If you could modify any light to an HID, which one?

[Brian894x4]

If you could put an HID bulb into any off road light out there, which one would it be?

The key being the light has to accomodate H3 bulbs. And I'm looking for mid to long range. I think sort of like a Eurobeam.

The reason I ask is that I have retrofitted a pair IPF 986s to run 55w HIDs and I'm very pleased how they work, but I'd like to carry it a step further and put these into a set of higher quality lights.

I was going to try a set of Hella 4000s, but then discovered they use H1 bulbs and so my retrofit apparently won't work. I also wondered about the Lightforce 240 Blitz, but I'm not sure what bulb type they use.

Any thoughts? Here's my thread on my modifying the IFPs to HID.

http://expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12471

My idea to relocate the IFPs as rear back up lights, running stock 100w Halogens and something tougher and higher quality up front using these same HID H3 bulbs.

 

[ntsqd]

I've been surprised by how good a set of the ~8" Pro-Comps that were given to me worked. I stumbled onto two more sets for $20 total and I had previously been given the complete HID assemblies from a crashed 350Z.
Seemed like a natural. My whole project has been intentionally on the cheap. So far I have one light converted by epoxying on the 350's bulb holder to the back of the Pro-Comp lense/reflector. By calibrated eyeball this resulted in the old halogen element and the middle of the HID bulb's 'kernal' being in the same place. I do not yet know if the epoxy chosen will withstand the heat generated, but in comparing the HID to the non-HID there is a very large difference in light. For what ever reason the 350Z lights are not a high Kelvin light, so they're less blue than most others I've seen. Packaging this particular HID assembly is not easy as it has separate ballasts and ignitors. The Pro-Comp's shell depth won't allow inclusion of either inside, so weld n fab time.....

 

[slosurfer]

I also wondered about the Lightforce 240 Blitz, but I'm not sure what bulb type they use.

Any thoughts?

http://expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12471

My idea to relocate the IFPs as rear back up lights, running stock 100w Halogens and something tougher and higher quality up front using these same HID H3 bulbs.

The LF's use a funky bulb, and as of right now there are no HID bulbs that are a direct fit. The regular H3 HID's can be retrofitted in and they put the source of light very close to where the original source of light was. Also I believe DS2 HID bulbs do the same thing. The first post in my LF HID thread (mine were done on my 170's but the housings/bulbs are exactly the same between the 170s and 240blitz only the reflectors are different) the thread has links to all the info I could find on HIDing lightforces.

Your shorty H3's may work, but the focus may be off. Do you have any pics of your shorty H3's (maybe with a ruler next to them) and I can compare them to mine for reference? With the shorter bulb, you may not be able to adjust them into a nice tight "spot".

 

[madizell]

Not the answer you are looking for no doubt, but I would not modify an incandescent unit to HID. Reflector and lens technology is a mathematical science. A lens and reflector calibrated to an industry standard location for light source won't perform correctly when the light source is shifted out of range. Even if you change the incandescent source from axial to transverse in the same general location you will alter the performance of the unit.

Not that you won't get light out of it if you do change to HID, but you won't get what you will from a unit manufactured to the purpose. The R&D costs of a single HID off road light can be staggering ($50,000 to $100,000) if the maker is trying to get it right. Without access to the same technical resources, your results may vary.

Review this article on HID conversions, as the author is rather an expert in the area, whereas I am not:

http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/bulbs/Hid/conversions/conversions.html

 

[slosurfer]

Not the answer you are looking for no doubt, but I would not modify an incandescent unit to HID. Reflector and lens technology is a mathematical science. A lens and reflector calibrated to an industry standard location for light source won't perform correctly when the light source is shifted out of range. Even if you change the incandescent source from axial to transverse in the same general location you will alter the performance of the unit.

Not that you won't get light out of it if you do change to HID, but you won't get what you will from a unit manufactured to the purpose. The R&D costs of a single HID off road light can be staggering ($50,000 to $100,000) if the maker is trying to get it right. Without access to the same technical resources, your results may vary.

What about offroad lights that use the exact same lense/reflector for their halogen and HID's for example the Lightforce 240XGT is the exact same housing, lense, etc... as their Lightforce 240HID's? The lightforce lights are also made to accept many different type of bulbs some with vertical filaments and some with horizontal filaments, they do change the light ouput and shape somewhat but are made to work that way (one gives a round spot while one gives a more oval spot and one is brighter and increases the distance over another).

 

[ntsqd]

The lights less likely to be successful conversion candidates will those whose beam shaping is done solely by non-round reflector. If the beam shaping is done mostly by the lens in front of a round reflector, then as long as the centroid of the light emitter is in the same place the distribution shouldn't be affected a great deal.

As soon as this isn't the case YMMV, and could vary a lot.

 

[slosurfer]

As soon as this isn't the case YMMV, and could vary a lot.

Hehe, I had to google YMMV to figure that out.

 

[Brian894x4]

Well, I had great success with the IPF 986s HID conversion. There's a lot of opinions about converting HIDs. Some of them very negative.

Part of the problem is the justifiably bad press the headlight conversions are getting due the beam pattern oncoming traffic and the quality of cheap conversion kits. But anyone who has actually run HIDs in any light will be hard pressed not to see the improvement.

I don't think this is as much an issue with off road lights. I ran both halogen and HIDs in these IPFs and the plain simple fact is the HIDs are many times brighter and put out many times more light. It may not exactly perfect and the beam pattern of a $1000 HID may be better, but I'm not looking for perfect, I'm looking for improvement and there's no question I'm getting that.

I think I will try a set of KC 800s. Mainly because the HID and non-HID seems to use the same lens/reflector (same part nos.) and they are metal and bigger (8") so hopefully I get some improvement in light throw. We'll see. In any case, I need something for the rear, so whichever ones work the least will go back there, if I decide to carry on with this swap.

 

[stevet47]

I've converted a set of Hella 500 driving beams and they work great.
Why do you have to get lights that take a H1, do you already have the HID kit? If not, you can just buy whatever kit you need.

There is a huge thread on ttora about converting Hella 4000s:
http://www.tacomaterritory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82281&highlight=HID+hella+4000

EDIT: Just re-read you post and see that you do indeed want to reuse your existing HID kit.

 

[madizell]

What about offroad lights that use the exact same lense/reflector for their halogen and HID's for example the Lightforce 240XGT is the exact same housing, lense, etc... as their Lightforce 240HID's?

I guess that depends on whether you actually like the Light Force lights. I don't. I think they have terrible beam control regardless of light source and have not yet seen one that didn't jiggle. Many of the converted LF lights for which I have seen photo results show lots of black spots, hot spots, and generally poor light control in all configurations.

If the reason one is attempting HID conversion is to avoid the high cost of manufactured lights, might as well give it a try because it is cheaper no doubt. Look for a housing that is highly water resistant, well insulated from shock or at least well mounted, deep enough to take the HID without crowding the lens, and relatively easy to disassemble and clean. One with excellent light control would be a bonus.

Also, the larger the lens and reflector, the more light output regardless of light source. I like the 8" KC's because the lens and reflector are excellent at controlling light and because the lens is acrylic not glass. They are, however, only 7" in effective size. It is the housing that is 8". The internals on the 8" are just about a dead ringer for a 7" round headlight. However, I have both the halogen 8" and the HID 8" and they are not the same unit. The HID is deeper by nearly 2" than the halogen, so you can't just pop the HID into the halogen unit. It won't fit.

 

[slosurfer]

I guess that depends on whether you actually like the Light Force lights. I don't. I think they have terrible beam control regardless of light source and have not yet seen one that didn't jiggle. Many of the converted LF lights for which I have seen photo results show lots of black spots, hot spots, and generally poor light control in all configurations.

.

I know most of my pics show what you are talking about, but all those are ones that have the "combo" filter on it. This doesn't surprise me as we already know that a non clear lense that is meant to adjust a halogen light will not react in the same way with HID. The pics that are with just the clear lense show a very good beam without hotspots and maybe a few strays (which in an offroad light is just more ambient light from your spotlight).

Some examples:
HID 170 with clear lense vs. 170 Halogen with clear lense (You will notice that the HID does have a few stray rays but the "spot" has no dark or hot spots, but is brighter than the halogen, and I can tell you that it goes farther than the halogen)

Here is an example of one with hotspots due to the filter being one that was made to bend a halogen beam:

HID 170 with a combo filter (I had to stitch two photos together to show the full spread of this one light) I don't have a comparison pic of this one but can tell you that I get a better spread with HID but a worse looking "spot". I made a crappy photoshop pic of what the "spot" looks like with the halogen bulb. Now even though the "spot" isn't as pretty with the HID compared to the halogen, it is brighter and goes farther. Once again, not really surprising since this filter is made to bend a halogen beam, so it is a little give and take. Not as visually pretty, but much more useful in that it gives a better spread and wide beam and the center "spot" is brighter and reaches farther.

One HID 170 combo filter

This is a representation of what the center "spot" looks like with a halogen bulb and combo filter. It ends up being a ring with it darker in the center (Next time I get the other 170 out I'll take some pics with the combo and halogen combo)

Like you were talking about, I am not claiming to outshine specific HID offroad lights, but I did make a significant improvement to my existing lights and my alternator is happier. I don't think anyone who does these types of mods are claiming to be better than the expensive HID lights with all their R&D, but are trying to get the best out of what they have both in equipment they have and $$$.

Edit:I wanted to add that I agree LF's with their already high price just for the halogens, might not be the best choice if you are planning on buying a new set of lights with the idea of immediately modding them, but I do believe that you can get some good performance out of them. I used what I had.