LED's Headlights.

This is the best £20 quidsworth I have ever spent on my 1972 series three.

NIGHTEYE 72W 9000LM H4/HB2/9003 LED Headlight

391908928073 eBay item number:
The beam is far brighter than the halogen replacement kit that I fitted years ago.

These led's seem to cut through the fog beautifully without glare back.

Anyone having difficulty fitting these fan cooled lights in the housings with rubber covers just ask me. Chris.

swarf said:

This is the best £20 quidsworth I have ever spent on my 1972 series three.

NIGHTEYE 72W 9000LM H4/HB2/9003 LED Headlight

391908928073 eBay item number:
The beam is far brighter than the halogen replacement kit that I fitted years ago.

These led's seem to cut through the fog beautifully without glare back.

Anyone having difficulty fitting these fan cooled lights in the housings with rubber covers just ask me. Chris.

Click to expand...

So fully MOT compliant now and when the rules are changed this Summer then?

Cheers

While the 2018 MoT regs do seem to acknowledge LEDs as a light source for headlights, there is still the problem of beam pattern.
Headlights which use a filament bulb as the source have a reflector and lens combination in conjuction with the source point of the light to create a flat topped beam to reduce or hopefully eliminate glare to oncoming road users.
LEDs have a totally different light source point therefore the beam pattern will be different too. The MoT test regulations are now wise to this and badly aimed headlights can result in a fail, especially if the aim cannot be adjusted.

I tried them in my p38 total crap poor light pattern had to adjust them down so far made them completely useless. Put my osram night breakers back in.

I believe the vehicle must also be fitted with auto beam adjusters in order to pass the test.
Many older vehicles retro-fitted with some forms of 'upgraded lighting' are being predicted to fail the new test.

brian47 said:

While the 2018 MoT regs do seem to acknowledge LEDs as a light source for headlights, there is still the problem of beam pattern.
Headlights which use a filament bulb as the source have a reflector and lens combination in conjuction with the source point of the light to create a flat topped beam to reduce or hopefully eliminate glare to oncoming road users.
LEDs have a totally different light source point therefore the beam pattern will be different too. The MoT test regulations are now wise to this and badly aimed headlights can result in a fail, especially if the aim cannot be adjusted.

Click to expand...

Badly aimed head lights ARE a fail even if there to low, and LED bulbs in a headlight meant for halogen bulbs will be a fail anorl but not only because of beam pattern problems

LED bulbs in a headlight meant for halogen bulbs will be a fail

Click to expand...

Well apart from that they are ILLEGAL.

Headlights since 1986 have to have an approval mark. A headlight designed, tested and approved for a halogen filament bulb fitted with a LED bulb immediately voids the approval markings.

Your insurance company needs telling of modifications. Please let us all know the result when you tell your insurance company that you have carried out an ILLEGAL modification.

Next time you are in a place like Halfords have a look at the small print on the back of their LED packaging. You will see expression (admittedly in small print) Off road Use Only

To be road legal on obligatory vehicle lights you will have to fit a complete APPROVED LED light unit.

OP states for a 1972 vehicle so might get away with it. Also a 40 year old exemption is in place for MOT if not radically altered

Brendan

Better filament bulbs is clearly the correct answer here.
Swapping the filaments in and out just for the MOT is no good either.
In any serious accident the filth will be all over the car like flies on S4!t and bang goes your insurance cover leaving you personally liable to all claims.
But... if the OP is on the NO MOT no Tax gig on his 1972 Vehicle..... happy days!

DanClarke said:

Better filament bulbs is clearly the correct answer here.
Swapping the filaments in and out just for the MOT is no good either.
In any serious accident the filth will be all over the car like flies on S4!t and bang goes your insurance cover leaving you personally liable to all claims.
But... if the OP is on the NO MOT no Tax gig on his 1972 Vehicle..... happy days!

Click to expand...

+1
Up-to-date improved filament bulbs such as "Nightbreakers" is one recommendation.
Another problem which might be encountered on old vehicles is the condition of the headlight wiring, especially the connectors in the circuit.
I would also recommend modifying the headlight circuits for an upgraded relay operated system such as that shown in this link:-
https://www.landyzone.co.uk/land-rover/headlight-wiring-upgrade.72348/

It has the advantages of having the relay which switches the high current circuit closer to the headlights reducing the length of wire on the high current side.
It reduces the electrical stress on the stalk switches which no longer have to switch the high current circuit.
New wiring and connectors can be used throughout, eliminating any older suspect components.
It might also be a good idea to replace the base connectors on the bulbholders for ceramic ones.

DanClarke said:

In any serious accident the filth will be all over the car like flies on S4!t and bang goes your insurance cover leaving you personally liable to all claims.
But... if the OP is on the NO MOT no Tax gig on his 1972 Vehicle..... happy days!

Click to expand...

I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make here. If the headlight modification is illegal, whether or not the vehicle is MOT exempt is irrelevant.
nb: I find the phrase used referring to the police offensive, but that's just a personal opinion

norseman said:

I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make here. If the headlight modification is illegal, whether or not the vehicle is MOT exempt is irrelevant.
nb: I find the phrase used referring to the police offensive, but that's just a personal opinion

Click to expand...

Sorry to have caused you any offence. I am sure they are all fine people. Except the ones that get caught for the sorts of crimes they are supposed to be fighting, that is. Apply here for a list with the relevant links.

DanClarke said:

Sorry to have caused you any offence. I am sure they are all fine people. Except the ones that get caught for the sorts of crimes they are supposed to be fighting, that is. Apply here for a list with the relevant links.

Click to expand...

@DanClarke

This is one of the "technical assistance" boards on the forum. By all means if you meant to say something to the effect that, "the police might find illegalities in a vehicle involved in an accident of interest" as a piece of advice for another poster, then OK, but it might be a better idea to keep arguments regarding your personal opinions about any particular constabulary, or even all 43 of them for the "Anything Goes" board please.
It's not that I'm particularly offended by your comments, indeed I often refer to the police as "The Old Bill", and I worked with (not for) the police for many years and met many who were not worth mentioning, but in general they're just people trying to do an incredibly difficult job.

brian47 said:

@DanClarke

This is one of the "technical assistance" boards on the forum. By all means if you meant to say something to the effect that, "the police might find illegalities in a vehicle involved in an accident of interest" as a piece of advice for another poster, then OK, but it might be a better idea to keep arguments regarding your personal opinions about any particular constabulary, or even all 43 of them for the "Anything Goes" board please.
It's not that I'm particularly offended by your comments, indeed I often refer to the police as "The Old Bill", and I worked with (not for) the police for many years and met many who were not worth mentioning, but in general they're just people trying to do an incredibly difficult job.

Click to expand...

You make a very fair point @brian47 which I accept fully. My apologies to all.

DanClarke said:

You make a very fair point @brian47 which I accept fully. My apologies to all.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, apology accepted & case closed.

brian47 said:

+1
Up-to-date improved filament bulbs such as "Nightbreakers" is one recommendation.
Another problem which might be encountered on old vehicles is the condition of the headlight wiring, especially the connectors in the circuit.
I would also recommend modifying the headlight circuits for an upgraded relay operated system such as that shown in this link:-
https://www.landyzone.co.uk/land-rover/headlight-wiring-upgrade.72348/

It has the advantages of having the relay which switches the high current circuit closer to the headlights reducing the length of wire on the high current side.
It reduces the electrical stress on the stalk switches which no longer have to switch the high current circuit.
New wiring and connectors can be used throughout, eliminating any older suspect components.
It might also be a good idea to replace the base connectors on the bulbholders for ceramic ones.

Click to expand...

Would this type of upgrade from the original sealed beam units of a series 3 require the insurance company to be informed??

Cheers.

Rubins4 said:

Would this type of upgrade from the original sealed beam units of a series 3 require the insurance company to be informed??

Cheers.

Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, the old sealed beam headlights are filaments, the entire system, light source, reflector and lens all contained in a single unit. Modifying the power feed to the lights to use a relay as suggested wouldn't need to be notified since it can be treated more as a repair/improvement that a modification.
To change your lights from the sealed beam units to any other kind of light, even one using ordinary bulbs would require changing the complete headlight unit anyway.
The point to remember is that a light source of one type cannot be installed in a headlight unit designed for a different light source. I don't think it's something which your insurance company would be particularly bothered about, the main consideration here is what will or will not be acceptable for the MoT test, but if you have any doubts then it would be up to you whether or not you ask them. The points made earlier in this thread regarding insurance would seem to apply to vehicles carrying modifications which then render them illegal.

Something to remember , just because a vehicle is MOT exempt, its still subject to Construction and Use regulations.........whch can be more stringent than MOT regulations.

Whilst Brian makes a very good point.

Under Vehicle Lighting Regulations it is ILLEGAL. VLR require headlights to have an APPROVAL mark, that approval mark is for a particular light source. Change the light source and the approval is void I.e, Your vehicle is no longer road legal.

If you tell your insurance company that you have changed your headlights to LED headlights that is one statement that they will accept. Tell your insurance company that you have carried out an illegal modification and I think you will get a completely different respons!

A director of the company which insures our vehicles has told us they are training loss adjusters/motor inspectors to look for undeclared and illegal modifications in the event of an insurance 'scenario'.

Brendan

leeds said:

Whilst Brian makes a very good point.

Under Vehicle Lighting Regulations it is ILLEGAL. VLR require headlights to have an APPROVAL mark, that approval mark is for a particular light source. Change the light source and the approval is void I.e, Your vehicle is no longer road legal.

If you tell your insurance company that you have changed your headlights to LED headlights that is one statement that they will accept. Tell your insurance company that you have carried out an illegal modification and I think you will get a completely different respons!

A director of the company which insures our vehicles has told us they are training loss adjusters/motor inspectors to look for undeclared and illegal modifications in the event of an insurance 'scenario'.

Brendan

Click to expand...

#MOT

leeds said:

Whilst Brian makes a very good point.

Under Vehicle Lighting Regulations it is ILLEGAL. VLR require headlights to have an APPROVAL mark, that approval mark is for a particular light source. Change the light source and the approval is void I.e, Your vehicle is no longer road legal.

If you tell your insurance company that you have changed your headlights to LED headlights that is one statement that they will accept. Tell your insurance company that you have carried out an illegal modification and I think you will get a completely different respons!

A director of the company which insures our vehicles has told us they are training loss adjusters/motor inspectors to look for undeclared and illegal modifications in the event of an insurance 'scenario'.

Brendan

Click to expand...

The approval mark is given to a particular complete headlight unit which meets the criteria as required, not to the vehicle using that particular headlight unit. If an owner should wish to replace the headlights on his vehicle for headlight units which have been approved, then that's OK, provided of course that such a unit can be found.

In the case which I was discussing, since the Lucas 700 series sealed beam unit was a standard unit for many years it might be easier to find approved replacements than for say a Discovery 2.

In that case, it would be totally acceptable to replace an old less efficient headlight type for another more efficient headlight which fitted on the vehicle properly and was type approved.