were ordered to be 9007s and being run with a 9004 wiring or if this is as designed. I do know that after having them adjusted and run for a week, that I like this better. The offset chips produce a bit more spread-out beam pattern which doesn't blind quite so badly when coming over hills. Where the high beams have a much stronger, more concentrated pattern which works out well being high beams are intended to illuminate objects off in the distance and thus NEED a more concentrated pattern to illuminate things further away. Unlike with the stock bulbs, the high and low beams are the same wattage, and thus produce the same amount of light. So regardless whether this is due to the 9004/9007 mismatch, I plan to keep them this way.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:18 am

Late last night, I figured out how to get my camera into a mode where I could manually control shutter speed and was able to get a picture of the beam patterns with "better" clarity. But it dawned on me looking at them this time that even the new bulbs aren't auto-sensing. It seems the high beam chips are coming on during low beam setting and vice-versa...and because of that, I installed the bulbs upside down so that high beams would cast higher than the low. But looking at the pictures of the high beam, I'm pretty sure that's the pattern intended for low beam. So I'm going to need to make a set of adapters:
  • 9004 vehicle to 9007 bulb
  • 9007 vehicle to 9004 bulb
In the meantime, I'll flip them around and just get over the fact that, for now, low beams have a blue light on my dash indicating high beam.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:47 pm

Here's the manually controlled shutter pics I got:
Low-n-High Beams.jpg
Low-n-High Beams.jpg (46.62 KiB) Viewed 959 times
I installed the bulbs so that the low-beam position of my blinker control gave me a beam pattern that was lower than what was given as the high beam. But just looking at the patterns, it's as though the high beams should be the low beam pattern. And that's what I thought last night which is why I assumed that I would need to make myself a 9004-to-9007 adapter. However after driving to work this morning, I'm reconsidering this. The low-beam beam pattern is a bit less concentrated and things are still plenty bright. But with the high beam, the beam is so strong that normal road signs are illuminated SOOO brightly they are almost blinding to ME. I can't imagine how horridly blinding it must be to be coming toward me with those pointed at you. I'm not exaggerating when I say these are WAY WAY brighter than any headlight I've ever owned (factory or auxiliary running light).

For someone looking to upgrade their headlights, I'd have a hard time not recommending these for 9004 housings. I think the other bulb style might do better in 9007. When I get my 9007-to-9004 connectors in, I'll get them running in my 97 Ranger so I can actually test them and see how they really work on the road. Until I can try both in the other truck, the jury's still out as it relates to these bulbs working in a 9007 application.

Now that I know how to manually adjust shutter speed, maybe I can get some better pictures. While the images are quite dark, they show much more detail than if I increase the shutter speed. Increasing it does make the picture brighter, but it quickly looses detail.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10443
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: My ramblings about LED headlight conversions

Post by cgrey8 » Sun Mar 11, 2018 5:10 pm

I couldn't find an actual 9004-to-9007 converter on eBay for cheap, but what I did find was a 9004/9007 extension cord. So I ordered a pair of those and simply popped the pins out of one end and rewired them to be an adapter. It's a boring device, but here's what they look like (ripped from the listing):
Image

So before I installed the Autofeels into the 97 Ranger, I wanted to get some pictures of what the Autofeels looked like relative to actual 9004 and 9007 bulbs. The 9007 bulb is a GE OEM 55w/65w replacement bulbs. The 9004 is an aftermarket 6000k 80/100w (blue glass) bulb which makes it a little more difficult to see through, but not impossible. Both are obviously used...

Anyway here's what I got. First the 9007 comparison:
Autofeel vs 9007_side view_with markup.jpg
9007 Side View
Autofeel vs 9007_side view_with markup.jpg (78.14 KiB) Viewed 863 times
Autofeel vs 9007_bottom view_centerline.jpg
9007 Bottom View
Autofeel vs 9007_bottom view_centerline.jpg (153.35 KiB) Viewed 863 times
I did calculations using pixel positions to make sure my lines were parallel and that the center-marks on the 9007 is truly center of the pic. Although I'm out on a limb on absolutely identifying the filaments. I believe I've called them out correctly, but I could be wrong.

The 9007's axial filaments better-align with how the LED chips are oriented, although there are still significant differences even with the low-beam chips. The high beams are still not even close to being oriented where the stock high beam would be. The bulbs that I have in the 89 Ranger now would be out of alignment in the other direction, by about the same distance. But it's likely they would work equally as well in 9007 just because it locates the low and high beam chips closer together similar to how 9007 filaments are.

What I found interesting is how the low beam is oriented right down the center of the bulb when viewed from the side, but the bottom view shows that both filaments are offset in that plane.


So lets take a look at the 9004:
Autofeel vs 9004_top view_with markup.jpg
9004 Top View
Autofeel vs 9004_top view_with markup.jpg (100.14 KiB) Viewed 863 times
It's hard to imagine that an axially oriented light source would be compatible at all as a replacement for bulbs that orient the filaments sideways like this.

Here's the offset alignment:
Autofeel vs 9004_top view_filament offset marker.jpg
9004 Top View with filament offset markers
Autofeel vs 9004_top view_filament offset marker.jpg (104.61 KiB) Viewed 863 times
Red = low beam filament
Green = high beam filament


Autofeel vs 9004_side view_centerline.jpg
9004 Side View with Centerline
Autofeel vs 9004_side view_centerline.jpg (87.44 KiB) Viewed 863 times
Left = low beam filament
Right = high beam filament

Interestingly neither filament goes through the centerline horizontally or vertically. My guess is neither 9004 filaments go through or at the focal point suggesting there is a wide range of light source "shapes" that would yield a decent beam pattern in the same enclosure which would explain why the other bulbs work decently well. But how are consumers to know this, know what bulb is going to work well in their enclosure, and why?

This explains why unless you are willing to trial-n-error your way into LED conversion bulbs, you are far better off going to a shop that specializes in these conversions. What they have is a wide selection of bulbs that they can try in your housings and sell you the one that works the best which is trial-n-error for them, but gets the customers a better result. The downside? No respectable shop is going to sell cheapo knock-off chips like these bulbs use. They'll be genuine with a full retail pricetag you can expect to be well into the $100+ range likely plus installation costs. I can't say that the LED conversion is worth that much. But for people willing to do a trial-n-error job like this, I would tend to steer them toward that second bulb where the chips are much closer together...IF the enclosure is for a 9004 or 9007. The more separated chip orientation is better suited for H4 applications where the stock filaments are separated in nearly the same orientation.

I also added an "edit" to a post made above where I compare the Autofeel and XAUTOHAUX bulbs based my experience with them.

I got the Autofeels installed and here's the beam patterns:
Autofeel vs 9007.jpg
Autofeel vs 9007_Low and High beam patterns
Autofeel vs 9007.jpg (48.39 KiB) Viewed 856 times
You can see that the halogen bulbs have a lower wattage winding on the lower beam than the high beam. Because the windings are so close together, the beam patterns are similar enough that you can visually see the higher output of the higher wattage winding in the beam pattern. Again, the LEDs are the same wattage for low and high beam.

With my adapters in place, I can actuate both low and high beam chips. And sadly the low beam is badly scattered like they did on high beams in the 9004 housings. I don't think that's going to work. The hooded chips on the bulb are again the High Beams which they shouldn't be. The low beams are the lower offset chips which explains why their beam pattern is so scattered...those were the high beam chips in the 9004 housings.

Another annoying oddity is that when I "flash" the high beams pulling the turn signal stick, nothing happens. This further strengthens my suspicion that the chips that are giving me a low-beam are the chips INTENDED to be the high beam. I could easily swap the wires in my adapters, but then the beam patterns would not really be what I want for low and high beam.

My gut feeling is I'll abandon the Autofeels and put the halogens back in.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests