85, 90 or 100 REAL watt H9 or H11

[fivemega]

Does anyone know the source of REAL 100 watt, 95 watt or even 80 watt consuming halogen bulbs in form of either H9 or H11 base?
Some Ebay listings claim 100 watts but they are really 65 or 55 watts.
Thank you.

 

[-Virgil-]

No, there are no over-spec-power H9 or H11 bulbs made by legitimate/reputable manufacturers. What is it you're trying to accomplish, in exactly what kind of lamp? The light output of a bulb is not measured in watts, it's measured in lumens. Moreover, a higher-wattage filament is a larger filament, which has a strongly negative effect on beam focus. A standard H9 bulb produces 2100 lumens, which is close to the output of 100w versions of older bulb designs such as H1, H3, etc. And many lamps designed to accept H9 or H11 won't tolerate the extra heat from a high-power bulb, not to mention the small contact pins in the plastic base.

 

[fivemega]

All I need is to improve my night vision from 55 watt H11
65 watt H9 improves a little but not much.
I used to have different vehicle using overspec 80 real watt H4 which I was happy with and didn't glare oncoming vehicles. In fact, I test it myself by let my friend drive my car from opposite side.
So my understanding is that the brightest available bulb for my 2007 Camry (projection low beam) would be 2100 lumens H9 istead of 55 watt original H11. Right?

 

[hokiefyd]

Sorry to jump in here, but it might be helpful to also include the particular vehicle application, and if you're talking about the high beam or the low beam. As I understand it, some vehicles with H11 low beams are good candidates for an H9 swap, and some are not. Additionally, some vehicles use H11 in the high beam, and I understand that these are usually (always?) good candidates for an H9 swap into the high beam.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

I used to have different vehicle using overspec 80 real watt H4 which I was happy with and didn't glare oncoming vehicles. In fact, I test it myself by let my friend drive my car from opposite side.

That only tested that you (subjectively) didn't feel as if there was excessive glare. Some people find ordinary, in-spec, properly-aimed headlamps to be glaring even when objectively they are not causing excessive glare. Imagine how an 80W low beam must look to those people-- especially considering how the overwattage filament is also oversize, which affects beam focus and can cause excessive glare as a result.

We still need to know what vehicle you are driving so that we can better recommend a solution.

Also, if you can avoid unnecessarily coloring or bolding text in a post, that will help make it readable on a wider variety of browsers and more compatible with assistive technology like screen readers and display themes.

 

[MichaelW]

If there wasn't a noticeable increase in seeing performance in the H11 -> H9 swap, then the wiring is likely the limiting factor.

How many vehicles actually have H11 highs? GM's "suv" minivans, right before they were killed off.

 

[-Virgil-]

Something's amiss here. Tell us what kind of vehicle you're working on -- the year, make, and model -- and which specific application you're looking at (high beam, low beam, fog lamp, etc). Without that information, you cannot get a helpful answer.

 

[hokiefyd]

How many vehicles actually have H11 highs? GM's "suv" minivans, right before they were killed off.

Current Mopar minivans do as well.

 

[Ducky's Dad]

I'm trying to upgrade the stock lights on a 2008 Toyota Tundra. Stock lamps are 9005 high beams, H11 low beams and 9145 fogs, all in stock housings with good condition lenses. I am planning to use 9011 HIR in the high beams and was planning to use H9 as replacement for the H11 lows. Getting a lot of seemingly spurious info from my supplier about the H9s, so checking in here. Supplier says the H11 +50/80/90 are going away and the new hot ticket is an H11 +100 that will put out 2400 lumens at 12.5V. That lamp may or may not be available yet, will have more info on Monday. If specs are accurate and if lamp is available, then it seems that would be a better choice than an H9 with similar output. Comments or feedback from any who have done this? Also, have read that H9 can be adapted to replace 9145. Rumor, fact, comments, feedback? Thanks.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

I'm trying to upgrade the stock lights on a 2008 Toyota Tundra. Stock lamps are 9005 high beams, H11 low beams and 9145 fogs, all in stock housings with good condition lenses. I am planning to use 9011 HIR in the high beams and was planning to use H9 as replacement for the H11 lows.

The 9011 is a good mod for the 9005 high beam. Unless the Tundra has projectors or very excellent glare control, the H9 swap may not be advisable.

Getting a lot of seemingly spurious info from my supplier about the H9s, so checking in here. Supplier says the H11 +50/80/90 are going away and the new hot ticket is an H11 +100 that will put out 2400 lumens at 12.5V.

According to some of my documentation, the H11 has a nominal rating of 1350 ± 135 lumens at 13.2v; 1250 ± 150 lumens at 12.8v. A 2400lm H11 sounds spurious to me!

A genuine H11 +100 bulb will have the same output as the +50/80/90 (and the standard type)-- the difference is it will have a smaller, more precisely wound filament which translates to better beam focus and better 'punch'-- but will have a shorter lifespan.

That lamp may or may not be available yet, will have more info on Monday. If specs are accurate and if lamp is available, then it seems that would be a better choice than an H9 with similar output. Comments or feedback from any who have done this? Also, have read that H9 can be adapted to replace 9145. Rumor, fact, comments, feedback? Thanks.

Yes, it is true that you have read the H9 can be adapted to replace the 9145. However, it's NOT true that the H9 can actually be adapted to replace the 9145.

The 9145 is on a PY20D base; The H9 is on a PGJ19-5 base-- the H9 will wobble in there, and the beam focus will be changed dramatically since the bulbs have different light center lengths. It'll be glare central. There is no "adapting" to put any bulb other than a 9145 in place of a 9145. You might be able to use a 9155 instead-- but the fog lamps aren't really useful on almost any car.

 

[Ducky's Dad]

Yes, it is true that you have read the H9 can be adapted to replace the 9145. However, it's NOT true that the H9 can actually be adapted to replace the 9145.

The 9145 is on a PY20D base; The H9 is on a PGJ19-5 base-- the H9 will wobble in there, and the beam focus will be changed dramatically since the bulbs have different light center lengths. It'll be glare central. There is no "adapting" to put any bulb other than a 9145 in place of a 9145. You might be able to use a 9155 instead-- but the fog lamps aren't really useful on almost any car.

That's what I was afraid of. I actually use my fog lights, both in pea soup fog and to illuminate the shoulders of the road when I'm in the boonies. I did upgrade the factory Hella fogs on another truck with a set of HIR 9011s and the results were very good, so I was hoping for something similar on the Tundra. Looks like the 9155 would be a minor improvement over the 9145. Do you know if it would be plug-and-play, or would it require mods?

I can probably live with the shorter life of the H11 +100 in the low beams, as long as life is somewhat reasonable. My Tundra does not have projectors and the factory lights are not adequate for my purposes. Some of the guys with late model Dodge Rams swear by the H9 bulbs in their H11 headlights. I guess I'll try the H11+100 if they are available, otherwise will pop in a set of H9s. Hella makes a 100W H9, but not sure I want to try that one without a bypass harness. Looks like the only simple upgrade will be the HIR 9011s in the high beams. My backup plan for the fogs is a set of p-n-p LED fogs from someone like Vision-X. Thanks for the input.

 

[-Virgil-]

I'm trying to upgrade the stock lights on a 2008 Toyota Tundra. Stock lamps are 9005 high beams, H11 low beams and 9145 fogs, all in stock housings with good condition lenses. I am planning to use 9011 HIR in the high beams

So far, so good.

and was planning to use H9 as replacement for the H11 lows.

NO good. Excessive/dangerous/unlawful glare, unless you aim the lamps downward so far that you won't have adequate seeing distance. Don't do this. Use the best H11 and aim the lamps nominally; the result will be better and safer.

new hot ticket is an H11 +100 that will put out 2400 lumens at 12.5V.

No such bulb, now or ever; whoever told you this is all mixed up. The maximum amount of light an H11 (per se) can produce is 1400 lumens at 12.8v, which is the test voltage for the US/Canada regs (12.0 and 13.2 in the rest of the world, with accordingly different lumen specs, but never anywhere near 2400). Whoever told you this does not understand what "+100" means in relation to a headlamp bulb, and probably just guessed/assumed it meant about 100% more lumens than the 1250 nominal spec for an H11 in the US technical standards. Anyhow, this mythical 2400 lumen H11 would be even more unsafe than the H9 in your low beams, for the same reason.

Also, have read that H9 can be adapted to replace 9145.

Not at all true (you wouldn't even be able to insert the bulb -- the physical difference between PGJ19-5 and PY20D bases are far more than just 1mm diameter; the keying and structure are totally different) and even if it were true you could swap this way, it would be a seriously bad idea for the same reason as the caution against H9 in your low beams: dangerous/unlawful levels of glare (in this case, no matter how you would aim the lamps). Leave the fog lamp bulbs as they are; the fogs should be unlit (turned off) almost 100% of your driving time anyhow. 9155s would be adaptable with non-zero (but not a lot, either) of heat-related damage.

There are some good LED fogs coming onto the market, but the Vision-X items aren't on the list.

 

[Ducky's Dad]

There are some good LED fogs coming onto the market, but the Vision-X items aren't on the list.

Recommendations?

A significant portion of my night driving is on dirt roads, farm roads, tractor paths, etc., often in bad weather, so my fogs do get used. I need something better than the stock fogs on the Tundra. Have also read that the 9011 can be adapted to replace the 9145. Wishful thinking?

Thanks.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Recommendations?

Slow down and don't count on fog lamps to be the magic bullet for heavy rain/fog/dust driving. Between 25 and 30mph they're really not helping, and above 35mph they're definitely hurting. They're for low speeds, where you are focused on the immediate foreground and sides of the road.

A significant portion of my night driving is on dirt roads, farm roads, tractor paths, etc., often in bad weather, so my fogs do get used. I need something better than the stock fogs on the Tundra.

Excellent headlamps obviate the need for fog lamps. If you must have them, they must have the right type of beam pattern, and preferably would be selective yellow (no, not to "penetrate fog", rather to make it easier for your eyes to process what you're seeing).

Have also read that the 9011 can be adapted to replace the 9145.

Where are you READING this stuff? Do not do this! The 9155 would be as high as you should go (they're a 55W bulb), the 9011 is a 65W bulb. Something's gonna melt. The glare will be outrageous.

 

[Ducky's Dad]

Slow down and don't count on fog lamps to be the magic bullet for heavy rain/fog/dust driving. Between 25 and 30mph they're really not helping, and above 35mph they're definitely hurting. They're for low speeds, where you are focused on the immediate foreground and sides of the road.

Not my first rodeo. I'm talking about 5mph in the rain, on slippery mud, with ditches on both sides of the road. Sometimes the fog is so bad that driver or passenger has to get out and walk in front of the truck to see what's going on. Have to navigate sometimes with fog lights only, no headlights. Visibility less than 10 feet at times. This is not a rice rocket.

Excellent headlamps obviate the need for fog lamps.

Absolutely disagree. First, the Tundra does not have what I would call "excellent" headlights, and it's not likely to get them without a huge investment in aftermarket fitments. Second, the height of the headlights on a 4WD truck with tall tires puts the headlights too high in relation to the dense fog we sometimes encounter. And no, the truck is not lifted because I don't want to screw up the CG on off-camber mud trails. Third, the dead spot immediately in front of and to the sides of the truck is not well illuminated by headlights, not even "excellent" headlights. I need broad, bright, short-range lighting from the fogs.

preferably would be selective yellow (no, not to "penetrate fog", rather to make it easier for your eyes to process what you're seeing).

I have had yellow in the past, and I much prefer something in the -4000K range for general purpose use in fog lamps. For low and high beams, I prefer 4300-4600K.

Where are you READING this stuff? Do not do this! The 9155 would be as high as you should go (they're a 55W bulb), the 9011 is a 65W bulb. Something's gonna melt. The glare will be outrageous.

This stuff is all over the Tundra forums, but I am well aware that most of those guys are not rocket scientists. This Tundra is new to me and I am trying to optimize lighting without having to reinvent the wheel. I am not too worried about melting things if I am careful with new ceramic connectors and bypass harness if necessary. Not too concerned about fog lamp glare to oncoming cars because I don't use them on public roads, but am concerned about light bouncing back into my eyes when in fog offroad. Need to balance the cost and hassle of optimizing the factory lights against the cost of just replacing the complete unit with something suitable.

Thanks.

 

[-Virgil-]

Recommendations?

It really depends on how/where you plan on mounting them and how much you're willing to pay for them. In 2014, one does not get fog lamps that are LED, good, and inexpensive. You can have LED fog lamps that are inexpensive (but not good), LED fog lamps that are good (but not inexpensive), good fog lamps that are inexpensive (but not LED), etc. You might well be better off with something completely different than you have in mind; if I were in your situation I can think of some lamps I would gravitate towards (Hella Bi-Focus auxiliary low beam, mounted in a suitable housing, or ZKW CeWe units), but those don't meet your "must be LED" criterion. Is there a particular reason you need to have LEDs in this application?

I need something better than the stock fogs on the Tundra.

Most people who have fog lamps feel their fog lamps should be better than they are -- that is because most fog lamps are not geneuinely useful.

Have also read that the 9011 can be adapted to replace the 9145.

You can find all kinds of very foolish ideas on the internet, put up by people who should not be allowed to own so much as a roll of duct tape, let alone screwdrivers or computers. This is one of those ideas. DON'T!

the Tundra does not have what I would call "excellent" headlights

They're actually rather good, objectively -- but it does sound like you have specific driving conditions that call for good working auxiliary lamps specifically for very low speeds in very bad weather. That might or might not mean "fog lamps" as such. Talk/listen less with the noisemakers on the vehicle fanboy sites (which, while they might not be completely useless, are generally full of unreliable subjective "reviews" and misguided advice -- not the place to find solid knowledge) and more with actual lighting experts who actually know what they're talking about.

I have had yellow in the past, and I much prefer something in the -4000K range for general purpose use in fog lamps. For low and high beams, I prefer 4300-4600K.

This is a problematic statement in several ways. For one thing, there is no significant practical difference between the 4000K and 4600K low and high ends of your stated preference range. For another thing, there are no legitimate bulbs to fit your truck's lamps that produce light of 4000K (halogen bulbs don't, unless they have blue-tinted glass, which artificially alters the light color with only drawbacks, no benefits). Also, if you're trying for maximum seeing in fog, snow, or rain, lower color temperature is objectively better. Dan Stern's got a good writeup on the science of it, with links to studies and data, here. That doesn't necessarily mean you should get selective yellow lamps, but it does mean that the color temps you say you prefer are working against you if you're trying to see in the conditions you describe.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

I have had yellow in the past, and I much prefer something in the -4000K range for general purpose use in fog lamps.

Except that fog lamps are not "general purpose" (hence the design of the beam pattern and their name).

For low and high beams, I prefer 4300-4600K.

Your low and high beams are filament bulbs; their CCT is well below that range. The Philips HIR2 (9012) has a CCT of 3450K, which is about as high as it gets without using any tints. It's the nature of the filament.

Any filament bulbs claiming a CCT in the range you prefer are actually using blue-tinted envelopes. This reduces the light output greatly, and the light that does get out is harder for your eyes to process.

CCT only applies to white light; selective yellow is not white light, therefore CCT has no application here.

This stuff is all over the Tundra forums, but I am well aware that most of those guys are not rocket scientists.

Nor are they lighting engineers. But they pass out bad advice like Werther's Originals at the retirement home, and people get misled time and again. Talk of "CCT" and "like daylight" and "penetrates fog" and whatnot.

Then, when confronted with facts they'll start in with the "but REAL WORLD experience!" and such. When confronted with more than one person using facts, they call it "regurgitation" (and think that it's somehow worse than their own regurgitation of the ol' "REAL WORLD experience" thing).

This Tundra is new to me and I am trying to optimize lighting without having to reinvent the wheel.

Which is why coming here was a good idea. We'll save you time, money, and perhaps property damage and bodily injury-- maybe even save you LIABILITY for property damage and bodily injury, which can be placed on you if you do unlawful or dangerous lighting modifications.

I am not too worried about melting things if I am careful with new ceramic connectors and bypass harness if necessary.

You might not melt the wiring, but you might melt the lamp assembly itself, depending on how it's constructed.

but [I] am concerned about light bouncing back into my eyes when in fog offroad.

And it will if you put 9011s in your fog lamps. Remember, selective yellow is the best color for fog lamps because some of the beam does pass through (and bounce back off of) the fog. Some of it also reflects off the wet road surface and back through the fog-- you're not just seeing the first order of reflection with fog lamps. Selective yellow makes everything easier to parse.

Need to balance the cost and hassle of optimizing the factory lights against the cost of just replacing the complete unit with something suitable.

Leaving the fog lamps alone doesn't cost you a cent!

 

[-Virgil-]

But they pass out bad advice like Werther's Originals at the retirement home

Hey! What's wrong with Werther's Originals?!! Are you calling me old??? Speak up, I can't hear you when you mumble like that!

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Hey! What's wrong with Werther's Originals?!! Are you calling me old??? Speak up, I can't hear you when you mumble like that!

Come back later! I'm not through yelling at that cloud!

 

[Ducky's Dad]

Except that fog lamps are not "general purpose" (hence the design of the beam pattern and their name).

But I use them as general purpose lights, including in fog. Sometimes need to sneak into a campground at 2:00am without unduly disturbing the other campers. Sometimes use the fogs by themselves as worklights for setting up camp, or for pulling other trucks out of the mud when I need to see stuff close to the ground.

For low and high beams, I prefer 4300-4600K.


Your low and high beams are filament bulbs; their CCT is well below that range. The Philips HIR2 (9012) has a CCT of 3450K, which is about as high as it gets without using any tints. It's the nature of the filament.

Any filament bulbs claiming a CCT in the range you prefer are actually using blue-tinted envelopes. This reduces the light output greatly, and the light that does get out is harder for your eyes to process.

I am aware of the limitations of filament bulbs, but my preference is still mid-4000s when I have a choice for road lights. My other "serious" truck is fitted with a set of 55W 4300K digital HID projector headlights, a pair of Hella fogs with 9011s, two Hella Rally 4000 Euro beams with 100W halogens, two Hella Rally 4000 pencil beams with 100W halogens, and a 32" double stack LED light bar on the front. The rear of that truck has a combination six 55W Hella projector headlights and work lamps for backup and work lights, plus the truck has dual Odyssey batteries and a high amp alternator. I have a huge investment in lighting and wiring on that truck and I don't want to do that to the Tundra because the Tundra is a daily driver that will see some offroad use. Just want to optimize the Tundra without spending an arm and a leg on it. I don't buy blue tint bulbs unless it's an emergency and that's all I can get. Have taken a lot of coursework in physiological psychology and have a pretty good understanding of how the eye and the brain work. But I'm not a lighting engineer or an auto electrician, that's where you guys come in.

This stuff is all over the Tundra forums, but I am well aware that most of those guys are not rocket scientists.


Nor are they lighting engineers.

I had to start somewhere, but the Tundra guys are usually not as sharp as those on some of the other enthusiast sites.

but am concerned about light bouncing back into my eyes when in fog offroad.


And it will if you put 9011s in your fog lamps. Remember, selective yellow is the best color for fog lamps because some of the beam does pass through (and bounce back off of) the fog. Some of it also reflects off the wet road surface and back through the fog-- you're not just seeing the first order of reflection with fog lamps. Selective yellow makes everything easier to parse.

I have found that yellow fogs are not very helpful when the vegetation surrounding the truck is mostly yellow and shades of brown at 3:00am, whether wet or dry. CRI does have some value when you are trying to pick a trail.

Leaving the fog lamps alone doesn't cost you a cent!

True, but where's the fun in that?