The SAE J581 Aux High Beam Thread

^This. Without a standardized pattern spec that they need to adhere to it is challenging to give an apples to apples comparison because you are comparing completely different products. Even calling a beam a driving beam isn't the same across brands, Diode Dynamics uses an SAE-style driving beam with higher than legal output intensity on their larger bars whereas Baja uses a wide-angle beam paired with their spot optic in a combo setup that they call driving. So you might think to compare combo vs combo but DD uses flood and driving optics, whereas Baja uses that wide and spot. They are different. There are so many variables with no standards across brands, not to mention so many brands.

Here was a just-for-fun not-at-all-indepth comparison between a newer AuxBeam bar and an older Rigid bar, both in combo. We were swapping the bars at my place on another members truck and just for fun we measured and compared the output intensity. The Rigid bar was 26.5x the output intensity of the auxbeam bar. While both claimed to be the same spot/flood combo, Rigids spot was highly engineered, precise and focused, whereas Auxbeams shallow open bucket "spot optics" were not much of a spot at all resulting in no spot punch in the beam. The patterns are essentially different even though they are advertised as having the same optics. And while the Rigid bar nukes the Auxbeam bar from orbit in output intensity, those crazy high intensity numbers don't carry over to the flood pattern in the same way. And Diode Dynamics will again be different, than Baja, than KC ect. And what is 'good' isn't the same for everyone. While there are clearly defined characteristics for a good fog or good driving light, what makes a good light bar? There is no defined purpose for a light bar other than adding light. That Rigid spot combo bar would be outstanding in high speed desert looking for maximum distance, but mostly worthless in night trail use in the woods, so then you need to factor what type of bars are good for which uses to say they are better/worse than another for different purposes. Fogs on the other hand have a single purpose, as do driving lights as do headlights.



Comparisons are certainly feasible, but it would be a lot of work without standardized patterns and compliance metrics, not to mention the number of brands making light bars and the differing patterns offered for each bar then sometimes dual row vs single row and the differing lengths ect, compared to products competing in the SAE space where everything is extremely standardized. It would be fun for sure, but I don't see having time in the near future to make a significant dent in a project like that. Most manufactures use the same optics in their pods that they do their light bars, so you can look at the performance characteristics from the pod and upscale it to the light bar to get an idea of how it will perform, though that won't give you hard numbers to compare against specific products but at least provides a solid clue of what kind of performance you can expect from the light bar.

 

If you were to stick to ECE/SAE compliant lightbars, you would have similar enough products to be useful.

For the short list:
-Hella 350/JW Speaker TS1000 (SAE compliant, although I believe the spec for the driving beam is around 110k cd, higher than the SAE compliant 75k cd/light max)
-Diode Dynamics SS6's (pair) or SS12 bar (same optics, again not technically compliant due to >max intensity/lamp)
-Osram/Sylvania FX250CB and FX500CB
-Rigid SAE SR series, 20" and 30"

You could do similar to your other test threads/this thread, and take garage door shots, then a second shot with different camera setting (reduced shutter time, etc) to highlight (ba-dum tsss) the different hotspot-to-corona in each pattern from the same perspective. Reviewing every variation of every vendors product would get old fast, especially if you're not really being compensated... internet props don't really count for the mortgage payment on a free forum...

 

Agreed, though I'd just include those products in this thread as they all fall into the same category of an SAE/ECE Aux high beam (or at least SAE J581 type pattern even if intensity is too high, I'm less concerned about that for a high beam with the note that it isn't street legal). I didn't intend to limit this thread to just pod type lights. Ironically I did plan to include that Hella/JW bar in this original thread but it has been discontinued. I'm certainly looking to always add more to this thread, but it won't be as exhaustive as my other ones in part by nature of the cost of some of these products.

And there is that. Especially when an expensive product performs poorly, so I give an unfiltered review and call out vendors for exaggerating performance claims by nearly 10x and resale on the product tanks as a result leaving me fronting the cost out of pocket for an expensive poor product that nobody is now interested in. I wouldn't have it any other way though, zero allegiance other than to the data.

 

I don't know if this is a feasible idea or not. What if you made a list of lights you would like to test and that way we can see if we already have one to ship or if someone was interested in that light anyway to buy it themselves and send it to you to test???? Again, just thinking out loud.

 

Roof bars: The Dumbening

Not strictly in line with J581 lights but it's the closest I can think of to ask this question.



I'm doing a few changes to my lighting setup (not because I need to, I just like spending money on stuff I don't need).Besides the 4000K pro driving lights in the upper grill, I'll be adding a set of these as cornering lights (also pro 4000K).


Maybe mounted on the hood as ditch lights (easy bolt on), or maybe right next to my existing driving lights (in the grill) and toed out (fab required).

The other update that I'll finally be changing is removing the flood lenses on each end of the DD SS30 "combo" bar on the roof.I already know roof lighting can have some big drawbacks, like hood glare and reflection on particles immediately in front of the windshield. Changing out the flood optics should at least help with hood glare.

Now, the combination of the headlights (low/high) plus the 1 or 2 pairs of SS3s blasting out white light from the grill is a pretty compelling amount of light. What should I do with the roof bar?

Should I go with a full driving optic white bar, or is this source of light becoming sort of redundant at this point? What about changing all of the optics to the amber driving lenses? I'd be diminishing output by about 40%, but are there any other (real world) advantages? Would this help with greater downrange visibility in, say, a snow-storm? Or does its location on the roof invalidate this use case?

KC has some thoughts, but it's tough to tell from the short video clips if the yellow is that much better than the white light at improving visibility in dust/fog/snow, especially from the roof bar at 3:35.


Anybody have some opinions? Thanks!

 

I recently added a 2nd pair of ss3 driving pros in yellow behind my grill and aimed them outwards. Combined with the 4000k white pro pods and my high beams its a nice blend of warm white. Both pods have their seperate switch and triggered with the high beam stalk. Its a huge wall of light and its pretty awesome lol. I wanted more light on the shoulders of roads, but im not a fan of the ditch light location for hood glare. This was a good compromise. I think you would be happy.

 

Nice, do you have any pictures of your current setup? I don't care for the traditional ditch light location either- besides hood glare I've just never seen a pair that didn't look garish and gawky. And most of them look like they'd rip off in an automatic car wash.

I think I'll be happy with the two pairs up front as well. Now I just need to make a decision about what to do with the roof bar. White driving or amber driving?

 

Its not perfect as the yellow pods are partially blocked, but they are angled out some which helps. I need to fine tune the aim too. Regardless they make a pretty big difference as i have the long range plus extra shoulder coverage

 

Lasfit HP Driving

Lasfit uses TIR optics like Diode Dynamics. At the time of their pod product launch their website content was blatantly plagiarized from Diode Dynamics web content, with zero effort to hide the complete copy/paste of all the content. The products appeared to be typical Chinese reverse engineered IP theft and when paired with the IP theft from the website, lets just say Lasfit clearly showed what kind of company they aspire to be.

DD SEA fog left, LF HP Driving center, DD SAE Driving right


This is very odd. Lasfit's driving optic has literally the exact same number of spread flutes as DDs fog optic, but this is supposed to be a driving beam. It is almost like the optic outer lens was copied without understanding how it works. Note how DDs driving optic has less spread flutes, which will give more focus which is required for a driving beam. Incredible coincidence that a knock off product happens to have the exact same number of flutes as the original product (but ironically completely wrong for the beam application).

The Lasfit pods are far more substantial than the SS3s in every dimension. These are chunky and not nearly as elegant.

Lasfit HP left, DD SS3 right


DD SS3 Sport SAE Driving 4000k top vs LF HP 6000k Driving bottom (I don't have my 6000k SS3s anymore for a closer color temp comparison)


The LF beam is strange, almost like a strange fog/high beam blend? (Thats not a thing by the way). While the DD Sports are 1.5 panels tall, the LF HPs are just over 1 panel and wider but very flat. Driving lights should be more circular or oval in nature, I've never seen a driving light that has flat upper and lower vertical cut offs, like a fog. But wait, it gets worse.

A driving light is supposed to have a focal hot spot in the center of the beam for maximum punch down road, to project the beam as far as possible as this is the purpose of a driving light. It is a little difficult to tell in the photo, but the center of the LF beam is actually a fair amount lower in output intensity than the sides. Like the pattern design is literally backward having higher output intensity on the lower sides vs in the center, on top of not having the vertical illumination of a driving beam.

Lasfit center beam vs lower far right corner


The outer edge of the "driving" beam has ~41% higher output intensity than the center that should have the maximum beam intensity.

Of course the real question is how do they compare to the product they ripped off?

Lets give the best possible favor to LF for a comparison. These are LFs most expensive HP (high power) pods compared to DDs least expensive Sport pods. The LF HP pods cost about $80 more than DD Sports. Using the peak intensity output from the LF pod, pointing at the ground in the far corner of the beam vs the DD sport pointing dead center with the correct driving hot spot:


So the properly designed driving pattern from the SS3 Sports comes in at 16% higher peak intensity (while actually placing that intensity where it is supposed to go), while also being $80 less expensive compared to the LF HP driving lights.

But these are LFs top of the line lights vs DDs significantly less expensive entry level. What about comparing to DDs Pros that are more in-line with the LF HP price point? The SS3 Pros are only $20 more.

DD SS3 Pro Driving


LF HP Driving


Again Diode Dynamics has an appropriate driving pattern with a centralized hot spot and drastically larger pattern area.

So if previously giving LF the best comparison possible comparing output intensity based on peak intensity pointed at the ground in the corner of the beam, what does it look like it we look at focusing on the center of the beam where peak intensity is supposed to be?

LF driving center vs DD Pro SAE driving center


The DD SAE Driving Pro is nearly 2x the output intensity, while having a correct driving beam pattern, superior pattern coverage, and cost $20 more for the US original vs the Chinese knock off.

I had the LF HP stable power draw of 33.8w compared to their spec of 36w. <-It is worth noting these are far higher power than the DD SS3 Sports they fail to outperform.

Operating temp at about 66 degrees F ambient


There is so much wrong with this product, despite having 2x+ the power of the SS3 Sports and costing significantly more, it fails to out perform them. The driving beam pattern is hot garbage. It seems those that reverse engineered the optics got confused and applied a fog spread to a driving pattern? Face palm. Why would they replicate the number of flutes in the DD fog optic on the driving optic? But worse is the peak intensity in the driving pattern is aimed at the ground toward the ditch, not at all in a center hot spot which is the point of a driving light. It is obvious LF lacked understanding of the technology used in this product.

The Chinese knockoffs might look similar and have their similar product performance claims, but as usual they don't at all compete with the products they reverse engineered.

NOTE:
I have a hard absolute stance on IP theft. IP thieves are scum that steal designs from hard working companies trying to advance lighting technology, cheaply reverse engineer them typically in China and make knock offs for a fraction of the price often falsely promising the same level of performance. IP thieves should be stomped out of existence. If you are a lighting enthusiast you should support companies working to advance lighting technology, not undermine them by supporting companies stealing the IP and selling Chinese knock offs. I was pretty conflicted posting this product, as I typically do not make any review posts with knock offs. But I felt this might be illustrative in showing that even though the knock offs seem similar, they are not.

Thanks to @Toy_Runner for sending these my way for review.

 

Can't lie, I thought perhaps these lasfit pods would be a contender... right up until I powered them up and compared them to my SS3 sport pods.

Lasfit? More like lassh*t. They're going back, and will get a scathing review. Not that that means much on Amazon, I've had negative reviews that I have left, with pics and all, removed by them as "spam."

 

Lol. Are we 100% sure that isn't their fog optic? What does their fog optic look like?

 

Not their fog optic according to their Amazon listings. The fog optic is 4 oval shaped optics.

 

Lol, I had the same initial thought when turning them on. But the the output intensity was too high for a fog and after checking the fog optic is a quad projector/fresnel style optic.

 

These look very interesting, the new Sentinel from Lazer out of the UK. The have an ECE Driving beam mode and what they call a boost mode, which is ballistic. By the specs in non-compliant boost mode, I calculate 550,000+ Cd. For reference the Max driving is about 124,000 Cd by my numbers. Though ECE to Boost is oddly a mechanical switch on the lamp. These are reflector based which is superior to open bucket forward facing emitters. But also quite appealing, they are the first I have seen to target improved CRI in automotive LEDs. Most all LED automotive products are in the low-mid 70s CRI, essentially using a 70 CRI rated chipset. These Sentinels spec a 5000k 80 CRI chipset, meaning a likely CRI rating in the low-mid 80s. This is the first automotive product I've seen with that high of a rating, which will help differentiate colors better and more accurately. 80 CRI the standard grade consumer interior home light quality for LEDs for reference, though better CRI options are increasingly more common.

These units are large though, at 9" round.
https://www.lazerlamps.com/sentinel-elite-black.html

 

The US version of the site will show you these as well, except they're fixed in "off-road" mode and there's no mention of the switch. I wonder if the mechanical switch is some sort of requirement to make sure people aren't illicitly using them in boost mode on the street.

 

The US site "triple-R" doesn't have the ultra high power Sentinel Elite version with the switch, they just have the standard Sentinel 87w model, the Elite is 145w. Odd on the branding and product offering differences.

 

I wonder how quickly output drops. Despite being 9" across, I don't see how it can dissipate nearly 150w in a static situation.

 

Valid concern, hard to say. I kinda want to get some to try but they are not inexpensive. 290w/pr with reflector optics would be fun to test and compare.

 

If I can figure out how to mount them to the Tundra grille, I’m game.