HIR/HIR2 adaptable to H7 base?

[juniormarbles]

As the recent HIR2 thread was closed before I could get an answer to my question, I am starting a new thread:


Does Philips or Toshiba make HIR bulbs that fit outright, or can be retrofitted for, the high beam position of Jetta MKV driving lights (H7 base)?

Looking at pictures, HIR2's are right angle plugs, and I am not sure that they will physically fit when trying to mount them in H7 bases.

Also still unanswered: a low-price source for Philips HIR or Extreme Power bulbs.

Many thanks,
JM

 

[Random Guy]

No, they don't; store.candlepower.com

 

[-Virgil-]

Does Philips or Toshiba make HIR bulbs that fit outright, or can be retrofitted for, the high beam position of Jetta MKV driving lights (H7 base)?

No. And I think you mean the high beam position of your Jetta's headlamps.

 

[Kuryakin]

The real question is, why? There's the H7s with the H9 bulb on it, that'll outpower the HIRs without any mods.

As the recent HIR2 thread was closed before I could get an answer to my question, I am starting a new thread:


Does Philips or Toshiba make HIR bulbs that fit outright, or can be retrofitted for, the high beam position of Jetta MKV driving lights (H7 base)?

Looking at pictures, HIR2's are right angle plugs, and I am not sure that they will physically fit when trying to mount them in H7 bases.

Also still unanswered: a low-price source for Philips HIR or Extreme Power bulbs.

Many thanks,
JM

 

[Alaric Darconville]

As the recent HIR2 thread was closed before I could get an answer to my question, I am starting a new thread:

I answered it in the original thread in which you asked it.

 

[snapdragon]

I have been looking too.
I would say wait a while, there are some fake looking H7 HIR, but they don't look like the real deal and are too expensive to risk. I'm sure this technology will filter down over a year or so.

 

[tay]

I have been looking too.
I would say wait a while, there are some fake looking H7 HIR, but they don't look like the real deal and are too expensive to risk. I'm sure this technology will filter down over a year or so.

AFAIK, it is a proprietary infrared reflective coating. Only the big manufacturers like Toshiba, GE, and Philips have access to the R&D bucks to design it and the manufacturing bucks to build the equipment to make it. The overseas shop churning out blue tinted poor-quality bulbs at $0.25 a pop aren't going to be able to make it.

There are plenty of knock-off HIRs, but they're just regular bulbs with a light blue tinted envelope that is big and oblong and not the correct shape, and with the fragile return wire that the first gen GE HIRs had.

AFAIK, the filament on H7 is off-center, which will mean a cylindrical envelope will not work correctly even with the IR coating.

Just get the Rallye. It's brighter than HIR2 anyway.

 

[Kuryakin]

Let me elaborate:

Image of H7

From Daniel Stern Lighting (c)2013 Daniel J. Stern
H7 bulbs

These single-filament bulbs are found in the low beams, high beams and fog lamps of many European and Japanese vehicles made since the 1990s. Fun Fact: The H7, introduced in 1993, was the first new halogen headlamp bulb design type-approved to Europe's Regulation 37 in twenty years. It touched off a wave of research and development that saw a dozen new halogen bulb types introduced over the next 15 years.

• 55W Ultra High Efficacy Plus 50 [SIZE=-2](Narva RangePower+50, Osram Silverstar, Philips VisionPlus or Tungsram Megalicht[SIZE=+1]*[/SIZE])[/SIZE]: $21.98/ea
• 65W Osram Ultra High Output (2100 lumen, H9 burner on H7 base, race and special-purpose use): $24.76/ea

Versus:
9011/HIR1 65 2350 SAE/ECE Halogen Infrared 9012/HIR2 55 1870 SAE/ECE Halogen Infrared
Now, it is true the 9011 will slightly outshine the H7 Rallye, but given it plugs right in without mods, seems to me, it's the way to fly here.
HIR is cool stuff, to be sure, but it's not so much the 9011/9012 is amazing, it shows how much 9005/9006 bulbs STINK!!

The real question is, why? There's the H7s with the H9 bulb on it, that'll outpower the HIRs without any mods.

Moderator Edit
Hotlinked image converted to link.
Copy from danielsternlighting.com properly attributed to the source. Please respect copyrights and provide source attribution.

--Alaric D

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Let me elaborate:

You mean: "Let Daniel Stern elaborate" -- nice copy/paste action going on there. A little citing sources never hurt anyone.


And is the 9006 or 9005 really all that bad?

 

[Kuryakin]

Good point. Thanks to Dan Stern for this info!

You mean: "Let Daniel Stern elaborate" -- nice copy/paste action going on there. A little citing sources never hurt anyone.


And is the 9006 or 9005 really all that bad?

 

[-Virgil-]

And is the 9006 or 9005 really all that bad?

The 9006 is pretty typical of US design priorities: long lifespan, low luminance and flux.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

The 9006 is pretty typical of US design priorities: long lifespan, low luminance and flux.

One out of three ain't bad! (It's abysmal.)

It seems they do pretty well in the Corolla (which could be subjective-- if only we knew someone with actual photometric test data for the 2001 Corolla). I'd rather a better reflector use a worse bulb than a crappy reflector use an awesome bulb (to a point). In one case you're trying to extract as much as you can, properly, out of a limited supply, and in the other you've got an abundant supply and you're spilling it everywhere (like a BP oil well).

At least it's not a 9004.

 

[-Virgil-]

I'd rather a better reflector use a worse bulb than a crappy reflector use an awesome bulb

Definitely agreed. Keep in mind also that back when all headlamps used parabolic reflectors, US-spec lamps used the entire reflector and lens area to create the low beam, while European-spec lamps carried an internal shield to block the lower portion of the reflector from "seeing" the filament, to create the cutoff at the top of the low beam. So an American beam with a lower-flux light source and a European beam with a higher-flux light source could contain comparable amounts of light (though it would of course be distributed differently).

you've got an abundant supply and you're spilling it everywhere (like a BP oil well).

Yeah. Well, except for the "abundant supply" part; most real experts say oil is decidedly finite and no longer abundant.

At least it's not a 9004.

For sure!

 

[Alaric Darconville]

Definitely agreed. Keep in mind also that back when all headlamps used parabolic reflectors, US-spec lamps used the entire reflector and lens area to create the low beam, while European-spec lamps carried an internal shield to block the lower portion of the reflector from "seeing" the filament, to create the cutoff at the top of the low beam. So an American beam with a lower-flux light source and a European beam with a higher-flux light source could contain comparable amounts of light (though it would of course be distributed differently).

And, as we've covered in many other topics, the debate is still on over what is "best"-- and that you can also have a beam that conforms to either set of regulatory requirements yet still sucks (it seems some makers have a "17 pieces of flair" approach).

Yeah. Well, except for the "abundant supply" part; most real experts say oil is decidedly finite and no longer abundant.

A little too abundant for the affected wildlife and wetlands for my liking, in this case of ChernobOIL. But, yes, decidedly finite-- I'm no petroleum expert, but if one considers the interior of the Earth a sort of "tank", then like my car's gas tank, and like a gas station's underground fuel tank, and an oil tanker's tank, those tanks all run empty and must be refilled. What's refilling the Earth? Seems to me that nothing is.

There's real irony in that so much may be wasted (unless there's some way to perform some sort of separation somewhere to try to reclaim it (but at what cost in dollars and energy)) that it would have been best to leave it all underwater, untapped, in the first place. At least then it wouldn't be killing plant and animal life all over. Sigh.

 

[bshanahan14rulz]

Not that this thread needs more help being derailed, but perhaps the dumps and landfills will turn into oil just in time for whatever species reigns most powerful centuries from now.

 

[-Virgil-]

And, as we've covered in many other topics, the debate is still on over what is "best"

Well, yeah, of course the Americans are still real sure their way is right and the rest of the world's way is wrong. :roll: Seriously, though, this particular bit of the endless quarrel is obsolete, since European-code reflector low beams have been able to use the entire reflector/lens area for quite awhile now, with complex nonparabolic reflectors. When that happened, the debate got that much less practical and that much more theoretical.

and that you can also have a beam that conforms to either set of regulatory requirements yet still sucks

VERY true! There is way too much room in both standards for lousy headlamps. And lousy stop lamps. And lousy turn signals. And useless back-up lights...etc.

(it seems some makers have a "17 pieces of flair" approach).

Well, I don't know that I'd quite put it in those terms (though I do get and appreciate the reference). I think it's more that various companies have different philosophy on what makes a "good" headlamp, and place different priority on headlamp cost vs. performance. Obviously "Legal" has to have the top priority because otherwise the vehicle can't be sold, but what comes next? Options are "Good", "Cheap", "Pretty", "Innovative", "Up-to-date", etc.

A little too abundant for the affected wildlife and wetlands for my liking, in this case of ChernobOIL.

Yeah, there is that. I love how the guy who "wants his life back" and thinks this is no big deal because the ocean's really big is now getting on TV saying he's going to make it all better. Um...how? (And he's also saying BP will pay all legitimate reparations, knowing fully well there are several decades' worth of a giant, well-paid legal team's weasel room in that word "legitimate").

I'm no petroleum expert, but if one considers the interior of the Earth a sort of "tank", then like my car's gas tank, and like a gas station's underground fuel tank, and an oil tanker's tank, those tanks all run empty and must be refilled. What's refilling the Earth? Seems to me that nothing is.

There are those who believe that God is. I do not share that, um, belief.

it would have been best to leave it all underwater, untapped, in the first place.

But...no!...but...DRILL BABY DRILL...but...free enterprise market without heavyhanded big-government regulation! Why do you hate America?! It's because we have freedom, isn't it? ISN'T IT!

 

[tay]

I lol when people say "renewable energy". There's no such thing as energy that isn't "renewable". It's simply a matter of how much effort you want to put into renewing it.

 

[AnAppleSnail]

I lol when people say "renewable energy". There's no such thing as energy that isn't "renewable". It's simply a matter of how much effort you want to put into renewing it.

I have things to say to this but they're off-topic here. Anyone want to take this underground? I feel out of place in this thread.

 

[tay]

I'd love to hear them. What is "underground"?

Although, to be fair, the question in this thread was answered in the larger HIR thread, and then answered for a second time here, so there is really no need for further discussion on the topic of HIR converting to H7 (cliffnotes is that you can't do it, and the best option is Osram Rallye H7s which are a H9 burner on a H7 base, 2100 lm). I'm not sure whether it is appropriate to go off-topic in a thread that has no on-topic comments left to be made.

 

[Alaric Darconville]

I'd love to hear them. What is "underground"?

The Underground Wine Cellar. I tend to stay out of there because I'd like to believe that... Well, never mind-- that statement would be best for the Underground, but I don't go there.