Just get a pickup truck, and toss some weight in rear-bed. This is one area where DOT sits on their butts; all pickups should have mandatory air shocks, that level pickup. The same thing with HID lights for autos/trucks, as in Europe.Originally Posted by lemons bob
I live in farm country, and deal with this light issue nightly....
Even our HID do not reach as far as European ones. Someone really needs to go through and update it. I understand the needs for standards, I mean without htem half the companies would go cheap as possible and you could barely see anything while others will go overboard and blind everyone. All you have to do is see someone with an omnidirectional LED off road lightbar driving the opposite direction of you. Sure they can see everything as well as if the sun was out, but anyone driving towards them are blinded by their light setup.
Sidebar - DOT and other government regulatory agencies tend to throw out proposals, and then get responses from related industries. Its basically a consensus arrangement, unless a given rule is needed for safety/etc aspects. Europeans do have HID Self Leveling headlights (not air shocks), but when this came before DOT the first time some years ago, US Auto industry said not needed.
Here is an overview of DOT's Rulemaking Process, and if one person wants to be involved, they can
Petition for rulemaking. The public has the right to petition an agency to issue, modify, or rescind a rule, and we may agree on the need for action.
but, I suspect one would need facts to make their case. For instance, in UK, "‘Blinding lights’ to blame for ‘soaring crash rate.' Another article, "Fight Headlight Glare," and LED Lights: Dangerous on Roadways and Off.
So, alot of homework would be required to make a factual case. Europeans "saw the light," but US's DOT/etc tends to listen more to industry.
Sidebar Footnotes - Here's the problem, jerks that "think" they "think,"
"“We think there is some problem with glare but we think it is a good tradeoff. Our overall opinion of HIDs is that they are good things. HID lamps can be and, normally are, better for seeing,” describes Michael Flannagan, research scientist of the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (TRI) which has been studying the problem."
The basic assumption here is that drivers are paying attention to roadway conditions. I would like to see the study that confirms this assumption. If true, then why the beef with cellphone drivers?
Also, I've noted elsewhere, with HID lights, you might gain a full second in reaction time...so, are all drivers paying attention?
Jackasses..."We think" is semantical BS
Last tidbit - Some OEMs have active braking systems, which begs the question of why HIDs are needed since this most likely is the future for vehicles. As Michael Flannagan stated, “We think there is some problem with glare...," well then, Michael, you still can't sort the chaff (HID) from the wheat (active braking system)?
I would like to see Michael compare the stats for active braking vs HIDs....see the cite above... Also, researchers suggested in 2009 that a dual lighting system may be best when dealing with deer, Enhancing the Perceived Threat of Vehicle Approach to Deer, which is a serious matter, 2016 Likelihood of Collision with Deer - "On average, one of every 41 West Virginia drivers will have an insurance claim for damage caused by a collision with a deer in 2016."
The basic problem with government and university research and "findings" is that they don't always see the "Big Picture" when those involved are only focused upon small details.
Last edited by 85_Ciera_Rebuild; 12-05-2016 at 01:35 AM.
We use the lights for other things like knowing where to steer, look at signs and other things that automatic breaking won't help on. So until it fully automated cars improved vision is useful. So for that you would need some of the night time vision aids.
Of course if its pure safety taking people out of the equation is the most reliable way to get improvements. A bunch of autonomous vehicles should be able to outperform any of these systems were humans still can overide and make mistakes.
To my awareness headlights, since tungsten sealed beams, have not been a safety issue when fit for duty (alternator voltage OK, wiring OK, etc). What has been the issue is dimwits with their brights on, scattered light in foggy/etc conditions, incorrectly pointing headlamps, etc.
If HID was such a "miracle," safety officials could make it mandatory on all vehicles...this was done for years...this way, now shut up.
There is a basic driving law: Unsafe Speed (Too Fast for Conditions) - "One of the laws that is identical from state to state states that all drivers must have their vehicle under control at all times no matter what the situation. This law applies to any situation; a construction zone, heavy traffic, low traffic, a school zone, an accident site or inclement weather conditions. In these situations, police officers have the discretion to determine if you were driving at an unsafe speed for the conditions presented to you."
All HID might do is give an edge in driving FASTER for alert drivers...so this begs the question, "is it safe?" As such, DOT is promoting faster speeds for HID folks...is this prudent? What was that about speed and accidents?
I would like to see the deer-HID stats in West Virginia, and then compare to vehicles with automatic braking. As stated before elsewhere, "Volvo was surprised to find that European insurance companies offered a 30 percent discount on premiums for the XC60, which British regulators called “the car we couldn’t crash," which is due to "a standard auto-braking feature called City Safety that stops the car when collision with an obstacle is imminent." This article was dated 11.16.09, and today, its been expanded to highway braking...for moose/etc.
Yes, I'd like to see a comparison between HID vs Volvo...HID will loose...so it begs the question
Keep in mind newer car owners are not prone to crash vehicles like older vehicle owners do, who tend to be younger. And there's the rub when examining HID users, who tend to be a more affluent class, and concerned more with liability issues.
Needless to say, OEMs are "milking" this product, and safety folks are looking the other way. HIDs should never be allowed on pickups...and HIDs should be no higher than X feet from the ground, with headlight leveling device.
When these vehicles get older, there will be more issues with them....especially vehicles that sag in the rear-end.
I drive hilly type roads, and I know how bright the low beams can be on hills, which forces my eyes to right side of roadway.
I believe OEM's HIDs have a color temperature of around 4,300 Kelvin....AMA's report, "Human and Environmental Effects of Light Emitting Diode (LED) Community Lighting," had this to say about 4k street lights:
Depending on the design, a large amount blue light is emitted from some LEDs that appear white to the naked eye. The excess blue and green emissions from some LEDs lead to increased light pollution, as these wavelengths scatter more within the eye and have detrimental environmental and glare effects. LED’s light emissions are characterized by their correlated color temperature (CCT) index. The first generation of LED outdoor lighting and units that are still widely being installed are “4000K” LED units.
As Michael Flannagan stated, "We think there is some problem with glare but we think it is a good tradeoff."
Again, "tradeoff" for what, faster speeds? Their opinion is in conflict with basic driving law: Unsafe Speed (Too Fast for Conditions), from a logical viewpoint. A driver must drive a speed relative to a condition....so HID drivers drive faster, while others drive slower. If all vehicles had HIDs, just think about those glaring effects.
Of course they already have LEDs replacement in the works with Laser Headlights.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/laser-...-headlight.htm
Just think about these tidbits:
"According to the AAA Foundation’s report, called “Countermeasures for Reducing the Effects of Headlight Glare” (2002), as many as 50 percent of all headlamps on the road, or 110 million vehicles, may have mis-aimed headlights! Shock, vibration and wear and tear are the greatest contributors to headlamp misalignment. (AAA Foundation)"
"Although 4,300K HID bulbs are thought of as being the “brightest”, they are not the most reflective. A 6,000K or 8,000K produces negligibly less light output, but has more reflective properties making it better for spotting animals at night, and seeing road signs from further distances away. (Top Line Group Automotive)"
FWIW, in regards to LED replacements:
High and Low Beam in the same 4×6″ LED headlight – The Dual Beam Vision X Vortex 4×6″ LED Sealed Beam Housing
7" LED Headlight Option with Halo for Motorcycles.
You see, the HID/LED/Laser marketing folks want to blow psychological BS at consumers, but tech orientated folks would want an active braking system. Think about it, "XC60, which British regulators called “the car we couldn’t crash." But so called "safety folks" can't sort the chaff from the wheat.
I'll take the active braking system, with plain oh 1950s tungsten sealed beams...after all, who really needs these blinding lights?
Reminds me I have to realign the lights on my MG. Replaced the god knows how old worn out bulbs with halogen bulbs in oem spec lenses (original Lucas Electic glass Pattern) and now that it was bright enough to actually see with them on I noticed that it looks like the alignment was done to the english specs with everything backwards.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote