Good, compact, and square or round driving lamp?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
Looking to add a driving lamp to a '06 Camry for a friend. The idea is to knock out the Toyota emblem on the grille and stick a driving light in place of the emblem. This way, we solve the number one problem of adding driving lights to sedans: mounting height too low. I know better than to stick a driving lamp where the fog lamps would go. Aesthetics aren't a concern; the only car washes this thing has seen since conception has been (acid) rain.

A light bar was considered, but there's not really a great place to mount them that's up high without turning the light bar into a crash bar as well. A license plate mount would work for a light bar...but the light bar would the first thing hit in any sort of parking lot bump/scrape.

So, we were considering this lamp:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002M9RHS/?tag=cpf0b6-20

The frontal surface area approximates a 3x5 index card, and the hole left by removing the emblem would pretty much allow the driving lamp to work unfettered. Is this a good lamp, though? There is no beam diagram for this lamp on Hella's website.
 

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
That's a lamp from the 1990s. It's a pretty good one to pick, but pretty severely overpriced in that link. Stern had some single lamps awhile back (don't ask me how long of a while...!); he might be worth asking. I assume this '06 Camry already has headlamps in good condition, aimed correctly, and with the high beams equipped with good HIR1 bulbs, and your friend still wants more high beam power.
 

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
You know, I was wondering why there was a fairly significant difference in prices between Amazon and Rallylights. I'll check with Stern as well.

https://www.rallylights.com/hella-micro-ff-driving-or-fog-lamp-kit-made-in-germany.html


Yes, new lamps, HIR1/HIR2 setup, the whole shebang. We were playing around earlier with a Ralleye 4000 Compact 55w H1 on a license plate mount, and just one of those things, even at a lower height, gave a pretty significant boost to the highs, both to the sides of the road and more importantly in the distance. The highs aren't bad by any stretch of the mind; he just wants a bit more. We returned it, however, because it was extremely heavy, looked awkward, and couldn't be installed anywhere else. We thought about the roof, but I'm pretty sure that's a bad idea because of excessive backscatter, right? Not to mention aerodynamics.

Finally, I just found that Peterson makes some compact driving lamps called the Nightwatcher series. Would those be any good?
 
Last edited:

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
I just found that Peterson makes some compact driving lamps called the Nightwatcher series. Would those be any good?

No, Peterson doesn't make any driving lamps. They import generic offshore junk and market it. Steer clear.

You might consider one of the Hella 90mm modules instead of the Micro FF. That family of lamps is a lot bigger than most presentations show you. Just in halogen alone there are numerous options: SAE, ECE, H7, H9, H1.

That said: are you really sure there's noplace on top of the bumper for a clean mount-up of one of these?
 

jzchen

Enlightened
Joined
Jan 16, 2015
Messages
328
Location
Arcadia, CA
You pry off the emblem, but there is plastic layer there no? You mean drill a hole? Then I worry about heat from the radiator...

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
You might consider one of the Hella 90mm modules instead of the Micro FF. That family of lamps is a lot bigger than most presentations show you. Just in halogen alone there are numerous options: SAE, ECE, H7, H9, H1.

That said: are you really sure there's noplace on top of the bumper for a clean mount-up of one of these?

True, good point, I forgot about the 90mm modules.

There's not a lot of horizontal space on top of the bumper cover to mount the light bar without the light bar sticking out in front of the vehicle a fair bit. He'd rather keep everything tucked behind the bumper cover if possible.

At one point we considered the Micro DE Xenon, which is absolutely tiny, and we could probably get away with hole saw-ing some ~3" circles in the upper grille and hiding the DE Xenons in those holes, but then I read that they weren't good performers.

Is there anything tiny like the Micro DE Xenon but more modern? Seems to me that a modern LED version of the Micro DE Xenon would be more than feasible, at least technically.
 

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
The Micro DE Xenon is really not worth pursuing. Hella just announced new LED 90mm modules, but I'm told it's going to be awhile before they're actually supplying them (and I don't like that they won't cough up a bird-eye view for just the high beam, instead of their "combined low and high" one). In the meanwhile, there's the L4060 series which has a lot to recommend it.
 

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
Yeah, I found some bird's eye plots for the Micro DE Xenon and it's easily outclassed by even the compact 55w H1 Ralleye 4000. I wonder why Hella never updated it, maybe with a freeform reflector, like a Micro FF Xenon. Perhaps its diminutive size created a low performance ceiling?
 

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
The problem isn' a lack of "update", the problem is that lamp's form factor is not suited to that task. It was conceived as an H3 fog lamp, and it does OK at that task with that bulb and an appropriate spreader lens. Getting rid of the cutoff shield, swapping out the spreader lens for a plain one, and cramming in a D2 bulb was a half-cooked effort pretty much guaranteed to result in a half-cooked lamp.
 

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
cramming in a D2 bulb was a half-cooked effort pretty much guaranteed to result in a half-cooked lamp.

You know, I was thinking about the Micro DE Xenon on the drive home and I think Shakespeare described it best: "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

I will look into the 90mm modules; they seem to be about the right size to go behind the grille emblem.
 

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
I was also considering some Hella FF50s for their compact size and the beam diagram on rallylights looks comparable to the Ralleye 4000 Compact, which we liked.

Now, could we use the H9 on a H7 base in the FF50s wisely? We'd lose the glare cap, but then, this is a driving lamp/aux high-beam. Would losing the glare cap create issues though, like excess backscatter (if that's even possible for a high-beam?)
 

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
I was also considering some Hella FF50s for their compact size and the beam diagram on rallylights looks comparable to the Ralleye 4000 Compact, which we liked.

...is why those "beam diagrams" on Rallylights' site are not reliable. Those two lamps are about as close in performance as a Chevrolet Spark (FF50) and a Cadillac ATS (Rallye 4000 Compact). Rallylights is a dependable vendor overall, but they have difficulty sticking with the truth in their descriptions and promotions. This difficulty has been described on this site in detail before.

Now, could we use the H9 on a H7 base in the FF50s wisely?

No. Lamp's too small/runs too hot.
 

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
Good point, and I did notice that the FF50 had a reference number of 12.5, as opposed to the Rallye's 37.5. I know this doesn't necessarily translate to 3x worse but it certainly seems like a precipitous drop.


Just out of intellectual curiosity, are there cases in which the hybrid H9/H7 bulb is contraindicated in H7 lamps because of potential glare issues? I know for 9006 to 9012 conversions there is a general rule: you need a full glare cap. I don't remember seeing any such rule for H7 to the hybrid H9/H7 bulb.
 
Last edited:

Alaric Darconville

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2001
Messages
5,377
Location
Stillwater, America
Good point, and I did notice that the FF50 had a reference number of 12.5, as opposed to the Rallye's 37.5. I know this doesn't necessarily translate to 3x worse but it certainly seems like a precipitous drop.
It could mean a broader hotspot-- the reference number tells you the maximum light intensity in the beam, but it doesn't tell you where it is, nor does it indicate the lamp's performance or quality. It doesn't really tell us anything about the shape of the beam, either-- but a broader hotspot with a more-even distribution of maximum intensity *could* explain it.

But really, it's just the peak beam reference number. It's used because maximum authorized total high beam peak intensity, under ECE regulations, is 225,000 candela at 12V. So, that reference number lets you add up all your high beams and auxiliary high beams, and if you're at 75 or under you're good. For an individual lamp, take the reference number and multiply it by 3,000 to see the maximum intensity in candela. Or add up ALL of them and multiply by 3,000 to see the total for the vehicle. In the two lamps' cases above, they are 37,500cd and 112,500cd respectively.

Just out of intellectual curiosity, are there cases in which the hybrid H9/H7 bulb is contraindicated in H7 lamps because of potential glare issues?
Yes.

I know for 9006 to 9012 conversions there is a general rule: you need a full glare cap. I don't remember seeing any such rule for H7 to the hybrid H9/H7 bulb.
For any reflector low beam without a full glare cap, a bulb without a blacktop is a bad idea, because the filament can be observed directly. For high beams and projector low beams, that's not the case-- but you still deal with other potential glare issues going from 1450lm to 2100lm light sources, full glare cap or not.
 
Last edited:

Ls400

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
276
Where would you rank the Hella 350 bar in comparison with a single Rallye 4000 compact?I think we can mount a Hella 350. We would just add one of those license plate bumper cushions to provide the bar a bit of breathing room in case someone decides to get cozy with the parking.
 

jeffsf

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
58
Location
San Francisco
I was tempted by the Hella 350 myself, but with its unique appearance and living in California, regrettably ECE isn't SAE/DOT in the eyes of law enforcement.

Hella has been hiding their iso-lux plots pretty well these days. Assuming that they are self consistent, these should provide some guidance on the relative output and horizontal pattern

https://www.hella.com/truck/assets/media_global/LED_AuxiliaryLights_HELLA_EN.pdf

http://www.myhellalights.com/pdf/Rallye_4000_LED_Flyer.pdf


Edit: In addition to "the usual" JW Speaker offerings, none of which are "compact" to me, there are a couple of manufacturers getting attention on the Tacoma boards (fog lights, in particular), with a lead poster that seems to have some knowledge of lighting (some of his tests have been referenced here).

Diode Dynamics has recently introduced SAE/DOT-approved driving and fog lamps in a 3"x3" form factor. They verbally add that they are the "F3" requirement of the J581 spec in one of their videos. They are available in 6000° K emitter and a clear lens, and a 4000° K emitter and a yellow lens. There is talk of them providing swappable lenses and/or a 4000° K option with a clear lens.
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads...og-light-review.554813/page-119#post-22409186 for information as it comes. Apparently the OP of that thread has some "challenges" with iOS updates and his photometry equipment. I don't own these (yet, especially as I'm not a fan of "boy-racer blue") and wouldn't be surprised if one of the more regular contributors here have some opinions.

Rigid has some listed at https://www.rigidindustries.com/sae-street-legal-landing-page, though it doesn't appear they offer an SAE/DOT-approved driving light in the 3"x3" form factor.

90 mm Hella units might be an option if I could figure out some kind of pedestal housing for them.
 
Last edited:

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
I was tempted by the Hella 350 myself, but with its unique appearance and living in California, regrettably ECE isn't SAE/DOT in the eyes of law enforcement.

This is the piece of California statute applicable to auxiliary lights. I don't see where it makes any reference to SAE or DOT certification. And just for good measure, here is the "general provisions" section. Nothing in there about SAE or DOT certification, either.
 

jeffsf

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
58
Location
San Francisco
I was under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that the Federal codes (FMVSS 108, for example), applied in addition to the California codes, unless specifically overridden by the California codes. I've been mainly wrestling with the height restrictions and permissible beam combinations with the "interesting" definitions of "driving" and "passing" lights and the 4" drop at 25' requirement for "fog" lights (left of center).

I can see that one could argue that


S5.1 Each required lamp, reflective device, and item of associated equipment must be designed to conform to the requirements of applicable SAE publications as referenced and subreferenced in this standard. The words "it is recommended that," "recommendations," or "should be" appearing in any SAE publication referenced or subreferenced in this standard must be read as setting forth mandatory requirements.

would not apply to lamps that are not required (arguably excluding aftermarket auxiliary lighting).

Reading https://www.bar.ca.gov/pdf/Lamp_Handbook_9.3.15.pdf, it indicates that

All required lighting equipment installed on a vehicle must comply with requirements of the California Vehicle Code (VC). Sealed beam lamps and bulbs must be marketed either as direct replacements or approved for on-road use by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT). The adjuster should check for use of illegal high candlepower lights such as halogen, xenon, and super plasma bulbs. The use of illegal sealed beams or bulbs shall cause a vehicle to fail the lamp inspection and a certificate shall not be issued.

(Highlights mine)

All in all, very interesting. Thanks for pointing that out.
 

Alaric Darconville

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 2, 2001
Messages
5,377
Location
Stillwater, America
Reading https://www.bar.ca.gov/pdf/Lamp_Handbook_9.3.15.pdf, it indicates that

All required lighting equipment installed on a vehicle must comply with requirements of the California Vehicle Code (VC). Sealed beam lamps and bulbs must be marketed either as direct replacements or approved for on-road use by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT). The adjuster should check for use of illegal high candlepower lights such as halogen, xenon, and super plasma bulbs. The use of illegal sealed beams or bulbs shall cause a vehicle to fail the lamp inspection and a certificate shall not be issued.


The major flaw in that is that the USDOT does not approve any item of regulated motor vehicle equipment. Another flaw is that there's no "on-road/off-road" distinction in FMVSS 108.

(Also, halogen and xenon lamps aren't inherently illegal; the language in that section is bad and they should feel bad.)

As far as California code overriding Federal Law, they can't refuse a vehicle whose lighting complies with FMVSS 108, they can only regulate the use of the lighting. Fog lamps and auxiliary low beams or auxiliary high beams aren't Federally-regulated nor required, so they could say you don't get to use your fog lamps, or they could say you can't have more than X lamps lit at a time.​
 
Last edited:

-Virgil-

Flashaholic
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,802
I was under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that the Federal codes (FMVSS 108, for example), applied in addition to the California codes

That's not correct. Registered vehicles and their owners are regulated by the laws of the state where the vehicle is registered. Some states' codes incorporate the Federal standards by reference, but California isn't one of them.

unless specifically overridden by the California codes

This sounds like it might be an idea resulting from a misunderstanding of federal preemption, which basically means that if a state has a standard for motor vehicle equipment, design, construction or safety performance, and that same aspect is the subject of a federal motor vehicle safety standard, the federal standard preempts the state standard. This isn't related to what we're discussing here, it just means (for example) if a state standard says parking lights have to be white, or have to be green, or may be green or purple, vehicles meeting the federal standard -- which says parking lights have to be white or amber -- may still be sold and used in that state, even though their equipment doesn't meet the state standard.

I've been mainly wrestling with the height restrictions and permissible beam combinations with the "interesting" definitions of "driving" and "passing" lights

What do you find unusual about them? The linked CA code says "Driving lamps are lamps designed for supplementing the upper beam from headlamps and may not be lighted with the lower beam." That's correct. The definition for "passing lamps" is likewise correct, though quite obsolete (they were subsequently called "auxiliary low beams").

and the 4" drop at 25' requirement for "fog" lights (left of center).

Again, what's so unusual? 4" drop at 25' is an inclination of 1.33%, which is right about where fog lamps are supposed to be aimed.

would not apply to lamps that are not required (arguably excluding aftermarket auxiliary lighting).

There's no argument here. Required means required, and auxiliary lamps aren't required. It's all very plainly delineated in the text of the code. "A motor vehicle may be equipped..." means it's not required.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top