Theorie First Production Run LED Taillight Conversion Review: IMPORTANT INFORMATION
05-22-11 | 02:10 PM
#1
Theorie First Production Run LED Taillight Conversion Review: IMPORTANT INFORMATION
REVIEW SUMMARY
Unsafe light output, serious design flaws, and non-responsive as well as abusive customer service fatally doom the promise of a unique, updated look. Parking light output is 13.7% compared to the stock units and a dismal 3.7% for brake lights.
BACKGROUND
This is a product review of the Theorie LED taillight conversion soon to be distributed by SakeBomb through the following GB: https://www.rx7club.com/vendor-classifieds-276/gb-fd3s-led-tail-light-conversion-sakebomb-garage-902148/
Theorie lists as the four features of the conversion:
• Direct-conversion, uses your existing tail lights
• Functions similar to stock tail lights but...
• “Ring” design gives updated look while retaining stock styling of OEM housings
• Uses OEM type bulb bases for direct plug & play operation (installs like any normal bulbs)
• ***Daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output***
I was the first person to receive the “production” version of the LED taillights. Tom (Theorie, the originator of the LED design) showed these to me at DGRR 2010 (on Goodfellas’ car). On April 22nd, after the event, he wrote to me he wanted “to do a few sets for "select" cars, yours being one of them”. After speaking with Tom about potential brightness issues (he was first going to use 5mm round LEDs) he indicated he had decided to use SMD – surface mounted –LEDS. He also stated, “Once I get the lights it should only take me a day or two to do them (depending on what day I get them...)”, so on May 6th, I sent $450 to Theorie for the LED conversion and for converting my OEM lights to 99 spec. Theorie received my lights on May 12th and about 4 weeks later I received my converted lights back.
DESIGN
Let’s start with the positive, design. The Theorie design is quite nice. The Theorie LED conversion updates the look of the taillights with a more distinctive -99 spec design. The LED circle design follows the design aesthetics of the '99 spec look, but updates the look in a modern circle, diffused LED way. On paper, this conversion is a nice complementary alternative to the basic '99 spec look and would appeal to those that are looking for something a little different and more distinctive than light upgrade options.
LIGHT OUTPUT
Simply put, unsafe for daily driving. Although Theorie promised “daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output”, testing confirms that at best, the units produce 13.7% of the stock unit light output (for parking lights) and only 3.7% of the stock unit brake light output. This is a serious safety issue for anyone who has purchased this conversion or who is contemplating the possible second GB. A summary of testing results is as follows (with higher numbers being better):
mod edit addition: Although chart has SakeBomb Garage (Theorie) as the title, only the Theorie taillight was actually measured...
The light output of the Theorie LED light conversion has been much debated with me contacting Theorie numerous times about the issue. After seeing these at DGRR 2011 for the first time from behind on someone else’s car, I became very concerned about the safety of the units.
I performed actual “light intensity” testing of the units by using a light meter and then compared these results to the same tests of the OEM units as well as LED bulbs purchased from www.superbrightleds.com. For me, this is the only way to determine if the units meet the “daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output” Theorie promised. Sadly, they fall far short of this guarantee and present a serious safety concern to buyers of the conversion as well as to other drivers from possible rear-end collisions.
For testing, I used a Mastech Digital Illuminance/Light Meter LX1330B , 0 - 200,000 Lux Luxmeter:
The unit features:
High Accuracy and rapid response
Auto Zeroing and Data Hold
Ranges: 0-200/2,000/20,000/200,000 Lux
Accuracy:
±3% ±10 digits (0-20,000 lux)
±5% ±10 digits (over 20,000 Lux)
Repeatability: ±2%
Sampling rate: 2-3 times per second
In short, the unit takes multiple samples per second and is accurate to plus or minus 3%, making it well suited for the testing of the Theorie lights.
The unit measures either “lux” or “footcandles”, with lux being more widely accepted today. Lux measures light “intensity” as perceived by the human eye, making it ideal for testing the Theorie claim of “daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output”. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lux#Lux_versus_footcandle
“The lux (symbol: lx) is the SI unit of illuminance and luminous emittance measuring luminous power per area. It is used in photometry as a measure of the intensity, as perceived by the human eye, of light that hits or passes through a surface. It is analogous to the radiometric unit watts per square metre, but with the power at each wavelength weighted according to the luminosity function, a standardized model of human visual brightness perception.”
I then built a light output measurement box, following the details provided by http://www.flashlightreviews.com/fea...box_output.htm. In short, I built a box that encompasses one taillight assembly, covering the inside with white and placing the light meter on the side, both to ensure the light didn’t directly strike the meter and that the measurements reflected total light intensity. Here is a pic of the unit:
Note the cutout on the top of the unit is the shape of the taillight. I used one of the taillight assemblies to trace out the pattern so the taillights fit neatly into the testing box. I then taped (another use for duct tape!) the testing box over the taillight assembly to ensure no light could enter the box except from the taillight assembly. I did this by turning on the light meter and making sure it “zeroed out” before turning on the lights for testing as shown in the following pic:
Here is a picture of the testing box installed on the right taillight:
Finally, I went to Autozone and had them look up “stock” incandescent bulbs for the taillights and used basic incandescent Sylvania 1156 and 1157 bulbs for the comparison testing. Autozone confirms these are stock bulbs.
For more pics of the bulbs and the testing unit, go here:
https://www.me.com/gallery/#100024
I then preformed a series of tests on the lights, comparing the stock unit “lux” light intensity output to the Theorie unit's under the various lighting conditions summarized in the table (parking lights only, brake lights only, parking and brake lights, etc.). I also took measurements with the engine off and with the engine on, assuming that voltage drops affect LEDs more than stock bulbs and with the engine on, the numbers might get better for the Theorie LEDs. As the results confirm, this is true but only to a small extent. Then, to ensure the light meter correctly measured LED light output (some LEDs operate in a higher wavelength than incandescent bulbs and I wondered if this might have an impact on the Theorie readings), I compared the Theorie conversion lights to a set of LED taillight bulbs I had previously purchased from www.superbrightleds.com. The results confirm the light meter accurately measures LED light output and that the Theorie LED conversion falls far short of matching stock or other LED light output.
For videos of the actual testing results, I have them posted on YouTube:
A comparison of “stock” OEM taillights on the left to Theorie lights on the right. Note the intensity of the glow of the stock units on the left:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZJpIvDmyEU
A short video of the voltage of the car during testing (12.9 with engine off and 13.8 with engine on):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCH99PlC-AM
Video results of Theorie parking lights and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKXcBb7xYLE
Video results of Theorie brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nadxyL_gJFI
Video results of Theorie brake lights and parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDLY2gRK_90
Video results of Theorie brake lights, parking lights, and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi5b2-2Jivc
OEM Stock Unit Videos
Video results of OEM parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCHotBMlrD4
Video results of OEM parking lights and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq150y7l5UE
Video results of OEM brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtS86Pv8hg0
Video results of OEM brake lights and parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=665xJVlk9zo
Video results of OEM brake lights, parking lights, and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDjLfCEVd4
SuperBrightLEDs.com Videos
Video results of SuperbrightLEDs.com parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C33jwr4pUkA
Video results of SuperbrightLEDs.com brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMthFNn9o4
Video results of SuperbrightLEDs.com parking lights and brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6au1IYBKMg
I believe the results speak for themselves and confirm the Theorie taillight conversion is unsafe and represents a serious safety hazard. The Theorie LEDS are much dimmer for the parking lights, 15 lux to 109.7 for the stock units, and in my opinion, an extreme safety hazard when braking, 55.5 lux compared to 1,485 lux for the stock units. As a side note, I also measured the "brightest" intensity of the Theorie units and the stock assemblies and have listed those results under the "parking intensity" and "brake light intensity". The Theorie conversion does not perform any better under this criteria.
ENGINEERING DESIGN FLAWS
The most significant design flaw with the Theorie LED conversion is the brightness of the LEDs as described above. The lights do not match or exceed the daytime visibility of the stock units as promised by Theorie and as proven in the above results. Theorie uses 2,800 mcd LEDs for the conversion and these do not equal or exceed the stock light output.
A potential second design flaw deals with the outer ring of the brake LEDs and the Theorie claim that this ring gets brighter when the brake lights are applied. I cannot confirm if this is true as I currently have no way of testing the light output only the outer rings (would need to open up the units which I don’t want to do), but several observers of my testing noted they did not see an intensity increase in the outer rings when the brakes where applied and they felt that a person in back of the car would have no way of knowing if the brakes were being applied. You be the judge:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyBvJH6yp5M
Could be but the point is moot anyway as the measured light output is not adequate.
In addition to the above issues, the thin gauge wiring Theorie used for the LEDs seriously compromises the conversion as vibration over time will likely cause the wires to pull loose from their solder points. For comparison, most automotive wiring ranges from 8 to 18 gauges. The thickness of the gauge is mostly dependent on the use of the wire but it is also designed to be able to withstand vibration failures. So, the thicker the wire, the more power load it can handle and the better it will be at handling vibration, of which RX7s produce a lot.
Theorie used wiring that is at best 30 gauge and is so thin, a standard stripping tool (at least not my Radio Shack tool) will not work with the wires. This wiring is hidden under mesh loom so it is not readily apparent until a problem occurs, like what happened to me. Over a period of two weeks, one ring on each side of my lights failed:
After much back and forth, Theorie did fix the lights for me claiming I (or one of my mechanics) had pulled the wires out of the units. This was not the case. I personally installed these and did not touch them after install – why would you once installed?
Finally, the right assembly of my recently repaired units now fogs up. Noticed this at DGRR. Theorie has stated I must have opened the lights up, which of course I haven’t.
CUSTOMER SERVICE
First, I personally like Tom. He seems like a nice guy and I have always enjoyed my conversations with him. On the forum though and with this particular issue, I have endured at best no responses from him to being publically ridiculed and this behavior is not acceptable for any business, let alone a member of our RX7 community.
Speaking for my own experience, I spent much time on the phone with Theorie before deciding to move forward with spending the $450 for the conversion. Although I offered several other LED options to Tom to resolve the brightness issue, I ultimately accepted his word the LEDs would be as bright as the stock units. I also posted up a video of the conversion after receiving the lights back, but was unable to test the units in the daylight as the car was at a body shop and couldn’t be moved (was on a scissor lift and had no wheels). I did follow up with Theorie with a call shortly after again expressing concern for the brightness and I wrote a short review at the time indicating the lights were “barely acceptable” which we now know is not the case.
So, I went through the trouble and effort to do the testing and as the results show, the lights do not perform even close to the stock level, making them unsafe for use.
SUMMARY
Unsafe light output, serious design flaws, and non-responsive as well as abusive customer service fatally doom the promise of a unique, updated look.
Testing results confirm light output substantially below stock level output, making them a potential rear-end collision hazard. Theorie wiring gauge too thin, resulting in vibrational failures as evidenced by two of my lights failing. Other unit now has fogging issue.
To date, Theorie has declined to notify conversion customers of the brightness issue and has presented no plan for a “fix”. Theorie claims they never warrantied the units for the brightness issue although one of the four features they marketed to potential customers was daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output
Unsafe light output, serious design flaws, and non-responsive as well as abusive customer service fatally doom the promise of a unique, updated look. Parking light output is 13.7% compared to the stock units and a dismal 3.7% for brake lights.
BACKGROUND
This is a product review of the Theorie LED taillight conversion soon to be distributed by SakeBomb through the following GB: https://www.rx7club.com/vendor-classifieds-276/gb-fd3s-led-tail-light-conversion-sakebomb-garage-902148/
Theorie lists as the four features of the conversion:
• Direct-conversion, uses your existing tail lights
• Functions similar to stock tail lights but...
• “Ring” design gives updated look while retaining stock styling of OEM housings
• Uses OEM type bulb bases for direct plug & play operation (installs like any normal bulbs)
• ***Daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output***
I was the first person to receive the “production” version of the LED taillights. Tom (Theorie, the originator of the LED design) showed these to me at DGRR 2010 (on Goodfellas’ car). On April 22nd, after the event, he wrote to me he wanted “to do a few sets for "select" cars, yours being one of them”. After speaking with Tom about potential brightness issues (he was first going to use 5mm round LEDs) he indicated he had decided to use SMD – surface mounted –LEDS. He also stated, “Once I get the lights it should only take me a day or two to do them (depending on what day I get them...)”, so on May 6th, I sent $450 to Theorie for the LED conversion and for converting my OEM lights to 99 spec. Theorie received my lights on May 12th and about 4 weeks later I received my converted lights back.
DESIGN
Let’s start with the positive, design. The Theorie design is quite nice. The Theorie LED conversion updates the look of the taillights with a more distinctive -99 spec design. The LED circle design follows the design aesthetics of the '99 spec look, but updates the look in a modern circle, diffused LED way. On paper, this conversion is a nice complementary alternative to the basic '99 spec look and would appeal to those that are looking for something a little different and more distinctive than light upgrade options.
LIGHT OUTPUT
Simply put, unsafe for daily driving. Although Theorie promised “daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output”, testing confirms that at best, the units produce 13.7% of the stock unit light output (for parking lights) and only 3.7% of the stock unit brake light output. This is a serious safety issue for anyone who has purchased this conversion or who is contemplating the possible second GB. A summary of testing results is as follows (with higher numbers being better):
mod edit addition: Although chart has SakeBomb Garage (Theorie) as the title, only the Theorie taillight was actually measured...
The light output of the Theorie LED light conversion has been much debated with me contacting Theorie numerous times about the issue. After seeing these at DGRR 2011 for the first time from behind on someone else’s car, I became very concerned about the safety of the units.
I performed actual “light intensity” testing of the units by using a light meter and then compared these results to the same tests of the OEM units as well as LED bulbs purchased from www.superbrightleds.com. For me, this is the only way to determine if the units meet the “daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output” Theorie promised. Sadly, they fall far short of this guarantee and present a serious safety concern to buyers of the conversion as well as to other drivers from possible rear-end collisions.
For testing, I used a Mastech Digital Illuminance/Light Meter LX1330B , 0 - 200,000 Lux Luxmeter:
The unit features:
High Accuracy and rapid response
Auto Zeroing and Data Hold
Ranges: 0-200/2,000/20,000/200,000 Lux
Accuracy:
±3% ±10 digits (0-20,000 lux)
±5% ±10 digits (over 20,000 Lux)
Repeatability: ±2%
Sampling rate: 2-3 times per second
In short, the unit takes multiple samples per second and is accurate to plus or minus 3%, making it well suited for the testing of the Theorie lights.
The unit measures either “lux” or “footcandles”, with lux being more widely accepted today. Lux measures light “intensity” as perceived by the human eye, making it ideal for testing the Theorie claim of “daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output”. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lux#Lux_versus_footcandle
“The lux (symbol: lx) is the SI unit of illuminance and luminous emittance measuring luminous power per area. It is used in photometry as a measure of the intensity, as perceived by the human eye, of light that hits or passes through a surface. It is analogous to the radiometric unit watts per square metre, but with the power at each wavelength weighted according to the luminosity function, a standardized model of human visual brightness perception.”
I then built a light output measurement box, following the details provided by http://www.flashlightreviews.com/fea...box_output.htm. In short, I built a box that encompasses one taillight assembly, covering the inside with white and placing the light meter on the side, both to ensure the light didn’t directly strike the meter and that the measurements reflected total light intensity. Here is a pic of the unit:
Note the cutout on the top of the unit is the shape of the taillight. I used one of the taillight assemblies to trace out the pattern so the taillights fit neatly into the testing box. I then taped (another use for duct tape!) the testing box over the taillight assembly to ensure no light could enter the box except from the taillight assembly. I did this by turning on the light meter and making sure it “zeroed out” before turning on the lights for testing as shown in the following pic:
Here is a picture of the testing box installed on the right taillight:
Finally, I went to Autozone and had them look up “stock” incandescent bulbs for the taillights and used basic incandescent Sylvania 1156 and 1157 bulbs for the comparison testing. Autozone confirms these are stock bulbs.
For more pics of the bulbs and the testing unit, go here:
https://www.me.com/gallery/#100024
I then preformed a series of tests on the lights, comparing the stock unit “lux” light intensity output to the Theorie unit's under the various lighting conditions summarized in the table (parking lights only, brake lights only, parking and brake lights, etc.). I also took measurements with the engine off and with the engine on, assuming that voltage drops affect LEDs more than stock bulbs and with the engine on, the numbers might get better for the Theorie LEDs. As the results confirm, this is true but only to a small extent. Then, to ensure the light meter correctly measured LED light output (some LEDs operate in a higher wavelength than incandescent bulbs and I wondered if this might have an impact on the Theorie readings), I compared the Theorie conversion lights to a set of LED taillight bulbs I had previously purchased from www.superbrightleds.com. The results confirm the light meter accurately measures LED light output and that the Theorie LED conversion falls far short of matching stock or other LED light output.
For videos of the actual testing results, I have them posted on YouTube:
A comparison of “stock” OEM taillights on the left to Theorie lights on the right. Note the intensity of the glow of the stock units on the left:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZJpIvDmyEU
A short video of the voltage of the car during testing (12.9 with engine off and 13.8 with engine on):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCH99PlC-AM
Video results of Theorie parking lights and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKXcBb7xYLE
Video results of Theorie brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nadxyL_gJFI
Video results of Theorie brake lights and parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDLY2gRK_90
Video results of Theorie brake lights, parking lights, and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi5b2-2Jivc
OEM Stock Unit Videos
Video results of OEM parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCHotBMlrD4
Video results of OEM parking lights and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq150y7l5UE
Video results of OEM brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtS86Pv8hg0
Video results of OEM brake lights and parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=665xJVlk9zo
Video results of OEM brake lights, parking lights, and turn signals:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDjLfCEVd4
SuperBrightLEDs.com Videos
Video results of SuperbrightLEDs.com parking lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C33jwr4pUkA
Video results of SuperbrightLEDs.com brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMthFNn9o4
Video results of SuperbrightLEDs.com parking lights and brake lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6au1IYBKMg
I believe the results speak for themselves and confirm the Theorie taillight conversion is unsafe and represents a serious safety hazard. The Theorie LEDS are much dimmer for the parking lights, 15 lux to 109.7 for the stock units, and in my opinion, an extreme safety hazard when braking, 55.5 lux compared to 1,485 lux for the stock units. As a side note, I also measured the "brightest" intensity of the Theorie units and the stock assemblies and have listed those results under the "parking intensity" and "brake light intensity". The Theorie conversion does not perform any better under this criteria.
ENGINEERING DESIGN FLAWS
The most significant design flaw with the Theorie LED conversion is the brightness of the LEDs as described above. The lights do not match or exceed the daytime visibility of the stock units as promised by Theorie and as proven in the above results. Theorie uses 2,800 mcd LEDs for the conversion and these do not equal or exceed the stock light output.
A potential second design flaw deals with the outer ring of the brake LEDs and the Theorie claim that this ring gets brighter when the brake lights are applied. I cannot confirm if this is true as I currently have no way of testing the light output only the outer rings (would need to open up the units which I don’t want to do), but several observers of my testing noted they did not see an intensity increase in the outer rings when the brakes where applied and they felt that a person in back of the car would have no way of knowing if the brakes were being applied. You be the judge:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyBvJH6yp5M
Could be but the point is moot anyway as the measured light output is not adequate.
In addition to the above issues, the thin gauge wiring Theorie used for the LEDs seriously compromises the conversion as vibration over time will likely cause the wires to pull loose from their solder points. For comparison, most automotive wiring ranges from 8 to 18 gauges. The thickness of the gauge is mostly dependent on the use of the wire but it is also designed to be able to withstand vibration failures. So, the thicker the wire, the more power load it can handle and the better it will be at handling vibration, of which RX7s produce a lot.
Theorie used wiring that is at best 30 gauge and is so thin, a standard stripping tool (at least not my Radio Shack tool) will not work with the wires. This wiring is hidden under mesh loom so it is not readily apparent until a problem occurs, like what happened to me. Over a period of two weeks, one ring on each side of my lights failed:
After much back and forth, Theorie did fix the lights for me claiming I (or one of my mechanics) had pulled the wires out of the units. This was not the case. I personally installed these and did not touch them after install – why would you once installed?
Finally, the right assembly of my recently repaired units now fogs up. Noticed this at DGRR. Theorie has stated I must have opened the lights up, which of course I haven’t.
CUSTOMER SERVICE
First, I personally like Tom. He seems like a nice guy and I have always enjoyed my conversations with him. On the forum though and with this particular issue, I have endured at best no responses from him to being publically ridiculed and this behavior is not acceptable for any business, let alone a member of our RX7 community.
Speaking for my own experience, I spent much time on the phone with Theorie before deciding to move forward with spending the $450 for the conversion. Although I offered several other LED options to Tom to resolve the brightness issue, I ultimately accepted his word the LEDs would be as bright as the stock units. I also posted up a video of the conversion after receiving the lights back, but was unable to test the units in the daylight as the car was at a body shop and couldn’t be moved (was on a scissor lift and had no wheels). I did follow up with Theorie with a call shortly after again expressing concern for the brightness and I wrote a short review at the time indicating the lights were “barely acceptable” which we now know is not the case.
So, I went through the trouble and effort to do the testing and as the results show, the lights do not perform even close to the stock level, making them unsafe for use.
SUMMARY
Unsafe light output, serious design flaws, and non-responsive as well as abusive customer service fatally doom the promise of a unique, updated look.
Testing results confirm light output substantially below stock level output, making them a potential rear-end collision hazard. Theorie wiring gauge too thin, resulting in vibrational failures as evidenced by two of my lights failing. Other unit now has fogging issue.
To date, Theorie has declined to notify conversion customers of the brightness issue and has presented no plan for a “fix”. Theorie claims they never warrantied the units for the brightness issue although one of the four features they marketed to potential customers was daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output
05-22-11 | 02:41 PM
#2
Very thorough thread, as it should be. This should stir the pot a bit.
What are your plans to remedy your purchase/lighting issues? Back to the OEM 99spec? Personally, I never felt the need to go LED and simply planned on the 99's when the time came. Either way, I do see cause to address these issues.
What are your plans to remedy your purchase/lighting issues? Back to the OEM 99spec? Personally, I never felt the need to go LED and simply planned on the 99's when the time came. Either way, I do see cause to address these issues.
05-22-11 | 02:52 PM
#3
Agreed with xlr8, I saw people doing this and I felt no need to convert to led tail lights.
My bulbs ARE led but I didn't convert the light itself..it doesnt seem appealing to me.
Its like copying what all the other car manufacturers are doing. Imo it doesn't even enhance the look.
Sorry to the gb people who have/gonna have trouble with these.
My bulbs ARE led but I didn't convert the light itself..it doesnt seem appealing to me.
Its like copying what all the other car manufacturers are doing. Imo it doesn't even enhance the look.
Sorry to the gb people who have/gonna have trouble with these.
05-22-11 | 03:34 PM
#4
Great thread, I would love a set of the tails, but there's no way with the light output being so abysmal.
Unfortunately this forum is in love with vendors and I wouldn't doubt that this gets locked and someone catches a ban.
Unfortunately this forum is in love with vendors and I wouldn't doubt that this gets locked and someone catches a ban.
05-22-11 | 04:55 PM
#5
Having the 99 spec taillights currently on my car, the only enticement for me to go with LED would have been the light output being "brighter then stock". Thanks for posting David as this clearly is not the case.
05-22-11 | 06:27 PM
#7
FYI, I've been developing an upgrade with my factory that manufactures the LED boards. Perhaps if you had waited, or tried to talk to me, you would have found out. As we speak, the factory is finishing off the new samples that use larger 5050smd multi-diode LEDs that are way brighter, and using boards that include even more LEDs on top of that. As I already told David, I am, and have been, working on a way of upgrading those who feel the original lights weren't bright enough for their tastes. It's not a big deal.
If you had just chilled out and waited I would have been happy to upgrade you guys.
Like I said, I'm not a scammer. I'm trying to make everyone happy.
If you had just chilled out and waited I would have been happy to upgrade you guys.
Like I said, I'm not a scammer. I'm trying to make everyone happy.
Trending Topics
05-22-11 | 06:48 PM
#9
Not yet because we wanted to make sure the order was coming in first. Like I said, the samples are on their way to me right now so we were waiting to see them before setting anything in stone. For people who already had the conversion we were going to make it as cheap as possible to upgrade (maybe only the cost of parts and shipping 1 way). Again, nothing is set in stone, we wanted to make sure the new parts were substantially brighter before we place the order since the factory has a minimum order of nearly $20k...
I told David Hayes all of this, in person, at DGRR not weeks ago, but he decided to go on the war path instead of waiting for an upgrade.
I told David Hayes all of this, in person, at DGRR not weeks ago, but he decided to go on the war path instead of waiting for an upgrade.
05-22-11 | 07:17 PM
#10
I may reiterate some things that Dan (or Tom) have said... I'm haven't read what they wrote though Dan told me he wanted to respond as well.
David,
You have never spent a PENNY with SakeBomb... and I have been fielding questions and attacks from you for years now (literally). I feel like attacking Dan and I has become your personal hobby, or outlet/vent for other frustrations in your life. I've spent a long time graciously dealing with you, despite the fact that you are not a "customer" or even friend of mine... but I'm done dealing with it. You did not buy the lights through us, you bought the first set from Tom, and did not mention anything about them being "unsafe" let alone "unsatisfactory" until (coincidentally) a few weeks ago, when I mentioned that I was working with Tom to lease the tail light design from him, and possibly create custom PCB boards with increased intensity LED's. Funny that none of this came up until THE DAY AFTER I posted that
.
David, it's been a year, seriously. If you (or anyone) thought there was a fundamental flaw with the lights, that would have been a good time to mention it, not a year later.
If you are this concerned, why don't you simply remove them from your car? It's funny that you've overlooked that option. For the record, I'm not saying this because *I* feel that the lights are unsafe, I'm saying it because if you were that worried you would have simply removed them. Tom offered to convert your lights back to stock, you said ok, then decided not to take him up on it, and post this thread instead. very interesting..........
The 3% claim is flat out absurd. Look at the pictures that are all over the forum comparing the the rings to 99 lights, look at the video that **YOU** yourself posted a year ago. Your "test" also is not using a 99 tail light, and the method that you are using to meter the light output relies on total output, not output at a specific angle from the emitter (light) to the detector. Knowing the test you performed relies on total output, and that the stock reflector housing emits light in a semi-even manner, simply converting to 99 spec (which looks to me like it removes about 30-50% of the surface area... as a guess) would decrease TOTAL output by 30-50%. I'll be better able to respond after the hardware arrives at my place, and I can test them for myself as I feel there are many flaws in the methodology you are using to test them. You also have to realize that incandescent light intensity decreases as the filamant wears out, so you are not testing the "average" output, you are testing a brand new best case scenario bulb, in the large-surface area stock 93 housing.... your comparing apples and kiwis. There are many other concerns that I have with the methodology you used, but I wont address that until I am able to do my own testing.
-Heath
David,
You have never spent a PENNY with SakeBomb... and I have been fielding questions and attacks from you for years now (literally). I feel like attacking Dan and I has become your personal hobby, or outlet/vent for other frustrations in your life. I've spent a long time graciously dealing with you, despite the fact that you are not a "customer" or even friend of mine... but I'm done dealing with it. You did not buy the lights through us, you bought the first set from Tom, and did not mention anything about them being "unsafe" let alone "unsatisfactory" until (coincidentally) a few weeks ago, when I mentioned that I was working with Tom to lease the tail light design from him, and possibly create custom PCB boards with increased intensity LED's. Funny that none of this came up until THE DAY AFTER I posted that
.David, it's been a year, seriously. If you (or anyone) thought there was a fundamental flaw with the lights, that would have been a good time to mention it, not a year later.
If you are this concerned, why don't you simply remove them from your car? It's funny that you've overlooked that option. For the record, I'm not saying this because *I* feel that the lights are unsafe, I'm saying it because if you were that worried you would have simply removed them. Tom offered to convert your lights back to stock, you said ok, then decided not to take him up on it, and post this thread instead. very interesting..........
The 3% claim is flat out absurd. Look at the pictures that are all over the forum comparing the the rings to 99 lights, look at the video that **YOU** yourself posted a year ago. Your "test" also is not using a 99 tail light, and the method that you are using to meter the light output relies on total output, not output at a specific angle from the emitter (light) to the detector. Knowing the test you performed relies on total output, and that the stock reflector housing emits light in a semi-even manner, simply converting to 99 spec (which looks to me like it removes about 30-50% of the surface area... as a guess) would decrease TOTAL output by 30-50%. I'll be better able to respond after the hardware arrives at my place, and I can test them for myself as I feel there are many flaws in the methodology you are using to test them. You also have to realize that incandescent light intensity decreases as the filamant wears out, so you are not testing the "average" output, you are testing a brand new best case scenario bulb, in the large-surface area stock 93 housing.... your comparing apples and kiwis. There are many other concerns that I have with the methodology you used, but I wont address that until I am able to do my own testing.
-Heath
05-22-11 | 08:05 PM
#11
I questioned the intensity of the lights in Toms original build thread, he mentioned using super bright smds so they will be brighter than stock. That made the decision for me of why I didn't buy the sbg lights and continued with my own led lights.
I had trouble finding smds bright enough for my tail lights behind one diffuser so I knew Tom's lights wouldn't be bright enough behind two and that is why I used superflux leds in mine.
I had trouble finding smds bright enough for my tail lights behind one diffuser so I knew Tom's lights wouldn't be bright enough behind two and that is why I used superflux leds in mine.
05-22-11 | 08:07 PM
#12
Personally I still have the prototype lights and I probably won't upgrade them. I've had them on for a long time now and driven round trip FL to NY twice, let rich borrow them for DGRR 2010, and even daily drive with them in New York City traffic. I've never had any problems or complaints.
If some people from the 1st GB want to get upgrades, its their decision, but it can only happen if we can get the newer, brighter LED rings from the factory.
Originally Posted by David Hayes
A potential second design flaw deals with the outer ring of the brake LEDs and the Theorie claim that this ring gets brighter when the brake lights are applied. I cannot confirm if this is true as I currently have no way of testing the light output only the outer rings (would need to open up the units which I don’t want to do), but several observers of my testing noted they did not see an intensity increase in the outer rings when the brakes where applied and they felt that a person in back of the car would have no way of knowing if the brakes were being applied.
This can be confirmed very easily: with the parking lights / headlights turned off, step on the brakes. Now, click the parking lights on and off. You'll notice that the outer ring does, in fact, get brighter as claimed.
I'll make a video when I have time.
05-23-11 | 10:19 AM
#13
Hey David, have you tried doing the comparison with stock efini lights vs. the stock USDM ones? I'm curious as to if the precense of the circles had an impact on the output measurements. The results you got seem a bit off. I've seen a bunch of the lights in person and I have a really hard time believing such a drastic difference in output. The only thing I could imagine being the cause is the of the lights being lit up is less and the "directionality" of the light source itself. I think efini vs. sakebomb would be a more apples to apples test.
05-23-11 | 03:05 PM
#14
i'm not sure if this has also been explained or not but:
if you modify or replace DOT lighting equipment you can be held accountable for an accident even if someone rearends you. i have been in several near misses where people had smoked lenses that seriously compromised lighting output levels, the lights have engineering and department of transportation approval for a reason.
in short, if i were to ever modify exterior lighting i would make damn sure that it at least has similar light output levels as OEM.
you don't want to get rearended and have the other "irresponsible" driver point out to an officer that your lights are defective and wind up having to pay out of pocket to repair your own vehicle as well as someone elses.
irregardless of previous points, the lights failed quickly and for more than one reason meaning there is still more engineering to be done on the lights.
if you modify or replace DOT lighting equipment you can be held accountable for an accident even if someone rearends you. i have been in several near misses where people had smoked lenses that seriously compromised lighting output levels, the lights have engineering and department of transportation approval for a reason.
in short, if i were to ever modify exterior lighting i would make damn sure that it at least has similar light output levels as OEM.
you don't want to get rearended and have the other "irresponsible" driver point out to an officer that your lights are defective and wind up having to pay out of pocket to repair your own vehicle as well as someone elses.
irregardless of previous points, the lights failed quickly and for more than one reason meaning there is still more engineering to be done on the lights.
05-23-11 | 08:33 PM
#16
As I mentioned in another thread, yeah, the tails might be a little hard to see at a specific angle, in super-harsh 3PM-ish direct cloudless-day sunlight. You think the the factory tails are easy to see under these conditions? Have you seen any of the threads in the 3rd gen section where people talk about getting pulled over and ticketed because they had '99spec or even USDM lights? It happens all the time. Where is all the criticism aimed at Mazda for designing tail light housings that harm visibility in these specific conditions?
Here's an older thread.
there are more pages to this thread, and more threads on this topic. these are all people with USDM or '99-spec lights.
Look, there is a flaw with how Mazda designed the housing from the get-go. Sure, you can find a specific time of day, with specific lighting conditions, and specific angle of viewing to criticize the SBG lights, but don't forget that even USDM or '99-spec lights will be hard to see under the same conditions.
Case in point. Here's a photo (again) of scrub's car with the above-mentioned conditions. He has non-LED '99-spec lights. His parking lights are on. Notice how you can't even tell:
People are being hyper-critical of the SBG lights because they are aftermarket, and being aftermarket people are going to scrutinize them.
One last thing, that I mentioned before. I drove behind moosejaw both on and off the dragon, and I had no problem seeing his SakeBomb tails. I think he will confirm that I was right on his *** the whole time too.
Originally Posted by HardHitter
Cop: The reason why I pulled you over is because you have tinted tail lights. You can't have tinted tail lights
Me: Sir, those are actually stock
Cop: It didn't come from the factory like that.
Me: Sir, I'm pretty sure they come stock like that.
Cop: From the dealership?
Me: Yes
Cop: Exactly, from a dealership. Someone modified the car and the dealership sold it.
Me: Ok, well I just want to know the process of getting this cleared. You're going to write me a ticket and what is the process for me to prove that they come stock? May I get my phone? I can show you right now.
Cop: I'm actually not going to give you a ticket. I will do some research myself but all of the RX7s and RX8s that I've seen have clear tail lights. Just beware, you may not get a nice cop next time.
Me: Thank you, sir.
Anyone else get pulled over for this same reason?
Me: Sir, those are actually stock
Cop: It didn't come from the factory like that.
Me: Sir, I'm pretty sure they come stock like that.
Cop: From the dealership?
Me: Yes
Cop: Exactly, from a dealership. Someone modified the car and the dealership sold it.
Me: Ok, well I just want to know the process of getting this cleared. You're going to write me a ticket and what is the process for me to prove that they come stock? May I get my phone? I can show you right now.
Cop: I'm actually not going to give you a ticket. I will do some research myself but all of the RX7s and RX8s that I've seen have clear tail lights. Just beware, you may not get a nice cop next time.
Me: Thank you, sir.
Anyone else get pulled over for this same reason?
Originally Posted by turbodrx7
Yes, just yesterday actually lol.....
Originally Posted by blackadde///
There was a big thread about this somewhere on here. It's a common thing we get pulled over for. :/
Originally Posted by DriftDreamzSS
I got the same thing awhile back and got no ticket either. Technically I did modify mine to 99 style so I'm sure that's illegal somehow in Ca, lol.
Originally Posted by meiogirl
me as well.
Originally Posted by curacaosfinest
yup same happened to me
but i actually got the ticket, have the court case on monday to get it cleared
but i actually got the ticket, have the court case on monday to get it cleared
Originally Posted by fdjon
I just got pulled over and ticketed for having "smoked taillights." In my stock 93 FD. Yes, you read that correctly.
Originally Posted by FDNewbie
What they said. I've gotten harrassed about it before too. Cops have a hard time believing they're OEM lol.
Originally Posted by Aeka GSR
i had a neighbor come up to me to tell me my smoked tails were illegal. It took me 10 mins of back and forth talking to tell him they were stock
Look, there is a flaw with how Mazda designed the housing from the get-go. Sure, you can find a specific time of day, with specific lighting conditions, and specific angle of viewing to criticize the SBG lights, but don't forget that even USDM or '99-spec lights will be hard to see under the same conditions.
Case in point. Here's a photo (again) of scrub's car with the above-mentioned conditions. He has non-LED '99-spec lights. His parking lights are on. Notice how you can't even tell:
People are being hyper-critical of the SBG lights because they are aftermarket, and being aftermarket people are going to scrutinize them.
One last thing, that I mentioned before. I drove behind moosejaw both on and off the dragon, and I had no problem seeing his SakeBomb tails. I think he will confirm that I was right on his *** the whole time too.
05-23-11 | 10:41 PM
#17
As far as some of these pics that have been posted, I don't think pics of the cars at different distances are really relevent. You would expect the car furthest from the camera to look dimmer than if you were closer, all else being equal. As far as the angles, I think the 99 spec lights look dimmer at some angles as well sometimes.
I think what Tom said about the aftermarket lights being criticized more is pretty true. Alot of people spent alot of money on these lights and expected them to be some sort of Jesus lights. I think that's asking a bit to much. Before people bought the lights, sample pics were displayed. Nothing was falsely advertised and it's pretty obvious that less of the area of the lights are lit up.
Here is my take on the situation...
In terms of noticeability, it's pretty obvious that the USDM ones would look the brightest since all of the area is lit up. 99 spec lights in comparison look less lit up (people aren't complaining about them either). If we compare that to the SBG lights, an even smaller area is lit up here. This is just a given and should come as no surprise to anyone. If you look at the actual areas that are lit up, all the lights actually look equal to me. In pics and in person. I never had any problems seeing when the SBG tails were lit up at all.
I think what Tom said about the aftermarket lights being criticized more is pretty true. Alot of people spent alot of money on these lights and expected them to be some sort of Jesus lights. I think that's asking a bit to much. Before people bought the lights, sample pics were displayed. Nothing was falsely advertised and it's pretty obvious that less of the area of the lights are lit up.
Here is my take on the situation...
In terms of noticeability, it's pretty obvious that the USDM ones would look the brightest since all of the area is lit up. 99 spec lights in comparison look less lit up (people aren't complaining about them either). If we compare that to the SBG lights, an even smaller area is lit up here. This is just a given and should come as no surprise to anyone. If you look at the actual areas that are lit up, all the lights actually look equal to me. In pics and in person. I never had any problems seeing when the SBG tails were lit up at all.
05-24-11 | 03:15 PM
#18
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 117
Likes: 1
From: Tucson, Az
I am posting some Arizona sun comparison pics of 99 tails with normal bulbs vs the Theorie tails. No doctoring of the pics they were taken directly behind the car at 1pm Arizona time. I love these lights at night as I very seldom drive during the daytime and I would be very interested in the upgrade if and when it becomes available. These pics all have parking lights on with the hazard flashers and a couple have the brake lights depressed.
parking lights and flashers
Brake lights as you can see by the center light
And in shade of the garage with parking lights and hazard flashers
parking lights and flashers
Brake lights as you can see by the center light
And in shade of the garage with parking lights and hazard flashers
05-24-11 | 05:37 PM
#21
Several points of clarification and then an update on testing numbers for 99 Spec Units.
First, as I covered in the original post, to my knowledge I was the first production customer for the Theorie LED conversion that was soon to be distributed by SBG as a SBG GB. As I also posted, Tom solicited me directly offering me a set right before the SBG group buy. As I also posted, I sent $450 directly to Tom, not SBG.
Tom is the designer and also the producer of this conversion both for me and for all other SBG customers. This has nothing to do with a legal argument, but it is fact that the taillights I have installed on my car are also the taillights all other SBG LED conversion customers have. Hence, the safety issue I have pointed out deals with all SBG customers and needs to be addressed by both Tom and SBG.
Prior to the GB and multiple times after the units started rolling out, I contacted Tom via the phone and discussed with him in person the dimness issue. I also gave him links to other LEDs that were better suited in my opinion for the conversion. Not really my job as a customer to have to provide this feedback but I did. As I also posted, at this year’s DGRR, for the first time I saw these lights from behind on someone else's car and become concerned at the dimness of the Theorie units and the safety hazard they represented. On May 4th, 5th, and 6th, I sent pms to Heath, Dan, and Tom about the issue and asked that they quickly handle the problem and post up a solution to current GB members. I did not receive any response from Dan, I have already posted up Tom's responses and he posted up his last communication to me on May 5th at 10 pm. The next morning (May 6th - 7:17 am in the morning btw, quite early for CA time) Heath contacted me and told me they were concerned and asked me to answer several questions regarding my interactions with Tom and the brightness issue, which I did. From this point forward I worked directly through Heath with the understanding he was handling the problem. After numerous conversations with Heath, I felt like the conversations weren’t going anywhere without scientific data, so I took it upon myself to go through the expense and time of testing the Theorie units to put to rest the issue of the claim of "daytime brightness is equal to or greater than normal output". Last week, once these tests were complete, I again contacted Heath via pm and asked him to set up a conference call between all of use including Dan, Tom, and I indicated I had testing data that would change their perspective on the issue. Tom, check with Heath if you'd like to confirm this. I happened to be going to Asheville last week so I brought along the results spreadsheet with me anticipating a call, but I never heard back from Heath.
The point of my post is to bring to light what I consider significant safety, reliability and design, and customer service issues. I have spent $400 and more on an LED taillight conversion that was promised to be of equal or greater light output than what I was replacing. Kind of big deal here as these are taillights and their job is warn others that we are stopping. While design is good, warning/safety is the primary function of taillights and if they don't perform, they present a danger to all of us. To date, I am the only one to have taken the time to test the Theorie units and I have posted up the results, which frankly were much worse than even I thought. If you question my methodology or the results, then please do your own testing and post up the results and let's discuss it.
What is my motive here? It is clear and simple: to have a safe and reliable product for forum members. If antidotal evidence suggests that the product is unsafe or not reliable, or not professionally done, then I feel the community needs to be made aware of the problem and there is no better way to do that than through actual testing. Would have preferred to do this off the forum but I exhausted all my avenues with Tom, so I posted up the results.
Putting aside the issue that light output testing should have been done during the product development phase by Tom and by SBG to support the claim of "daytime brightness equal to or greater than normal output", we now have an opportunity to fix what I believe to be a serious problem with the design so the product can be safe and so SBG can sell many more units. Karack hit the nail on the head with comment that Tom and SBG as sellers are responsible for these units. Wouldn't it be nice to ensure the product actually does have brighter light output before someone gets hurt and gets sued? There are many ways to make this happen and I am happy to help should you guys like.
So let's focus on the issue here, the safety of the LED conversion and the light output. As our cars came with non-99 spec lights, I considered this to be normal and did my first testing with OEM units, but apparently SBG meant this to be compared to 99 spec units. I now have the data on this also as Andy asked if these had been tested against 99 spec conversions. I have again taken the time and money to do this. Here are the results:
mod edit addition: Again, although chart has SakeBomb Garage (Theorie) LED Taillight as the title, only the Theorie taillight was actually measured...
The Theorie LED conversion tested fairs slightly better compared to the 99 spec units, but not much. Parking lights are 20.5% of the intensity of the 99 spec unit and 4.7% of the brake output. These numbers are based on using OEM stock bulbs (Dan, I posted up a link to pics of these in my first post) and the 99 spec conversion done by Tom. So, the results are still not safe for daily use.
Here is a link to the new testing videos:
OEM Bulbs, 99 Spec Unit Testing
Brake Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JbBmDgrjUc
Parking Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-3PJAruZ2s
Parking and Turn Signals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ605PHCkc8
Brake and Turn Signals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1nTqWT3GFk
Superbrightleds.com LEDs, 99 Spec Unit Testing
Brake Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuewyTNMWKc
Parking Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBwT5-ZNGL0
Parking and Turn Signals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEK65T2Hk14
Some questioned my methodology for testing and I encourage you to follow the link I provided on why what I did is valid and outside of purchasing a $10,000 lumen testing sphere, why my method should yield the most accurate results. Based on his post, I also did some additional testing on taking "intensity" readings from differing angles to measure "peak brightness". I had done this on the first set of testing but this time I took videos of the testing (with brake lights on) and the results from this methodology match my original approach results. From differing angles, the Theorie LEDs range from 90 -320 lux, compared to 1,100 - 3,600 lux for the stock units, or the Theorie units are approximately 10% of the stock units.
If some feel my methodology is flawed or I someway skewed the results, then I look forward to additional testing and to them posting the results. As I have stated on practically every PM, I am available any time to speak about this over the phone and to help in making the product safe, reliable, and professionally manufactured.
First, as I covered in the original post, to my knowledge I was the first production customer for the Theorie LED conversion that was soon to be distributed by SBG as a SBG GB. As I also posted, Tom solicited me directly offering me a set right before the SBG group buy. As I also posted, I sent $450 directly to Tom, not SBG.
Tom is the designer and also the producer of this conversion both for me and for all other SBG customers. This has nothing to do with a legal argument, but it is fact that the taillights I have installed on my car are also the taillights all other SBG LED conversion customers have. Hence, the safety issue I have pointed out deals with all SBG customers and needs to be addressed by both Tom and SBG.
Prior to the GB and multiple times after the units started rolling out, I contacted Tom via the phone and discussed with him in person the dimness issue. I also gave him links to other LEDs that were better suited in my opinion for the conversion. Not really my job as a customer to have to provide this feedback but I did. As I also posted, at this year’s DGRR, for the first time I saw these lights from behind on someone else's car and become concerned at the dimness of the Theorie units and the safety hazard they represented. On May 4th, 5th, and 6th, I sent pms to Heath, Dan, and Tom about the issue and asked that they quickly handle the problem and post up a solution to current GB members. I did not receive any response from Dan, I have already posted up Tom's responses and he posted up his last communication to me on May 5th at 10 pm. The next morning (May 6th - 7:17 am in the morning btw, quite early for CA time) Heath contacted me and told me they were concerned and asked me to answer several questions regarding my interactions with Tom and the brightness issue, which I did. From this point forward I worked directly through Heath with the understanding he was handling the problem. After numerous conversations with Heath, I felt like the conversations weren’t going anywhere without scientific data, so I took it upon myself to go through the expense and time of testing the Theorie units to put to rest the issue of the claim of "daytime brightness is equal to or greater than normal output". Last week, once these tests were complete, I again contacted Heath via pm and asked him to set up a conference call between all of use including Dan, Tom, and I indicated I had testing data that would change their perspective on the issue. Tom, check with Heath if you'd like to confirm this. I happened to be going to Asheville last week so I brought along the results spreadsheet with me anticipating a call, but I never heard back from Heath.
The point of my post is to bring to light what I consider significant safety, reliability and design, and customer service issues. I have spent $400 and more on an LED taillight conversion that was promised to be of equal or greater light output than what I was replacing. Kind of big deal here as these are taillights and their job is warn others that we are stopping. While design is good, warning/safety is the primary function of taillights and if they don't perform, they present a danger to all of us. To date, I am the only one to have taken the time to test the Theorie units and I have posted up the results, which frankly were much worse than even I thought. If you question my methodology or the results, then please do your own testing and post up the results and let's discuss it.
What is my motive here? It is clear and simple: to have a safe and reliable product for forum members. If antidotal evidence suggests that the product is unsafe or not reliable, or not professionally done, then I feel the community needs to be made aware of the problem and there is no better way to do that than through actual testing. Would have preferred to do this off the forum but I exhausted all my avenues with Tom, so I posted up the results.
Putting aside the issue that light output testing should have been done during the product development phase by Tom and by SBG to support the claim of "daytime brightness equal to or greater than normal output", we now have an opportunity to fix what I believe to be a serious problem with the design so the product can be safe and so SBG can sell many more units. Karack hit the nail on the head with comment that Tom and SBG as sellers are responsible for these units. Wouldn't it be nice to ensure the product actually does have brighter light output before someone gets hurt and gets sued? There are many ways to make this happen and I am happy to help should you guys like.
So let's focus on the issue here, the safety of the LED conversion and the light output. As our cars came with non-99 spec lights, I considered this to be normal and did my first testing with OEM units, but apparently SBG meant this to be compared to 99 spec units. I now have the data on this also as Andy asked if these had been tested against 99 spec conversions. I have again taken the time and money to do this. Here are the results:
mod edit addition: Again, although chart has SakeBomb Garage (Theorie) LED Taillight as the title, only the Theorie taillight was actually measured...
The Theorie LED conversion tested fairs slightly better compared to the 99 spec units, but not much. Parking lights are 20.5% of the intensity of the 99 spec unit and 4.7% of the brake output. These numbers are based on using OEM stock bulbs (Dan, I posted up a link to pics of these in my first post) and the 99 spec conversion done by Tom. So, the results are still not safe for daily use.
Here is a link to the new testing videos:
OEM Bulbs, 99 Spec Unit Testing
Brake Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JbBmDgrjUc
Parking Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-3PJAruZ2s
Parking and Turn Signals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ605PHCkc8
Brake and Turn Signals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1nTqWT3GFk
Superbrightleds.com LEDs, 99 Spec Unit Testing
Brake Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuewyTNMWKc
Parking Lights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBwT5-ZNGL0
Parking and Turn Signals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEK65T2Hk14
Some questioned my methodology for testing and I encourage you to follow the link I provided on why what I did is valid and outside of purchasing a $10,000 lumen testing sphere, why my method should yield the most accurate results. Based on his post, I also did some additional testing on taking "intensity" readings from differing angles to measure "peak brightness". I had done this on the first set of testing but this time I took videos of the testing (with brake lights on) and the results from this methodology match my original approach results. From differing angles, the Theorie LEDs range from 90 -320 lux, compared to 1,100 - 3,600 lux for the stock units, or the Theorie units are approximately 10% of the stock units.
If some feel my methodology is flawed or I someway skewed the results, then I look forward to additional testing and to them posting the results. As I have stated on practically every PM, I am available any time to speak about this over the phone and to help in making the product safe, reliable, and professionally manufactured.
05-24-11 | 05:55 PM
#22
was just driving behind a suburban with altezzas and thought about these tails again, as i could barely see his brake lights even with conventional bulbs. because, regardless of even light output if the light isn't aimed correctly it won't catch your attention which is what the bright brake lights job is to do, even with peripheral vision as you are looking away.
with the pictures others have posted with half sets on their car you can easily see the difference between light output of both stock and the SBG lights without reference to camera quality being an issue.
i have also found myself needing to look directly at the tails of cars ahead of me because of their aftermarket lighting issue, this shouldn't be something that people should have to worry about from people following them after shelling out a premium for the modified lights.
to even those that say that the OEM light output is low quality, it still at least catches your attention when looking to the side away from the car ahead of you, do the Theorie lights do the same? i have only slightly noticed an issue with parking lights during the day and only remotely with light glaring at the right angle into the housing off the lenses, but it still isn't a huge issue with the OEMs.
i do think the figures that David portrays are a bit skewed as LED light output isn't directly equivalent to conventionals. i have used LED bulbs in flashlights for example, then take a halogen and see how much heat each generates. while the light output might appear near the same you get very different results in heat output. i have seen my flashlight smolder rubber, the LED bulb replacement in the same light creates next to no heat.
but the main point is that the lights should provide enough to get even your peripheral attention, and that is something i think most are complaining about here.
with the pictures others have posted with half sets on their car you can easily see the difference between light output of both stock and the SBG lights without reference to camera quality being an issue.
i have also found myself needing to look directly at the tails of cars ahead of me because of their aftermarket lighting issue, this shouldn't be something that people should have to worry about from people following them after shelling out a premium for the modified lights.
to even those that say that the OEM light output is low quality, it still at least catches your attention when looking to the side away from the car ahead of you, do the Theorie lights do the same? i have only slightly noticed an issue with parking lights during the day and only remotely with light glaring at the right angle into the housing off the lenses, but it still isn't a huge issue with the OEMs.
i do think the figures that David portrays are a bit skewed as LED light output isn't directly equivalent to conventionals. i have used LED bulbs in flashlights for example, then take a halogen and see how much heat each generates. while the light output might appear near the same you get very different results in heat output. i have seen my flashlight smolder rubber, the LED bulb replacement in the same light creates next to no heat.
but the main point is that the lights should provide enough to get even your peripheral attention, and that is something i think most are complaining about here.
05-24-11 | 07:22 PM
#23
i do think the figures that David portrays are a bit skewed as LED light output isn't directly equivalent to conventionals. i have used LED bulbs in flashlights for example, then take a halogen and see how much heat each generates. while the light output might appear near the same you get very different results in heat output. i have seen my flashlight smolder rubber, the LED bulb replacement in the same light creates next to no heat.
On another note, I forgot to post up the videos on the light intensity tests. I think was speaking about this regarding taking light output measurements from various angles instead of using a light box to measure total output. As I just posted, the Theorie LEDs produce about 10% of the light intensity as compared to the stock OEM units.
Here are the videos:
Theorie Light Intensity Tests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBb8imHsBS0
OEM Light Intensity Tests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBwEzN3qBh8
05-24-11 | 09:55 PM
#24
Yes I do question your methodology of testing... from the white walled total light "collector" box you used to the fact that you used brand new incandescent bulbs (which is a best case scenario as intensity drastically decreases over time with incandescent bulbs). Look at your own videos, I believe Dan reposted them back to back showing your original video from a year ago next to the new video you posted which looks like a laser beam coming out of the back of the car. Can you please explain that discrepency to me
cause the "base test bulb" you are comparing to appears to have gotten MUCH MUCH brighter over the last year. I've got a nice set of "seasoned" incandescent bulbs to test out, and Tom is sending me a set of the tail light hardware. I'll have to purchase a light meter, come up with a methodology that I feel approximates real life to test them under, and find the time to do it, which will put me further behind with the headlights and other products I am working on with my very limited time. But whatever, next time I get a question asking "where is my ----" I'll have to explain, "I haven't had time to work on building your lights (so you can safely see at night) to defend against David's flawed home-brewed tail-light-expose tests"
But the important point here is: If anyone feels uncomfortable using them during very bright high noon driving scenarios... remove them. No one is forcing you to use them. If a year later you decide you no longer like them, or they do not perform to your standards, take them off of the car. Sorry. We're not SONY and can't do a "factory recall". You neglect to realize the fact that you bought and accepted a product, used it for a year, and THEN decided it was fundamentally flawed... and then decided you were CNET and did a full review/expose on them. Are you missing the point that Dan and I are two guys... doing this on the side of real life? We're not a multi-national corporation. These were made by Tom (not us) in the 10's... not hundreds, not thousands. Tens. We simply provided an outlet for Tom to make these available to the people who wanted them. Thats it. If someone would have approached us a few weeks after receiving them claiming there was a fundamental flaw in the design, then yeah, we could have stepped in assessed any potential issues and done something, but your (or anyone else's) lack of action early in the game made an intervention by us impossible.
It also sounds like EVERYONE likes the lights 95+% of the time (except for a select few people, 2-3 hours on extremely bright days). If you are worried no one will see them, add a brake light flasher to your car http://www.flashingbrakelights.com/ . David, you yourself said "oh they have LED's 3x as bright, Tom should have used those" but by your reasoning even those would have failed your "test". So even if we are able to get enough people together to make custom LED boards possible, you'll just come back with another thread saying they are unsafe.
05-25-11 | 07:20 AM
#25
Heath, the video I posted up quite some time ago compared the Theorie LEDs versus the set of superbrightleds.com LEDs that I had installed on the car and those are the ones that I have also included in the testing. The new video shows the OEM bulbs versus the Theorie conversion. The first video was taken at the body shop in Orlando with an 8meg 720p camera which I lost in Tunisia and the new video was taken in my condo garage obviously under differing lighting conditions with my new 1080 true HD 12.1 meg camera so the new videos will be more accurate I would think although YouTube converts to 720p so I am not sure how that works. The videos are the videos and are unaltered so you draw your own conclusions - but they of differing light bulbs.
As for the "lightbox" test, what issues do you have with this? I posted up a link to the methodology and have also stated to best measure if LED conversions are safe is to use an integrating sphere and all the associated equipment. As neither of us have $10-20K to spend doing this, you have to find the best way to measure with the equipment available and to me, the light box is the way to go. Here is what a light box does:
"It approximates RELATIVE TOTAL OUTPUT from a light (NOT LUMENS). The light measured is reflected around and not from a beam directly striking the meter sensor. It is like shining a light at the ceiling of a white room and having the meter on the floor, thereby getting a sense of the overall reflected light that hits the sensor". Hence the use of the box with white surfaces. White, cheap, easy to replace, and easy for almost anyone to replicate.
To further support my methodology, the designer of this test now has updated his information with the following:
"More recently I had the opportunity to go over the numbers from a Lightmeter Benchmarking test that was done on CandlePowerForums which I took part in. A few things occurred which makes me think we now have a much more accurate calculation factor:
"I took Overall Output numbers of the lights that were passed around using my Lightbox.
Those same lights were fully regulated. Output did not change (or changed very little) between my test and the benchmarking. They were tested by a reputable company to benchmark the Lux and Lumen output. As a result, I was able to get what appears to be a much more accurate Lumen calculation factor. Here it is:
LED lights:
multiply the Overall Output chart number x 1.39
Incandescent lights:
multiply the Overall Output chart number x 1.62"
If you know the CandlePowerForums.com site, you'll know it is one of the best sources for testing information on all things lights and what the information above describes is that the originator of the testing methodology I used to test the Theorie LED's has had his testing process confirmed by tests run against the more expensive light sphere equipment (see the above reputable benchmarking company) and he has verified you can use the tests I have run and with the above conversion, can even turn the results into lumens, which we know is the best overall measure. If you do this, then the Theorie LED lights fair even worse so there is no need to do this unless you'd like me to.
Heath, I used the new stock OEM bulbs for three reasons, one to ensure I was testing exactly what are the OEM bulbs for the car, two, to eliminate any variability from "seasoned" bulbs as you describe, and three, I don't have a set of old bulbs. Heath, you have no way of knowing with seasoned bulbs if the bulbs are about to go out so why would you want to test this way? Isn't this skewing the tests very much in your favor?
Heath, did you see my other testing, where I did relative angle tests? The Theorie units did not fare any better here either so I am not sure what else can be done outside of sending these to NHTSA for testing.
And finally, you say if the lights "do not meet your standards" just take them off the car. They are no longer on my car. But it is not my "standard" that is in question here. Theorie made the claim of "daytime brightness of equal or greater light output" and now you guys are distributing taillights that do not meet that standard. Why did Theorie make this claim? Would anyone have purchased the product if Theorie had stated "light output less than normal output - how much less we don't know"? Tom knows I was very happy to help with selecting the right components for the lights - I still am if you'd like as I have serious concerns with what you are currently using.
As for the "lightbox" test, what issues do you have with this? I posted up a link to the methodology and have also stated to best measure if LED conversions are safe is to use an integrating sphere and all the associated equipment. As neither of us have $10-20K to spend doing this, you have to find the best way to measure with the equipment available and to me, the light box is the way to go. Here is what a light box does:
"It approximates RELATIVE TOTAL OUTPUT from a light (NOT LUMENS). The light measured is reflected around and not from a beam directly striking the meter sensor. It is like shining a light at the ceiling of a white room and having the meter on the floor, thereby getting a sense of the overall reflected light that hits the sensor". Hence the use of the box with white surfaces. White, cheap, easy to replace, and easy for almost anyone to replicate.
To further support my methodology, the designer of this test now has updated his information with the following:
"More recently I had the opportunity to go over the numbers from a Lightmeter Benchmarking test that was done on CandlePowerForums which I took part in. A few things occurred which makes me think we now have a much more accurate calculation factor:
"I took Overall Output numbers of the lights that were passed around using my Lightbox.
Those same lights were fully regulated. Output did not change (or changed very little) between my test and the benchmarking. They were tested by a reputable company to benchmark the Lux and Lumen output. As a result, I was able to get what appears to be a much more accurate Lumen calculation factor. Here it is:
LED lights:
multiply the Overall Output chart number x 1.39
Incandescent lights:
multiply the Overall Output chart number x 1.62"
If you know the CandlePowerForums.com site, you'll know it is one of the best sources for testing information on all things lights and what the information above describes is that the originator of the testing methodology I used to test the Theorie LED's has had his testing process confirmed by tests run against the more expensive light sphere equipment (see the above reputable benchmarking company) and he has verified you can use the tests I have run and with the above conversion, can even turn the results into lumens, which we know is the best overall measure. If you do this, then the Theorie LED lights fair even worse so there is no need to do this unless you'd like me to.
Heath, I used the new stock OEM bulbs for three reasons, one to ensure I was testing exactly what are the OEM bulbs for the car, two, to eliminate any variability from "seasoned" bulbs as you describe, and three, I don't have a set of old bulbs. Heath, you have no way of knowing with seasoned bulbs if the bulbs are about to go out so why would you want to test this way? Isn't this skewing the tests very much in your favor?
Heath, did you see my other testing, where I did relative angle tests? The Theorie units did not fare any better here either so I am not sure what else can be done outside of sending these to NHTSA for testing.
And finally, you say if the lights "do not meet your standards" just take them off the car. They are no longer on my car. But it is not my "standard" that is in question here. Theorie made the claim of "daytime brightness of equal or greater light output" and now you guys are distributing taillights that do not meet that standard. Why did Theorie make this claim? Would anyone have purchased the product if Theorie had stated "light output less than normal output - how much less we don't know"? Tom knows I was very happy to help with selecting the right components for the lights - I still am if you'd like as I have serious concerns with what you are currently using.