2014 Sierra Projector Headlamps, best upgrade?

Hi Gents,

My brother just bought a 2014 Sierra, with the forward lighting that includes halogen projector headlamps. I was just wondering if they will be similar to my Verano in having a legal bulb upgrade, ie H11 to H9, or something like this.

Thanks in advance!

Dave

I don't know that I'd quite call the H9/H11 swap "legal". It's safe in some lamps; legally it's light gray. What complaints does your brother have about the lighting on his truck? They should be pretty good in stock form.

-Virgil- said:

They should be pretty good in stock form.

Click to expand...

Should be! The only things that come to mind (other than people ALWAYS want to upgrade everything, or it's so radically different from a prior vehicle that it just "feels wrong") are that perhaps they're misaimed, or they're not factory headlamps (which, considering it's a 2014, isn't extremely likely, but if it was bought as a "program car", who knows?).

Nothing specifically guys, I just asked in advance before buying my last car, and figured I would see if there was anything available for this truck. I know he will ask because he tends to not leave well enough alone, so I figured I would ask about a safe effective upgrade and attempt to steer him in that direction.

I didn't realize that the H11 to H9 in the Verano was more "safe" than "legal". Does the same hold true for 9005 and 9006 to HIR1 and HIR2?

Thanks again.
Dave

dave_b said:

Nothing specifically guys, I just asked in advance before buying my last car, and figured I would see if there was anything available for this truck. I know he will ask because he tends to not leave well enough alone, so I figured I would ask about a safe effective upgrade and attempt to steer him in that direction.

Click to expand...

Wait until it even comes up-- but probably it won't if it hasn't already, then.

I didn't realize that the H11 to H9 in the Verano was more "safe" than "legal". Does the same hold true for 9005 and 9006 to HIR1 and HIR2?

Click to expand...

The 9005 and HIR1 burners are geometrically, electrically, and thermally identical, and the base modification, if done correctly, ensures a proper alignment of the filament in the lamp. And because high beams should be used away from other traffic, the extra light shouldn't ever be an issue. The same geometric, electric, and thermal compatibility exists with the HIR2. However, there are many headlamps that produce too much glare with the *correct* bulb, especially if the lens isn't in near-perfect condition. And if the lamp assembly lacks a full cap bulb shield, then the HIR2 is not at all a good idea, as the filament will be in direct view of others. The 9006 has a tip coating (usually black, sometimes silver or whatnot) but the HIR2 has none, making the full cap bulb shield a necessity.

You two guys may remember, this is the bro with the MkIV Jetta that he added TYC/DEPO headlights with LED strings and blue bulbs. He has a history of not leaving well enough alone. Luckily, the Sierra has LED bling upfront, so I am just trying to arm myself with knowledge in case he "HAS" to "upgrade", so that I can steer him towards not being a nuisance.

I appreciate all the info I get here, you have helped me steer other people away from illegal and unsafe upgrades in the past.

dave_b said:

You two guys may remember, this is the bro with the MkIV Jetta that he added TYC/DEPO headlights with LED strings and blue bulbs.

Click to expand...

Ugh. That's a triple downgrade.

I am just trying to arm myself with knowledge in case he "HAS" to "upgrade", so that I can steer him towards not being a nuisance.

Click to expand...

Steer him toward these for the low beams. If he wants to upgrade the high beams, I think they're HB3 (9005) on that truck, so use these.

But somehow, if he's into Depo and TYC and blue bulbs and bling, I imagine he'll find a reason why those legitimate products are "lame" or something.

Hi All, its been a while since I've been around or posted. Alaric, congrats on the promotion.

So, my brother never complained about the headlights on his truck, but apparently GM has been hit by a law suit over their truck headlights.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/10/gmc-hit-lawsuit-sierras-new-headlights/

I made a bit of a rant in the comments, based on everything I have learned here, its interesting to see the level or lack of knowledge and good intentions on what in my opinion is a very well behaved internet comment section.

According to court documents, the trucks were fitted with a single bulb for low and high beams, rather than three bulbs normally used for fog lights, low- and high-beam lights.

If that's what the plaintiff is basing this bogus lawsuit on, his only hope is that GM's lawyers won't be able to stop laughing long enough to make their case. Virtually every automaker in the world has produced vehicles with one (1) single bulb for low and high beams. Some of those headlamps have been objectively good, some have been objectively bad, some have been somewhere in the middle. The same goes for vehicles with separate bulbs for low and high beam. And fog lamps have nothing to do with this. And did the nincompoop filing the lawsuit even bother having the headlamp performance TSB applied to his truck?

dave_b said:

Hi All, its been a while since I've been around or posted. Alaric, congrats on the promotion.

Click to expand...

Thanks!

So, my brother never complained about the headlights on his truck, but apparently GM has been hit by a law suit over their truck headlights.

Click to expand...

A tenuous suit if I ever saw one.
According to court documents, the trucks were fitted with a single bulb for low and high beams, rather than three bulbs normally used for fog lights, low- and high-beam lights.
My '95 Previa has a single bulb for high/low functions. My '87 Corolla had a single bulb. My '76 Corolla wagon and my '65 Dart each had a single bulb (sealed beams). Guess what? All of them complied with the legal requirements. The GM headlamps also comply with the legal requirements.

The only real difference is that these "single bulb" lamps also have a single filament, but in other single-bulb, dual-filament systems, the filaments aren't burning at the same time.

And the mentioning of fog lamps? Those aren't for normal driving, and are almost surely available equipment on the GMC Sierra-- probably standard at certain trim levels.

This lawsuit is a non-starter.

And, as -Virgil- has pointed out, there's a TSB for flashing the BCM to increase the voltage to the bulbs. The original voltage probably reduced warranty claims on the bulbs (despite being a wear item). The so-called "upgrade bulbs" are probably just regular HIR2, but I've seen some marked as +30 bulbs.

-Virgil-, if the HIR2+30 bulbs are legit, let us know. I might have to give the '01 a little bonus upgrade

Well, that's this bulb (30 Euros apiece? OUCH! Much less expensive via GM's parts distribution system). The maker is legitimate; Vosla bought a chunk of the car bulb business and production equipment from Philips' Narva division in 2013 or so. As far as I know, they are the only ones making an upgraded HIR2. The spec sheet is here, note the extra performance comes at the usual price of shorter lifespan. Comparing with their product sheet for their standard HIR2 (here) we see the +30 version has roughly half the life rating of the standard version. And the HIR2LL (Long Life) Philips sells has roughly twice the life rating of the standard version Vosla sells. So as with all other bulb types available in multiple variants, it's the same old story: pick more light or longer lifespan.

I don't think I could pass these up at that price, even with the shorter lifespan.

Both the spec sheet links above are pointing to the same document (28432.pdf). Could you repost?

Thanks.

Oops, sorry about that. The links are fixed now.

I need educating here: the luminous flux rating for both 28032 and 28432 is 1700/1875. Isn't this the measure of the light output? Shouldn't the 28432 +30 numbers be higher?

Are the bulbs available through GM Parts Distribution the 28032 or the 28432 version?

world.traveler said:

I need educating here: the luminous flux rating for both 28032 and 28432 is 1700/1875. Isn't this the measure of the light output? Shouldn't the 28432 +30 numbers be higher?

Click to expand...

The +30 refers to 30% increased output within the main beam. This is achieved by a tighter, more precisely placed filament, such that it's closer to the focal point of the lamp's optics. It's this same tighter hotspot that contributes to the bulb's shorter life. Overall, the same amount of light is available in either bulb; it's more-readily translated into useful beam in the +30 bulb.

Are the bulbs available through GM Parts Distribution the 28032 or the 28432 version?

Click to expand...

The link to GMPartsDirect is to the higher-performing bulb.

Alaric D is correct -- for any given bulb type (HIR2 in this case), Federal and international standards control the amount of light it emits, with a plus-or-minus percentage tolerance. In the case of HIR2, the spec is 1700 lumens +/- 15% at 12.8 volts. That is an allowable range of 1445 to 1955 lumens, a very large range. The luminous flux (lumens) figure on the spec sheets is just the nominal specification of 1700 lumens, it doesn't mean both bulbs actually produce 1700 lumens. A long-life bulb produces less light (that's a cost of the filament design aspects needed to extend life). A high-output bulb has a shorter lifespan (that's a cost of the filament design aspects needed to improve output). A +30 bulb does tend to produce closer to the maximum allowable lumens, but it doesn't produce 30% more lumens than the nominal spec, that would be illegal. The improvement in beam performance comes not only from higher-than-average lumen output, but also from a smaller, tighter-pitch filament coil which gives longer and wider beam reach due to improved focus and greater filament surface luminance. Note that a +30 bulb is actually two "steps" above the original Long Life bulb. One step would be a plain HIR2 (neither LL nor +30).

Thank you Alaric and Virgil. On the last point re the double step from up from the LL bulb, I'd wondered if that would be the case. The trade off is a life expectancy of I suppose 25 to 30% of my existing bulbs.