XtremeVision vs RacingVision 🤔

[Kabana]

I'm comparing the Philips XtremeVision Pro 150 vs the RacingVision +150%


XtremeVision

https://www.philips.co.uk/c-p/00567028/x-tremevision-pro150-car-headlight-bulb

https://www.philips.com.au/c-p/12342XVPS2/x-tremevision-plus-headlight-bulb


RacingVision

https://www.philips.com.au/c-p/12342RVS2/racingvision-car-headlight-bulb


Apart from life hours of 540 - 600 vs 200, what's the difference?


Is the XtremeVision really an unadvertised hyper long-life bulb or a second generation Gforce +130% bulb which has similar life at 450 hours?

https://www.philips.co.uk/c-p/12342XVGS2/x-tremevision-g-force


XtremeVision, RacingVision, Gforce comparison


https://www.philips.com.au/etc/phil...=CONSUMER&ctn=12342RVS2,12342XVPS2,12342XVGS2

 

[-Virgil-]

It's difficult to squeeze any good juice out of this bag of apples. The first two links appear to be the same product marketed differently in two countries. The "X-tremeVision G-force" link has pictures showing two very different amounts, depths, and patterns of blue tint on the glass. And that last link, the comparative one, is a mess. Three H4 bulbs, OK. Wattage: one listed as "55 W", one as "60 W/55 W", and one as "55/60 W". Useless; 60/55w is just the nominal wattage of an H4 bulb at 12.0 volts, as per UNECE Regulation 37. Color temperature: two are listed as "Up to 3500K", one as "3500K". I guess this refers to the fact that two of them have a light-reducing/color-increasing blue band around the high beam. Lifetime: one listed as "200 hrs", one as "600 h" and one as "450 hrs". Useless! What is that, is it B3? Tc? B50? For the low beam or the high beam? At what voltage? Lumens: one is listed as "1650 lm", one as "1650 +/- 15%" and one as "1650 +/- 15% / 1000 +/- 15% lm". Useless! 1650/1000 +/- 15% is just the nominal output and allowable range for an H4 bulb at 13.2 volts, as per UNECE Regulation 37. These "specifications" tell us nothing useful or reliable about these bulbs, individually or comparatively. It would take careful, appropriately-done 3rd-party testing to be able to legitimately compare and rank these bulbs.

I'm still sticking with the Tungsram Megalight +120. Of all these high-plus bulbs, it's about the only one with no blue tint in the light path.

 

[Kabana]

60/55w is just the nominal wattage of an H4 bulb at 12.0 volts, as per UNECE Regulation 37.
Lumens: one is listed as "1650 lm", one as "1650 +/- 15%" and one as "1650 +/- 15% / 1000 +/- 15% lm". 1650/1000 +/- 15% is just the nominal output and allowable range for an H4 bulb at 13.2 volts, as per UNECE Regulation 37. These "specifications" tell us nothing useful or reliable about these bulbs, individually or comparatively.

Yep totally agree with your assessment.

Philips sloppiness is down right deceptive with there lack of and incorrect info on their webpages - have seen almost as bad with Osram.

TBH its six of one and halfa dozen of the other with the bulbs I have mentioned.

As far as the MG 120, I understand why its a good all round bulb for the low and high beam. As for me I will be upping the V wit the main priority the low beam, so the more precise low beam of the Philips RacingVision 150 - 200 is likely to produce better results.

Also your Interesting headlight bulb test results should be a sticky. Do you remember from back then if the Philips HB2 + H4 Xtreme Power 9003XP you tested was a the XP +50, +80 or +100?

Moderator EditPared down quote

 

[-Virgil-]

Good idea, that thread is now a sticky. The XP in those tests was a +80, the gen1 XP.

 

[Kabana]

Virgil since your Interesting headlight bulb test results is now going on some 7 years later, would you consider adding some of the other data like luminous flux?

 

[-Virgil-]

The luminous flux data from that set of tests was not released for publication. It's not really very important, either; any legitimate H4 is going to produce 1650/1000 lumens, +/- 15%, at 13.2 volts. Aside from the nerdy desire to know (which I will completely admit to sharing!), luminous flux off the bulb isn't anywhere near as practically useful as the kind of beam photometry data shared in that linked thread. Putting different bulbs in a given headlamp (or several given headlamps) allows to see the real, effective performance differences between the bulbs -- a combination of luminous flux, luminance, focal and positional accuracy, and so on.

 

[robscorpio]

I'm still sticking with the Tungsram Megalight +120. Of all these high-plus bulbs, it's about the only one with no blue tint in the light path.

I had great luck with two different sets of the Osram Rallye 70/65 recommended here and was wondering if the Tungsram H4 Xenon [ which does not meet DOT regulations - 71 watts at 13.1 volts ] [ a good thing probably ] according to one of Tungsram's charts .
It is apparently a different bulb from the Tungsram 9003 -

Is it worth hunting one down the H4 ?

Might be similar to the Rallye 64205 ?

Moderator Edit
Pared down overquote
--AlaricD

 

[-Virgil-]

I had great luck with two different sets of the Osram Rallye 70/65 recommended here and was wondering if the Tungsram H4 Xenon

Do you mean the Night Hawk Xenon? That's the American packaging for what is sold in Europe/rest of world as Tungsram Megalight +120. This bulb has an advantage over most/all of the "plus more" bulbs (+130, +150, +200), which have more and darker blue tint on the bulb glass, especially around the high beam filament.

[ which does not meet DOT regulations - 71 watts at 13.1 volts ]

One doesn't follow from the other. The US spec for HB2 ("9003") is max 72/65w at 12.8v. Rest-of-world test voltage is 13.2v, not 13.1v, and the spec is max 75/68w. Wattage varies exponentially (approx 1.6) with voltage, so if your 71w figure (where did this come from, and is it for high beam or low beam?) is accurate at 13.1v (where did this come from, too?), then that's about 68w at 12.8v. If your 71w figure is actually at 13.2v, that's still about 68w at 12.8v.

It is apparently a different bulb from the Tungsram 9003 -

Which Tungsram 9003? There are many. There is not enough real difference between a "Tungsram Night Hawk 9003" and a "Tungsram Megalight +120" to make one better than the other in any practical sense.

Might be similar to the Rallye 64205 ?

On low beam, pretty similar -- it's better than the older +80 and +90 bulbs in this comparo, which were pretty close to the 70/65w bulb on low beam. High beam was better on the 70/65, but those 70/65w bulbs just don't exist any more, except from time to time when batches are found sleeping on a shelf somewhere.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Tungsram H4 Xenon [ which does not meet DOT regulations - 71 watts at 13.1 volts ] [ a good thing probably ] according to one of Tungsram's charts .

Generally speaking, bulb wattage increases to the power of 1.6 with changes in voltage; 71W (major filament) at 13.1V seems like it could be within the norm for a 60W (nominal) at 12v filament. The power of 1.6 is a general guideline and can differ with metallurgy.

 

[robscorpio]

Thanks . I was able to find 2 and another 2 on your recommendation and others for about the last 5 years , now I am looking for a good replacement as they finally died.
My headlights were/are set a bit lower so I used the high beams mostly , except on left turns or directly facing traffic.

I was spoiled by the huge lightfield , lol , and quite a bit of throw .

For 2022 Tungsram has gone back to the Megalight +150 Megalight+200 but not available on Amazon yet , but the Tungsram Nighthawk Xenons are available as only the 9003 on Amazon .

Tungsram on the PDF chart said the only non DOT compliant bulb was the H4 - could that have been why they were blowing them out at low prices a few years ago ?

 

[-Virgil-]

No, it's because H4 is not on the list of replaceable light sources approved for use as original equipment in US headlamps.

The +120 bulbs (the good ones, not all gooped up with blue tint) are available through Daniel Stern, if you run out of patience with Amazon.