HID xenon lights to reduce electrical load

[mcrews]

do you have any idea how much money you are talking about?

The reality of your recommendation happening is zero.

I don't understandmaking suggestion that aren't going to happen.

That's the problem with forums. Posters just spill out recomendations that have no application to the poster.
It really requires some thought to post a proper answer.

[tollo]

Some of the head lights are made for both: xenon and halogen. My Astra G has approval for low beam xenon and halogen. Xenon headlight can be done also with reflector (not only projector=lens type).

[Nevyn]

Some cars you can buy the housings from a different vehicle and add in. My Elantra can with a little modding, be retrofit with the projectors/lenses and required ballasts/wiring from an Acura TSX with *relative* ease, for less than $300 US. That's about the only LEGAL way to do in in the USA that I know of.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by tollo

Some of the head lights are made for both: xenon and halogen. My Astra G has approval for low beam xenon and halogen. Xenon headlight can be done also with reflector (not only projector=lens type).

tollo,
can you provide a link to that information?

That is like saying " Astra runs on gas or desiel"

[redpoint5]

I have installed an aftermarket HID system on my motorcycle because the OEM halogen was dangerously dim.

1. It is illegal and is annoying to oncoming drivers because the lens was not designed to cutoff the light at the proper level.

2. The retrofit did result in dramatically more usable light, and I feel that I am much safer riding at night and detecting objects in the road sooner. I believe the annoyance I cause other drivers is more than offset by my increased safety.

3. The lights are illegal. I narrowly avoided a ticket by explaining to an officer that my low-beam had died and I was running my HID high-beam as an emergency measure to get home.

[mcrews]

wow......

THat is the most self-centered post I have ever read.
No really.
THe fact that you even thought to post it, much less actually do it......

YOU ARE CHEAP. YOU ARE SELFISH. YOU ARE A FOOL.
Go uot and buy legal hid headlamps.


Oh AND YOU ARE STUPID.
Any effort on your part to actually LEARN about hid would lead you to realize that your instalation is REALLY not providing proper lighting. You just think so because it is 'brighter'

I'm stunned.

[redpoint5]

I rank among the least self-centered, and would happily give most things to the service of others, including my life.

Your post, however, is among the most self-righteous and condescending that I have read.

If you read my posting, you would see that I merely placed the safety of my life at greater importance than the comfort of oncoming drivers.

I only run 1 HID and aim it low. I tested this setup from the perspective of the oncoming driver to verify that it is not causing a dangerous situation.

I do realize my setup is not optimized, but that does not preclude improvement. You are displaying ignorance when you make the claim that I do not have improved visibility and safety with my HID retrofit (which you have not seen for yourself).

It is downright arrogance to insinuate that I know nothing about HID technology and implementation. I have posted nothing that would support this claim.

At the time of my retrofit (9 years ago), I do not believe there were any other options (I looked). I would be surprised if there even is a legal retrofit for F4i projector beam HIDs.

My questions for you:

1. Assuming there are legal and "optimized" retrofit kits available for my application, what is the maximum amount I should be expected to pay for the sake of compliance of law and other driver comfort?

2. Should all things that could negatively impact others environment always be avoided?

3. Is it ever appropriate to break the law? Are there some laws that are acceptable to break under certain circumstances?

Originally Posted by mcrews

wow......

THat is the most self-centered post I have ever read.
No really.
THe fact that you even thought to post it, much less actually do it......

YOU ARE CHEAP. YOU ARE SELFISH. YOU ARE A FOOL.
Go uot and buy legal hid headlamps.


Oh AND YOU ARE STUPID.
Any effort on your part to actually LEARN about hid would lead you to realize that your instalation is REALLY not providing proper lighting. You just think so because it is 'brighter'

I'm stunned.

[mcrews]

your reply reflects just about everything I said.

Instead of acknowledging THE FACT that you admitted to, you want to throw up defections.straw man arguements.

"if only you knew me" wow....get a grip. We do know you, read your first post.

listen to yourself " I have posted nothing that would support this claim." You posted your comments!!!
Light coming uot of an iccorrect housing is NOT improved light. And like most ricers, you are COMPLETELY unaware of the impact of improper nighttime lighting on the eye.

9 yrs. YOu have been doing this 9 years. Do you realize how really stupid and "i have my head in the sand' you sound?
Maybe, I would forgive you if this was 3-4 yrs ago.
But the amount of FACTUAL information available that proves you are uniformed is staggering.

"I aim it low" So you admit that it causes others problems and you admit that you 'sacrifice' because of it.

********************************************
My questions for you:

1. Assuming there are legal and "optimized" retrofit kits available for my application, what is the maximum amount I should be expected to pay for the sake of compliance of law and other driver comfort?
**********again, self-centered punk*********
Driving is a priviledge.
*****************************************
2. Should all things that could negatively impact others environment always be avoided?
**********again, self-centered punk*********
Driving is a priviledge.
*****************************************


3. Is it ever appropriate to break the law? Are there some laws that are acceptable to break under certain circumstances?

**********again, self-centered punk*********
Driving is a priviledge.
*****************************************

amazing, really.

you are an admitted liar. To law enforcement no less.

[redpoint5]

Let's take a look at each of your comments individually for the sake of clarity.

Originally Posted by mcrews

your reply reflects just about everything I said.

Instead of acknowledging THE FACT that you admitted to, you want to throw up defections.straw man arguements.

"if only you knew me" wow....get a grip. We do know you, read your first post.

How have I misrepresented your position on the subject (which is what a strawman is)?

I don't have to acknowledge what I said, because it's all there plain as day, but I will summarize (acknowledge) what I wrote:

1. The retrofit is illegal
2. The retrofit is annoying to other drivers
3. The light is not properly distributed (not optimized in your words)
4. The retrofit resulted in dramatically more usable light and safety

Please, tell me what I need to admit. I've agreed with most everything you have stated or implied.

listen to yourself " I have posted nothing that would support this claim." You posted your comments!!!

Light coming uot of an iccorrect housing is NOT improved light.

Car Analogy:
(more) power coming out of an incorrect transmission is NOT improved power.

Of course, the term "improvement" is subjective, but in general receiving more of a desired output is what we are aiming for.

And like most ricers, you are COMPLETELY unaware of the impact of improper nighttime lighting on the eye.

I don't know any "ricers", so I can't comment on their level of awareness. I did, however, mention in my last post that I considered the impact of lighting on the eye of others. Not only did I consider the impact, but I tested it from their perspective so that I could make an informed decision about what I am doing. This is evidence of an individual who is concerned with others.

9 yrs. YOu have been doing this 9 years. Do you realize how really stupid and "i have my head in the sand' you sound?
Maybe, I would forgive you if this was 3-4 yrs ago.
But the amount of FACTUAL information available that proves you are uniformed is staggering.

Fortunately for me, I do not require forgiveness of anyone, but what am I uninformed of? I am pleading to be enlightened, but instead I am receiving mostly ad hominems.

"I aim it low" So you admit that it causes others problems and you admit that you 'sacrifice' because of it.

As in all things of life, sacrifice for the sake of bringing about balance is a necessity.
********************************************
My questions for you:

1. Assuming there are legal and "optimized" retrofit kits available for my application, what is the maximum amount I should be expected to pay for the sake of compliance of law and other driver comfort?
**********again, self-centered punk*********
Driving is a priviledge.
*****************************************
2. Should all things that could negatively impact others environment always be avoided?
**********again, self-centered punk*********
Driving is a priviledge.
*****************************************


3. Is it ever appropriate to break the law? Are there some laws that are acceptable to break under certain circumstances?

**********again, self-centered punk*********
Driving is a priviledge.
*****************************************

amazing, really.

I see more ad hominems and a regurgitation of a line from the DMV Handbook, but no answer to my questions. This makes my understanding of where you are coming from impossible.

you are an admitted liar. To law enforcement no less.

Is there any better kind of liar than the admitted kind? It's the people who will not admit to being a liar you must be most weary of, but I digress...

I have lied to law enforcement on multiple occasions (although I don't know how lying to them is significant compared with lying to anyone else). In this case though, my low-beam was indeed out, and I was using my high-beams to make my way home. I did omit the fact that my low-beam is also an HID, but the LEOs never had a problem with it before. As long as it's not aimed in their faces, they don't seem to care. Had I been asked if my low-beam was HID, I would have replied in the affirmative.

Would now be an inappropriate time to also admit to having illegal license plate, turn signal, and brake lights?

Is it also inappropriate to bring up this admission from mcrews' own profile:

FALL 2010:
2002 Q45 Sport w/ IMPUL body kit, 2005 Headlamps blackedout w/ Advanced Automotive Concepts Halos.

1. You drive an aesthetically altered Japanese import (ricer?)
2. You have blackout headlamps. Illegal in most states including CA.
3. Are halos DOT approved? I think not.

Pointing out hypocrisy does not invalidate a claim, but it does make you question the motives and values of the person making the claim.

[redpoint5]

The eyeball mutilator in full mutilation mode (high and low-beam).


Normal half-mutilation mode (low-beam).


I can now see further than 30ft ahead, and can see the road shoulder, but what do I know about improved visibility?!?



and finally, an admitted liar and Worst-Person-In-the-Worrrld


I hope my posts have helped nobody, since I don't care about others.