HID H4 headlight HI/LO operation

[jestal]

I have been playing around with the HID Hi/Lo beam setup on my workbench. Pretty unscientific using another headlight shell (the FJR is together at the moment) and operating the Hi/Lo mechanism while watching the light dispersion using a welding helmet. You can actually see it operate and the light cutoffs and such pretty well using the welding helmet. I took the mechanism apart so as to try different mods with some alternate pieces so as to not damage the OEM parts....yet.

I had two older (Yamaha XS1100 retangular headlight housings/lenses so I can use one as a baseline with an H4 bulb in it and put the HID capsule into the other for comparison as I go along. I know the reflector is not the same as the FJR but I was looking for a way to do comparison testing not necessarily fine tune for the FJR yet. I fugure if the HID capsule can be improved to work in one headlight housing that was designed for an H4 bulb then the results should apply to the FJR reflector/housing.

I don't think the wings that swing in and out are the problem nor do they need to be modified.

The problem with the unwanted light cutoff in Hi beam seems to come from the shadow of the narrow sheet metal part that operates the wings. Normally, in the high beam mode the light source would have unrestricted 360 degree dispersion from the bulb onto the reflector. With the HID kit the sliding rectangular sheet metal "beam" underneath the bulb is always in the way. I think that it is casting a shadow that causes the unwanted cutoff of the high beam light. I'm talking about the moveable little rectangular sheet metal piece that operates from the solenoid and slides fore and aft to move the wings.

Solution...??....drill a hole or holes in the retangular piece so that the hole ends up directly under the bulb "filament" area when the rectangular piece is in the Hi beam position. With the hole in the rectangular piece over the bulb light source in the Hi beam position this allows light to shine thru the beam and onto the reflector where it was shielded before.

Unfortunately, this causes unwanted light to leak thru in the Lo beam position so I added a short tab from the angular cap at the far end of the lamp to cover the hole when it is in the Lo beam position.

So far I haven't actually drilled or modified anything as I only have the one kit and don't want to do anything rash yet. I have mocked this up with some pieces of aluminum and it does seem to work and to make a significant difference in the HI beam light pattern. It noticeably fills in the center top part of the HI beam pattern. Not perfect but much better.

Huge caveat here: I am just aiming the light against the basement wall inside so I am not outside or riding or seeing actual performance differnce over distance. Just evaluating the pattern close up with mock up parts. But by looking at the light and operation with the welding helmet you can see an obvious difference with this mod that fits my preconceived notions about what would help the situation on Hi beams.

I did put the capsule in the headlight shell without the beam and wings and it makes a huge difference in the Hi beam operation. The ground anode doesn't seem to make much differnce, just the (relatively) wide rectangular beam in the mechanism which is as wide as the bulb.

There is still an issue with the focal point of the light source in Hi beams. Normally the focal point would shift from Lo to Hi due to the lateral change in location of the element in play in the H4 bulb. No way to get around this but it doesn't seem to matter much IF the HID bulb is unshielded. Putting the beam in place on the capsule shields the top side of the bulb and the cutoff in the high beam pattern is obvious in my tests.

My plan would be to open a rectangular slot in the beam and then have it slide under a small tab added to the end piece of the capsulen to close off the rectangular slot when in Lo beam position.

Considering that this is in the brain storming idea generation stage of development I am looking for input from those that have studied the operation of the bulb. Does this seem feasible or not? Any problems?

 

[Warchild]

Interesting approach toward solving this problem.

Please keep us appraised of your progress.

Got any photos you can share?

 

[FJRocket]

EDIT: I wouldn't jump on this HID mod that Jestal is purporting just yet. I tried it and although it does help a bit, in garage testing it doesn't seem to eliminate the shortcomings of the traditional setup using the self buy Bixenon HIDs. Back to the original thread....

I agree on several ideas Jestal has about the high beam on the HID. Thanks Jestal for sharing your benchtesting with us!

The problem with the HID high beam is two fold: not enough light let out the bottom due to the bixenon mechanism and the HID light source is fixed in an imperfect location.

Drilling out the actuator channel at the bottom of the bixenon mechanism (the part that moves the shutters) might let more light out. Remember, though, that there is an anode along the bottom of the light source, and that you would have to drill some pretty big holes to let out enough light to get around that thick anode wire. My solution to this little problem was going to be to cut the channel down to the diameter of the anode wire (cathode, whatever), and then JB a piece of stainless (or other ) wire on the bottom of the channel to reinforce it. The anode wire is going to block the light on the very bottom no matter what, so instead of drilling holes, I would dremel the channel sides down to size.

Having said that, Jestal already pointed out that the shutters do not completely close and there is going to be light leakage when low beam is selected, so you also have to add material somewhere to block the light from leaking out around the reduced channel from the bottom of the source (high beam) when low beam is selected. That actuator channel is part of the beam blockage mechanism and if you cut it down, you have to add the blockage back somewhere else. That is why I chose NOT to make this modification. Yet.

I have, in fact, already trimmed down the vertical part of the shutters to let more light out. This did improve the amount of high beam light to a degree, and it did improve the light in the dead zone area. The increase is somewhat to the detriment of the crisp dilineation of the low beam. Therefore I do not recommend this mod, especially on the left HID. This mod does fill in some of the dead zone light at the horizon (or wherever you have the top edge of your beamcast adjusted), but not enough to call it a success.

The HID only has one light source. The halogen has TWO filaments: one for low and one seperate filament for high. These are offeset from each other by several millimeters. I think (and others wiser than I) that the high beam problem may be more the location of the single HID light source in the lens than the light blockage by the bixenon mechanism.

So the dilemma is: do you let more light out of the bixenon mechanism, or merely move the light source to a more "ideal" position. Well, there is no ideal position for a single light source bulb in a dual light source engineered lens. You have to compromise something.

If you move the light source rearward, you will get the light more favorably in to the high beam zone of the lens. This will undoubtedly reduce the amount of low beam that comes out of the lens. The high beam will be better at the cost of the low beam.

Now the question is which way to go: move the light source, or start chopping at the mechanism? I'm leaning toward trying to move the light source back. I have done this by hand. I have seen the high beam intensity increase as the dead zone reduces along with the low beam. I think the low beams are so bright that reducing their output somewhat to increase the more important (to me) high beam is an acceptible compromise.

 

[BrunDog]

WC: How about an update?? It's been like, what, two days already?!?

Again, I am of the foolish belief that the VENDOR should be responsible, not us. If that damn capsule doesn't meet the H4 spec, it ain't our fault...

What about the stepper style (in/out)? Can we use one of those?

-BD

 

[Warchild]

WC: How about an update?? It's been like, what, two days already?!?

 

[jestal]

The nice thing about cutting a rectangular hole in the shutter activation mechanism is that the piece moves back and forth to move the shutters in and out. By adding a small tab to the end piece of the capsule it would shade the hole when it was in the low beam position and the hole would "disappear". From putting a hole in a similar piece of materail it looks like removing a retangular section of the center of the activation mechanism channel would add substantial light onto the bottom part of the relector which improves the center of the high beam significantly.

I agree totally that with a fixed light source the HID capsule could never work as well on both high beam and low beam as the H4 bulb with two elements that changes the focal point by almost .5 inch. I like the look and light of the low beam so much with the HID setup, though, that if I can get the Hi beam to work reasonably well it will be a good compromise. Bysides, there is so much more light available that even if the focal point isn't perfect it may still have a good high beam illumination when all is said and done.

I also agree that the vendor somewhat misrepresents the ability of the HID kit to replicate the performance of an H4 bulb. After looking at the hardware and the capsule design it is certainly a clever attempt and does work somewhat well but just isn't "as good" as an H4 bulb. Maybe we can "fix" that....

 

[FJRocket]

I think I get what you're saying. You let an added piece fixed on the capusle cover the "actuator channel light hole" when low is selected, then on high beam, the channel moves rearward and you get the "peekaboo" effect. I like it!

Ok, Jestal. Start chopping on yours and show us some pics!

I was thinking about doing some of this stuff with metal tape, but I thought the adhesive would cook. What kind of materials you thinking of using?

It's too bad the manuafacturer didn't just make a push rod to the shutters about the same diameter of the anode, and then just have the shutters completely closed. I guess cantalevering a peice off the front might work instead.

 

[jestal]

Shit....now I am getting obcessed with making this work.

Who has an extra H4 bulb to chop up....LOL LOL LOL

Some observations and questions:

The bulb itself is just assembled into the base socket and held in place by the metal circlip that is buried in the barrel of the base socket. If you have the bulb out of the H4 assembly (by removing the silver ring pressed into the ID of the H4 assembly from the side outside the lamp assembly) you can also remove the bulb itself from that socket by prying the circlip out at the little flats. This is important for a reason we have discussed. Once it is out you will see a variety of rings that the clip can be assembled into. This allows you to set the bulb depth at any depth you want and it will just clip back together. This will easily allow setting the bulb depth to the optimum Hi or Lo beam location...or anywhere in between. So this is a very easy modification to play with.

The anode rod that is outside the bulb. Who knows if that is positive or negative for sure.?? I assume that it is negative/ground but am not sure at all. The large diameter of the anode rod is just insulation. If you take the insulation off there is nothing but a thin wire. That bulb looks to be a generic bulb that is then assembled into a variety of enclosures...some possibly needing insulation on the anode wire. The H4 setup does not look like it needs it. If it was removed the thin wire would not cast much of a shadow.......

If you look at the bulb mounting base it is keyed into the H4 assembly by a notch and slot. Cut a slot 180 away and you can install the bulb 180 from their intent. This puts the anode rod (and the shadow it casts) in the LO beam area. There seems to be plenty of Lo beam light so maybe just reversing the bulb so the anode casts the shadow the other way would allow unrestricted light to go thru my little window I am cutting to reach the Hi beam reflector. If the anode doesn't really need that insulating rod on it then there would just be a thin wire shadowing the Lo beam and that would probably be unnoticeable.

Warchild....can you/we buy just bulbs from your source. I don't need the whole H4 kit as the ballasts and wires don't need mods. Just the bulb. Getting some spare H4 bulbs would allow mods to procede. I really don't want to hack mine up quite yet as I hate to ruin it and want some think time on this to come up with more ideas....but, God hates a coward so I really want to chop into it. Can I get a replacement easily/inexpensively??

 

[BrunDog]

Guys, I completely applaud your efforts. You are burning up your precious time in an effort to make all of our rides better. In that sense, you are truly pioneers.

But my question to you is this: Why are you doing this when a solution likely already exists?

Maybe we should pull the plug on this kit and try to work a decent price on one of these styles:

Bounce back, and slam me if you must.

-BD

 

[Warchild]

Jestal - I *believe* you can get replacement bulbs.... I'll inquire.

BrunDog - If we knew for sure that the "moving capsule" concept was sound and reliable over time, that would obviously be the way to fly. However, what happens if the selonoid fails while in the high-beam position? :bigeyes:

One of the entrants in the Utah 1088 last June had that very selonoid-actuated HID capsule you show in the image there. It failed on him *during* the Utah 1088. He managed to get it working again, but it failed him again about a month later. In his case, the kit stopped working altogether. He junked it.

Here is how I am going about solving this issue for my setup. This may or may not be an acceptable solution for others, but I'll offer up the concept, and the reader can make up his/her own mind.

It is an exercise in frustration to try to make the Hi/Lo version work in an optimal manner without the ability to physically place the "filament" of the HID capsule in the correct position to achieve the proper focal point (for either configuration, high-beam, or low-beam).

Moving it partially to the correct position isn't going to cut the mustard. It must be *precisely*, *exactly* in the correct position. No other measure will do. None.

Therefore.... here is my solution that I'll be implementing:

To my eyes, one properly positioned low-beam HID capsule is still superior to two low-beam (55w) halogen bulbs. So I intend to leave my current right (deer-side) HID Low-Beam Only capsule alone, and let it operate just as it does now. It will always remain lit as long as the engine is running.

The left capsule, however, I am going to turn into a "High-beam only" H4 HID capsule.

I am going to do this by simply re-positioning the HID capsule EXACTLY 6mm rearward from it's current orientation. 6mm is the distance from the *center* of the Low-beam filament, to the *center* of the high-beam filament. This re-positioning will be permanent, and will be accomplished by either i) introducing a 6mm shim to the existing base of the H4 HID capsule, or ii) "withdrawing" the capsule exactly 6mm from where it resides in the low-beam only holder now.

Additionally, the Low-beam holder will of course have to have the Dremal applied to it such that the "filament" has the best unhindered, 360-degree view of the reflector housing that it can (knowing, of course, that two small "legs" of the existing metal shield must remain in order to retain the nose cone. Retaining the latter is important).

Both methods ("shimming" and "withdrawing") has its advantages and disadvantages. The whole purpose of the kit that Toynut scored for me to experiment with is to test each method. The kit should be here by Monday, and I should know something a few days after that.

 

[jestal]

Yea, that is an approach that I thought of too. With two headlights just set one up for Lo and one for Hi and switch them back and forth.

I agree that the fore/aft position of the single HID "element" will never be perfect for both but there is a lot of light to play with so it still might work out.

I think the best setup looks like reversing the HID bulb 180 in the H4 cartridge to move the anode wire to the opposite side so that it doesn't shadow onto the HI beam side, make a hole or window in the shutter activation piece and add a shroud for the hole to cover it when the unit is in the Lo beam position. Looks fairly easy to do and might work. If not, then yours sounds like the best alternative.

I was even thinking about leaving a halogen H4 bulb in one side and use the HID on the other to see if that offered a better compromise.

IF you do want to optimize the position of the HID element for Hi beam you can just remove the silver ring from the backside of the cartridge and the bulb and it's adapter or holder will come out. Pry out the small circlip and you can slide the HID bulb back and forth to wherever you want it and then install the clip. It is designed to be "adjustable" for different applications I am sure.

 

[FJRocket]

The circlip on my HID capsule won't even stay together. It was loose from the very start. So mine has been apart many times. I don't think that you are going to be able to easily move the light source/bulb section rearwards any where near 6 mm in the mechanism and clip it back together. Looks more like 2 mm or so is all you can get, and then you're going to have to glue the two segments together. I think shimming the entire capsule back to the proper heigth is the way to go there. That way you can leave the two parts of the capsule together.

I don't think removing any insulation from the anode is going to give you much bang for the buck. I think letting light out the bottom is worth the effort, and perhaps the 180 rotation is worth a try, but otherwise I don't think I'm going to mess with the light source.

I like Warchild's concept, and I'm sure it will work well for his application. I still want to try to improve the HID's to work better in a more conventional manner. This is a good rainy/snowy day project.

H4 shims

An easy way to start moving the capsule rearward would be to get the shims listed above (although there might be a better source for purchase). If you mate this shim to a thin cylinder, like with a slice of some type of heat resistant pipe, you can make a new mounting base at various depths. The shims are reportedly .5 mm thick. If you made a 6 mm shim ring to sandwich inbetween the H4 shim and the HID base, you could easily set the capsule back to a better high beam position.

Now the big question is what to use for the "sandwich" material. I have found some high temp "PVC" parts that are the correct diameter and wall thickness, but I think the melting point is too low. I'd sure like to find something off the shelf that would work. Anyone happen to have any ideas? Aluminum conduit?

 

[BrunDog]

If we knew for sure that the "moving capsule" concept was sound and reliable over time, that would obviously be the way to fly. However, what happens if the selonoid fails while in the high-beam position? :bigeyes:
One of the entrants in the Utah 1088 last June had that very selonoid-actuated HID capsule you show in the image there. It failed on him *during* the Utah 1088. He managed to get it working again, but it failed him again about a month later. In his case, the kit stopped working altogether. He junked it.

I guess like anything else - what happens when it fails depends on how mission critical it is. What happens when your front tire blows out? Either way, you have a problem. One is more serious, will stop you from riding, and could be dangerous. The question, of course, is to determine the likelihood of that failure happening. The front tire issue is fortunately low. How reliable is the solenoid mechanism, really?

Was his the only one of these kits we know about? Obviously one failure out one system is not a good percentage, but considering the sample size, it is hard to get any true handle of reliability. Also, perhaps there are different manufacturer's of these with different track records?

And with all due respect, WC, I guess the other thing about the failure concern is that this Hi/Lo mechanism could fail in high beam only, too. Couldn't it? If it is a electro-mechanical solution, it certainly his its inherent failure modes as well.

-BD

 

[Bounce]

...message deleted

 

[FJRocket]

Yes, this is a tinkering thread. I'm not whining. I still think these lights kick ass, and rest assured I will put them to use, one way or t'other.

Bounce, if you know specifically where there are other threads denoting other "experimentations" with these lights, I'd sure like to know where they are. Might help us out a bunch.

The stepper motor setup might in fact be a good alternative for some folks. Any chance our "source" might make these available to those who would like to try them? Do we have enough room behind the lenses/housings for those motors and such? They certainly look long enough that the rubber dust caps won't fit over them.

Ok, now back to tinkering....

 

[Bounce]

...message deleted

 

[Warchild]

When I first tried the HID (in my first FJR, spring of 2004), I used the "shielded" version of the HID capsule, known as the "D2R" capsule:

This capsule is an early-generation attempt that was supposed to mimic a low-beam H4 by shielding the light from the lower part of the reflector housing (the high-beam portion of the housing) It did this by applying that dark silver coating to the bulb that you see above.

This worked to some degree... but was sub-optimal, at best.

A measurable amount of the intense HID output would still strike the lower part of the FJR's reflector housing, giving it a faint, "ghost" of a high-beam pattern even though theorectically operating in low-beam mode.

I tried a million different ways to adjust the aim so oncoming traffic wouldn't get zapped, but by the time I lowered the aim such that the "ghost" high-beam wouldn't bother oncoming traffic, the original benefits obtained from using HID in the first place were negated. After a couple months of experimenting, I went back to stock.

Now, as we all know from this Self-Buy, the "shielded" version of the HID bulb looks like this photo below. Obviously, this version is shielded up the wazoo to prevent any stray light from hitting the high-beam portion of the reflector housing:

And since the CORRECT focal point is achieved for low beam, this system still gives approximately the same razor-sharp cut-off that the original H4 low-beam does, as we see below:

And IF we could obtain the "moving capsule" variant of the HID that physically re-positions the "filament" rearward 6mm to achieve proper high-beam focal point, then it, too, would be a staggering increase in output over conventional halogen.

The bottom line is that it is now clear that these HIDs work exceedingly well in our reflector housings, but ONLY when the correct focal point is achieved. Anything less is problematic. The butterfly wing approach is novel, but flawed.

In halogen reflector housings that are based for single-filament applications like the H3 or H7, these kits have proven to be god-like! Below is a shot of the H7-based HID lamps in my 2005 R1 (which is designed for a H7 halogen).... just how razor-sharp is *this* cutoff for HID low-beam?! :bigeyes: Photos taken from ~ 15ft from lens to garage door:

Pity the FJR doesn't use H7's, huh....

 

[Warchild]

And with all due respect, WC, I guess the other thing about the failure concern is that this Hi/Lo mechanism could fail in high beam only, too. Couldn't it?

I asked about this, and was told that should the selonoid fail, the butterfly wings "fail-safe" in the low beam position due to small mechanical springs that normally keep the wings closed when power is not applied to the selonoid.

I never got a chance to examine the mechanism that closely to determine if that is a true fact, but it appears to be the case, since whenever you shut the bike down while high-beam is engaged, the butterfly wings snap shut.

 

[BrunDog]

WC: Which begs the question: Why can't the moving capsule be spring loaded, too? If it were to fail, then it could default to the "low" position equally as well.

BTW, "stepper motor" is not really the correct term for these actuators. I think it may mislead people.The actuator is just a simple solenoid. And that is what surprises me. Solenoids are basic, usually extremely reliable devices.

Do we know if anyone has specifically tried the brand I put in the picture above? Check it here: Xtralights

Bounce: I read the e-mail, thanks for reiterating. But I would love to see the reports you are talking about WRT the reliability of the new butterfly capsules.

-BD