narva +100 lights

thunder039

thunder039

Forum Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2011
Messages
1,201
Location
Bairnsdale,gippsland victoria
well after having such good success with the philips +100 H4 bulbs in my SG i thought i would give the narva +100 ago in my SF.

well compared to the great results with the SG i was left disappointed with the results in my SF. the low beam is a little brighter and a little longer which is good but nowhere near the results in the SG. the high beam i cant notice any difference in the amount of light :sad:

now i'm not sure whether its the fact that the philips are better bulbs then the narva's as i never had the philips in my SF to try it out, or the fact there isn't much more light to be had from the SF headlight design, such as reflectors etc.

anyway at this stage i wont be rushing to be these bulbs again, and when the blow i will try the philips +100 and i would suggest with my experiences if people want a easy cheap upgrade go the philips :cool:

EDIT: both the philips and narva bulbs i used were H4
 
Gidday Thunder

I have never been a fan of Narva bulbs. They have given me a lot of grief over the years, and simply don't last worth a damn IME.

Interested in how the Philips bulbs went in your SG.

Before I do this, I really need to properly align my headlights (and fog lights). After I have done this, I will have some feel for the need for any changes. Apart from their poor alignment, they do seem to be adequate.

Can you recall what wattages the Philips bulbs come in?
 
My upgrade to narva plus 50 in my SG was night and day, but comparing a bulb at the end of its service life to a new bulb is unfair.
 
G'day again Thunder

I used 90/55W in the '93 Impreza because of its lousy standard lights.

One of the reasons for my aiming at getting the 2006+ SG was for the far better lights. Roo2 has certainly got far better lights than Roo1 had! Even with their relatively poor horizontal adjustment. My old Austin Kimberley had superb lights (4 x 75W high beam), as did our previous Camry (4 x 60W high beam).

What I am thinking of is fitting 90W high beams to the inner pair, leaving the outer dipping pair at 60/55W. I don't know what's in there ATM, as I have re-seated the bulbs before a previous alignment attempt, but did not remove them. Checking just now, it seems that the inner bulbs are far brighter than the outers on high beam.

Equally, I don't want to melt the headlight lenses!

Do remember that fog lights are supposed to throw light down and sideways, not so much forward. It seems to me that many people use them as ersatz driving lights these days.
In my youth, it was unlawful to have fog lights that were white (had to be yellow; but that could have been local to Queensland), and that had clear lenses (had to have diffracting lenses). Both of these were sensible requirements IMO.
Yellow light penetrates fog better (or is reflected back at you less, to be more accurate), and diffused light low to the ground is also better when driving in fog IME.
 
I think you'll find the reflectors in the SG will be better than the SF.

I also dont like Narva a whole lot, IMO Phillips are far better...
 
Gidday NL

What wattage are you running?

Does the SF have the same polycarbonate lenses as the SG? I am a bit worried about heat with higher wattage bulbs.

Ideally, I would like to run 90W in the inners and 90/55W in the outers.
Can the wiring take this kind of amperage? I know it didn't in Roo1 ... :(
 
I'm running 130/90W with a HD custom wiring loom & ceramic connectors. Very bright! :cool:

IMO you would not only melt the standard wiring but also get a very bad voltage drop...

The SF has glass lenses. No way would I do this with plastic lenses, even if they dont melt they'll still go yellow :( Not sure if 90/55W would but it may...
 
Gidday ST

stilson said:
RB, I'd use a 9011 HIR bulb. With a little trim it will fit the 9005 housing.
Click to expand...

Could you be a tad more specific please mate?
Us SOFs are a bit slow on the uptake, specially right ATM ... :(

I can't really complain. It appears that my shoulders are almost normal again, a mere 15 months later ... LH is still not as freely articulating as the RH, with less flexion arc particularly at the side lifting straight up, and reaching up my back.
 
I installed Philips H1 CrystalVision Ultra bulbs in my SG a few months ago. They are a significant improvement over the OEM bulbs (lower end Philips). The difference is like night and day (pun intended)! These bulbs are probably the best $25 upgrade I've made to the Fozza.

Don't have an SF, so can't say anything about the reflector configuration on it.
 
No, best thing for an SF would be a bi-xenon projector setup.

HIRs only come in 9011 and 9012 but will fit 9005 (HB3) and 9006 (HB4) with a little trimming.
 
I have been using the Osram night breaker bulbs, which are think are phillips. As you said Thunder, has the same- good low beam and ok high beam but a weird light that makes you wonder if it is actually better or not.
 
I used to have the "HID look" bulbs which have a blue coating on the bulb. They look really cool but have terrible light output. Even the 130/90W had less light than OEM! :(:shake:
 
It's almost comical!

HIDs are released in 4300 kelvin colour temp.

The shield in a HID projector gives a band of blue/violet along the cutoff line.

People see the colour flicker and relate blue to high end lighting.

Pox ridden HID 'conversion kits' release ridiculous colour temps from 6000 to 14,000 kelvin.

Halogens jump on the bandwagon with blue tinted bulbs.

Buyers of high end cars feel left out and the marketing teams insist that higher colour temps are specified in models even at a reduction of lumens and usable light.

Sorry for the thread jacking thunder39!

A good set of pencil beam spotties might be the answer to your woes.
 
nope all mate its a good read and discussion that i encourage!

matt i think you're right in that the SG has better designed reflectors from the factory which is why i was able to get more light out the headlights in that scenario

i drove home tonight 2hrs and the improvement in the low beam was very nice but there is no difference at all in high beam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top