Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

I was installing the HID kit yesterday for my low beam headlight (H1)

I'm not sure if I did everything correctly and the lights don't seem to be as bright as they claimed.

Well basically i took out the old globes, replaced them with the xenon bulbs that's connected to the ballast

and also connected the ballast to the +ve and -ve terminals of the low beam assembly.

Now I still have from the HID kit, a set of wires all connected together.

there's a red +ve terminal wire, a black -ve terminal wire, a fuse, two other wires(one black and one white)

and two connectors which are supposedly for the ballasts.

There is an instruction diagram that says 'H4 Hi/Lo Beam installation' where you need to use these set of wires,

but there's also another diagram titled 'Circuit Diagram' which only shows what I've done so far.

So I'm a little bit confuzzled, can anyone tell me if I need to use those set of wires and fuse for the HID installation?

Also I hear this little noise that the ballast makes when you turn the lights on.

Thanks in advanced, hope I've wrote everything as clear as possible.

I'll post some pics up tomorrow of the wiring I've done

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/199302-r33-hid-install-help/
Share on other sites

i jus did my HID kit yesterday as well..

if you have turned it on and they work, you wouldve installed it correctly. the brightness level would be dependant on the HID kit.

ive got the buzz noise too from the ballast, im pretty sure thats normal.

Sounds like you got the most confusing HID kit out there.

HID kit are piss easy to install.

RED lead power

BLACK lead earth thats all there should be.

Connect the black lead to the earth on your headlight and the red to the back of the bulb then red and black to the ballast

Done.

Also 10,000k should be REALLY blue!

I had 8,000k in mine and was too blue IMO

So now just using the standard halogen bulbs.

EDIT: I have never heard any ballast buzzing.Sounds like a poor quality kit to me.

The extra cables are there incase the way you connected it now doesn't work. If it turns on, it should be fine and that the brightness of the lights are because of the kit.

I just think you should take the kit out altogether. Reflectors with the HID kit will produce HEAPS of glare and hot spots.

The extra cables are there incase the way you connected it now doesn't work. If it turns on, it should be fine and that the brightness of the lights are because of the kit.

I just think you should take the kit out altogether. Reflectors with the HID kit will produce HEAPS of glare and hot spots.

couldn't agree more, take the HID lights out, i had them and i had the same problem not enough light, i went out and bought phillips bluevision which work wonders, most people only use the hid's for looks and not for seeing, sell the HID's and spend $60 at your local autobarn and buy phillips bluevision

if the HID you install is not brighter then a halogen bulb its either because

1) you installed it incorrectly and not aligned properly

2) you got a HIGH Kelvin range (10000 or something) it is HEAPS BRIGHT but cant see far thats why 6000k is recommended for street use not just for "looks"

ok think I might switch to the 6000K or 8000K bulbs

though they do look alot nicer, I'd like a little bit more visibility

specially as I got tinted windows,

I thought the HIDs would counter the limited amount of light that I can see.

Edited by POLICE

Generally, the higher the Kelvin, the brighter they are but the less penetration of light.

The new BMWs you see getting around have 4800k sets, and are for lack of better explanation a 'step up' from halogens.

I have 6000k in my car, and they are superb (true white, with the faintest of blue tinge), mind you my friend (owns an r33, bloody plastic light covers) has the same, but they don't look as bright

The fact that your work means that they are plugged in correctly, it might just be that your globes burn cooler or something. We even installed a set of 12000k with little difference.

They only really go purplish around 30000k and eventually they go ultraviolet.

But I digress, 6000k are more than enough for near everyone. Be careful with the higher ones, since the police don't seem to like them (they're illegal in W.A at least)

Handy hint: if your plastic headlight covers are yellowing and scratched, give them a rub with some metal polish, they'll come up heaps better

  • 2 weeks later...

12000k is purplish but still very white.

To look at directly they are piercing bright, but it's all about the PENETRATION (heh)

Uber bright they may be, but anything above 6000k is near useless for driving in the dark as the light doesn't go as far.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...