Dim Headlights on 97 voyager

Hi, to all on the group. I wanted to know if anyone had any experiences with
sylvania silverstar lamps in the 96-00 minivans or had any other good
results trying to get their weak known chrysler headlights brighter.

Thanks for any info

 

How are the plastic lenses? Mine cloud up terribly. Had very good
results with a cheap plastic lens cleaner made for this.

 

Can you pl give details of your plastic cleaner?
Thanks

 

Not much in the way of details. I just picked up a $1 pouch of some
plastic lens cleaner made by Meguiar, looks like toothpaste. It worked.

Now Pep Boys has a bottle they sell for $7. Almost all the auto stores
have some plastic cleaner or other. Novus makes them, #1 #2 #3. 3M
makes them. I would start with the mildest, preferably with some UV
protection if possible.

On the internet, you can find whole kits, with little buffers for
around $30.

Or a motorcycle shop will have stuff for this since also a problem with
those plastic windshields. I was intending to stop into a cycle type of
shop.

In any case, these cleaners do work. How long? Mine lasted about 6
months. Some of the cleaners will help the UV which is what nails the
plastic. Meguiar's was not bad.

Enough details?

 

Thanks for the quick reply.
I have a 2000 caravan and the bad headlights are getting worse.
I'll look for a plastic lens cleaner with uv protection.

Thanks again

 

my lenses were the first thing I cleaned up using meguiars and they look
good just weak headlights.

 

You're welcome, let me add:

For the record, I used a $1 packet of Meguiar's PlastX, purchased at
AutoZone. The Pep Boys product I referred to was Blue Magic, but I
personally have not tested that. Although my headlamps were very cloudy
and failed an inspection, they cleared up to pass inspection without
getting into wet sanding and buffers. Used only a brand new rag [socks]
and not much hand buffing.

 

The Sylvania Silverstar bulbs actually put out less light than the standard
bulb! (due to the coating on the glass). Go to a large Wal-Mart and pick up
a set of GE Night Hawk bulbs. These bulbs sport a standard current load and
voltage and long life, but also the highest output bulb out there for this
application. Still, the lights on the 97 Voyager, at their best, are
inadequate by design.

Richard

Richard.

 

The first thing to do is to clear the cloudy lens as previously discussed.
You could easily pick up 50% more light if they are really amber/cloudy.
Also bulbs dim with age, so just replacing the bulbs 9even though they are
not burnt out) will usually throw better light.

To answer your question, Sylvania Silverstar's throw considerably more light
(and whiter light) which makes seeing better. I use them on both of my cars.

Although you can't actually see farther (they have the exact same light
output* as compared to regular halogens) they will fill in the road better
and make it easier to discern what's ahead (the whiter light makes distant
objects easier to make out than the yellow light of a regular halogen.)

*Both standard halogen and Silverstar's (bulb number 9007) are rated at
1000 lumens @ 55 watts (low beam), 1350 @ 65 watts (high beam)
For color temperature, standard halogen's are rated around 3200k (yellow
white) while Silverstars are rated around 4000k (white/white).
http://www.sylvania.com/ConsumerProducts/AutomotiveLighting/Products/ProductComparison/default.htm

A fairly good example can be seen on the Sylvania website:
http://www.sylvania.com/ConsumerProducts/AutomotiveLighting/HighPerformance/Silverstar/
The photographs are consistent with my own personal observations.

Age also plays a factor in night vision. As we age, our ability to discern
certain colors diminishes. If your over 55, I believe that the Silverstars
will improve your visibility at night (as compared to standard yellow/white
halogens.) At least I find this to be true for my own eyes.

If you decide to change over to new bulbs, remember to never touch the glass
bulb material, as the oil on your fingertips will result in a hot spot
causing the halogen to burn out much faster. If you do touch the glass,
clean it with alcohol or Windex before placing it into the headlight
assembly.

On the minus side, they cost more and their rated life is much lower than
standard halogen. (My car doesn't have the daylight / headlight feature so
the shorter life isn't really a factor in my case.)

I recommend them as their better visibility far out weigh the added costs.

 

That's interesting. The Sylvania site is good. I did not understand
their graph. When they say the opposite ends are yellow and blue, I
gather they are referring to their lights? In general, the
electromagnetic spectrum's end, if "looking" at only the wavelengths,
are blue then the invisible, for humans, ultra-violet, and at the other
end are the reds and then the invisible, to humans, infra-red. Some
animals can see infra-red or ultra-violet.

So the more yellow, the less visiblity, the more blue they add, the
more visibility because one is getting near white light.

I noticed with my computer monitor, as the Kelvin goes up, from 5000 to
9300, the warmth goes out, so better for text but not for pictures. I
gather that's the yellow leaving, and yellow is what, a secondary
formed by two of the primary red/blue/green? Yellow is formed by red
and green. And adding in blue will decrease yellow and go near white. I
gather that's what Sylvania meant with their graph. Have to study that
again.

Red, blue, and green form white light, fasinating to me. For printing
and painting, it's mmagenta, cyan and yellow are the primary colors.

In any case, green is the best color I find at night to see and red is
the worst. In other words, a green light appears to illuminate far more
than the equivalent red lights. This is easily seen in the use of night
lights. A green light will tend to illuminate an entire room whereas
the red barely gets past the bulb itself.

In any case, thanks to your excellent and pithy comments, I changed one
of my monitors to 9300 Kelvin, and it's much clearer for text reading
now. I had set it low for photographics and forgot. And I'll check out
my replacement headlights that I carry around.

 

The Silverstar line in North America is a short lived, relatively expensive
bulb that puts out less light than their standard bulb. Less light because
of the blue coating, less life because they have to crank its output to
overcome the blue coating. Their Xtravision line puts out about 15% more
light than their standard bulb, has standard life and no colored coating, it
is their best bulb line in my opinion. But GE's Night Hawk line put out
almot 40% more light, has standard life and no colored coating. They are not
as expensive as the Siverstar's, last longer and put out significently more
light. To me this is a no brainer.



Richard.

 

That is absolutely incorrect. The human eye, under mesopic (night driving)
conditions, is most sensitive to yellow/yellow-green light. Blue light is
all but useless to us for seeing purposes. And, there is no such a thing
as "whiter" light. Sylvania's site is peddling blue-glass bulbs, not
offering facts on how human vision works. Want facts? Look up "V-lambda"
and "mesopic vision", read
http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/lights/light_color/light_color.html
, and do some digging at the UMTRI library, which is fully catalogued
online. If you don't feel like doing so, here's a real quick summary:
Headlight bulbs with blue glass increase glare without increasing seeing.

"Kelvin ratings" have no validity in the realm of automotive lighting.
They are extensively used to sell blue bulbs, however.

What you need for seeing at night isn't this color or that color or some
other color: It's light. Lots of it. As much as possible, directed to the
places where you need it and kept away from the places where it causes
glare to you or others. The way to get maximum light is not by installing
blue- or purple-glass bulbs or gushing over "Kelvin ratings". It's by
installing the bulbs with *clear* glass that produce the maximum allowable
amount of light.

 

Of couse it's a no-brainer, but facts don't stand a chance when they get
in the way of high-dollar pseudoscientific ad campaigns like Sylvania's
for their Silverstar junk.

 

"> all but useless to us for seeing purposes. And, there is no such a thing

That's just plain nonsence.

I use the Silverstar's on both cars and they are indeed very much 'whiter'.
There's nothing blue abut them; it's a pure white.

You are mistaken in your belief that the bulbs are useless for seeing
purposes. I can see much better, and apparently so does everyone else who
has ridden in the car at night.

The pictures I referenced in my earlier message is a very good example what
the difference appears like. These to pictures are exactly the difference
that you can expect.
http://www.sylvania.com/ConsumerProducts/AutomotiveLighting/HighPerformance/Silverstar/

Your comments about blue light and blue bulbs don't really fit the picture I
have when I replaced the old halogens with these, so I pulled one of the
bulbs' and looked at it. It does have a very, very slight bluish tint to it,
but no where's near enough to claim "blue-glass" bulb (it's very, very
faint). Are you certain you are not thinking about the 'Cool Blue's' or
similar?

I guess the only way you will ever be able to test this for yourself is by
actually using a pair on your own car and see what difference they make for
you. Until that time, you would be better off not making false claims for
products you have never used.

And yes, I also agree that yellow - yellow/green lighting is the most cost
efficient for overhead lighting. It is however; they would probably make
great headlights if they were ever offered. (Of course they could only be
offered in HID as it's the only way the light can be produced.) Makes one
wonder if the technological problems are too great; assuming that auto bulb
makers have probably already thought if it.

"Kelvin ratings" have no validity in the realm of automotive lighting.
They are extensively used to sell blue bulbs, however.

A rating of degree Kelvin is simply the color temperature of the light.
There is a complete science of color temperature in automotives, and federal
standards which have exacting requirements for automotive lighting by
several factors; not just color temperature. I'd love to tell you that your
full of shit, and because based on your ridiculous statement you really are,
but it's obvious you never heard of the FMVSS or any of the required
standards that automotive manufacturer's must comply with to build and sell
an automobile here in the US, so it would probably just be a waste of time
anyway. But I'll try anyway.

Automotive lighting is governed by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No.
108, "Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment". It governs the
maximum wattage, color temperature (in degrees Kelvin) and light output (in
lumens). Also specified are angles of visibility, mounting locations and
other physical characteristics. That's mandated for new car manufacturers.
Once the car is sold and on the street, state laws govern whether it can be
modified and to what degree. All states have laws which match the federal
laws and this is why a manufacturer (like Sylvania) advertises the bulb
parameters; to show that their products are 'street legal'. Many you see at
Pep Boys, Wal Mar and the like are not. Look for the DOT certification ON
THE PRODUCT. (Some Chinese products are being sold with a "letter of
certification" and are not approved.)

Anyways, your completely wrong about the light bulbs. They may be expensive
(I bought mine off EBay) and shorter lived, but the light is white and
visibility is much improved.

 

Actually it puts out the same amout of light (in lumens).

I didn't consider Xtravision as I had seen the SilverStar in my nieghbors
car and was immediately sold. In looking over the Sylvania site, it appears
that the Xtravision lights have the same color output as standard Halogens
(3200K) and the same lumens (1000 for low beam) (re: bulb 9007).

My guess is that they have the same extra distance visibilty as the
SilverStar's, with the color of a standard Halogen. A good comparison is to
see both headlight's output:
Xtravision:
http://www.sylvania.com/ConsumerProducts/AutomotiveLighting/HighPerformance/Xtravision/
SilverStar:
http://www.sylvania.com/ConsumerProducts/AutomotiveLighting/HighPerformance/Silverstar/

Both appear have better distance, while the SilverStar has better color of
light (whiter vs. yellower). (That's in my opinion of course. As they say,
"your milage may vary".)

General Electric advertises that this bulb has 33% better brightness (than a
standard Halogen) (39% for sealed beams). Couldn't find anything about the
rated output, color temperature or rated life on the GE website. All I could
find was a reference to being their brightest. Although they discuss color
and lifetime of their other headlight, nothing on the Night Hawk. My guess
is, it has similar ratings to Sylvania's Xtravision; both in color, lumens
and life span; which would justify the lower costs comparable to the
Sylvania Xtravision (as compared to the SilverStar.)

At this point, I don't believe that I would recommend either over the
SilverStar for vision. If cost is a factor, I could see using Xtravision
bulbs (over the GE bulbs for no other reason that Sylvania gives more
information for one to base a decision on).

As to the rated life for all three bulbs, I can't find any published
information relating to the rated hours of any of these. Granted, the hotter
bulb (SilverStar) will have a shorter life than either the Xtravision or
Night Hawk. And of course you can automatically assume that both of these
will have shorter lives than a standard Halogen.

Your argument that this is a "no brainier" is baseless. Apples-to-apples
it's a choice between GE's Night Hawk or Sylvania's Xtravision (which are
probably similar in color and brightness and rated life). For the best
seeing (other than going full bore $300 for a HID system), the best lighting
is still SilverStar.

 

No. Nominal ratings are not the same as actual output.

The Sylvania Silverstar bulbs, like all others with blue glass, do have
very short rated life, because the only way to get legal-minimum flux
(amount of light) through the light-stealing blue glass is to overdrive
the filament. It works, but there's no free lunch; filament life is
extremely short.

The little "Really, we promise, these blue bulbs are street legal,
honest..." slips of paper that come packaged with Silverstar bulbs (to
show to the officer when he questions the legality of your lights) don't
list the bulbs' actual luminous output, but rather just list the nominal
output.

Here is an easily-readable tabulation of most of the bulb types legal for
use in headlamps in the US (49CFR564 light source list):

http://fmvss108.tripod.com/light_source_list.htm

Notice that the specs contained in the standard for each bulb type are
maximum allowable wattage, nominal flux and allowable flux tolerance.

If you want the info directly from 49CFR564, you can find the legal specs
in full for each bulb type in DOT docket 3397, accessible via
http://dms.dot.gov simple search.

It's readily available in the manufacturers' engineering specbooks. Can
you think of a reason why they might make it difficult for the average
consumer to find?

No, GE's equivalent to the Xtravision is the High Output (and Philips' is
the High Visibility). Sylvania does not presently market an equivalent to
the GE Night Hawk, but Philips does (VisionPlus).

There is no factual basis for this assertion. You're certainly entitled to
your opinion, but it's based on nothing more than optical illusion and
advertising hype.

Not a legal or safe option for most cars,
http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/bulbs/Hid/conversions/conversions.html

 

No, GE's equivalent to the Xtravision is the High Output (and Philips' is

Could be, as I stated, I wasn't able to find any spec's on the GE website.

I liked my neighbor's lights when I went fishing with him last May
(SilverStar) and got a set for both cars. It was a case of liking what I
actually saw, not read. I knew what I liked and didn't do much of any
comparing of various brands, etc. These work fine not withstanding all hype
about price and life.

As far as price you can pick up a pair of 9007 on EBay for $18 +shipping ($6
for me). And 150 hours will last me for about 2-3 years. I can live with
that.

I still do not agree that you lose a lot of visability with the SilverStar.
Whether it's opinion or not, I do see much better with the Sylvania
SilverStar vs. the stock Halogens. I notice that I can see distant objects
which have some reflectivity to them much better, as well as the fill of
medium distant objects. (I would be the first to jump to an Orem if I could
find a H13, but I never found them offered in a configuration I could use).
Sorry if you can't accept this, but I LIKE the white/white of the
SilverStar. For me, it's not illusion nor opinion nor any other degrading
remark you can devise. It's just gives me better perceptibility at night.
Did it ever occur to you that certain people CAN see better with this light
(even if you can't)?

As I'm 'slightly' older, ahem, perhaps we more "experienced" drivers can see
better with a bluer spectrum bulb over a yellowier spectrum bulb. I did read
a study on this relating to aircraft several years ago, but can't remember
the results, but color did seem have an impact on seeing relating to age.

FYI, I did find some rated hours (Sylvania), 500 for 9007, 1500 for H13,
150 for SilverStar.

For now, based on my personal experience, I'll stick to the SilverStar's and
continue to recommend them. I like the white light and better visibility.

Take care,
Dennis

 

That's fine, but you're disagreeing with physical fact.

Subjective impression.

THis doesn't make any sense. H13 bulbs only fit headlamps designed to take
H13 bulbs. You can't install an H13 in a headlamp designed to accept a
9007.

That, I have no problem accepting. It's considerably different from the
baseless claims you've been making about better seeing, though.

It's not a question of my experience vs. yours, it's a question of
physical fact. Science and fact trumps opinion and preference.

That hypothesis has been studied and tested, and found not to be the case.

That might be applicable if planes were allowed on interstates.

 

You admit that th
these bulbs have a blue coating on the glass but still insist that the light
is more white. The coating does not change the color output of the bulb
other than filtering out part of the color output of the bulb that is not
blue. Thus part of the color output of the bulb that would help you see in
the dark has been filtered out. If you think this is going to get you to see
better in the dark fine, but it is without any scientific basis. Every
comparitive test I have read, and my own experience, supports what Stern is
trying to get through to you.

Richard.

 

Richard you might find the following article on color interesting. It
relates to why fog lights are yellow, and why yellow is not any more
effective that other colors. Interesting article.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy99/phy99xx4.htm

If you would, look at this website and tell me why YOU think they are lying.
http://www.sylvania.com/ConsumerProducts/AutomotiveLighting/HighPerformance/Silverstar
This, not a bunch of BS, is exactly what I'm observing. So tell me why I'm
not seeing this in real life. (Remember, I have no agenda, I'm not selling
any competing light products nor have nothing to gain whether you or anyone
else believe me or not.)