LED Off-Road light

Life_in_4Lo

Explorer
aeroleds are interesting but for the price, i think the xmitter is a better deal.

i got the 12" xmitter bar and it is 3500lumens w/ 262,000 hr bulb life and not much more expensive than the aeroled at half the lumen output.

leds have super long life, very low power draw and very even light.

I had Lightforces and upgraded, bunny hopped over HID's and went for the LED
 

Redline

Likes to Drive and Ride
Are your Xmitters installed? Do you like them much better than Lightforce? How about the color of the light?

Life_in_4Lo said:
aeroleds are interesting but for the price, i think the xmitter is a better deal.

i got the 12" xmitter bar and it is 3500lumens w/ 262,000 hr bulb life and not much more expensive than the aeroled at half the lumen output.

leds have super long life, very low power draw and very even light.

I had Lightforces and upgraded, bunny hopped over HID's and went for the LED
 

Life_in_4Lo

Explorer
here are a few pics. i'll give my impressions after i test them out a bit
they are bright, it's a clean light.
the first pic was taken in daylight and it's still super bright

2417082007_41c4bc6961.jpg

2417083417_36c014918e.jpg

2417900900_c89cf26593.jpg
 

Redline

Likes to Drive and Ride
Looks cool and different to just have the one light up front.

I was thinking of one 22" in front and one 12" in the rear. Think one 22" in the front is overkill?
 

Life_in_4Lo

Explorer
it is much brighter and wider/even spread than my Lightforce 170s but i'll reserve my opinon till i get some impressions on distance. the LF 170s shot out great, but these are quite a bit brighter so far.

I don't think you can have enough light and if you can afford a 22", i would go for it. I just didn't want to spend any money so I went w/ 12" - and it is still a solid upgrade.

i'll update w/ some more impresions- i am excited about it but cautiously optimistic, we'll see if they live up to the hype. so far so good.

i'll take pics later, tho i can never tell anything from comparison photos of lighting
 

Redline

Likes to Drive and Ride
Please remember to comment on the 'color' of the light. There were a few cautionary/discouraging comments that these LEDs would have too 'Blue' of a color.

Do they appear Blue to your eye or more white, like day/sunlight?

Better, worse, or just different than the lightforce color?


Life_in_4Lo said:
it is much brighter and wider/even spread than my Lightforce 170s but i'll reserve my opinon till i get some impressions on distance. the LF 170s shot out great, but these are quite a bit brighter so far.

I don't think you can have enough light and if you can afford a 22", i would go for it. I just didn't want to spend any money so I went w/ 12" - and it is still a solid upgrade.

i'll update w/ some more impresions- i am excited about it but cautiously optimistic, we'll see if they live up to the hype. so far so good.

i'll take pics later, tho i can never tell anything from comparison photos of lighting
 

greybrick

Adventurer
Thanks Life, sure would be great to see some dark road pics, ie OEM low, OEM high, led light only, low + led light, high + led light, etc. :)

.
 
Last edited:

R_Lefebvre

Expedition Leader
madizell said:
I don't entirely agree. First, the photos referenced are not photographically equal. The halogen photo is pretty well focused. The others are not, which is partly due to the camera's interpretation of available light in a night time photo. Much of the lack of detail can be attributed to lack of focus.

Secondly, these are just photos. Your eyes don't see the world the way a camera does. While the camera can not record something it does not see (nor can we), it also can not interpret what it sees moment to moment, whereas we can. As such, details on the road are far more apparent in real time to our eyes than they will be to a camera in a single photo image.

Third, the HID's or whatever were used to produce the washed out photos were aimed very badly. Pointing that much light directly at the road is going to give you a great deal of glare and bounced back light. It might make for a photo that looks intensely bright, and it is, it is not a wise use of the available light, and accounts for much of the "harshness" and "unpleasantness" mentioned. Properly aimed and properly focused for the application they are neither harsh nor unpleasant.

Fourth, look at the distance down the road which you can see with the halogen light versus the other light. Obviously I can't tell how the halogens are aimed, or even if they are brights or dims for that matter, but the down-road vision with the halogens is just not there. With the others, the down road vision is something like 8 times greater, and that is with them aimed too far down.

For close-in vision at night you need diffused light, not hot spotlights. Many of the lights we have been seeing in photos on the board recently have been of the spot variety, such as Light Force and so on. These lights are only best at spot focus lighting, which is not appropriate for close in work. Of the 8 forward facing HID's I use for night racing, NONE are spots, 4 are flood lights, and 4 are driving beams. The light is spread over a bit more than 180 degrees or range which offers full vision including peripheral without significant changes in light density. Only the driving lights will reach out to a quarter mile or more, and they are all focused in the front 45 degrees where they do the most good, and none are aimed so as to reach the ground with the hottest spot of light any closer to the car than about 100 feet. The close in lighting is all flood light which is so soft that there is no "hot spot" to find. The color rendition is essentially white, not blue, and because the close light is not as hot as shown in most of the photos referenced above, a great deal more definition is there to see, and far more than halogens can provide.

The LED's are a different story as nearly as I can tell. I have not seen the new light bars in the real world, but have several LED lights of varying intensity up to one watt, and the light is essentially blue, not white. This likely accounts for the lack of color definition in use mentioned by others. Everything illuminated is reflecting blue-shifted light, which confuses our eyes. Blue light is also more diffuse by its nature, and will not penetrate distances well, nor penetrate things like fog and dust worth a darn. In dust, you would need to turn the LED straight off or you won't be able to see 10 feet. The blueness of the light to some extent is the reason you sense less definition in road detail, simply because blue-shifted light does not offer detail. That is why blue light sources suck as headlights, whether they are halogen based, HID or LED, and it is why I never use HID lamps over 4,300K for road or off road lighting. The 6,000K and hotter lights are so blue and purple that you can't tell where on the planet you are, no matter how bright they may appear to be.

Another feature of the LED as I see it is that you can't alter the focus of the light. Each of the LED's has its own lens, and to produce light in usable quantity, it has to be pre-focused by the LED itself, as LED's are not really omni-directional emitters of light, nor are they all that strong. Some of the light bars are using 40 LED's at 3 watts each to produce the light that you see.

So I see the LED bars are useful if carefully applied, but I would use them for generalized lighting, and would probably use some other light source for the central down road lighting needed for night driving, whether that would be HID's or high output halogens, just to stay away from the blue light for critical vision needs.

I agree with most of this. From what I can see in the pictures is that the Xmitter bar creates an incredible amount of light, but it has no focus. You can see there is a lot of light hitting the houses across the lake, but there's even more light hitting the ground RIGHT in front of the truck.

Maybe it's different for trucks, but for rally cars, this is really bad. You want your light to be projected down the road, not the ground 50 feet in front of the car. At speed, anything 50feet in front of the truck is too late to do anything about.

Your pupils respond to the total amount of light available to them. If you have a ton of foreground lighting, they will shrink in response, and that will reduce how much use you will get out of what distant light you have.

If you have tons of light available at all ranges, then none of this probably matters. But if you have limited lighting, you're better off putting the light exactly where you need to be looking.

These Xmitter bars may the case where there is so much light everywhere, it just doesn't matter. At least for the 22" bars. But if one is considering the smaller bars, with less total light, I think it's a bad idea. You'll get less background light, and too much foreground light. Your distance vision could actually be reduced vs. what you used to have with halogen or HID lamps which actually focus the beam.

I think these LED's are much more useful as close in lights because of this. And it's sort of a shame because it seems the design is not correct to make the best use of this technology. I think these bars would make GREAT side and rear lights, if they actually curved the panel a bit to diffuse the light more onto the ground. You could have one light on each side maybe drawing only 40W, and that would be enough to light the ground immediately around the truck. The same could be useful for really slow going aimed on the front of the truck. But I would use focused beams for any distance work, and turn the foreground lighting off when you're moving fast.

I also suspect the colour is too blue, I mean 7000k is really really blue. I don't know if anybody else has noticed this or if it's just me. But I the new LED Christmas lights really prove the point. My eyes can't focus on the blue bulbs. I didn't really notice it at first when I'd see a string of all blue bulbs. They were always fuzzy, and I just assumed it was an atmospheric thing. But then I started seeing multi-colour strands this year. I can see the red and green LED's as a very small, focused point of light. The blue bulbs however, were just blurs. My eyes just cannot focus that light. It's strange.

And that's the effect that can make these LED's less than useful if you suffer from this problem.

These bars almost seem to suffer from the typical lighting marketing pitfalls as "blue bulbs" and 6000k HID bulbs. More light is not always better. More noticable (blue) light is not always better. The light has to be tailored to suit your needs. You need the right light to be placed right where you need it.
 

DaveInDenver

Middle Income Semi-Redneck
The 12" light bars cost about $500, give or take, have 20 LEDs and are said to be 3600 lumen. That means each LED is 180 lumen. The company says it consumes 60W, which means you are looking at around 250mA per LED.

http://www.visionxoffroad.com/products/led/XmitterBar/

For comparison, a Philips Luxeon LXHL-PW03 illuminates at 120 lumen with 700mA. They cost about $25 each individually or about $20 in high quantity. So I'd think that the Philips is pretty close in spec and cost to the ones they are using. Therefore, I have some doubt about their spec claims. Either they draw more current or put off less light. But I do agree that they could be in the ball park at around 3000 lumen for a 20 LED bar, more or less.

http://www.lumileds.com/

http://www.luxeonstar.com/item.php?id=377&link_str=&link_catg=&partno=LXHL-PW03

But either way, if it's 120 or 180 lumen per LED, times 20 is at least 2400 lumen for a 20 LED bar. A regular Hella 55/60 halogen H4 does 1000/1650 lumen (low/high). That bulb draws 5A on high and so there is definitely some efficiency gain for your 60W of energy.

OTOH, an H4 costs like $5 or $6, which means you are spending ~1% the cost of LED bar to get ~60% of the light. You'd have two H4 bulbs with two headlights or aux lamps, so really you get roughly the same light for 2% the cost. No argument, you'll be consuming twice the energy to get that equivalent light and that's obviously a compromise.

Cheap, bright, low current...pick two.

IMHO, the range of color temps and lens & reflector focuses available for incandescent bulbs still makes them the preferred choice when all compromises are weighed. I think HID is mature enough that with a good lens they win on an energy-for-light comparison, but are not inexpensive and have somewhat more limited color choice (although getting much better).

Personally, I think there's some psychological factor here with these LED lights. Blobs of bright, white light seem to your brain to be brighter even if they are measured to be pretty much the same as a traditional bulbs. But there's a physiological effect that needs to be weighed. You don't necessarily want a ton of light, you want the right amount projected where you want it. If the light is focused down the road a long way and is a sufficient color temp that your natural night vision is not completely ruined, that might be better than trying to make night into day with a dozen aux lights. It all depends on your needs (like going 120MPH thru the desert vs. 60 MPH down the Interstate vs. 30 MPH on a dirt road).
 

R_Lefebvre

Expedition Leader
The comparison is a little off, because your price for an H4 bulb does not include the cost of a lamp to put the bulb in...

I really wish there were lamp options that would take a 9005 or 9006 bulb, because that would allow us to install 9011 or 9012 HIR bulbs. I have used these in my WRX high beams, and they work EXACTLY as advertised.

http://www.rallylights.com/hella/9005.asp#9011
http://www.rallylights.com/hella/9006.asp#9012

The 9011 puts out 2300 lumens at 65W and cost only $30 each. They were absolutely fantastic. Half way to HID quality lighting, at only a fraction of the cost. I also found the light quality to be excellent. It was the truest white light I've ever experience. Really, the colour is more like a 130W halogen than even a white HID. Just perfect IHO.
 

DaveInDenver

Middle Income Semi-Redneck
R_Lefebvre said:
The comparison is a little off, because your price for an H4 bulb does not include the cost of a lamp to put the bulb in...
That's true. So say a pair of Hella Vision Plus housings are $100/pair. So for $112 you get fairly close to the same illumination, which means 25% of the cost for roughly the same amount of light and the reoccurring cost is 2% of the original LED price. It would take decades of H4 bulb replacement to equalize the initial cost of a LED light bar. This is of course not worrying about ruggedness to vibration and energy consumption, both of which are important. Just looking at it from a very simple cost/benefit of light against cost at this point.
 

R_Lefebvre

Expedition Leader
And how would you mount a set of sealed beams?

Better of with just a set of 500's at least, and they're even cheaper, so there you go. The problem with just buying a ton of cheap halogens is amp draw.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
190,186
Messages
2,924,870
Members
233,522
Latest member
Petersmithinak
Top