3rd Gen HID vs LED vs Halogen H11 projector headlights

Just curious, did you read this thread?

 

I got for my 19 trd the led's from diode dynamics and they are super great, they go for $150 and for the fog lamps I got the trd pro oem rigid industries led's, it is way better than stock, no complains and both match the same color as the drl's. Best way to go in my opinion.

 

Definitely not the way to go, if you read the thread at all. or the Ultimate Fog Light thread.

 

If you do H9s you don't want the Osrams you get at the autoparts store, you want the Philips, there is a noticeable performance difference. The GE +120/+130 bulbs will outperform the Osram H9s but not the Philips H9s.

Look at the data in the thread, German made Philips bulbs rebased far outperform the XD China made bulbs. I'm not aware of any other HID kit that uses a real German Philips capsule, most all use made in China bulbs.

I'll be testing the DD LEDs very soon. They seem to understand the optics engineering better than most LED companies, but I don't have high hopes of them outperforming halogen performance alternatives. We'll see what the data says. The Rigid TRD Pro lights are pretty low in output compared to the aftermarket, they are above Morimotos, but far below KC's G4s and the Rigid D-series SAE fog pods or the new Rigid selective yellow fogs. All the data is here:
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/the-led-sae-j583-fog-pod-fog-light-review.554813/

 

I currently have the German Phillips H9 bulbs in my low beam projectors and Im not impressed at all by their performance. I was running these https://headlightrevolution.com/2016-2018-toyota-tacoma-led-low-beam-headlight-bulb-upgrade-v-4/ and they were much brighter than the Phillips H9s I am currently trying.

 

I wasn’t terribly impressed by H9’s in the lows either. The GE +130’s were a significant improvement over both, and to my eyes were nearly as bright as the XD 4300k HID’s I tried far more agreeable to drive with an a cold snowy climate

 

Just ordered 4 H9 philips bulbs from Rock Auto since they were a third of the price of Amazon up here in Canada. After my last two vehicles being factory Hid, the stock taco lights are underwhelming for sure. I did however cannibalize the H11 HIDs from my Mustang fogs, but after dealing with the nuances of an Aftermarket hid system, I think I will enjoy the simplicity of a plain high powered halogen. I may still try the HIDs, but silly young me ordered 6k rather than 4300k.

Now I know this isn't the proper spot to ask, but @crashnburn80 I was looking at your foglight thread (and kudos by the way, amazing job on thread and all the other ones you've done. I've been lurking the forum at work for a while before buying my new 19 trd sport just 2 weeks ago) and I've decided I would like the KC G4 lights. But I'm stuck between the clear and Amber. I like the power of the clear, but with my current work schedule, in the winter I drive to and from work in the dark and alot of days the snow can be nasty and I think the Amber would be properly suited to the inclement weather of winter better. So to reiterate, clear or Amber G4s? Or clear with amber/yellow film??

 

By far the best of both worlds is Rigid's new SAE selective yellow. The KC G4s are an outstanding plug and play option option, but the Rigid selective yellow gives you the performant long wavelength light for poor weather conditions, while also providing higher output than the highest output KC G4s white fogs. On top of that, for snow weather conditions, the KC G4s easily ice over, as the reflector optics with LEDs are so efficient there is almost no heat. Rigid uses a white light with an amber lens. Basic physics 101, since energy cannot be created or destroyed and light is energy, filtering white light to selective yellow with the lens removes output, aka energy. Where does that energy go? Heat, which means the lens is heated through light filtration so the lens actually gets hot to melt snow, unlike any other currently available LED fog. Baja is due out with their selective yellow SAE lights next month and I'll add them to the fog thread, but right now I would go with the Rigid Selective Yellows. You can see my review of the prototypes here:
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads...fog-light-review.554813/page-14#post-18889711

 

I'm trying to think of a way to do a beam pattern test in three dimensions. Trying to show a 3-D beam pattern that's spread over 200-300 ft by projecting it on a wall at 10-25ft I think hides a lot of flaws that would otherwise be apparent in terms of projection, hot or dark spots, and glare.

There are several civil airfields around here, and usually we get about a month or two with night before the snow falls. I'm thinking I would be able to set up something similar to the IIHS tests, with markers every 25ft or 50ft, and take a lux reading at the markers. And maybe get an overhead shot, or at least a shot from a high tripod, to give a visual of what the beam patterns look like. For the pattern shots, it might be more illuminating to see them once the snow falls since the snow will better show the beams since it's reflective, but that's not very representative of most of the country for most of the year...

Here's the IIHS diagram:


Thoughts?

I know someone with a stock TRD OR also, so I think we’d be able to compare the stock aim vs my adjusted aim as well as the stock fogs and the Subaru fogs.

 

It's a decent visualization, I like your idea, you're very dedicated so thank you so much for all the effort you put into this. That being said, I want the one in the middle.

 

I thought about doing something more to better illustrate light patterns to show lack of throw issues, as lighting is a difficult thing to visualize in all the dimensions. I considered using an overhead drone at a large soccer field park at night near my place with distance markers, but using photography is so camera shot dependent you would need 2 trucks to be in the photo simultaneously running competing setups for a decent comparison. And if one truck had a bunch of high level foreground light, the resulting aperture settings may wash out the distance light. Lux measurements at specific distance intervals and spreads I think will give by far the best usable data and be a pretty cool experiment. It would be a lot of work to replicate it across several light sources and make it repeatable, as vehicle placement in relation to the lux reading markers would have to be exact. You wouldn't want to do it in the snow, short wavelength light refracts and scatters on the snow, causing back scatter at the camera making the light source appear significantly brighter than it actually is, meaning that in the photos the highest color temp light source is likely going to incorrectly appear as the highest performing.

For myself, I wanted the tests to be highly controlled and repeatable, which is why I went with the 18’ vs 42’ distance projection test, so I could precisely reproduce the tests to compare newer products at a later time to older data. Ideally I would have liked to go longer than 42' as longer distances highlight the focus/throw issues more, however that was a limitation of my practical space. One of the challenges I find is with continual new product development and advancement, the tests go stale very rapidly if new products are not added and compared. Meaning that unless you want to rerun the entire test suite again the test needs to be standardized to be highly scientifically repeatable to make testing more comparisons practical.

 

Speaking of testing new products against standardized tests, these just showed up today.



Let’s see how they do in the 3rd Gen headlight in output, focus and distance projection.

 

I really like this representation, as I am a visual person, this would give me better perspective on the studies and comparisons you are doing. Agreed that an inexpensive drone would be a great point of view for your studies.

 

Keep in mind that graphic is comparing completely different beam patterns. When comparing the same beam pattern the differences will not be quiet as drastic.

Rigid has a great beam pattern simulation tool, where you can compare differing patterns and view points, like from the driver seat or overhead. Obviously not very useful for a headlight comparison, but helps give an idea of how differing beam patterns perform. I think this tool is likely better on a desktop:
https://viewpoint.rigidindustries.c...r-type=multi&hud=off&demo=false&driving=false

 

Incoming due to arrive next week.

 

Damn! $$$$

 

Was about to pull the Amazon trigger on the Diode Dynamics SL1 LEDs.
Now I have to wait to see what's your opinion on the LED headlight conversion is (besides pricey).

My checkbook/credit card awaits your findings...

 

Hey guys, First post!
Just got a 19 TRD OR. First thing I noticed that I wanted to change were the headlight. They suck pretty bad for projectors. I’ve done quite a few HID swaps in other cars, there seems to be a pretty high rate of issues that pop up with those over time so probably going to stay away for now.
Reading this thread, looks like the GE 130 for LB is the way to go for me, confused on the HB. Is the Philips H9 better than stock? Is there a better H9 to go with?
Are the 130s the best halogen option with the factory housing for the fogs?
I know options vary, really just looking for stock replacements without changing wiring, cutting tabs, or modding fixtures.
Thanks!

 

Welcome to TW! Check out the 2nd post in the thread that has all the continued comparison halogen testing. For plug and play with no trimming the GE Megalight +130 is a excellent option but the GE Xenon +120 is just a little better, though it does cost a fair amount more. The GE +130s are a bit whiter than the Xenons. The same bulbs will be the best ones for the plug and play option in the fogs.

The 3rd Gen comes stock with a Philips H9, it is the best H9 bulb I have tried. The high beam performance is somewhat restricted in the 3rd Gen due to the small high beam reflector. Larger reflectors project much more efficiently than smaller ones.