I decide not to go with those after market projectors. Cuz if do so I have will lost my level adjustable headlights. So I put on my HID kit today. These are H4 hi/Low beam in one. Driving lights is HID 8000K, high beam is normal bulb. These HID are alot brighter on the road. I can see much better. High beam blink give more warning . Cuz the light color switchs back and forth. My HID kit is the slim type. It is smaller and easier to hide. Pics...



HID 8000K low beam

High Beam on

 

Low Beam

High Beam

 

looks good.

 

nice i went w/ 6000k

 

Nice pics! I guess it's hard to capture the color temperature...yours looks similar to my 4300k kit. It's also hard to tell what kind of cutoff you have there, but from these photos it looks like the light spills over quite a bit. It would be nice if we could develop a standard for taking photos of HID kit light output to better compare each kit. At the very least, perhaps we could hold up a yard stick at 15' or so? Or we could all follow the steps outlined in this document: http://www.coolbulbs.com/HID-VISUAL-HEADLIGHT-AIMING-PROCEDURE.pdf

Or use this site as a reference: http://www.automedia.com/Aiming_Head...cr20010801ha/1

 

Where did you get the HID kit from? Curious. Thanks.

 

God I hate these plug and play "HID's". They have no cutoff what so ever. You can still adjust your beams with a proper retrofit that actually puts off more usable light and doesn't throw light all over the place, and fills your headlight with a purple glow.

 

http://www.honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=2543977

 

Yep, not only are they dangerous for other drivers on the road, they're illegal!

 

FAIL FAIL FAIL



RETROFIT FTW!!!!

 

i love these threads, because the retrofit guys come out in force.
the same honda-tech thread (imo, honda tech is a horrible source of information, but that's besides the point in this thread/post) always gets posted.
those pictures (can't watch the vids at work, so can't say anything about them) are horrible doctored either by photoshop or in the technique of the actual photo itself. while I am all with the retrofit guys in that retrofitting is defintely the best way to go, those pictures do a horrible job of relaying that point. those pictures are either taken using different exposures, or purposely photoshopped. it just irks me that the photos in that thread really prove nothing as they aren't showing both PnP and retrofits in the same "light" (no pun intended). Even tho what they are trying to prove is true (retros are defintely better than PnP and most PnP will emit some sort of glare), it's drives me nuts that it's not done correctly.
the worse part is those who don't know any better will look at those pictures and not think anything of it.
Either way, that's my .02 on the issue. Retros are defintely better than PnP, but that particular thread on honda-tech has been posted at least 4 times already in the GE forum and I had to finally comment on it.

 

If you don't like those pictures then look around the forum and check out the pictures of people with their HID kits. You will see the same exact thing. Huge hotspot in the middle, and scattered light everywhere around it. Including light about 6 feet higher than the car itself, and none on the ground.

 

here's a few i found with a quick search (not from this forum)
can you tell which ones are retros and which are not?

 

Notice how you didn't post any pictures of the cutoff against a flat surface as it will be obvious which ones are which.

And did you really post a picture of a cutoff against some bushes? And those pictures from straight on or sideways don't prove anything as it all matters where the camera was at. Those are horrible pictures.

 

My stock lights let me see in the dark.

 

exactly how i feel about the other pictures.

also, it seems you didn't read all of my post. i am all for retros.
but... i am against "infomercial" types of comparisions. it makes the truth behind the argument or comparision moot.

 

All of the pictures in that thread show cutoffs against walls, with the same cars in the same locations... Opposite of what you showed.

 

first pic set:
glare is OVERLY exaggerated. if you look at the light in the garage, the intensity is clearly brighter with the non-retros. unfair comparison because they purposely used a longer exposure or doctored the picture with photoshop to support their statement of "glare out the wazoo"

second pic set:
nothing to compare to. next.

third:
not sure where to start with this one. different vehicle locations. the one with the retros is clearly a lot closer to the wall than the other vehicle. the one without retros looks as if it's either has high beams on, or they purposely pointed it into the sky. o and he also has his foglights on. i'm not sure how that is even a side by side perfect comparison.

last:
two totally different locations. no specifics of how far each vehicle is from the wall. an 8000k kit compared to a 4300k kit.

and what i showed was a picture of vehicles all with retros.

 

i'm putting in a pnp set of hid's into my fit soon (they're sitting on my kitchen table), but the whole argument about which is better is rough. yes, retro are 100x better IMO, but until i have the $1k that you spent to do your retro, i'll settle for the $60 HID PnP kit for better lighting. no need to hate on either, he just wanted to show off his new toy. glad you like it man! it's your car!

 

Plug and play kits dont even offer better lighting than stock. They have an extremely narrow beam patterm and shine light all over the place. No light on the ground where its needed. Halogens > PNP kit. Get some osram nightbreakers, those are waaay brighter.

Oh well though, its a losing battle. People dont seem to grasp the concept of why xenon bulbs arent meant to be put into reflective housing lights. Fit's are going the way of civics and crx's.

http://www.hidplanet.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=31997

Read that entire thread to get a better understanding. That thread is as unbiased as your going to get.