HIR1 - Still a good idea?

Hey folks,

I hope that most of you remember me, I was quite active on here for some time. I drove a '97 Maxima with a projector retrofit, S2000 lowbeams, FX with TSX clear lens high beams, and projector fogs. The factory clutch went at 153k miles, and I sold the car, and parted out the retrofit.

Well, I'm back. I'm close to buying a '00 Subaru Legacy GT, and I've got a few lighting questions for the experts. I'm not really planning on going back to a HID projector retrofit. As impressive as it was, it was a huge inconvenience and a gigantic time sink. I went through many configurations, and probably bought and sold 50-60 projectors over a two year span. I want to maximize the halogen performance of the factory LGT headlights.

The lenses are slightly hazy in portions. They're not bad at all, and probably serviceable, but I'd like to have them perfect. Is this still the best restoration kit available: http://www.doublehornproducts.com/product.php?productid=8&cat=1&page=1

The headlights take a H1 low beam and a 9005 high beam. I have a set of Powerbulbs +50 H1 bulbs from back when I was running a pair of Cadillac Catera H1 projector lowbeams on my Maxima about a year and a half ago, so I presume that those will serve me well, albeit not as well as the Osram Nightbreakers or whatever the good +90 bulbs were. For the high beams, I believe the 9005 should be easily replacable with HIR1. As I recall, last summer, Philips had released a third generation HIR2 that significantly outperformed the second generation Toshiba HIR2s. Have they released a HIR2 variant? If not, will it be coming soon? What's the best bulb to replace a 9005 in a reflector high beam right now?

Thanks,
Taylor

The Philips 9011 (HIR1) is your best bet. It is not a new-generation item like their HIR2/9012, and AFAIK there is no plan to update the HIR1 bulb design.

Interesting. That's the one that was the subject of a large debate here last year, because it lacks the IR coating on it, so it's not technically a HIR bulb, just a bulb that meets the 9011 specs. If that's the way to go, though, Amazon has them for about $23 each.

The specs for the HIR1 and HIR2 bulb categories do not require an infrared-reflective coating. Like all other bulb specs, there's a nominal and max allowable power consumption, and a nominal and min/max allowable luminous flux. How to meet those specs is left up to the manufacturer. There's not necessarily an inherent advantage to a bulb with an IR coating vs. one without.

Curious.
I always thought that that was the only way of meeting the spec via the IR coating, and if it didn't have that coating it would basically be a special built 9005 type burner (bad wording I know, but you know what I mean) yielding typical numbers of a 9005 bulb. I wonder what kind of lifespan it has being that its seemingly overdriven to achieve so much higher output in comparison to the Toshiba HIR1's..

...they should really take off the IR designation then and just call them 9011's

LeanBurn said:

I always thought that that was the only way of meeting the spec via the IR coating, and if it didn't have that coating it would basically be a special built 9005 type burner (bad wording I know, but you know what I mean) yielding typical numbers of a 9005 bulb.

Click to expand...

Technology evolves.

I wonder what kind of lifespan it has

Click to expand...

The Toshiba HIR1 had a rated lifespan of around 320 hours if I recall correctly. Don't know what the Philips HIR1's rated lifespan is, but I'd be surprised if it's very much shorter than that. GM would not likely accept shorter lifespan than that for OE application.

they should really take off the IR designation then and just call them 9011's

Click to expand...

9011 is the ANSI sales number; the actual designation, both in the US and the European/rest-of-world regs, is HIR1 (and HIR2).

I ordered the Doublehorn kit and the Philips HIR1 bulbs today. Thanks for the help guys. I'm pretty excited about this. I was a little surprised to see that Subaru offered different headlights based on trim options, other than just halogen/HID options. The regular Legacy gets a 9007, but the Legacy GT gets H1 lows and 9005 highs. It's an oddly designed headlight, too, as you can tell that they took a form factor that was good for a dual-filament bulb (big square reflector) and made an uncommon design to get two reflectors in it. There's a large rectangular low-beam on top, and a short wide high-beam below it. The reflector is one piece, so some low-beam light hits the high-beam portion of the reflector, and vice versa, but there is a bezel piece that runs along the separation at the lens (but not anywhere else). It's certainly unlike any other headlight I've seen before.

Oh, those headlamps. I know them too well (sorry, can't go into detail on how/why). Neither the 9007 version nor the H1/9005 version is much good. Beam focus is inconsistent and generally poor. The EU version of the dual-bulb lamp is a much better optic, with H7 low and H1 high.

I got the HIR1s in today, still waiting on Doublehorn. One additional question, though. From the factory, the LGT has lowbeam DRLs. Will use as DRLs have a negative impact on the life of the Powerbulbs +50 H1s? I have looked, and disabling the DRLs is very easy on a LGT (there's a DRL module that you just disconnect, and it doesn't affect the other aspects of the lighting) . If they're not hurting anything, I don't mind them, but if they will reduce the lifespan of my bulbs, I'll remove it.

obviously they are burning more hours as they are on during the day,at a reduced voltage so some life is being used up- but not sure it is worth disconnecting drl function to gain hours of life at the expense of safety.....I would think any reduction in life is worth the added visibility that DRL provide.

Qship1996 said:

obviously they are burning more hours as they are on during the day,at a reduced voltage so some life is being used up- but not sure it is worth disconnecting drl function to gain hours of life at the expense of safety.....I would think any reduction in life is worth the added visibility that DRL provide.

Click to expand...

Well, so long as that reduction in life doesn't result in sudden loss of lamp you're using at night. (Of course, we do always run that risk, anyway. Bulbs are made to burn out.)

I'm not the biggest fan of DRLs-- I don't value them nearly as much as the third brake light and the unincorporated (and AMBER) turn signal. At least yours are on the lowbeam.

I know that the lifespan is exponentially related to the voltage, I think by roughly a 3.5 power, according to this forum. I am curious if there is a quantiitative estimate in regards to bulb life. I don't know what voltage the drls run at, or whether +50 bulbs react differently from regular bulbs. Drls don't bother me, but I am very skeptical as to their safety benefits outside of the arctic circle. If I am looking at a significant decrease in life, I will disable them since my bulbs are somewhat pricey due to being imported from the uk. Otherwise, I will leave it as is.

silly to spend $$$ for brighter bulbs to increase your vision, therefore your safety, then on the other hand attempt to disable another system {the DRL} that is designed to increase your visibility {therefore your safety} to other motorists on the road.

If the DRL only prevent ONE motorist from not seeing you and pulling out in front of you {maybe on a 2 lane road to pass?} and prevent 1 accident from occuring over the entire time you own the car- they have done their job, and maybe even saved your life. Visibility is a good thing, especially to others sharing the road with you {think teenagers, the elderly, and chemically impared} Makes no sense to disable a safety system to save a few dollars on a light bulb. PS, the drl highbeams {generally a lower hour rated bulb than low beam bulbs} are still operating on our 2002 highlander with the original bulbs after 53,000 miles of driving if that tells you anything about lifespan.

tay said:

Will use as DRLs have a negative impact on the life of the Powerbulbs +50 H1s?

Click to expand...

Effectively, yes. So will Subaru's having given you the option to leave the headlamp switch in the "on" position and have the lights go on and off with the ignition; this is really hard on the filaments and shortens their life considerably.

disabling the DRLs is very easy

Click to expand...

That is true on that car. And DRLs such as yours that operate the headlamps in whatever mode -- full or reduced intensity low beam, or reduced intensity high beam -- are really not very effective or efficient. They comply with the permissive US DRL regulation (which in turn was written to harmonize with Canada's permissive DRL regulation, which was basically written by GM in 1988 and forced through into Canadian law in place of what was going to be an ECE-style functionally-dedicated DRL with 1500 candela maximum...basically the same DRL that just became mandatory in Europe this year). However, headlamp DRLs' compliance with the regulations in force in North America don't mean they're good DRLs, and they're really not. With low beam DRLs like yours, the cost-benefit is negative in terms of fuel and headlight bulb life. Automakers tend to compensate for the latter factor by specifying long-life bulbs, but those have such reduced luminance and this, together with their larger filament coil, reduces beam focus and punch. As a result, seeing distance at night is significantly shorter, which is a much larger safety cost than even the most optimistic calculations of DRL safety benefit. There are other safety net-drawbacks to DRLs based on the high beams, but you haven't got those, so there's no real need to discuss them in this thread. Bottom line is that you're justified in considering disabling the headlamp DRLs. You may want to use the front turn signals as DRLs by putting in one of these modules. Turn signal DRLs, on their technical merits, really are better than headlamp DRLs and really have to be considered second-best to a dedicated DRL-only lamp.

The maximum possible safety benefit even from zero-compromise dedicated DRLs is small. It's worth pursuing -- small safety benefits add up -- but the implementation has to be good or you cancel out or reverse the safety benefit overall. Those urging you to keep the DRLs as they are because "if it saves just one life...!" are entitled to their opinions, of course, but they do not appear to know or understand enough about the subject for their opinions to be worth considering as sound advice. They are basically doing this.

Read up at http://lightsout.org/

When the quality of the Toshiba HIR bulbs declined, did that apply to both HIR1 & HIR2? I have a set of IIRC are five year old Toshiba HIR1 & HIR2, and they are still operating well, granted they have been 'divorced' [two bulbs are one vehicle, two are in another; the intended have having been divested with], so I can hopefully assume they were the 'good' Toshiba HIR1/2.

Qship1996 said:

anything that increases your visibility to other motorists increases your safety

Click to expand...

Nope. The real world often doesn't work the way our individual notions of "common sense" suggest it should. A system or device that increases visibility but also reduces the safety performance of another safety system or device, does not increase your safety.

(Also, when you encounter someone who knows more than you do about a particular topic, the adult thing is to learn, not to complain about it. I'm sure there are things you know more about than I do, and if those topics ever come up on here, I hope I will have the wisdom to shut up and learn. But keep in mind that knowledge and opinion are not the same.)

MichaelW said:

Read up at http://lightsout.org/

Click to expand...

That site contains a great deal of poorly-informed anti-DRL blather with no (or distorted) factual basis, which is a shame because it also contains some good info. It is difficult for the average reader to discern the good from the bad; I surmise most of the people who go there simply go there to shore up their own preconceived notions.

When the quality of the Toshiba HIR bulbs declined, did that apply to both HIR1 & HIR2?

Click to expand...

Yes. If you've had yours for five years, you probably have some of the last well-made ones.

Do you know if Candlepower.com will move to selling the Philips 9011 bulbs or continue on with the Toshiba 9011...you know, considering the quality of the Toshiba 9011 is not what it used to be?

Scheinwerfermann said:

That site contains a great deal of poorly-informed anti-DRL blather with no (or distorted) factual basis, which is a shame because it also contains some good info. It is difficult for the average reader to discern the good from the bad; I surmise most of the people who go there simply go there to shore up their own preconceived notions.

Click to expand...

Indeed, for myself it shored up some of my preconceived notions-- but it also modified some of them for me. It takes a very cautious eye to try to sort through it, but unless you really have the education and experience, it's still hard to separate fact from fiction. I mainly went there to get info on how to disable my own DRLs and "Twilight Sentinel".