I'm not familiar with those housings.

I'm not at all impressed with anything by Sylvania. All their bulbs seem to be mediocre "good enough" type products. Osram owns Sylvania, but they are not identical products, and the Sylvanias do seem to be held to a lower standard.

So there are all kinds of variables that I can't account for, but some food for your thought here:

As a vague guideline, hotter/higher wattage bulbs tend to be more vulnerable to premature failure from physical abuse such as impacts/bumps/jostles--not so much average road travel stuff but potholes and off-road surfaces. Since you do go off road, this is something to consider. Honestly, I do not know if the failure risk is reduced if the lights are off or not--I've wondered on many an occasion if the vulnerability is really only relevant to the hot filament when they are on.



P.S. I'm deliberately avoiding the nitty-gritty of CCT and its interactions with water/vapor. The physics are quite complicated especially when you consider that it's not JUST a physics problem but also a perception problem, and there is a metric truck-ton of misconceptions and misinformation out there on this topic. Fog lights are tied very closely to this clustermuck of a topic as well.

(Small rant incoming)
The bottom line is that my advice is that people need to stop questing for whiter and whiter and bluer and bluer light. There are reasons I avoid short wavelenth light when I can, and water is not even the main reason for that, but I'm not about to sacrifice other great qualities of lighting just for a specific CCT. Charley, this isn't directed at you; I know you're not on some misinformed quest for "upgrades" that don't actually exist. You know what you're comfortable with and are just looking to find the stuff that hits as many of the marks as possible for you--I totally get it.

What I'm excited about one day seeing are LED headlights with specifically tailored spectral power distributions (SPD. See my original post for info on what this is) that can favor advantageous wavelengths and reduce undesirable ones. This is already happening in horticulture. Here's a little something I just grabbed from a quick Google. https://ledlight.osram-os.com/wp-con...rticulture.pdf. And here is another interesting one I grabbed for anyone wanting to go just a little deeper into the rabbit hole http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles...-magazine.html.

People also need to stop thinking that fog lights can be left on all the time and/or that they turn you into a super fog-penetrating god of not having to slow down in bad conditions. Human perception is a funny thing that makes us lie to ourselves all the time, and regardless of how much better you think selective-yellow lights or fog lights allow you to see, you're likely quite wrong and need to slow down.

P.P.S. Beam pattern is even MORE important for a good fog light, and most aftermarket "fog lights" and even some OEM ones have patterns that are utter toilet.

Here's a great read regarding fog lights. Still relevant today. http://danielsternlighting.com/tech/...fog_lamps.html

 

Thanks. My main complaint on the Silverstar Ultras was their higher price, for no better lighting than the lower priced basic models. So don't waste your money CF. Sad part is, that's the only brand other than GE that the parts stores carry down here.

Think I may order a set of the Philips Brand to try (Open for suggestions on which ones). It's actually the wife's XJ/Family Vehicle. Lol

 

Well, their availability EVERYWHERE and the cheap price of the base models are sort of points in their favor I guess. I mean, they're not great, but at least they're always there for you when your nice ones burn out on you (however, here's a protip: keep a fresh set of your chosen bulbs "on deck" in your glove box so that when you need to replace them, you can right away), they don't break the bank, and it's not like they give your Jeep..."car herpes" or anything.

Heck, I don't like them, but I've bought them before, too. Sometimes you just need to replace your bulbs RIGHT NOW.

Yeah, the pricier Sylvs are not worth it for any reason, but I'm not about to shame anyone for buying a basic set at a store so that they can get where they need to at night.

 

Stern's website is a wealth of information, but not well organized, IMO, and he's a long winded fello. I was just reading there about headlight color and he said yellow doesn't really penetrate water better. I was like WTF is he talking about because I know about driving in rain, but then I read on and on and on. Stern is exhausting in his excessive lighting history lessons that irritate me quite frankly, but I persevered on and on.

Finally he got to the part where he began to redeem my confidence in him and regain my interest. He said most people who drive in rainy weather insist they can see better with yellowish light (3000K to 3500K) and no arguments to the contrary can ever dissuade them, even though numerous physics tests have shown yellow light doesn't penetrate rain better. OK, that part was offending me, but finally he started getting to his point.

He went on to say people have the perception of seeing better on rainy or foggy nights with yellowish headlights because our eyes cannot see blue light very well in dim lighting due to how our retinas focus (more sciencey talk) and how our optic nerves and brains work, etc. So we can see better on wet nights with less blue in the light due to how we perceive light. I would take that a step further and say that how we perceive light is because of the physics of our retinas, wavelengths of various colors of light, and the mysteries of how our nervous systems work. We do see better when there is less blue in the light (especially on wet nights when our vision is challenged), assuming the light is bright enough.

So it's not exactly for the reasons I thought, but for other reasons we see better on wet nights with less blue in the light (assuming the light is bright enough).

 

I recently bought XtremeVision +130 bulbs, but I'm not liking the high-beam as much as I'd hoped (not quite bright enough for me, and I don't care for the overly white color. I'm not concerned about cost of buying new bulbs again. I want to see as good as possible without bothering other drivers to much. That is partly for safety and partly for hobby. I can give my existing bulbs to my cousin who needs bulbs (he's still stock).

I'd like a slightly brighter low-beam than XtremeVision +130 are giving me, but not offensively so; and I'd like a much brighter high-beam. I'd like a kick butt high-beam. I don't think a 100W high-beam would cause excessive lighting of road signs with my Cibie ECE housings.

Mschi, earlier you said Philips Rally 100/90 would be to bright on road. I agree. I read at other forums where some people said it's to bright on road. They said low-beam offends other drivers and high-beam lights up road signs to much - blinding the driver. That sounds unpleasant. Also, life span is to short.

I have since learned that 100/55W lights are made by Narva, Flosser, Philips Rally, and Hella. I wonder if one of those would work well since the low beam would be similar to stock brightness? Which of those do you think would be best performance-quality?

Philips Rally 100/55 color temp is 3000K, which I'd like. It seems like a good possibility. Not sure about those other brands' color temps.

Osram 70/65W is a possibility with a somewhat brighter than stock low-beam (I like that), but would it be acceptable on road? It seems like a possibility.

Osram Rally 85/80W seems like another possibility, but I'm guessing the low-beam might be to bright.

Is Osram as good as Philips? How good are Hella and Narva compared to Philips? Some of the non-Philips bulbs interest me because they're made in some wattages I find attractive, and Philips isn't made in those wattages. However, I'm nervous about buying another brand because Philips has been my go-to for years now. Those other brands might be fine, but I don't know since I have no experience with them.

 

How come cheaper Philips bulbs with lower +rating have more lumens than many of the more expensive (alleged) upgrade bulbs that have a higher +rating? I don't understand this. It makes me suspicious of trusting Philips +% ratings claims because their +30 has much higher lumens than their +130. Does a plus-rating mean anything, or is it just marketing lies? I'm wondering if Philips basic bulb (Vision +30) is one of their best. Looking at the specs it appears so. Am I missing something? Based on lumens it looks like we're getting ripped off buying XtremeVison and RacingVision performance bulbs and would get more true brightness (lumens) and more life from buying the basic Vision +30 bulb. Am I missing something?

Vision (Bright, ideal color for wet weather, and cheap. Why aren't these more popular? I might "upgrade" to these. They're probably available at most local auto stores cheaply.)
Brightness +30%, 1815 Lumens
3200K (color is ideal, IMO)
? Hours

VisionPlus
+60%, 1780 Lumens
3200K (color is ideal, IMO)
? Hours

XtremeVision (+100)
+100%, 1815 Lumens. 1850 lumens is as bright as it gets for stock wattage high-beams. XtremeVision +100 bulbs are better focused than Vision +30. I think XV +100 is the best stock wattage bulb ever made and has good color too.
3400K (color is ideal, IMO)
300+ hours (I don't drive much. This lasts me 5+ years)

XtremeVision Plus +130
+130%, 1650 Lumens
3700K (a little to white on rainy nights, IMO)
450 hours

LongLife EcoVision (This one seems superior because the lumens are good and lifespan is excellent. I suspect color is good, but I don't know. Am I missing something?)
1650 Lumens
?K
1500 hours (holy cow)

RacingVision (+150)
+150%, ? Lumens (Philips is keeping the lumens a secret. I can't find lumens info anywhere. This does not speak well of Philips. I'd bet the lumens are not impressive, which makes me wonder if the bulb is not impressive.)
Philips states 3400 to 3700K. I'm not sure if that means low and high beam, or maybe Philips doesn't want to say what the color is?
200 hours (The life is short, but I don't drive much. So they'd last me 2.5 years)

===

The above are stock wattage bulbs.

The below are higher-than-stock wattage bulbs.

===

Rally 100W/55W (+230) (The 55W low beam should mean they wouldn't molest other drivers, correct?)
+230%, 2900 Lumens high-beam, Curious what low-beam is
3000K
100 hours

Philips 100/90W
Hi/Low
2600/1700 lumens
3000K
100/150 hrs

Osram 85/80W
Hi/Low
2400/1750
? K
? hrs


Edited in Later: After much research reading at lighting forums, reading European car magazines lighting tests and reviews, emailing with Stern, and having personally used XtremeVision +100 and XtremeVisionPlus +130 bulbs, I conclude that (as of March 2017) the best street legal lighting is Philips XtremeVision +100 or RacingVision +150, depending on what color light you want and how much bulb life you need. For brightness and focus they are both excellent and you can't go wrong with either. The weakness of RacingVision is the short lifespan.

Philips XtremeVision Plus +130 is an OK bulb, but isn't great. The XVP+130 focus isn't as good as XV+100 or RV+150, and the XVP+130 light color is considerably to white to be good in wet weather. It's not terrible in wet weather, but it's not good either. It's a mediocre bulb for a premium price. Philips did not get this bulb quite right, IMO. I base that on reading forum and magazine reviews, talking with Stern, and my personal disappointing experiences with this bulb. It's not a terrible bulb. It's just not a great bulb. It's siblings (XV+100 and RV+150) are great bulbs.

Personally I think the XV+100 is still the best legal lighting you can buy. Narva Range Power +110 is same bulb as XV+100, except the Narva has slightly whiter light, but still a color that should work well enough in wet weather. Vosla +100 is also the same bulb, but with whiter light (not sure how white).[indent]Note: Philips owns Vosla and Narva. Their tech is very similar, and in some cases the same. Though I have noticed one difference. Narva, and especially Vosla, usually put more blue filter band on bulbs that Philips does. So Narva, and especially Vosla, tend to be slightly whiter (or less yellow) than Philips. Whiter is OK (maybe even preferable) on dry nights; but yellow is preferable on wet nights. Philips traditionally has had less yellow (3200K) than a basic stock bulb (3000K), but still enough for good wet weather performance. XV+100 is 3400K, which IMO is an ideal color for wet and dry performance. The XVP+130 veered away from normal Philips design and added more blue filter rings and has 3700K light, which IMO is a bit to yellow for wet weather performance. The RV+150 has come back a little more toward yellow again (which is good, IMO).

I prefer the Philips XV+100 because it's light is slightly more yellow (3400K) which is ideal for my wet climate, it reaches far enough and with good focus, it's bright enough. (The XV+100 overall high-beam is brighter than XVP+130 according to my personal experiences, and according to tests done by a European auto magazine). So how did the XVP get a +130 rating? The XVP+130 has a brighter hot spot than XV+100, but that doesn't meant the XVP has an overall brighter beam. I'm also looking forward to trying Philips Rally 100/55W, or Vosla or Narva 100/55W. That's not legal lighting for high-beam, but I won't use high-beam when other cars are around. I'm curious how it will compare to XtremeVision+100 bulbs in my relay harness. I suspect the XV+100 will have a better low beam. I suspect the 100/55 might have a better high-beam. I say "might" because the 100/55 high-beam is probably not as well focused as the XV+100 high-beam. No one has tested and compared these two bulbs (that I know of). So I'm going to test and compare them.

IMO the XV+100 is the ultimate performance legal light bulb. Now I want to see how it compares to illegal performance.

 

I just read on another forum that when installing a relay harness and higher than stock wattage, one should also upgrade the headlight grounds too. I assumed that was already taken care of by my new relay. I never really thought about it before. My cousin installed the new harness for me.

Do I need to also upgrade my headlights ground wire(s)? I'm considering using 100/55W bulbs.

 

K, I'm just going to throw answers to questions at you. You'll know what questions I'm answering.



Osram, Phillips, Narva, Flosser, Vosla all have great products. I can't promise that some aren't duds, though. I mean, I don't know everything about every single thing they offer. Osram has been my go-to in the past, but I've branched out into learning and trying more and more as I can. I avoid

I used higher-wattage Osram Rallye in my Cibie's in my 96 XJ. Street sign reflection is a good point that I forget about, but I did not like it. Some of the blame is the ECE pattern. ECE kicks up at the side of the road to hit signs with more light which, if I'm not mistaken, is because reflective signs aren't as common in Europe...or weren't once upon a time?

+ratings and lumens....

The "+100, +130" stuff is marketty fluff. Like I said earlier, it is to imply that they are some percent "brighter" than "normal" bulbs. This is deliberately vague pseudoscience. Don't get tricked into assigning discrete scientific values to those numbers.

Lumens are a real unit of measure, but companies get to play around with gray areas here in order to mislead consumers as well. Some companies will list the raw lumen ouput of their product. That is a meaningless figure. Some companies (JW Speaker for example) realize this and instead list effective lumens. Effective lumens is always a smaller number, but it is a whole lot more meaningful than raw. Unfortunately a lot of products won't specify in which case I assume they are being vague on purpose and that the number they provide is raw.

To answer your question about the various Phillips bulb having counterintuitive lumens (cheaper bulbs having more lumens listed)....It is because the better bulbs have differently configured filaments (more tightly wound for example) with much more effort put into positioning so that more of the light they generate gets focused by your optics correctly and goes where you need it (EFFECTIVE lumens!). Honestly, I'd be straight surprised to find out that those numbers Philips provides are based on anything resembling reality anyhow.

This is also an example AGAIN of why HID's in halogen housings are garbage. You can slap an HID with 3000 raw lumens into a halogen housing but because most of that light is originating outside of the focal point of the optics, it ends up flying in all sorts of useless directions in the end. Effectively not so good (and dangerous!).

If you are considering running two 100W lights on a harness, even if it is just the occasional high beam, you need to be equally concerned about your positive AND negative wires (it's DC--no sense in upgrading the ground if the + lead is wimpy). I would use at least 12AWG if not 10AWG or, if your current harness is 14AWG you could just double that up with a another run of 14AWG in parallel. But make sure the entire run of both positive AND negative/ground are upgraded, not just the grounds.


P.S. If you really want to geek out, CandlePowerForums.com is to lighting geeks like BITOG is to oil geeks. I'm both. I have a problem.

 

When I did my H4 upgrade I did a ton of research on which bulbs to buy. I ended up buying 60/55W Osram Silverstar 2.0 This was a couple years ago so I really don't recall why I chose those specific bulbs but they have a great white color and have lasted since I put them in. Even Daniel Stern approved of them.

With Cibie housings and the Putco harness I am still impressed every time I use high beams or pull up to a wall.

 

My cousin just installed a new Stern harness for me. Wouldn't that have already upgraded my ground wires? I think I remember that harness is rated for 130W.

 

Then yes.

 

Mschi, I realize you might not know all, but you know much. Below I'm going to summarize where I'm at in my thinking. I'm also going to email the text below to Stern for his opinion.

For anyone who doesn't know this already: I have a Stern made upgrade relay harness. I think it might be rated to 130W?

Philips XtremeVision (+130) I currently have these and they're a bit to white for my tastes, and the high beam isn't quite strong enough. The low beam is excellent (almost to bright, but well focused with good cutoff)

Bulbs I'm most interested in and considering:

Philips Vision +30 High lumens, good 3200K color, not sure how well focused.

Phillips XtremeVision (+100) I had these before and love the low-beam. The high-beam was adequate, but I'd prefer a brighter high-beam.

Philips RacingVision +150 I have no idea how these would be.

Philips Rally 100/55W The high-beam (2900 lumens) is fabulous, the 3000K color might be to my liking (if not to yellow) but would low-beam be bright enough? Is this bulb focused well?

Narva, Hella, Vosla, Flosser 100/55W I don't know anything about these, but they sound interesting.

Osram 70/65W, 75/70W, or 85/80W.

Hella Weatherstar 110W/85 I don't know much about this, but it's for wet climates.

ARB IPF 110/80W I don't know anything about this, but ARB sells them. So I assume they'e good, but I don't know.

ARB IPF 170/100W Holy crap! That would melt my harness! That must be intended for an underwater dive light. I can't imagine putting that in a car.

Does any good brand make a 100/70W, 100/65W, 100/75W, or a close approximation? I want to increase my low beam a little bit and my high-beam a lot (compared to XtremeVision). However, I'd be happy enough with same low-beam and more high-beam.

 

BTW - Mschi, the issue with overly bright high-beams making road signs blindlngly bright was a problem with XtremeVision bulbs in my Hella DOT housings, but is not a problem in my Cibie ECE housings.

DOT housings throw more light to the sides (and less light forward). i.e. - less focused. So DOT housings light up street signs to much with a bright high-beam bulb. ECE housings are much better for sending less light to the sides and more light forward, IME. Which is why I now can have (and want) a brighter high-beam.

If I still had DOT housings, I wouldn't even want a brighter high-beam (due to road signs blinding me).

 

I don't agree. Assessments like this are more case-by-case rather than a generic ECE vs DOT, and there are a lot of factors and a lot of claims here that I'd rather not try to tease it all apart.

I'm not saying you didn't have a problem with you Hella DOT's because clearly you did. All I'll say is that my sign glare came from street side signs and that it was a combination of high-wattage bulbs and Cibie ECE pattern that did it. What about the pattern? The kick up on the right side that DOT patterns generally don't have which allows a lot more light to go down the shoulder and/or directly into streetside signs.

Honestly, it was not a debilitating problem, and I'll happily take that minor annoyance over the problem of poor lighting every single time.


All your other bulb questions above...you're to the point where you're better off going over to http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...ycles-Included and running your questions by those guys. Virgil and Alaric Darconville are both especially awesome and likely to help out.

 

I realized the Philips XtremeVision +130 weren't Stern's foul up. It was mine. I didn't ask him for advice. I just asked him to sell me some Philips XtremeVision +130. I assumed they'd be excellent since the XtremeVision +100 were excellent for stock wattage.

However, Philps has (IMO) sold out their principles of excellence in an effort to please fools who want whiter bulbs. Fools are very influential people because they are the majority.

BTW - Stern confirmed that his harness upgraded my ground wires and his harness can easily handle 130W high-beams, but he doesn't recommend 130W high-beams for vision reasons (probably would cause blinding road signs reflections, haha). He recommended 100/55W to me. So far he hasn't recommended any specific brand.

Thanks for all your help. You helped me get started down the right path when you explained why I don't like XtremeVision +130 as much as the XtremeVision +100 that I had before, and thank goodness I didn't buy the RacingVision. 100/55 bulbs are cheap by comparison to those allegedly higher snoot bulbs.