Red filter (tail light lens) - red or white LED?

[-Virgil-]

What's the reason to design a new light with LED tecniq around the LED bulb Joule?

Excellent cost/benefit ratio. The manufacturer can easily and inexpensively produce a basic (bulb) and premium (LED) version of a lamp for different trim levels of a vehicle. Example is the Chevrolet Malibu. Or the maker can update to an LED tail/brake lamp without retooling the entire lamp assembly, because only the optical reflecting surface and the bulb seat need to be changed. Example is the Mercury Mountaineer (vs. Ford Explorer). Even if starting from scratch, it can be less expensive to design, tool, and make a single optical reflecting surface (w/Joule) rather than multiple such surfaces (w/multiple non-Joule emitters). Also, the Joule provides an easy way of having good performance with a very homogenous, smooth light distribution (rather than the "polka dot" look of multiple LED emitters). The "polka dot" look can be disguised, modified, or eliminated even with multiple emitters, but it is relatively costly and difficult to do it.

If one design a light from scratch with LED tecnology in mind, you want to use the benifits that LEDs have. Like that they can be mounted on a PCB and sealed inside the light, don't need to think of access to replace anything but the whole light

This is not necessarily an advantage (light source fails -- as some of them will -- and you're stuck replacing entire assembly rather than just the light source module. As for packaging, of course, but there are applications where there's no shortage of packaging space, so it makes no sense to spend money for a packaging advanage that won't be used.

Or that LEDs have a directed beam that you want in a rear light

No. All (real) LED vehicle lamps use optics; we are long past the days of the "shotgun" approach of an enormous number of relatively weak emitters with no or almost no optics. The directional nature of the beam from an ordinary LED emitter is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage overall vs. a lambertian (spherical) emitting light source; it is simply a difference. Linear output can be advantageous vs. lambertian output in certain kinds of optic systems, but vice versa.

It's not logical to take a directed beam light sourses and populate them so it is omnidirecional and then use a reflector to direct it again.

Perhaps in theory, but in practice it is a cost-effective, commercially-successful solution that performs well. And plus, the Joule line now includes a really good compact fog lamp and some forthcoming excellent small 14w SAE and ECE low and high beam headlamps. So where is the lack of logic?

 

[-Virgil-]

In my state, the motor vehicle laws are in RCW Title 46 (Revised Code of Washington). But when it comes to lights, they say "as approved by the Commission on Equipment." Nobody seems to be able to find out what that Commission has or has not approved as of this date.

That information is right here, and as state lighting codes go it's quite coherently written (Daniel Stern spends a lot of time in Seattle, wonder if WA hired him ). In a nutshell, the first paragraph at the linked page says lighting equipment items are permitted or forbidden in WA according to the applicable provisions of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108, except that ECE headlamps are also legal to sell and use in WA even though FMVSS 108 does not permit them. So basically any lighting device genuinely compliant with FMVSS 108 (and any headlamp genuinely ECE-compliant) is legal in WA, and any lighting device that is not genuinely compliant with FMVSS 108 (except a genuinely ECE-compliant headlamp) is not legal in WA.

 

[-Virgil-]

Well, he seems to have the urge to add something...

Gee, if he's got money he's just got to spend or go crazy, he could just mail it to me!

I recall adding a pair of high level brake lights (Hella, if memory serves) to my 1978 Saab 99 Turbo

If they're the ones I think you're talking about, that's a very seldom-seen accessory marketed for a few years in the mid-late '80s by Hella in Germany and a couple of other European countries. It was a pair of cube-shaped brake lamps, about 2½" on a side, each on a height-adjustable round aluminum pole (black anodized to prevent distracting reflection). You wedged each end of the pole in between the rear glass and its rubber seal, then adjusted the lamps so they were the same height and aimed directly back, thus giving you left and right high-level auxiliary brake lights. The single central 3rd brake light was not yet allowed in Europe (it became legal in 1993 or so, mandatory for 1998).

I never had problems there. But I can see that an over-zealous cop who didn't like a particular driver might try to ticket just about any sort of extra lights. And it's always an expensive nuisance to go to court and get it dismissed.

I wish the cops would crack down on idiot (or high-on-drugs) tow truck drivers who slap the (intended) left and right magnetic-mount brake/tail lights together side by side on one side of the towed vehicle, then when they're done towing they throw them side-by-side on the back deck of the truck.

I agree that some extra rear lights look odd or confusing. But in general, I've not disliked extra brake lights - maybe it's that motorcyclist mindset that makes me want to be more visible.

It has to be done right. Every schmoe (I'm not saying you are one) has his own ideas of what increases visibility/conspicuity/safety. Most of these ideas are baseless and without merit, and many of them are downright unsafe. Anything that causes a fellow traffic participant to have to figure out what signal is being presented, even if "only" for a fraction of a second, is bad. This includes brake light flashers, auxiliary lights of nonstandard position, color, or operating parameter, etc. Just the other day I saw some moron in a MINI who had replaced his car's amber front sidemarker lights with red ones, so all four (front and rear) were red. Real brilliant!

 

[Neondiod]

Good explanation Scheinwerfermann, I really learnd something :thumbsup:

 

[Hamilton Felix]

If they're the ones I think you're talking about, that's a very seldom-seen accessory marketed for a few years in the mid-late '80s by Hella in Germany and a couple of other European countries. It was a pair of cube-shaped brake lamps, about 2½" on a side, each on a height-adjustable round aluminum pole (black anodized to prevent distracting reflection). You wedged each end of the pole in between the rear glass and its rubber seal, then adjusted the lamps so they were the same height and aimed directly back, thus giving you left and right high-level auxiliary brake lights. The single central 3rd brake light was not yet allowed in Europe (it became legal in 1993 or so, mandatory for 1998).

You're right, that's exactly what they were. Good description. :thumbsup: I did this in the 80's. I patronized a lighting and specialty accessory shop in Seattle that sold Cibie, Marchal, Hella and other good things.

And thanks for that link. I think the rules have been simplified a bit since I last looked. Frankly, I don't see any way the Commission on Equipment could look at EVERY lamp being sold; there are just too many.
I do try not to buy too much cheap junk when it comes to lights.

 

[Mdinana]

So, with respect, how can people generalize that LED's don't work? Is it just the bulb-replacement types, or are you talking about LEDs in general? I ask b/c tons of vehicles have LEDs now ( I assume, therefore, that you're speaking of aftermarket parts).

Second question - how can these be illegal? I mean, you buy them at a store, right? It's not like I can walk into my local pharmacy and pick up a dime bag of coke and a pack of joints. Stores simply aren't allowed to sell illegal items (uh... right?). Or do they get around that sort of idea by saying "We just sell it, we don't put it on the car" (kind of like you can buy a bong at some stores, but you still can't smoke drugs legally)

As for the OP's question, well, the light goes through a filter. Consider what the filter is supposed to do, and you'll get your answer.

 

[jsdragonsoul333]

The argument is a lot of them are poorly made and they were not designed to put out the proper amount of light in the proper directions. They may look brighter but the output 99% of the time is not as the incandescent counterparts.

 

[CKOD]

So, with respect, how can people generalize that LED's don't work? Is it just the bulb-replacement types, or are you talking about LEDs in general? I ask b/c tons of vehicles have LEDs now ( I assume, therefore, that you're speaking of aftermarket parts).

Second question - how can these be illegal? I mean, you buy them at a store, right? It's not like I can walk into my local pharmacy and pick up a dime bag of coke and a pack of joints. Stores simply aren't allowed to sell illegal items (uh... right?). Or do they get around that sort of idea by saying "We just sell it, we don't put it on the car" (kind of like you can buy a bong at some stores, but you still can't smoke drugs legally)

As for the OP's question, well, the light goes through a filter. Consider what the filter is supposed to do, and you'll get your answer.

"For off road use only" I.E. either real offroading in 4x4's or show vehicles, or track vehicles. Its on just about every lighting accessory.


Also,

It's not logical to take a directed beam light sourses and populate them so it is omnidirecional and then use a reflector to direct it again.

when was the last time you saw an OEM brake light that just sent a beam of light backwards? They arent illumination devices, they are signaling devices, they are meant to be visible from the whole rear half of the car, not cast a beam behind the car. Ive seen a saturn Ion driving around that has LED conversions in the tail lights which look like just 8-9 5mm leds facing rearwards. The only thing that lights up is a 1" dot on each tail light when he steps on the brakes. :sick2: Even if he had a SST-90 in there dumping out 2k lumens it would still be a very poor brake light. (And if I ever rear ended him, the first thing out of my mouth to the police and the insurance would be "I was following a safe distance, but I never saw brake lights, I couldnt tell he was stopping..." Its not real cool then when 1 insurance company is after you, and your own doesnt wanna cover you )

The point of using a large reflector with scallops and dips etc... is that it spreads the light out over a large area, making for a large apparent light source. You either need to illuminate the reflector, or use a large array of LED's and optics.

If youre gonna do your own conversions dont half-*** it with drop in LED bulbs, (equivalent of putting HID bulbs into reflector headlight housings...)

 

[Optical Inferno]

So, with respect, how can people generalize that LED's don't work? Is it just the bulb-replacement types, or are you talking about LEDs in general? I ask b/c tons of vehicles have LEDs now ( I assume, therefore, that you're speaking of aftermarket parts).

Second question - how can these be illegal? I mean, you buy them at a store, right? It's not like I can walk into my local pharmacy and pick up a dime bag of coke and a pack of joints. Stores simply aren't allowed to sell illegal items (uh... right?). Or do they get around that sort of idea by saying "We just sell it, we don't put it on the car" (kind of like you can buy a bong at some stores, but you still can't smoke drugs legally)

LEDs work very well as most of us design around them almost exclusively now instead of filament, halogen, or HID (personally I guess). We are referring to these LED drop-ins that fit directly into your existing housing. They don't work because they rely on you existing halogen or HID reflector, while requireing their own optics/reflectors to meet the same codes and design characteristics as the originals. The vehicles that have factory stock LED lights have the optics/reflectors, heatsinks, etc. that meet the required codes and produce the correct standards of light.

When we say illegal we mean that they are not illegal to sell or even own. Just illegal if you install them as they don't produce the correct required image, or intensity.

 

[alpg88]

wow, it never stops, why do ppl feel the urge to screw up perfectly good cars, am not just talking about lights, but stupid computer chips, wrong mufflers, intakes, springs, shocks, electric turbos...etc.
about 10% or so of cars that came into my shop had to be fixed cuz they broke for that exact reason, stupid mods. ppl spend on average 3-4x as much to remove those things and fix what they broke, than they paid for them in the first place.

 

[CKOD]

wow, it never stops, why do ppl feel the urge to screw up perfectly good cars, am not just talking about lights, but stupid computer chips, wrong mufflers, intakes, springs, shocks, electric turbos...etc.
about 10% or so of cars that came into my shop had to be fixed cuz they broke for that exact reason, stupid mods. ppl spend on average 3-4x as much to remove those things and fix what they broke, than they paid for them in the first place.

You've had someone pull a car into a shop not driving right with an electric turbo in it? Did you charge them twice as much just because?

 

[Drkmith]

Re: Red filter (tail light lens) - red or white LED? Still agree with this post?

Do you still agree with this post, that led lights will never be good enough for tail lights?

 

[Unicorn]

Re: Red filter (tail light lens) - red or white LED? Still agree with this post?

Things have changed and there are a couple LED lamps that work. The ones in the iriginal post are still junk though. Phillips makes good LED lamps that work in some applications. They have actually tested them for compliance. They didn't just come up with some cool sounding name like stage 1 and stage 2 brightness. And only for the uses they specify. Just because that lamp works in car a doesn't mean it will work in car b.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Re: Red filter (tail light lens) - red or white LED? Still agree with this post?

Just because that lamp works in car a doesn't mean it will work in car b.

Which, to me, is broken. A bulb designed to replace an 1157 should replace the 1157 properly in any lamp designed for one.

 

[SubLGT]

Well, he seems to have the urge to add something… ….

How about a pair of LED backup lamps? That might satisfy the urge.

 

[Unicorn]

Re: Red filter (tail light lens) - red or white LED? Still agree with this post?

Which, to me, is broken. A bulb designed to replace an 1157 should replace the 1157 properly in any lamp designed for one.

Only two reasons I can think of that... and one is just a disclaimer for legal reasons...

First is that Phillips tests them in those specific cars to ensure the glare, light pattern, etcetera is correct and within limits. Until they've been tested, they can't guarantee they will work properly... I'm sure their lawyers had something to do with that.

The other reason is a guess. That the reflectors might be different in different cars so things might be different.

But yeah, you're totally correct, it does seem like if it works in one it should work in another. I think it was either you or probably Virgil that has first stated this.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Re: Red filter (tail light lens) - red or white LED? Still agree with this post?

Only two reasons I can think of that... and one is just a disclaimer for legal reasons...

Their disclaimer offers no legal protection. People reading packaging thing it does, and it scares them away, but ultimately the products are marketed as replacements for [bulb type].

First is that Phillips tests them in those specific cars to ensure the glare, light pattern, etcetera is correct and within limits. Until they've been tested, they can't guarantee they will work properly... I'm sure their lawyers had something to do with that.

Which reveals a fundamental flaw in their design.

The other reason is a guess. That the reflectors might be different in different cars so things might be different.

These two reasons are interelated to my concern about these drop-ins: An 1157 should always fulfill the job of an 1157 when used in a lamp assembly designed for an 1157. (Strange that I always lean on "1157".)

Side note: I wonder how the 1156 version would perform in one of those old Tensor "high intensity" desk lamps.
Second side note: Mr. Monroe should've also made a version using an 1157, so you could switch to the minor filament and use the high/low setting for it, so it could be a nightlight as well as a task light.

But yeah, you're totally correct, it does seem like if it works in one it should work in another. I think it was either you or probably Virgil that has first stated this.

I'm not sure who was first, possibly it was me, but it's not a contest. (Maybe it was "conspiracy theory" me, annoyed that Philips gets a pass for what we wouldn't allow Homebrew Joe to get away with.) Still, I have to admit the Philips entry into the market is orders of magnitude better than those silly "corncob" type LED bulbs such as from Putco. (Putco: Where the putz goes!)