well finally got the ignition barrel sorted and my car back today so tonight i thought i'd quickly test the HID's
guess from the pic which side has the HID bulb? hehe the pic makes both bulbs look really bright almost blinding but there not really, shit phone cam i guess. beam pattern is identical to the halogen bulb in the other side so i'm gonna whack them in properly tomorrow and see if they go through the MOT ok next week.
beam pattern looks better and less blinding than the MR2 Turbo ones, guess cos my old beamer has projector lenses helps.
oh the lil round light on the left hand side just above the headlamp is not distortion or anything it's the torch i left on that i was using to see the connections and shit with lol
Hope the MOT guy isn't on the ball - you need headlamp washers and self levelling to comply with regs if fitting aftermarket ones.
It seems to. I have E36 headlamps in my SD1 with aftermarket HIDs and the beam pattern is fine. Although it might be to do with how the upper cutoff is made - these projectors use a flag in front of the bulb which is less sensitive to focus than the type which do it in the lens.
Oh - the SD1 has both headlamp washers and self levelling suspension. ;-)
Doesn't work on this browser - just bands of pretty colours.
*cough* of course! mind you i got pulled loads of times with my MR2 Turbo which looked silly bright several times and they never got mentioned and always past the MOT. there not blinding at all no more so than a normal bulb when i ran both together and the beam is spot on so should be fine plus they'll be MOT'ing it at work and i've seen how they MOT so doubt it'll fail really.
The information given out by the DoT with regards to HID is confusing and misleading at best. They make *recommendations* that the systems should have self-levelling and washers but at the same time they also ackowledge the fact that there is no way to enforce this because the type approval regs do not apply to used vehicles.
The whole premise of the DoT's negative stance on aftermarket HIDs is based on the fact that they are not mentioned in the lighting regs. And because they are not in the regs, that means they can't be used at all, on new or old cars - regardless of whether there are levellers/washers in the system (Systems fitted to brand new cars do however pass European type approval, which overrides our own UK regulations - thus making factory fit systems legal).
But either way, there is still nothing in any of the regs that states aftermarket systems must have levellers and washers. They are deemed "illegal" purely because they were not around when the lighting regs were drafted up and haven't yet been amended into them.
So basically if you retrofit it doesn't matter whether you have levellers/washers or not, or even whether they are E-marked or not (EU Type approval only applies to brand new cars with factory fit systems remember) they are still not legal for UK use under any circumstances.
On the plus side though, I couldn't really give a f*ck :)
Requirement for leveling and high pressure wash is construction and use regs FOR NEW VEHICLES. Compliance with construction and use regs is not checked for by MOT test but only during typetest or SVA or ESVA (or a court case bought by the police!). Nothing about HID bulb being a reason to fail test at all on here.
formatting link
about the leveling or high pressure wash being functionaland/or a test requirement on 3+ year old car equipped with HID fromnew either.
formatting link
- Filament lamps have to be E-marked. Doesn't say you have to use afilament lamp, just if you do it has to be E-marked. So LED and HIDdon't need marks for now.
New one is blue one in drivers side. Old one is PINK on pass side. Having different colour bulbs WILL FAIL MOT!
Which kind of bikes - pushbikes or the rubbish kind?
Assuming pushbikes, then it's sort of similar. LED lights (and flashing lights) used to be illegal, but are now ok if they are BS or EU approved. It's different though in the manner that these are not fixed legally required items that are built onto the bike at the production stage (i.e. you are not replacing an integral part of the machine that is legally required to be there at the production stage).
Speaking of lights, I have a portable supernova attached to the front of my bike, I seem to make lots of new friends amongst car drivers on the road - they always wave a friendly greeting at me! At least, I *think* it's friendly - but for some strange reason they don't appear overly happy. Must just be all that time spent stuck in traffic... :)
As per the other post, it's nothing to do with the Construction and Use regs or the MOT. HID lights are currently deemed illegal because they do not conform to the Lighting Regulations.
This is only relevant at the production stage though - in order to pass the Construction and Use regs. Whether an *aftermarket* HID system is E- Marked or not is completely irrelevant until the regulations are updated.
At some point or other this is probably going to be cottoned on to and clamped down on, but at the moment the potential revenue gain to be made through fines is not significant enough to warrant motivating a few more clipboard wielders into action. Cynical? Moi?
In item 14 above I was referring to the "Lighting Regulations"! Statutory Instrument 1989 No. 1796 The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989
I'm having problems being sure I've found all amendments to relevant acts.
1994
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
Where specifically do the "lighting regs" or amendments say you MUST use a filament lamp or CAN'T use a discharge lamp? What it says in the '89 regs is that if IT IS a filament lamp it must conform to reg 4 or reg 5 - marking of lamps. The fact that it neglects to prescribe the marking and use of other types doesn't preclude their use. I think it's illegal to sell unmarked filament bulbs for road use.
They can change it but UK Law makes enacting it retrospectively to apply to the current vehicle population and mods to those vehicles quite hard. Hence all the bits that go "before 1971" or "after 1986". The only vehicle regs they have gone to that trouble for are speedos and brake lights (lorry tachographs?).
The 1994 amendment seems to be an update to refer to the EC directive
76/756 - which contains, "aggregate intensity of all beams that can be switched on simultaneously must not exceed 225000 Cd". As Candela is a measure of light / unit area it depends of the spread of the beam or divergent angle so will be different for every lamp unit and set of combined lamps.
RTA - 1988 and 1991 - zilch
formatting link
You can bet your ass that some clipboard wielder in the prosecution service (or whatever it is now) has done the calc for how much they will pay out in costs to lost cases v's fines from successful cases. And found it's a loser.
By the time they get the regs sorted nearly 100% of cars will have HID as stock and ones that don't, it will be an option. A large volume of the secondhand stock will also have HID with type approval from new so except for H4 identifying the non compliant installs as they drive by may be a bit hard.
Just noticed you have clear indicators with the S2 chrome surround. How'd you manage that? I bought a set of S1 indicators thinking the lenses would just screw onto the S2 light units. Seems I was wrong, and you have to fit the entire S1 unit, and so loose the chrome, which I don't want to do.
Hacked off the chrome surround from a spare pair and fitted it underneath the Series I units. But I think I might get rid of the chrome surround and the ones round the headlights too.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.