Is it time to ban LED Headlights

[robj20]

If they're all dumb systems, there's not a massive difference between them all as simple dipped beams, though I preferred the LED units in the Skoda as the beam pattern was a much more even distribution.

The adaptive Xenons I have now though are much better at night, because of the adaptive beam splitting etc. I've no doubt newer matrix LED implementations are even better.

This feels like it's a totally different topic though. Standard setup Vs matrix type.

But for info they do the moving side to side as you go round corners but aren't the matrix type if they're what you mean.

I just need enough light to see what's in front of me I don't need more and more. Maybe it comes down to people that are happy just getting from a to b Vs people wanting to do 120mph along country lanes then I can see extra visibility being worth it, but then that's what full beam is for.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

This feels like it's a totally different topic though. Standard setup Vs matrix type.

But for info they do the moving side to side as you go round corners but aren't the matrix type if they're what you mean.

I just need enough light to see what's in front of me I don't need more and more. Maybe it comes down to people that are happy just getting from a to b Vs people wanting to do 120mph along country lanes then I can see extra visibility being worth it, but then that's what full beam is for.

You literally called me out on me saying im keen to get back into Matrix!

Anyway you are right, I'm wrong. Cheers.

 

[Kenai]

This feels like it's a totally different topic though. Standard setup Vs matrix type.

But for info they do the moving side to side as you go round corners but aren't the matrix type if they're what you mean.

I just need enough light to see what's in front of me I don't need more and more. Maybe it comes down to people that are happy just getting from a to b Vs people wanting to do 120mph along country lanes then I can see extra visibility being worth it, but then that's what full beam is for.

Not sure it's a different topic really, when you responded to a post saying there's a huge difference from LED to Matrix by saying it makes zero difference to you

 

[Mr Jack]

Are you really asking me how increased visibility isn't a safety upgrade from the drivers perspective? Really?

You can see more of the road ahead, this is nothing but a safety improvement (The separate argument that this then encourages people to drive faster than they otherwise would have is, however, valid, but the same is true of almost all safety upgrades).

Earlier you made an argument about evidence; I'd like to ask the same thing about this. Is there any evidence that the kind of lights that people are complaining about provide any safety benefit? I would argue that the halogens on my car already provide complete visibility as far as the need for safety is concerned. The brighter LEDs on the car I had before certainly made things in front brighter but I don't believe there was a single thing I could see then that I can't see with my current car.

By analogy: right now, it's overcast outside, but there's still enough light for me to see as far as eye can see. If I go outside on a bright sunny day it may be three orders of magnitude brighter yet I won't be able to see any more; it'll just be brighter.

In my opinion, the entire possible increase in safety from brighter headlights was exhausted a decade ago.

 

[robj20]

You literally called me out on me saying im keen to get back into Matrix!

Anyway you are right, I'm wrong. Cheers.

I didn't call you out I miss read. But you get all defensive about it sure.
I'm not entirely sure when the topic swapped from led lights in general dazzling people to matrix lights are the best and anything less is dangerous.

 

[Greebo]

I think the logical thing is a limit on the light output.

I wish they'd use LED bulbs as well. When I was buying the Mondeo I avoided the LED option, with the Mazda it was just the default lights.
One costs about £5 to change the other is almost £800.

£2400 on a BMW

 

[ttaskmaster]

Maybe there are no specific statistics for "collisions caused by excessive glare from oncoming headlights" for a similar reason there are no specific statistics for "collisions caused by excessively sized seagulls crapping on windscreens"

ISTR an RAC report showing about 15% of accidents had been directly attributed to excessive glare, with their estimate that a far greater additional percentage had it as a major contributory factor, albeit without enough details to fully confirm...

By analogy: right now, it's overcast outside, but there's still enough light for me to see as far as eye can see. If I go outside on a bright sunny day it may be three orders of magnitude brighter yet I won't be able to see any more; it'll just be brighter.

In my opinion, the entire possible increase in safety from brighter headlights was exhausted a decade ago.

I'm still of the opinion that if people need this much light blasting out the front of their car, especially in well-lit urban areas, they need their ******* eyes tested!
I'm sure it's mostly down to poorly adjusted lights, but I really don't give a **** about the reason - I'm just ****** off at not being able to see through the glare, and the possibility of hitting what's hiding behind it.

 

[Greebo]

So you think regulation should be based on the perception of the general public not the reality?

That sounds great! Just imagine the things we could regulate if we did it based on how people feel rather than the actual facts of the situation.

Well that does seem the basis of our current Govt for the last 10 years anyway. So it woudlnt surprise me at all if the UK brought new rules in to regulate LED headlights

 

[robj20]

£2400 on a BMW

Is that each as well?
I know they say they should last forever as well, but as far as I know they won't do then for free after the warranty runs out and they fail. It's a huge cost on a wearable part.
I've seen a few cars driving around with only one side working so they clearly fail as all things do.
I imagine a lot of cars will be written off for minor front crashes just because both headlights are damaged.

 

[JonRGV250]

A lot of the time on some older cars with LED headlights, it’s the control unit that fails, not the actual headlight itself.
Easy and cheap to replace.

 

[Greebo]

Is that each as well?
I know they say they should last forever as well, but as far as I know they won't do then for free after the warranty runs out and they fail. It's a huge cost on a wearable part.
I've seen a few cars driving around with only one side working so they clearly fail as all things do.
I imagine a lot of cars will be written off for minor front crashes just because both headlights are damaged.

Each as I full well know after smashing both of them within 6 weeks or each other.

And yeah all this tech on modern cars is great but its driving up insurance costs (I claimed for both headlights on my insurance at £2,400 each) plus when these cars are old, it wont take much of a bump to write them off.

When i did the my first bump in my bmw x5, there wasnt that much damage but I had taken out a headlight and the main autonomous sensor at the front of the car plus it needed a new front trim and painting. total bill was £12,500.

The sensor wasnt cheap either, something like £3k from memory and took 9 weeks to come from Germany as each one has to be programmed with the cars VIN

So when 10 years old, it will be quite easy to run up a big enough ins repair bill for the car and write it off for just minor damage.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Earlier you made an argument about evidence; I'd like to ask the same thing about this. Is there any evidence that the kind of lights that people are complaining about provide any safety benefit? I would argue that the halogens on my car already provide complete visibility as far as the need for safety is concerned. The brighter LEDs on the car I had before certainly made things in front brighter but I don't believe there was a single thing I could see then that I can't see with my current car.

By analogy: right now, it's overcast outside, but there's still enough light for me to see as far as eye can see. If I go outside on a bright sunny day it may be three orders of magnitude brighter yet I won't be able to see any more; it'll just be brighter.

Try that again on a dark lane at night though and you'll probably find it to be quite different - as far as the eye can see in this situation is about as far as your headlights reach. The further they reach, the more you can see, and the longer you have to react to anything you spot.

In my opinion, the entire possible increase in safety from brighter headlights was exhausted a decade ago.

I don't necessarily disagree with this - but I don't think lights are much, if at all, brighter now than they were a decade ago. This is around when the technology reached the level it is now. People complain a lot about how bright the headlights are on a Mini - these lights were introduced in.. 2014. The first car I drove with excellent LED matrix lights was a Mercedes E Class registered in 2014. etc...

 

[[TW]Fox]

ISTR an RAC report showing about 15% of accidents had been directly attributed to excessive glare

This is absolutely nothing like the figures on gov.uk.

 

[Mr Jack]

Try that again on a dark lane at night though and you'll probably find it to be quite different - as far as the eye can see in this situation is about as far as your headlights reach. The further they reach, the more you can see, and the longer you have to react to anything you spot.

I live in rural nowhere so I drive on unlit roads quite often. That's the situation I'm talking about.

I don't necessarily disagree with this - but I don't think lights are much, if at all, brighter now than they were a decade ago.

I think my main point, as I said quite a while back, is that there is a trade off here and that being the brightest possible lights isn't automatically the best outcome overall. Hopefully this study can make sensible findings on that and we'll see sensible regulation introduced but, tbh, I don't have great faith in that being the outcome.

I don't like being dazzled by oncoming drivers, I don't think anyone does, and I'm pretty sure it happens a lot more than it used to and specifically whereas it used to be almost invariable from people who hadn't dipped their headlights now it often happens from cars with their lights still dipped. I think there are ways to ensure that is a rare occurrence while maintaining the safety improvements from good headlights.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Interestingly my previous car had headlight washers and my current car does not - I am sure the requirement is linked to the brightness of the headlights (Oh look, there are already regulations ), which might offer further support to the idea that they are not getting any brighter.

 

[Rilot]

Interestingly my previous car had headlight washers and my current car does not - I am sure the requirement is linked to the brightness of the headlights (Oh look, there are already regulations ), which might offer further support to the idea that they are not getting any brighter.

Odd that isn't it? Our CX5 doesn't have washers either despite having retina-ripping matrix LEDs. My S2000 does though for its xenons, as did our CR-V for its halogens.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

2000 Lumens per light source, so technically when you have loads it meets regulations

 

[jpaul]

but it's what you do with the lumens that counts - if you are erratically dazzling people across the beam throw,
because the sealed-unit reg say intensity/lux can be infinite at points (lb2v).... matrix light should help, though
ironically the non-sealed units/halogens impose restrictions across the beam throw -
graphic from thread I linked earlier

 

[Jonnycoupe]

Thats a federal requirement where Matrix lights have only just been allowed. Not really relevant for the UK or EU where we mainly live...

 

[Greebo]

The problem is there is no maximum brightness in law for headlights

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989

goes into considerable detail about what’s legal when it comes to headlights in the UK. The law doesn’t exactly specify a maximum legal brightness. But it strongly implies that there is one.

In short, it stipulates that all of your car lights must have an approval mark – often called an E mark – or a British Standard mark. After all, if you fit your headlights with a bulb that’s going to blind other drivers, then it won’t have any marks of approval. So it won’t be legal anyway!

But beyond this, the law essentially states that your headlights must be white or yellow, and that they must be bright enough to allow you to see around 100 metres ahead of you without blinding other drivers.

Thats it. Perhaps it does need updating?

Halogen was 600-900 lumens. HID were up to 4500 lumens. Decent LED headlights are 2500-3000 lumens but some car manufacturers fit headlights that are up to 12,000 lumens apparently. Some LED headlights in the Seat leon for example are only 900 lumens so LED headlights doesnt necessarily mean more light power

By law any headlight producing over 2000 lumens needs a headlight washer. But not sure if this applies to LED headlights? Certainly the BMW laser lights were 170% brighter than the standard LED lights and i would imagine standard BMW LED headlights were already close to 2,000 lumens so laser lights should have taken them well above.

But it does seem like a bit of mess atm and perhaps we do need to ask the question as to why we need cars with 12,000 lumen headlights? The may well have E mark approval but doesnt mean they should be allowed.