HDS Systems        
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 199

Thread: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

  1. #1

    Default New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Greetings, all.

    I've just had a close-up look at the preproduction version of the new Philips HIR2 bulb, and it looks really good. The burner is based on the latest iteration of H7 (...H8, H9, H11) architecture: a very compact, high-precision filament coil with filament supports configured so as to create a metal-free region around the filament -- this greatly improves beam focus and reduces shadows and stray light, respectively. The bulb envelope is made of quartz, and there is no IR-reflective coating on it; the very high flux and luminance with long life are achieved primarily by the filament configuration and fill gas composition and pressure, with a tubular (not spherical) bulb glass. This is a technically superior solution; that spherical glass made problems: the irridescence diffuses the light to some degree, which reduces beam focus and increases glare. Also, filament placement is super-critical; if it is not exactly in the middle of the sphere (either because of imprecise manufacture or because of filament distortion with age/usage), the IR is reflected back to empty space instead of filament metal. The Philips bulb is rated at 1875 lumens (with the usual tolerance of +/- 15% per regulation), with lifespan figures of >800 hours (B10 at 14v), 900 hours (B3), and 1400 hours (Tc). There is no blacktop on the end of the burner, so as with the previous Toshiba and GE designs, this means the new HIR2 will make glare problems if it is used in reflector optics lacking a bulb shield that completely covers at least the top half of the front of the bulb (a ring-style bulb shield that leaves the front of the bulb exposed to the lens would not be effective).

    Sorry, no idea when exactly they'll be commercially available on the aftermarket; hopefully soon. The first O.E. application is slated for release in four months or so.
    Last edited by -Virgil-; 02-23-2010 at 03:34 PM.

  2. #2
    Moderator Alaric Darconville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Stillwater, America
    Posts
    4,965

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Thanks for letting us know about them.

    Have they done anything to prevent base modifications so that they can't be used off-label? I know with previous HIR bulbs people would modify the base to put them in older lamps not designed for them.

  3. #3

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    There's really no way to prevent swapping an HIR2 (9012) in place of an HB4 (9006); the only difference between the two bulbs' bases is the width and height of one plastic key.

  4. #4
    Flashaholic* bshanahan14rulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    so technically, these are high-output burners, not HIRs, but they are made to replace HIRs in the applications for which they were originally intended?

    I like the idea of a clear envelope, that is the one thing I wasn't sure about when using it in conjunction with a projector.

  5. #5

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Correct, I think. I need to do some more digging to see if they have an IR-reflective coating on the tubular glass or not. Either way it's a little confusing because the bulb's designation does not change; it is officially (in ECE Regulation #37) "HIR2". The regulation does not specify an IRR coating, just specifies bulb geometry, power consumption, and light output. It's up to the manufacturer to decide how to meet the regulation.
    Last edited by -Virgil-; 11-11-2009 at 06:23 PM.

  6. #6
    Flashaholic tay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hoboken, NJ
    Posts
    295

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    so instead of having the same general design as the 9005/9006, they're now going to be H7?

    IIRC, H7 isn't all that similar to H8/9/11. Doesn't H7 have an offset axial filament and a glare cap, while the 8/9/11 have a centered axial filament? I know H7 was used in a lot of projectors before HID got popular, and many newer reflectors use H7

    If it's 1875lm, I'm guessing that it is the 'low beam' version to replace the 9006/9012? Odd that they don't have a glare cap on it. Will it be a H7 base with that slightly off-center filament, or a H11 base? Will they also make a 'high beam' ~2500lm 65w version to replace the 9005/9011? With a H7 or H9 base?

    Hopefully what I'm asking makes sense - I've never been able to find a good chart of bulb specifications and size diagrams, so this is all going offhand (if you know a good website, please post it). This sounds interesting, hopefully the price is reasonable. I'm running Osram H9s now, but maybe once they burn out, a good HIR version will be affordable and I can bump up from 2100 to 2500 lm without any extra heat.

  7. #7
    Flashaholic* bshanahan14rulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    I believe that when he stated that the burner is based on the latest H7 specs, "burner" refers to the filament, and that he is relating it's construction (gauge, coil tightness, coil compression) while keeping within the HIR2 specs of burner orientation and length.

  8. #8

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by tay View Post
    so instead of having the same general design as the 9005/9006, they're now going to be H7?
    No.

    IIRC, H7 isn't all that similar to H8/9/11.
    Geometry and burner architecture are identical, only filament characteristics (flux, wattage, luminance, life) and base are different. H7-8-11 have blacktop, H9 has none.

    Doesn't H7 have an offset axial filament
    Yes, so do H8, 9, and 11.

    Odd that they don't have a glare cap on it.
    Neither did the GE or Toshiba designs.

    Will it be a H7 base
    No.

    or a H11 base?
    No.

    Will they also make a 'high beam' ~2500lm 65w version to replace the 9005/9011?
    They already make 9011 according to regulated specs (~2300 lumen @ 12.8v, ~2500 lumen @ 13.2v). Not sure what you mean by "replace the 9005/9011".

    With a H7 or H9 base?
    No.

    Hopefully what I'm asking makes sense - I've never been able to find a good chart of bulb specifications and size diagrams
    Refer to ECE R37 and this passable copy of U.S. 49CFR564.

    I'm running Osram H9s now, but maybe once they burn out, a good HIR version will be affordable
    There will not be an HIR H9.

  9. #9
    Flashaholic tay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hoboken, NJ
    Posts
    295

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Ok, I understand. I thought you were referring to the whole bulb when you said it's a H7, not just the filament. Your wording threw me off a little bit. That sounds cool. Is it still the roughly teardrop shape of the original 9012, or is it cylindrical?

    So, in other words:
    They've discontinued the old Toshiba 9012
    There is a new 9012-based bulb that Philips is making
    It has the same filament design as a H7, no more IR-reflective coating, but the focus is still correct for 9012, and the output is still the same
    They're still making the old 9011 with the IR coating

    Did I get it right?

    BTW, thanks for ECE R37. It's a good reference. I particularly like how it gives lumen output at 12v and at 13.2v. Kinda kills the old "I don't need a harness, 15 feet of 18ga wire is fine!" argument.

  10. #10

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by tay View Post
    Is it still the roughly teardrop shape of the original 9012, or is it cylindrical?
    Small-diameter cylindrical.

    They've discontinued the old Toshiba 9012
    There is a new 9012-based bulb that Philips is making
    It has the same filament design as a H7, no more IR-reflective coating, but the focus is still correct for 9012, and the output is still the same
    Yes, the luminous flux is still nominally the same, probably actually slightly higher on average. The luminance of the Philips HIR2 is superior to that of the Toshiba bulb -- 30 Mcd/m2 vs. 24 Mcd/m2 -- and the filament ghosts are more consistently and conventionally located. See image here. The increased luminance substantially improves beam performance.


    They're still making the old 9011 with the IR coating
    Philips never commercialized a 9011 bulb with IR coating; their 9011 (HIR1) bulb is essentially a high-performance, high-luminance HB3 (9005) that has been optimized and improved over the years. I would like to see their HIR1 switched over to the H7-style burner as well but it is unlikely to happen unless/until there's an OE market demand for it.
    Last edited by -Virgil-; 05-20-2010 at 11:52 PM.

  11. #11
    Flashaholic tay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hoboken, NJ
    Posts
    295

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by Scheinwerfermann View Post
    Philips never commercialized a 9011 bulb with IR coating; their 9011 (HIR1) bulb is essentially a high-performance, high-luminance HB3 (9005) that has been optimized and improved over the years. I would like to see their HIR1 switched over to the H7-style burner as well but it is unlikely to happen unless/until there's an OE market demand for it.
    Oh, ok. The Philips 9012 is a very nicely optimized H7 burner on a 9012 base. The Philips 9011 is just an optimized 9005, on a 9012 base. Is the filament length and diameter on the H7 the same as the old HIR? It's hard to tell in the pic because it's slightly tilted, but it looks that way. What causes the extra image of the filament (to the left for the old one, to the top for the new one)?

    So the Toshiba IR-reflective 9012 and 9011 are both discontinued?

  12. #12

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by tay View Post
    Oh, ok. The Philips 9012 is a very nicely optimized H7 burner on a 9012 base. The Philips 9011 is just an optimized 9005, on a 9012 base.
    Pretty much.

    Is the filament length and diameter on the H7 the same as the old HIR?
    It's shorter diameter, which improves beam focus (closer to the point-source ideal) and improves filament luminance (smaller surface area). It's longer, which improves beam width.

    What causes the extra image of the filament
    Reflection off the bulb wall.

    So the Toshiba IR-reflective 9012 and 9011 are both discontinued?
    Yes. Candlepower has Toshiba 9011s remaining in stock...don't know how long supplies will last, though.
    Last edited by -Virgil-; 10-06-2009 at 10:31 AM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    All I want to know is if we get a 9007 bulb

  14. #14
    Flashaholic* bshanahan14rulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    You think better performance than the philips 9006 xtremePower?

    I also read that back in 2000 Philips introduced its HIR1 by picking the best filaments or something to that nature and overdriving them. A shorter lifespan was mentioned in the article as well.

    In response to Chrysler's use of the fragile GE 9011 (HIR1) in the high beam of the Viper, Philips added a replacement product to their line. They first displayed it in their booth at the 2000 Automotive Aftermarket Parts Exchange show in Las Vegas, at which time their product manager told me "We didn't want to pay GE a royalty or tool up for different bulb glass, but we wanted to serve the replacement market, so we just basically put together this bulb with a maximum-legal-wattage 9005 filament, overdriven to get the minimum allowable lumens for type 9011. Life isn't optimal, but our bulb costs less to make and we probably won't make it for very long." Remember, this kind of bulb is called a 9011/HIR1 because that's its type designator, not necessarily because it uses any particular technology (such as HIR) to produce its light. Philips took the quick 'n' easy way
    out on this one. The bulb isn't bad, but it's not an HIR bulb.
    Here are the figures to ponder:
    9005's light output spec is 1700 lumens, +/- 12% at 12.8v, maximum 70 watts.
    9011's light output spec is 2300 lumens, +/- 15% at 12.8v, maximum 70 watts.
    So, the allowable range for 9005 is 1496 to 1904 lumens, while the allowable range for 9011 is 1955 to 2645. (Remember that the nominal wattage is just that -- actual wattage is specified in the regulation. All legal 9005s and 9011s are "65 watt" nominal and are actually allowed to draw up to 70w). It's easy to see how by just selecting the highest-wattage 9005 filaments and overdriving them a little, Philips is able to put together their 9011 bulb. It'll produce the low end of allowable lighting, consume at the high end of allowable wattage and life will be very short, but it'll be a legal 9011.
    http://www.rdautosport.com/GroupBuy.htm

    I'm hoping this isn't the same thing as what you are talking about, Scheinwerfermann.
    Last edited by bshanahan14rulz; 10-07-2009 at 11:07 AM. Reason: quote

  15. #15

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Vastly higher output, luminance, and precision than Xtreme Power 9006, yes. The XP is the best 9006 I'm aware of, but it still uses the 9006 burner architecture, not the superior H7 architecture. Plus, 9006 (HB4) is legally permitted to emit between 850 and 1150 lumens; 9012 (HIR2) is legally permitted to emit between 1445 and 1955 lumens -- figures are at 12.8v as tested under U.S. regs -- so there's no way to make a compliant 9006 that produces more light than a compliant 9012.

    Your link looks like an old group buy through Stern and Candlepower; I'm not sure what you're hoping is not the case. The Philips 9012/HIR2 being discussed in this thread is an all-new bulb, literally just released, and I don't see any mention of it in the page you linked (though there is some discussion of the older Philips 9011/HIR1). Can you clarify your question...?
    Last edited by -Virgil-; 10-07-2009 at 06:08 PM.

  16. #16
    Flashaholic* bshanahan14rulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    You just answered it, thanks! I was just making sure that philips had a newer version of their HIR2 and wasn't just using their old version. So the new version has an H7 style filament, compared to the old version which just tried to overdrive the best 9005 filaments that they could make.

  17. #17

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    There never was a "Philips old version" of the HIR2 bulb being discussed in this thread.

  18. #18
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    So, hopefully, shouldn't these be much cheaper than Toshiba HIR?

    How close together are the outputs of the Philips HIR1 & 2? if 2300-15%=1955 for HIR1, and 1700+15%=1955 HIR2


    Anyone in the industry up to a drunken lunch challenge, to make a high beam bulb [stock wattage] that puts out 3200 lumens?
    Last edited by MichaelW; 10-26-2009 at 09:02 AM.
    6.5K diving light, 5K cool-white, 4K neutral-white, 3K warm-white, 2.7K extra warm-white

  19. #19

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelW View Post
    So, hopefully, shouldn't these be much cheaper than Toshiba HIR?
    They will probably wind up costing more. Newly-designed bulbs usually do.

    How close together are the outputs of the Philips HIR1 & 2?
    The early-production Philips HIR2s I looked at were slightly above nominal spec for the HIR2 bulb type. The HIR1s I've looked at have been just about dead-on nominal spec for the HIR1 bulb type.


    Anyone in the industry up to a drunken lunch challenge, to make a high beam bulb [stock wattage] that puts out 3200 lumens?
    Well, h'mmm. If you could tolerate extremely short bulb life, it might be doable.

  20. #20
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Thanks. I have a cousin who works nights, driving an '03 Accord, I'd like to get headlight upgrades.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scheinwerfermann View Post
    Well, h'mmm. If you could tolerate extremely short bulb life, it might be doable.


    How short? like 10 hours or 100 hours?
    Last edited by MichaelW; 10-27-2009 at 04:38 AM.
    6.5K diving light, 5K cool-white, 4K neutral-white, 3K warm-white, 2.7K extra warm-white

  21. #21

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    I wish they made one for a 9004

  22. #22
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by passive101 View Post
    I wish they made one for a 9004
    Which filament would the IR reflectivity focus on?
    Maybe an H4?


    How about a 9004 with a 55 watt low beam? [yes technically it wouldn't be a 9004 then]
    6.5K diving light, 5K cool-white, 4K neutral-white, 3K warm-white, 2.7K extra warm-white

  23. #23

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    9004s get left out of everything good or higher powered bulbs

  24. #24

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    That's because there's really not much you can do to improve a 9004. The system architecture has a lot of optical noise (uncontrolled/uncontrollable light from multiple-order reflections off the bulb walls, filament supports, and unlit adjacent filament) and is difficult to keep focused precisely because of the base design + transverse filament. Just about everything you could possibly do to increase the bulb's output would also increase the waste/glare/flare light. You can make a higher-luminance filament, and that's the direction they've gone with the Night Hawk and Vision Plus, but increasing low beam filament power to 55w (giving output of roughly 1000 lumens instead of 700) would greatly increase glare and backscatter from whatever headlight you would use these bulbs in.

    Better seeing at night requires good fundamental design, not just a brighter bulb. A brighter badly-designed bulb is not a better bulb.

  25. #25
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    I think you are being optimistic with that 1000 lumens, which would match 9006, but conservatively at least 850.

    I sort of remember seeing, years back, 55/65 watt 9004s in addition to the 55/100 watt 9004.


    Did I mention I hate the 9004s, I had the pleasure of driving a GM car that had double 9004s. Why did you shut off the low beams when I ADDED the high beams, why GM?
    Last edited by MichaelW; 01-01-2010 at 01:56 PM.
    6.5K diving light, 5K cool-white, 4K neutral-white, 3K warm-white, 2.7K extra warm-white

  26. #26

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelW View Post
    I think you are being optimistic with that 1000 lumens, which would match 9005
    No, it would match the 55w 9006. And it would match the 55w low beam filament of a 9007.

    I sort of remember seeing, years back, 55/65 watt 9004s in addition to the 55/100 watt 9004.
    Nope. Your memory is playing tricks on you.

    Did I mention I hate the 9004s, I had the pleasure of driving a GM car that had double 9004s. Why did you shut off the low beams when I ADDED the high beams, why GM?
    To avoid violating the foreground light test point.

  27. #27
    Flashaholic tay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hoboken, NJ
    Posts
    295

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    The wiring harness on most 9004 cars would not be safe to run simultaneous low-beams and high-beams, since most have a shared ground.

    I know lots of people put 9007 in their 9004 cars, and be like "wow the lighting is so much better". It always bothered me. You're going from tranverse filament to axial (IDK if that's the correct term, since it's not centered) filament. The beam pattern is going to be terrible. The reason it looks "brighter" is because it's a higher wattage bulb, and because the low-beam filament is lighting up part of the high-beam reflector.

  28. #28

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by tay View Post
    The wiring harness on most 9004 cars would not be safe to run simultaneous low-beams and high-beams, since most have a shared ground.
    Both filaments in a 2-filament halogen headlight bulb can't be run together safely, but that's not actually the situation in discussion. GM equipped some of their cars with a 4-lamp system in which all four lamps used a #9004 bulb. The outboard lamps used only the low beam filament, and the inboard lamps used only the high beam filament. In some cases the bulb was installed "upside down" relative to its normal position.

    I know lots of people put 9007 in their 9004 cars, and be like "wow the lighting is so much better". It always bothered me. You're going from tranverse filament to axial (IDK if that's the correct term, since it's not centered) filament. The beam pattern is going to be terrible.
    You're correct on all counts here. "Axial" is the right term (it just refers to filament orientation, not placement), and there is never, ever an improvement from putting a 9007 bulb where a 9004 bulb belongs.

  29. #29
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,789

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by Scheinwerfermann View Post
    No, it would match the 55w 9006. And it would match the 55w low beam filament of a 9007.



    Nope. Your memory is playing tricks on you.



    To avoid violating the foreground light test point.
    Why is the 65 watt high filament only 1200 lumens in a 9004, when the 65 watt filament in the 9005 1350? [filament design, gas fill, filament orientation for light transmissibility. got blacktop?] The world will never know what a 55 watt low filament in a 9004 produces? if you take 1200/1350 X 1000 = 889 lumens.

    No, I was trying to save face, because I saw both 65/55 & 100/55 HB1 bulbs at JCWhitney. JCWhitney is like the PepBoys of online stores. [disclosure: I have never purchased anything from JCWhitney]

    I was thinking of how to improve the headlights of a early Nissan Quest. One ideas was to use the 100/55 watt. Use full power lows, and add the 100 watt filaments in series as the high beams.

    That Oldsmobile was unique in that the bulbs were clocked 180 degrees apart (the bottom filament was lit up).
    I don't see how GM would have overloaded the near field. The areas illuminated by the lows & highs were almost mutually exclusive.
    I wired the high beam bulbs to light up both filaments, the now lit up 45 watt filament didn't provide distance light, but mid-range illumination.
    If I would have installed a custom wiring harness, so that low beams would have stay on with the highs, then running the low beam filament of the high beams at full power would have been unnecessary.
    I could have wired the low filament of the highs in series with the high filament of the lows.
    Who doesn't like to have 8 filaments burning? Okay arguably you could say you have 6, because the ones in series wouldn't be that bright.
    Last edited by MichaelW; 10-29-2009 at 06:37 AM. Reason: Ripping on GM.
    6.5K diving light, 5K cool-white, 4K neutral-white, 3K warm-white, 2.7K extra warm-white

  30. #30

    Default Re: New Philips HIR2 scrutinized

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelW View Post
    Why is the 65 watt high filament only 1200 lumens in a 9004, when the 65 watt filament in the 9005 1350?
    Why does the 55w filament in the 9006 produce 1000 lumens, while the 55w filament in the H2 produces 1820 lumens? There are lots of variables that go into the luminous flux put out by any given bulb design.

    The world will never know what a 55 watt low filament in a 9004 produces?
    More glare.

    I was thinking of how to improve the headlights of a early Nissan Quest. One ideas was to use the 100/55 watt. Use full power lows, and add the 100 watt filaments in series as the high beams.
    There are no well-made overwattage 9004 bulbs, just off-brand trash with utterly random filament placement and fictitious output numbers. Even if there were a well-made 9004 with 55w low beam filament, it would not improve lousy headlamps (reread above). As for 100w filaments in series, let's pretend we've got a well-made 9004 with a 100w high beam filament (no such bulb, but we're in make-believe mode here). Let's assume it produces 2000 lumens at 12.8 volts. Now let's put two of them in series so each is operating at 6.4 volts. Remember, flux changes exponentially to the power ~3.5 with voltage change, so (6.4 ÷ 12.8)^3.5 = 0.083 multiplier, which means your high beam filaments would be producing 177 lumens each.

    I don't see how GM would have overloaded the near field.
    Probably would've violated the 12,000-candela limit at (4D,V).

    Who doesn't like to have 8 filaments burning?
    Those who understand that where the light's directed is far more important than how much of it there is.
    Last edited by -Virgil-; 10-29-2009 at 10:53 PM.

Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •