The LED SAE J583 Fog Pod & Fog Light Review

I've got my popcorn!

 

Are you posting it here or someplace else?

 

Apologies for leaving you guys in suspense. With the help from other members I’ve now got some additional tests and comparisons to run that should be very interesting. I’ll post results tomorrow night or Friday.

 

Thanks to this thread, I had a SAE conversation with my middle child on the way to her bus stop about SAE and importance of properly aimed fog lights.

There was a Taco coming toward us at the stop light with selective yellow non SAE lights and she asked why they were yellow and too bright!

 

Baja Designs Squadron Next Gen SAE Fogs



Baja's next generation SAE fog lamp has been a highly anticipated successor to Bajas original SAE fog lamp. The new lamp has unique aspheric optics that promised a sharp pattern cut off, in a major design change from Baja's original SAE fogs that were designed with maximum light spill.





Vastly improved cut off over the previous generation lamps with a uniform pattern.

I have the lamps pull 2.22A (30.6w) at startup in 64 degrees F ambient.


And 2.14A (29.5w) stable in 64 degrees F ambient. Baja specs 29w, these are on target. Also good to see stable being used for spec.


Comparing to the previous gen Baja SAE lamps using the recall fix compliance optic.
Next Gen lamp top vs original lamp bottom


The new lamp pattern is shorter, far brighter and much better defined, all good improvements over the previous gen lamp.

Comparing width, Baja next gen SAE lamp top vs original lamp bottom


Output intensity of the original Baja SAE lamps with the recall compliance optic insert.


Output of the Baja next gen SAE selective yellow lamp.


Nearly a 3.5x gain in output intensity over the previous gen lamp, while providing substantially better cut offs. Impressive improvements over the previous gen lamp.

Yellow optic filtration spectrum comparison vs white


CIE plot


Selective yellow chromaticity window


The lamps do not fall into the selective yellow chromaticity compliance window. Note the X and Y coordinates are taken from the CIE plot, which has measurements taken from peak intensity in the pattern, which is near the center of the pattern. All measurements for standard yellow were taken with an un-tampered out of the box product. More on this later.

Thermals of selective yellow, tested in 64 degrees F ambient.


Peak lens temp hits just over the 100+ degrees over ambient mark. Quite surprising for a 29w lamp. But unlike other fog products that have done so, these peak temps are very localized at the center of the optic and quickly taper off moving off center. The majority of the face is much cooler. It would likely be ok clearing light snow, but not do as well as the SS3 Max or Morimoto HXB in heavier snow.

Examining the internals.
Note that Baja says these lamps are non-serviceable by the customer and should not be opened due to possible optics misalignment.


For some reason I was surprised to see the internal optics as clear on the yellow lamps.





The aspherical lenses have alignment pins and somewhat snap into place on the board. It seems pretty simple to tell when they are in proper placement. Again Baja discourages this due to possible misalignment of the internal optics.

Appears to be running Cree XP-P emitters


I tried assembling the new Baja next gen SAE optics on the original Baja lamp. Turns out they are not compatible due to interference. The new board is much lower profile than the old board. This means for those getting the free upgrade sending in the old Baja SAE lamps, you'll likely be getting a new board with updated emitters in addition to the optics update.



The upper optic cannot seat properly due to obstruction.

Original SAE vs next Gen SAE. The new board is lower profile for compatibility with the revised optics, in addition to the emitter update.


Comparing to similar performing competition

Morimoto NCS top vs Baja next gen SAE bottom


The NCS lamps benefit from a slightly wider pattern.

Baja next gen SAE vs Morimoto NCS yellow


Peak intensity is effectively about the same, but the Morimotos have a wider pattern and much better yellow color.

Diode Dynamics SS3 Sports top vs Baja next gen SAE bottom




Again nearly identical peak intensity performance, though the SS3 Sports have a substantially wider pattern and better yellow color.

The Baja lamps aspheric lens provides good cut offs, but the pattern is narrower than the competition, so I experimented with adding a spread optic over the new SAE aspheric optics. A spread optic only changes the light output horizontally, meaning the optic will not spill any additional light vertically.


The result.


Much better pattern spread, rivaling that of the SS3 Sports in terms of spread. However, of course, spreading the same amount of light over a larger area reduces output intensity.

Next Gen SAE with spread optic vs Next Gen SAE with standard optic


26% output intensity loss using the spread optic at the trade off of a much wider pattern. Arguably it could be worth it if you consider pattern width important. Even with the spread optic it is 2.5x+ the output intensity over the original SAE lamp. This is not a configuration supported by Baja, and it should be noted that using a spread optic would lack the compliance stampings found on the SAE lenses.

At the time of acquiring these new SAE lamps for testing last week, only selective yellow lights were available. However, after taking apart the lamps it became clear the only difference for white lamps was the outer lens using a clear squadron spot lens that had SAE compliance markings. So instead of waiting for white lamps, I swapped a Squadron clear spot lens onto the yellow lamps. This should be identical to the SAE white lamps, sans the compliance markings on the lens.

SAE White






The color differences at the top and bottom of the pattern are far more obvious with the white optic than the yellow.



If you look closely, the optics overlap in the upper portion of the pattern, but it is not at the very top edge of the pattern at the cut off. There is a slight band of lower intensity at the top of the pattern before the cut off where it appears only one optic is illuminating the area. This is present on the yellow as well, but slightly easier to see in white. Ideally the full intensity would be carried right up to the pattern cut off.

Original Baja SAE with the recall compliance optic insert.


Next Gen Baja SAE white


Approximately a 3.3x performance improvement over the previous gen Baja SAE lamp with the recall compliance optic insert. Significantly higher output intensity, shorter pattern, better cut offs, again big improvements all round.

Baja next gen SAE vs Morimoto NSC white.


Note that Motimoto effectively has hot spots in their pattern leading to increased peak intensity vs the rest of the pattern, though the Morimoto pattern is also wider as demonstrated earlier.



The white Baja next Gen SAEs beat out the white Diode Dynamics Sports in peak intensity. Diode Dynamics selective yellow Sports are far more efficiently optimized for color vs Baja's next Gen SAEs, so when removing the yellow filtration losses with white optics the Baja's pull ahead in peak intensity. One of the ways to increase output intensity is to reduce the light pattern area and Baja's next gen SAEs have a much smaller lighting pattern area vs the Diode Dynamics Sports which have a far wider pattern. It is a 5% intensity difference at the cost of a significant width difference and very different price points.

Thermals of white, tested in 64 degrees F ambient.


As with most LED fog lamps, the lens doesn't generate heat from filtration and therefor does not get substantially hot. The white optics run 68 over ambient and will likely be ineffective at clearing snow.

Back to the emitter color temp.


These next gen lamps seem to be using ~5500k emitters vs the previous gen was claimed to be using 4500k emitters. This is important because Baja's previous SAE lamps would not pass the selective yellow chromaticity window using their normal 5000k color temp and their standard yellow optics (which Baja calls amber). Light sources that are too high in color temp for the optic color correction will be too green. Baja explicitly stated they switched down to 4500k emitters in the Gen 1 SAE for this purpose so that their standard yellow optics would meet the selective yellow chromaticity window. My tests on the previous gen showed 4875k and these next gen units at 5400k. If the old lamps wouldn't pass chromaticity at 5000k, and the new lamps use a higher color temp 5400k and the yellow optics remain the same, then it is no surprise the light color falls outside of the selective yellow chromaticity window.

As a result of the above, the next gen lamps fail to meet selective yellow chromaticity compliance.



Side-by-side data for easy comparison
Original Baja SAE with recall compliance optic insert.


Baja SAE next gen


Baja Designs SAE free trade in program for Gen 1 units
Baja is offering an absolutely incredible program to upgrade the original SAE lamps to the next gen lamp internals at no charge to their customers. The new lamps have significantly higher output intensity and far better cut offs with less light spill, giving their customers a drastically better product for poor weather use and results in less glare to oncoming drivers. If you have some of the original Baja SAE lamps, I'd highly recommend sending them in for the upgrade as these next gen lamps are a drastic improvement over the gen 1 units. Major props to Baja for standing behind their products with this program.

Aiming instructions
Baja's original SAE lamps had a great aiming instruction sheet, which I thought was a great attention to detail since many do not know how to aim their fogs. However the next gen lamps did not contain any information on aiming.

Props to Baja for taking the time to redesign their SAE lamp from the ground up into a higher performing product that is safer for everyone on the street.

Community side-note
I want to give a shout out to just how awesome this community is. While my Baja lamps were on order from Baja with no available timeline, I received word for the first sets found in the wild and immediately purchased. When I pulled the new Baja lamps apart, I realized I could test the white output before their availability for order if I had a clear squadron spot lens. After seeing the internals I also wanted to test installing the new optics into the original lamp. And after seeing how narrow the pattern was I decided I wanted to try the next gen SAE lamp with a spread optic. Except I had none of these additional components anymore. With a few posts and PMs to this community I had optics lent to me and overnighted for testing and @msgs350 agreed to pull the original Baja SAE lights off his Tacoma very late Tuesday night and had them off his truck before 8am the next morning to contribute to the testing, meeting in a city half way between both of us for the exchange. The incredible support and contributions of this community is what makes reviews like this possible. Thank you.

 

Have been away from this thread for a while. First major thanks and very much props to Crashnburn80 for all that he has done with testing, same goes for the others who have helped Crashnburn80 get lights and parts. Sent my set of Bajas off for the upgrade, waiting for them to come back. The one thing I wish Baja done, at least with my specific application, is to reuse the factory adjusters. In my truck with there kit I can only adjust them so far up and down. Worked great when I first purchased them, since then I have installed a leveling kit and larger tires. I have yet to properly adjust my headlights, have them close but not perfect. Hoping with the next gen sae lights I will be able to get it close. The only set I have seen that include the adjuster similar to factory is Morimotos. Again thanks to Crashnburn80 for this awesome thread, and the members here for not burning me for owning a Ford XD (a Tundra will be next when this thing falls apart). Just noticed that Crashnburn80 has a Aux High beam thread, guess I know what I'm reading next.

 

I'm wondering if the cutoff anomaly is potentially caused by the LED alignment? Maybe it's just an optical illusion with how the picture is taken, but it appears like one LED is placed lower in the alignment square than the others. Kinda looks like all of them are, but specifically the one with the arrow.



Compare that to the old version which appears that the LED's appear to be more centered. Again, may just be an optical illusion with how the photo was taken.



I wonder if that's why they don't want the lenses removed assuming the alignment comments? Another observation I found interesting is that the board is the same, just the components have changed. Not that it's a big deal because a board is just a base that which components are placed. I just found it intriguing that there were so many changes and the same board was used. I'm not a fan of the greenish looking output of the yellow/amber lens. That's personal taste, but I prefer the true selective yellow from other manufactures.

Rant that doesn't really fit here but is street legal lighting related:
Now if only the motorcycle LP6 headlight swap trend would stop!! If Baja Designs could add a similar projector style lens like they did here for the "low beam" function on the LP6 Pro, that would be great!! Bikes around town with those annoy the crap out of me with just the low beam. The dang side shooters are always on in "low beam mode" and blast right into your car or eyes (on the motorcycle) when they are next to you. I've ridden with guys that have the LP6's on low beam and there is no amount of aiming that will fix the glare from those lights. I just stay behind them so they aren't blasting my my mirrors. But I get bored because their HD's are a bit slow and I have to throttle out to keep pace when they are trying to make noise, my Victory ain't no super hopped up bike either. The "high beam" is interesting too. If the lights are aimed in an attempt to avoid glare, the high beam is pointed at the ground. But ignorance is bliss and people equate more spent ($1400) as meaning it has to better than everything else, even though lumens mean nothing without control. I'm not trying to rag on BD for making a desirable product, it's just that product shouldn't be used as replacement for a headlight. Rant over. lol

 

Great review on our new Squadron SAE, All this information will be directed to our engineering team as well as our CEO for further improvements. One point that I would like to make regarding our products is that they are designed and tested behind the wheel. With this being said we have numbers of hours testing what we believe will be the best spread and intensity for a SAE driving light and have designed these lights to be utilized in a pair application. With mentioned the pair of lights has been tested and designed around a mid size/full size vehicle thus aiming our optics spread to accommodate this rather than a single light analysis. We appreciate the in depth review as always and are very pleased with the improvement that we have brought to the market.
Best,
Brandon

 

Hey @TacoFergie, The cutoff is produced by the aspherical optics that have been added. This is the main reason for the disclaimer regarding opening the light and tampering with it because doing so could misalign the optics creating a overlap in the output.

We are actually currently working on a DOT rated LP6 version for the Harley application as a resolution to so many people opting for our off-road lights on the street. The light will come into play later this year and will be available with further applications.
Best,
Brandon

 

That is what I was referring to as well with the alignment of the spherical lenses. Whether that was from Crash playing around with it during testing or the alignment of the LED's to the lens being off? Who knows? It wouldn't be noticeable on the road, so its really a non issues. But this is a very critical group of lighting enthusiasts on even the finest of details, almost to a fault. haha

I am happy to hear that about the LP6. Many other drivers and fellow riders on the road will be thankful!! The Indian Challenger guys have started doing it too. I think it's a cool concept and I don't mind the style. It'd be really cool if the side shooters could be controlled via a lean angle sensor similar to how the JW Speaker adaptive headlight works. I'd like to see adaptive style headlights implemented more in motorcycle lighting in general because it would have saved my butt more than a few times. Let me know if you need anymore ideas...I've got tons of them. haha

 

Even a non motorcycle dot version would be great, as cars/trucks have different needs then motorcycles

 

This light will be utilized on other platforms as well.
Best,
Brandon

 

After taking a second look and using the highly technical method for evaluation of placing a finger over individual outer optics while evaluating the pattern, the double cut off is from both upper optics being slightly higher than the lower two optics. In other words the cut off does not appear to be designed to converge between the upper and lower optics like we saw with the 360 Pros. It's really a non-issue, just an observation I had made. You can see the double cut off in the original un-tampered with yellow wall shot as well.

I also took a second look at the cold start color temp and observed 5268k and a reading of 470 lux for the white lamps, so not a big shift in color temp from cold to stable either with about an 18.5% intensity drop from cold to stable by my numbers.

Very much looking forward to seeing these, I haven't been very impressed with other 6" LED headlight offerings.

 

Which DOT reg table you are aiming to achieve ? UB2 for high beam ? LB2V for low beam ? Other than J581 AUX for high, on road intended low beam reg is pretty tight complex requirement Interested to see what you come up !

 

What ever they shoot for, I really hope it has a defined low beam cutoff to avoid blinding others, high beam that operates like a normal one and lean angle lights for the insides of corners. But that doesn’t keep riders from not aiming them with any sort of accuracy. Motorcycles are difficult though because of lean angles. Even just adjusting for road crown can send the outer portion of the beam into other motorists vision.

For what its worth, I took these screen shots from a YouTube video to see what the beam pattern of the current LP6 that people mount on their bikes is like compared to what I see when riding with people that have it. Notice the High beam is pointed in exactly the same direction as the low beam. Which totally makes sense since the optic is mounted on a board with no intention of being used in this form.

“Low Beam”



“High beam”



This is my Victory with a D2S 4.0 retrofit. Absolutely phenomenal output and better than any other motorcycle headlight I’ve experienced. Although it is a pain when leaning into corners because the cutoff is so sharp and leaves a dead spot. I plan on getting a JW Speaker adaptive because of the lean angle lights.



Sorry for getting off topic here. Just spitting out ideas

 

Just did quick check on my opt development software. Look like 4 Banger NCS Wide ( 3 degree downward aim) and straight aim Combo satisfy Motorcycle Low Beam and High beam.
(HXB was not suitable, to prevent glare, had to be aimed lower, then exceeded foreground illuminance max allowance)

For motorcycle low beam, look like requirement is pretty simple
1. To have cutoff ( no need to be sharp, have step but can't have any more illuminance than vehicle low beam regulation. Essentially, if beam has distinct enough cutoff, and not leaking to above H line, it should be good.
2. Foreground at 4D 4R can't exceed 12500Cd This also same as vehicle low beam reg.
So most of automotive low beam optics can achieve minimum performance, but motorcycle intended low beam likely can't be used in vehicle low beam.
Vehicle standard low beam has much more strict requirement and more test points.

Below is visualized measurement point for Motorcycle low beam ( I am not too familiar with motorcycle reg,, so just development software information)
Beam is 3 degree downward aimed 4Banger NCS for low beam and straight aim Combo beam


Lean angle is headache, it can be only solved by adoptive system. Pod is small enough maybe possible to hook up with lean angle sensor feedback actuator or something if someone really want to try.

 

We are far out on this light, once we are closer to production I will be able to let you know what ratings we are aiming for. This light will not be limited to just motorcycles, we will be doing some vehicle replacements as well.
Best,
Brandon

 

If you are aiming for vehicle front lighting, really not much choice in regulation, You should firmly define goal target regulation at beginning.
Vehicle low beam regulation has many test points that are very sensitive to design, it will take substantial engineering effort to meet standard.
I suggest bi-function lamp to conform LB2V or J1735 (if you want to expand to harmonized standard) for low beam and UB2 for high beam table.
It will help determining system config, such as power consumption, type of optics to use, method of cutoff creation etc.

Have you sent J583 F function photometric measurement done for new Gen Fog lamp? Share us measurement once available. It helps community learn about fog function/character and aiming reference.

 

@Yoshi I and @Baja Designs, I do agree that a defined flat cutoff would be better suited for a motorcycle than a stepped design like automotive projectors. Mainly because illuminating both sides of the road is more difficult when factoring in lean adjustments for road crown or wind if it has a step. I find my retrofit to be amazing while upright, but even with the step shaved down a bit, it can be difficult to see the left side of the road. Also the sharpness of the cutoff really makes it difficult to see the inside of turns, that should be obvious though. In reality the stepped design is almost useless on a motorcycle since minor amounts lean will tilt the light's cutoff anyways. So there's really no controlling some amount of light spill into oncoming traffic via the light's cutoff design, though a more defined cutoff of some type would be better than the current LP6 that people use (not trying to knock your product BD, just the way customers interpret that they are acceptable as a headlight is asinine lol). I don't see light bleed as completely avoidable on a motorcycle unless someone could make a super advanced matrix style headlight like some of the EU cars have that would adjust for all sort of conditions, probably a $2k headlight if that ever happened.

I do wonder if a cutoff design like my Subaru Ascent would be beneficial for a motorcycle? I think it would have to be a projector since I don't it's possible to get a cutoff like this with TIR or Spherical lenses, but I could be wrong. Having the center stepped up would give good distance visibility and lessening the chance for light bleed while leaning. Photo courtesy of Evo Robles from Aftermarket LED Research, I don't know what that guy does for a living but he seems to have access to a lot of OEM lighting data.



@crashnburn80 - Sorry for side tracking this thread yet again, my squirrel brain is all over the place sometimes. lol I want to see some opinions, do you and others think this type of discussion would suit the Automotive Lighting 101 thread better? Or do you think this type of discussion is constructive to this thread as long as it doesn't stray too far from the purpose of it? I try to keep my comments on this thread to forward lighting in respect to SAE type lighting.

 

Well this was out 12 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdyNdlw8zaA
Matrix would be even better as there's less moving parts.