The ultimate headlight upgrade H4 (not LED or HID)

@crashnburn80 have you ever done any tests on the alpha Rex projector housings with the harness and bulb upgrade? Very curious to see how this would turn out.

 

No, that would be pointless.

Optics require high quality high precision housings for good performance. Reflectors are far more efficient and performant than projectors, and large reflectors are more performant than smaller ones. The 2nd Gen has massive reflectors. Even quality OEM Toyota 3rd Gen Tacoma projectors pale in comparison to the 2nd Gen reflector assemblies output. See charts below compiled from the two threads by @daveeasa.



AlphaRex is cheap Chinese garbage white labeled and upsold to US consumers that don’t know better. Their projectors will not be high quality or high precision, they will be significantly worse than OEM Toyota 3rd Gen projectors, which are already significantly worse than the OEM massive reflectors as shown above. On top of that projectors do not take 9003/H4 used in this mod, you’ll need a different bulb for whatever the aftermarket projectors require. If you already have the AlphaRex assemblies that is highly unfortunate. Run the best halogen bulb possible for best performance, but you’ll be so far down from stock that your much better off going back to OEM assemblies.

 

That's too bad. The oem housings are okay, but worry about the long term effects of the high wattage bulbs. I have stock assemblies, I ended up with osram 90/100w because I couldn't find the hypers at a reasonable price.

 

About what, exactly, are you worried? I've run it for years with ZERO issues.

Where did you find Osram Hyper 85/80W bulbs at any price? They were discontinued years ago, leaving Osram Superbright 100/90W as the best generally available bulb for those of us running the upgraded harness.

 

No negative long term effects of the Osram SuperBright high wattage bulbs in the OEM 2nd Gen assemblies as long as you use an HD harness. Not using the harness will put your wiring and connectors at risk as well as not deliver any performance gains due to insufficient voltage. Hypers have been out of production so long and they are so sought after that they are basically unicorns at this point, practically do not exist anymore.

 

This feels like an odd tone to take on a genuine concern. Stock bulbs are something like 45w on low beam. Wattage is rating based on dissipation or equivalent dissapation of heat. 80w is nearly double the stock bulb, and plastic is only rated to a specific heat. The long term effects I am concerned of are primarily fogging or hazing internally on the stock housing and weather the stock housings will maintain uniformity without deformation.

 

This comprehensive thread clearly explores all potential problems. Well worth the read. Your concerns will be addressed once you delve into it.

 

To be candid, the housings are rated to a much higher heat tolerance than the stock bulbs produce. Anecdotally, I've been running Osram 100/90s for a handful of years and there is no internal damage, or change to internal dynamics - my headlights certainly need to be replaced as you can only scrape off the outer layer of plastic so many times before it degrades to the point of replacement, but that is not due to heat, that is due to age, UV exposure, and elements affecting the external surfaces.

 

This thread is over 9 years old at this point and I haven't seen anyone report this happening. I feel it's safe to say that damage to the plastic OEM housings from the higher wattage bulbs is not really a concern.

 

Not sure what's "odd" about the "tone" of confirming that, based on years of experience, your concerns are unfounded. At the risk of reiterating what others said in their responses, you'd know this if you delved into the plethora of information the thread contains.

Your wattage arithmetic is also off a bit. In my experience, stock bulbs are rated at 60/55W, meaning 100/90W bulbs are, on average, ~66% (not 100%) higher than stock.

 

Worthwhile to note that heat dissipation by distance follows inverse square. This is relevant to concerns about increased wattage. Some extra heat also helps clear snow.

ultimately I consider headlights a consumable needing replacement or refurbishing at 10-15 years. Just like a timing belt.

 

thanks! I just put in an order

 

Are the osrams 100/90 still considered the best option for this upgrade?

Headlightservices also has the philips gt200. What is the difference in going with one or the the other?

 

The Osrams need the harness and the Philips can use the stock wiring. My opinion is that the Osrams are much better.

 

I really like my Morimoto headlights.

 

2014 Tacoma TRD Sport
Can anyone recommend options, or link me to a thread, where I can look over custom headlights decently priced?
Answer to the main questions of performance or looks is I want to meet in the middle. Preferably a display with projection. I have plugnplay LED bulbs ready to go, had a similar setup work perfectly on a '14 RAV4 previously.

 

Teq customs?
https://teqcustoms.com/

 

DSL +250 by Osram

From DSL's website:
"60/55W Osram-DSL +250 - (easily the world's best H4 / HB2 / 9003 bulb; made exclusively per DSL specs to exceed the performance of the briefly-made, much-loved, discontinued Osram 64205)."
The Osram 64205 was the 70/65w version of the discontinued Hypers, which were also made in the 85/80w spec posted at the start of the thread.

World's best H4/9003 is a big claim, I was very curious to see how these measured up. For those unaware, DSL is Daniel Stern Lighting, one of the most respected names in the lighting industry.

The bulbs came in a very unassuming unmarked packaging, though clearly Osram packaging for those familiar.


Single sticker on the side of the packaging noting the contents


Bulbs are produced by Osram and made in Germany


Stock 9003 Osram (left) vs DSL +250 Osram (right)


Stock vs DSL +250


The DSL +250 bulbs provide a 63.4% improvement in output intensity over the stock 9003 standard Osrams in the Tacoma assemblies.

DSL +250 70w vs stock Osram 69w power draw


Comparing to the legendary 70/65w Osram 64205 Hypers
64205 vs DSL +250


The DSL +250 bulbs outperform the legendary 64205 Hypers by an 11% in output intensity on low beam.

Compared to the best performing stock wattage bulbs for low beam tested to date
Philips Racing Vision +150 vs DSL +250


Compared to the Philips GT200 which has 2x the bulb life of the Racing Vision +150s and is the current preferred bulb for best balance of low beam performance vs life.
Philips GT200 vs DSL +250


The DSL bulbs just beat out the Philips Racing Vision +150s and the GT200s for low beam. However the Philips Racing Vision/GT line in H4/9003 coat the high beam filament in a performance robbing blue filter coating, meaning the high beam will be lower performing than stock, as blue filters remove output.

While I do not typically evaluate high beam performance, I feel it is essential to do so for these bulbs.

Stock Osram 9003 high beam vs DSL +250 high beam


High beam comparison


The DSL +250s provide nearly a 44% output intensity improvement over the stock bulbs on high beam.

Comparing high beams against the previously preferred (for low beam) GT200s


That higher color temp light might look brighter in the photo, but it is achieved with blue filters to remove light output, which means output loss and lower output numbers.

GT200 high beam vs DSL +250 high beam


The DSL +250s come in at 55% higher output intensity than the GT200s, due to the performance robbing coating on the GT200 high beam filament.

Looking at the output spectrum slope, you can see the huge losses the Philips bulbs pay on with the blue filters on high beam vs the DSL bulbs. Halogen spectrum is fairly linear as shown by the DSL bulbs, the drops in the output of the Philips bulbs are due to the blue filter coatings.


The DSL bulbs put down higher numbers even though the GT200s pull just slightly more power.
DSL+250 vs Philips GT200 high beam power


For informational purposes on stock vs coated bulbs
Stock high beam vs GT200


The GT200s suffer an ~8% intensity loss vs stock. The GT200s pull 5.67A (78.2w) on high beam, the stock bulbs pull 5.6A (77.2w) on high beam. Meaning the higher power bulbs are actually lower performing due to the performance robbing coating.
Stock 9003 Osram power on high beam


The DSL +250 bulbs do not use any performance robbing coatings/filters and are by far the highest performing stock wattage bulbs to not do so. They offer substantial gains in both low and high beam, unlike the competition that reduces high beam performance.

Bulb life is always a consideration, low beam bulb Life:
Philips Racing Vision +150 - 200 hours
Philips GT200 - 400 hours
DSL +250 - 400 hours
Osram Superbrights - 200 hours

The DSL +250s have the best stock wattage low beam. Best stock wattage high beam. Better bulb life vs performance than the next closest competing stock wattage bulbs. Definitely the best stock wattage performance bulb yet.

Bulb close up, can see the low beam filament uses tighter filament windings than the high beam.


DSL +250 H4 capsule vs stock 9003 Osram


Comparing the DSL +250 60/55w to the Osram Super Brights 100/90w low beam in the 2nd Gen assemblies


The Superbrights come in at about 9% higher peak intensity for low beam. The Superbrights are an over wattage off road bulb requiring an aux HD wiring harness competing with a stock wattage pnp DSL +250 bulb.

Comparing DSL +250 high beam vs Osram Superbrights


Perhaps the most surprising results of this series of tests. The DSL +250s come out at nearly identical peak intensity as the Osram Superbrights for high beam. While the Superbrights provide more lumen output, the DSL +250s provide better focus, leading to higher output intensity. Incredibly impressive.

The DSL +250 bulbs are the best stock wattage bulbs tested to date by far. While the massive 2nd Gen assemblies are more forgiving on larger filament high wattage bulbs like the Superbrights, smaller assemblies may see more favorable improvement with the high efficiency DSL bulbs vs the Superbrights.

Special thanks to @Kabana for bringing these to my attention.