PERRYinLA

This just appeared on the news wire, and I thought I'd post it here for any comments:

Consumer Reports' 50th Anniversary Auto Issue Puts a Premium on Safety

YONKERS, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 10, 2003--Problems with HID Headlights, Dangerous Blind Spots, and Top Vehicles for Crash Protection & Accident Avoidance

CR's First-Ever Tests of HID Headlights: How Do They Fare Under CR's Glare?

Consumer Reports April auto issue sheds some light on a new type of headlight designed to help drivers see better at night. While high-intensity discharge (HID) headlights tend to produce a wider, brighter, more uniform light than the halogen headlights found on most vehicles, complaints have poured into the government about the glare from HID lights.

In CR's first-ever headlight tests, engineers found that the distribution of HID lights do produce more glare - the temporary annoyance or blindness caused by bright light in your field of view - than halogen lights. CR also found that while many HID lights tested were among the better performers, even the best didn't outdistance the best halogens.

CR tested headlights on 41 vehicles, 10 with HID lights and 31 with halogen. Individual headlight Ratings will soon be a part of every car and truck test CR performs.

In its evaluations, CR also found that an SUV's high-mounted lights can be especially glaring. Our HID equipped 2003 BMW X5 and 2003 Range Rover SUVs prompted many oncoming drivers to "flash" us with high beams, even though we were using low beams that were properly aimed.

While HIDs' blue hue is part of the glare problem, much of it lies in how their brighter light is distributed. An HID beam's sharp edge between light and dark causes the beam to "flash" other drivers when the car travels over uneven surfaces. Halogens tend to produce a more gradual shift from light to dark.

At CR's test track in East Haddam, CT, engineers conducted three sets of tests, measuring headlights' ability to light the road ahead and along the sides as well as checking them for glare. Tests were conducted on moonless nights, in good weather conditions.

CR's engineers put the most weight on the test measuring low-beam lighting straight ahead - evaluated using 10 posts up to 800 feet from the vehicle - because more distance ahead equals more time to react and brake safely. Based on typical reaction times and braking distances, drivers traveling at 50 mph need 237 feet to see a pedestrian, hit the brake pedal, and stop in time.

In this test, the inexpensive, halogen-equipped Mazda Protege5 was the winner. Its low beams illuminated our 600-foot marker without creating a glare problem. Among the worst performers, the HID-equipped Audi TT's low beams lit only to our 200-foot marker, while the halogen-equipped Chrysler Sebring and Pontiac Grand Prix provided weak, non-uniform light.

Based on the varying performance of the headlights tested, CR recommends that car-shoppers with trouble driving at night include night driving as part of their test drive. They should see how well the vehicle lights dark roads, how well the light is distributed, and whether drivers "flash" them with their high beams.

CR's headlights report also includes a sidebar on blue-hued HID headlight knockoffs and what to avoid, and our recommendations for what the government can do to improve forward visibility and the glare problem.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

I think this explains why Lexus didn't put HIDs in the new GX470.

Apart from that it's the usual consumer reports panic creating report.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

yup, very true. suv with hid is a pretty bad problem. even with halogen it's hurting a lot in the rear view mirror already.

but i don't understand. if there is a reason why the lx470 doesn't have hid, when that doesn't apply to rx and gx?

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

I'm not sure if the LX has HIDs but if it does it's probably because they were designed in before consumers began to complain a lot about HIDs in tall vehicles. The RX does have HIDs now but it's a lower vehicle I think.

squarehat

The two truck based Lexus SUV's, (LX/GX) have never offered HID as an option, despite the LX having the highest based price of any Lexus vehicle. I believe it is because Lexus was concerned about mounting HID lights that high up on a vehicle. However, that doesn't stop people from putting in retrofit kits.
The RX's lights sit closer to the ground, but the X5's light's aren't super high, either. Navigator/Escalade are now available with HID, those are some tall vehicles, people were already whining about halogens on full-size SUVs.
Good thing I finally got the rearview mirror mount changed so I could install my Gentex electrochromic mirror

CK1_RX3

All this proves is that once again Consumer Reports doesn't know what the hell they're doing when reviewing products. I strongly question the methodolgies used in the testing - goes against ALL research that has been done in the Europe proving that HID offers superior lighting performance when properly set up.

see_fu

I don't understand these people. The problem isn't the HID, its the optics! People in asia and europe don't complain bout lights glaring and what not. DOT needs to move their *** and start enforcing some new guidelines to make these things work.

I just installed some Q45 gatling gun projectors into a Toyota tundra and the thing doesn't blind at all. I did some flybys with one of my friends in his lowered accord and there wasn't any instance where he was blinded. People need to stop looking right into the headlamps.

CK1_RX3

RIGHT ON! Properly aligned headlamps aren't blinding if drivers keep their eyes on the road. I think part of the problem is that the "pretty" headlights (HID's) attract the oncoming drivers eyes towards them because they're unique looking, and the driver ends up staring into the headlights instead of at the road. OF COURSE they're going to get blinded, and the SAME thing would happen w/ halogen headlamps.

squarehat

Where I live, Audi vehicles are commonplace (as are X5's with HID). I think people have gotten used to the color and and intensity of HID lighting, and don't stare at the pretty purple flicker. None of my friends, colleagues, and relatives have ever been flashed at for having OEM HID, either.

1.5RS-T

I don't get these people that are complaining about HID. It is not like they were designed specifically to shine in your face. I guess some people are like deers, once they see on coming headlight they don't know what it is and can't help but stop and stare at the light and waiting to get hit by the car. Stupid animal - I mean the deer.

Drivers ed. teaches not to look at the light, meaning don't stare. I can understand the rear view mirror thing. But on coming traffic that does the glaring does not last for 30 seconds. Generally, people that retorfited their car with HID don't bother to re-aim their beam should be charge. But all factory vehicles that does what the law says then they are fine. The X5 should not be equiped with projectors, projectors are bad. Reflectors are fine with the "high up" cars.

About the white light, always, the human eyes are not comfortable with sharp changes with regards to lighting. Yellow light is more comforting to the eye in a dark place, while white light is not. That is why HID with 6000K are illegal, 4100K are not as white. I want to go with HID is because they are brighter, just need to aim right.

Take care.