LED lights and the law: any experiences?
Discussion
Disclaimer - I'm only looking at quality emitters positioned correctly, so correct beam pattern and for main beam only. So, no need to discuss the dazzle thing.
With the MOT test no longer automatically failing class 1&2 motorcycles for LED headlights (just a bad beam pattern is a fail and that's fair enough) and my insurer's view that light mods do not need to be declared, I'm considering an upgrade to the main beam. The dip will remain a filament as it is supplemented by auxiliary lights (all legal) and I don't want to cause dazzle to oncoming traffic.
The problem is the main is weak and when I'm running down unlit country lanes, it is still somewhat inadequate even with upgraded bulbs. The simple answer would be a LED in H7 fitment for main. Although the MOT and insurance are covered off there is still the lack of E marking as a H7 reflector was never designed to have anything other than a H& halogen in there, it cannot be approved and so cannot be legal.
Any real-world experienced with the police / police views out there please? As it sits on a tall adventure bike in a reflector, the bulb type is really obvious as soon as you look at the front of the vehicle, so no hiding it. The fact I'm sticking with a conventional bulb for dip (and I'm borderline OCD over alignment of this and the aux setup) means I won't be causing nuisance, but if a copper's out on a compliance / nicking mission, I fear a ticket...
With the MOT test no longer automatically failing class 1&2 motorcycles for LED headlights (just a bad beam pattern is a fail and that's fair enough) and my insurer's view that light mods do not need to be declared, I'm considering an upgrade to the main beam. The dip will remain a filament as it is supplemented by auxiliary lights (all legal) and I don't want to cause dazzle to oncoming traffic.
The problem is the main is weak and when I'm running down unlit country lanes, it is still somewhat inadequate even with upgraded bulbs. The simple answer would be a LED in H7 fitment for main. Although the MOT and insurance are covered off there is still the lack of E marking as a H7 reflector was never designed to have anything other than a H& halogen in there, it cannot be approved and so cannot be legal.
Any real-world experienced with the police / police views out there please? As it sits on a tall adventure bike in a reflector, the bulb type is really obvious as soon as you look at the front of the vehicle, so no hiding it. The fact I'm sticking with a conventional bulb for dip (and I'm borderline OCD over alignment of this and the aux setup) means I won't be causing nuisance, but if a copper's out on a compliance / nicking mission, I fear a ticket...
I fitted a pair of quality ( Denali ) led lamps to my Multistrada and have since moved them over to my Stelvio. They are very effective and make riding lanes at night quite effortless, plus they have the advantage of not messing with the standard headlamp setup, can be used or not where appropriate and are totally legal.
I have auxiliary lights that do a good job of covering the dip part of the question and I daresay their effectiveness has made main seem worse with the bright foreground!
Working off the Class 1 & 2 motorcycle MOT thing, I did a quick bit of Google-ing around the need for an E mark, or other approval being the sticking point and stumbled over this below - section d that aligns with the MOT revision for bikes. Not sure it's 100% as there may be no requirement for anything produced before 1986 either, but then again this is main beam only...
The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, Schedule 5, Part 1
5. Markings–
(a) Any vehicle not covered by sub-paragaph (b), (c) or (d):
[shall have] An approval mark or a British Standard mark
(b) A motor vehicle first used before 1st April 1986:
No requirement
(c) A three-wheeled motor vehicle, not being a motor bicycle combination, first used on or after 1st April 1986 and having a maximum speed not exceeding 50 mph:
No requirement
(d) A solo motor bicycle and a motor bicycle combination:
No requirement
Working off the Class 1 & 2 motorcycle MOT thing, I did a quick bit of Google-ing around the need for an E mark, or other approval being the sticking point and stumbled over this below - section d that aligns with the MOT revision for bikes. Not sure it's 100% as there may be no requirement for anything produced before 1986 either, but then again this is main beam only...
The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989, Schedule 5, Part 1
5. Markings–
(a) Any vehicle not covered by sub-paragaph (b), (c) or (d):
[shall have] An approval mark or a British Standard mark
(b) A motor vehicle first used before 1st April 1986:
No requirement
(c) A three-wheeled motor vehicle, not being a motor bicycle combination, first used on or after 1st April 1986 and having a maximum speed not exceeding 50 mph:
No requirement
(d) A solo motor bicycle and a motor bicycle combination:
No requirement
I wish people wouldn't do this, having been dazzled by incoming headlights more times than I can count, including ones that are supposedly dipped.
Why people feel they need to be able to see 5 miles ahead to be able to drive safely is beyond me. It is very unlikely that your original headlights are so poor to be a safety concern. Certainly not a big a concern as blinding other road users.
Why people feel they need to be able to see 5 miles ahead to be able to drive safely is beyond me. It is very unlikely that your original headlights are so poor to be a safety concern. Certainly not a big a concern as blinding other road users.
The beauty of the Denalis I have is that they are dual intensity, so can be used with dip as well as main if you wish to. With the auxiliary light route you don't fall foul of the RVLR so the legality of them is a non issue as long as, as you've already addressed, you don't dazzle. The problem is that the legislation has issues keeping pace with technology, so there are various other EC regs and type approval legislation that controls what light source types you use which can also have an impact on what you want to do. The UK is lucky in that there is no TUV or similar which dictates what you can and can not bolt onto your car or bike. Even better over here in France for the mo as there is no Controle Technique for bikes although there are moves afoot to change that, strangely the locals over here are less than happy with that.
Edited by Rushjob on Thursday 8th April 10:48
I do wonder if something like Denali would have worked better, but originally the remit was daytime conspicuity and keeping in KTM kit had an allure of ease to fit & compatibility. Cyclops who do decent conversions also do a main beam light bar, but that's $400 + shipping and taxes.
The fact the KTM aux ones work well at night with a clear cut-off and no nuisance to others was a bonus, the problem was that it showed that the regular ones were pretty poor. There's plenty of talk on the KTM forums about sorting the lacklustre dip & main, but I was hesitant to play with dip as I thought the sheer output could exceed the capabilities of reflectors and cause dazzle. Also, there's the legal position.
Hopefully a decent main will give the range for unlit roads and the aux/halogen dip combo works well for when there are other road users around.
Strange how the legislation seems to creep into France that used to be such a relaxed place for bikes.
The fact the KTM aux ones work well at night with a clear cut-off and no nuisance to others was a bonus, the problem was that it showed that the regular ones were pretty poor. There's plenty of talk on the KTM forums about sorting the lacklustre dip & main, but I was hesitant to play with dip as I thought the sheer output could exceed the capabilities of reflectors and cause dazzle. Also, there's the legal position.
Hopefully a decent main will give the range for unlit roads and the aux/halogen dip combo works well for when there are other road users around.
Strange how the legislation seems to creep into France that used to be such a relaxed place for bikes.
C350Akra said:
Can you not use an upgraded 'normal' bulb instead? There are many places that provide +90%, +100%, +150% bulbs that make a world of difference? Some years ago I fitted some +150% to my Skoda Octavia main beam, so good it reflected off a road marker 900m away.
I have tried those and the difference is incremental, combined with the bike's vibration and a shortened service life, I'd sooner go for something reliable and bright. I only have one bulb for main, so kind of dependent on it, especially when the local wildlife takes a stroll onto the roads after dusk.bsidethecside said:
I only have one bulb for main, so kind of dependent on it, especially when the local wildlife takes a stroll onto the roads after dusk.
Same problem here, foxes not too much of a problem, but deer and bagders are a bit more of an issue.....Now as for the wild boar, they just stand there and stare at you daring you to even think about hitting them
944 Man said:
I wish people wouldn't do this. Shut up.
I'm with him - have more consideration for other users, if you can't see as far as you think safe then you are going too fast, it is a PUBLIC road after all and not your private drive.The deer, or boar, are harder to avoid at higher speeds and even a water deer will make a mess.
IJWS15 said:
I'm with him - have more consideration for other users, if you can't see as far as you think safe then you are going too fast, it is a PUBLIC road after all and not your private drive.
The deer, or boar, are harder to avoid at higher speeds and even a water deer will make a mess.
I have already clearly stated this was main beam, you know the one you turn off when traffic comes your way? As for the going too fast, that depends on visibility, the whole point of this. Increased visibility is the object of the exercise. I would draw pictures, but I had tried to head this off with the opening disclaimer, but clearly that wouldn't satisfy the opportunity for some sanctimonious bleating. Perhaps you have the wrong forum?The deer, or boar, are harder to avoid at higher speeds and even a water deer will make a mess.
IJWS15 said:
944 Man said:
I wish people wouldn't do this. Shut up.
I'm with him - have more consideration for other users, if you can't see as far as you think safe then you are going too fast, it is a PUBLIC road after all and not your private drive.The deer, or boar, are harder to avoid at higher speeds and even a water deer will make a mess.
944 Man said:
IJWS15 said:
944 Man said:
I wish people wouldn't do this. Shut up.
I'm with him - have more consideration for other users, if you can't see as far as you think safe then you are going too fast, it is a PUBLIC road after all and not your private drive.The deer, or boar, are harder to avoid at higher speeds and even a water deer will make a mess.
fatboy b said:
944 Man said:
IJWS15 said:
944 Man said:
I wish people wouldn't do this. Shut up.
I'm with him - have more consideration for other users, if you can't see as far as you think safe then you are going too fast, it is a PUBLIC road after all and not your private drive.The deer, or boar, are harder to avoid at higher speeds and even a water deer will make a mess.
Far too many people never use main beam even on quiet unlit country roads and are then outraged when somebody comes round a corner on main beams because they have not seen the dipped beams.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff