Supernaut

iTrader: (83)

Indeed. This is a good comparison. I'm shocked. Whenever I see the lights in person they never looked remotely like that. How old are those bulbs?

What do you guys think HID tail lights fellas?

muibubbles

iTrader: (36)

For the record, I'm not picking sides, im just trying to learn and educate myself.

Whats wrong with the white box? isnt that the same concept as light boxes used in photography? so it should bounce/deflect light appropriately?

I believe the whole light bulb dilemma is a faulty variable. the chart you displayed is a little confusing (david). i get understand your point (david) that there are better led's available and the OEM 93's give off more light then the OEM 99's. so I think to keep it simple, test should just be between 99 spec tails and the Theorie tails. also if the Theorie's are used lights, the bulbs for the oem should be used as well.


agreed. Idk if david is still using the Theorie tails or not, but if this is an issue to you, you should definitely take them off. But as this issue arose, this should be noted as a disclaimer or something to potential customers. You wouldnt want a disappointed customer rand have to go through the whole ordeal with a refund or some kinda of mutal agreement right?

As an industrial design, and trying to develop my own product, i would LOVE for feed back to better my product. and hell if a customer DID tests for me and provided me with feedback and facts, id be thrilled.

Ive read several times that, SBG is dedicated to making the BEST part for the FD and started because lack of, so why is it an issue when a product SBG distributes could be made better? I would think SBG would be thrilled? They are now given the opportunity to ask for a better product that people thought was already great!

It sounds like EVERYONE likes the lights 95+% of the time (except for a select few people, 2-3 hours on extremely bright days). If you are worried no one will see them, add a brake light flasher to your car http://www.flashingbrakelights.com/ .

exhaustnoteV2

iTrader: (9)

Hi David,

Good information.

Do you mind listing the source, his name and when he/she was quoted with the statement below?


Thanks,
ty

SakeBomb Garage

iTrader: (17)

We at Sakebomb Garage pride ourselves in producing top quality products and offering them to the community at a reasonable price and with excellent customer care. For this particular product we worked with a third party, and because of this we were not in control of certain aspects of development and production. There is nothing wrong with the way in which the taillights were fabricated, but going forward we will handle production. We are working on a design that is more efficient during daylight hours, and will offer preferred rates to those who are already taillight customers.

It's obvious there's a brightness issue under certain lighting conditions, Toyzzzz' pictures clearly show this. As I've said, now that we are aware of an issue we can work on making this product even better. Solutions of this nature take time to implement successfully, and we pledge that there will be an equitable solution to this issue. If any of our customers are unsatisfied with the steps we are taking to correct the issue they can contact us directly.

Based on the pictures posted and customer feedback, we hereby retract the statement "Daytime visibility equal to or better than normal light bulb output." It is our belief that customers bought this particular product for various reasons and that was not the main selling point of the taillights. SBG will take the necessary steps to work with our customers, this is a promise. Many are not only customers, but friends of ours and we take issues of safety seriously.

Moving forward, Heath and myself are focusing our efforts on the above as well as on product development and order fulfillment. Therefore we will not respond to this thread in the near future, as we've said our piece. Thanks for your continued support, and stay tuned for future updates!

Thanks,
Dan and Heath

GoodfellaFD3S

iTrader: (213)

I closed this thread for the express purpose to let the dust die down a little bit. I'm going to reopen this thread with the following caveats:

(1) Any posts that do not move the issue along in a POSITIVE manner will be completely deleted.

(2) Anyone making personal ATTACKS on another member will have their posts deleted.

(3) Anyone posting MISTRUTHS in this thread will have their posts deleted.

If a member has repeated occurrences of the above they'll receive a temporary ban, followed by a permanent ban if they really push the issue.

Don't say you weren't given fair notice

David Hayes

iTrader: (6)

Ty has asked this question and I have sent him a pm about it but thought it would be of interest to the thread.

A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of speaking with Gary King, current chairperson for the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) and the CEO of North American Lighting (http://www.nal.com/). North American is a leading designer of headlights and taillights for a bunch of OEM cars (check out the website) and the company used to be part of the Hella Corporation, the people I worked with on my headlight conversion. He's a pretty big time person in the industry and is an expert in all regulations issues so I think we can assume he knows this issue well.

Here is a paper he co-authored:

http://papers.sae.org/2004-01-0802/

In short (and specific to taillights and headlights), Mr. King states that the Society of Automotive Engineers establishes the regulations but it is the compliance/enforcement division of DOT, or the National Highway Safety Traffic Administration (http://www.nhtsa.gov/) that ensures compliance and enforcement of the regulations. He stated the use of the label "off road use only" does not apply to lighting and that the same regulations are used for lighting installed on cars that will be driven on the road (or are registered). Finally, he said the responsibility lies with the manufacturer of the lights, whether OEM or after market upgrades/conversions, to ensure they meet SAE/DOT standards, and if the lights do not pass testing, the maker is subject to a fine of up to $5,000 per light sold, or $10,000 per set of lights sold. Also said if the converted/upgraded light has a DOT/SAE label on it, then the manufacturer is also subject to potential fraud claims. Tough stuff for sure.

Finally, muibubbles wanted a less confusing testing results sheet and here it is. The 99 spec comparisons are in the bold area:

mod edit addition: Again, although chart has SakeBomb Garage (Theorie) LED Taillight as the title, only the Theorie taillight was actually measured...

$lacker

iTrader: (9)

Correct me if I'm wrong here... but the brake light issue could be solved fairly easily, couldn't it?
The red rings are parking lights, and are really just decorative. They're dim, but that's ok (as compared to dim brake lights). I wouldn't personally be concerned about those
For the big round inner brake lights, why aren't a set of $30 bright LED tail light bulbs wired in there? I don't see the reasoning for using individual LEDs for that portion when pre-made applications are already available and quite effective.

That could be a time/cost effective way of making the lights better and more safe. Doesn't help with the turn signals (which are also important), but I think the brake lights are the highest priority


Maybe this is the wrong thread to bring this up, but I know some people aren't happy... hopefully there will be an acceptable solution to the situation soon.

Personally I'm looking forward to SBG LED tails V2, whenever the time comes

David Hayes

iTrader: (6)

You got me thinking about this and it's interesting. The issue with wiring up a $30 bright LED bulb like the superbrightleds.com one I used for testing (this one is even better: http://autolumination.com/1156_1157.htm, the first ones listed) is that SBG/Tom uses the base socket of an 1157 bulb to power the led rings, so the plug in is no longer available. What I am saying is there isn't a way to plug it in.

But I have another thought on the brake lights. Your idea reminded me of the high powered disc LEDs that are now available:

http://www.ledsupply.com/creexpe-red-3.php

These feature 3 red Cree high powered LEDs. The total light output from these is 137.1 lumens at 350mA or 295 lumens at 700mA. How does this compare to the stock OEM bulbs? I think it would blow them out of the water frankly but you'd have to test to be sure.

So, you could use one of the above to replace the center brake section (using two higher powered rings for the parking circles) and I think the results would be outstanding. You'd also need one "power puck" per taillight to power them (http://www.ledsupply.com/wired-buckpuck.php) so your total cost for the brake "fix" would be around $45 per taillight. Finally, you could play around with one of these $1.50 lenses to see if it helps to improve the lighting: http://www.ledsupply.com/carclo-optics-3up.php. I would guess the wide angle lens is the best. For the turn signals, I think these would work just fine:

http://www.ledsupply.com/07040-pl000-f.php

$lacker

iTrader: (9)

Maybe the best way would be for the 12V to be diverted from the rings to the center bulb when braking? That way the center would get the entire 12V and xx amps.
The good LED "bulbs" are so bright that you probably wouldn't even notice that the LED ring was no longer lit (depending on the interior design, it may be lit more on braking by indirect light than when it was lit independently)


Anywho, my point is that throwing money at more expensive brighter parking lights probably isn't going to directly address the issue, since the brake lights are the important ones and the parking lights are more decorative.
Good luck guys

David Hayes

iTrader: (6)

I agree the priority is the braking lights and what I posted above about the Cree LEDs would directly address the issue for the same cost or less than buying a set of the Eagle Eyes for each taillight. The Eagle Eyes are $50 per set, two sets required for the taillights. The Crees can also be wired up with the current led rings I think. And for not much more, the led rings can also be improved so it is a win win.

GoodfellaFD3S

iTrader: (213)

Simon, Tom isn't an approved vendor... Tom is a standard user.

I've officially washed my hands of this entire situation, and another moderator is going to deal with it moving forward. I will not read further PMs or emails on this subject, so don't send them to me.

David Hayes

iTrader: (6)

I have ordered the LEDs I suggested and will post up the results once I get one of the assemblies together.

theorie

iTrader: (31)

I hate to chime in, but again I just wanted to make it clear that I have been working on a way to make a brighter version of the design for 3+ months now, well before this thread or any "drama" over the brightness.

The reason it's been 3+ months in the making is because I'm not dealing with two different factories to produce LED rings. Before I only had to work with one. We had to bring in a second factory that could produce the PCB boards required to accept larger, more, and brighter LEDs.

The new samples came yesterday, and they are very promising. I don't have any good photos yet because I finished building the unit around midnight, but compared to the original design there is a large and very noticeable increase in brightness. I think I'm still seeing spots when I blink from having the LEDs burn the back of my eyeballs. I'll post some photos when it's actually sunny out and I can get some direct-sunlight

I'm only posting because I want to make sure everyone knew that: #1 Just to reiterate, I told David many times that I have been working on an upgrade for Version 1 customers, well before this thread was ever posted, and #2 that I'm getting closer to being able to offer this upgrade.

I still have testing to do with the new prototype, and I have already found one feature that can be revised, but like I said, it is, and has been, in the works.

Cheers everyone, and stay tuned for some preview shots of the new prototype, which will be posted elsewhere.

MOBEONER

iTrader: (18)

^^^ I can't wait to see these in person

Supernaut

iTrader: (83)

I saw Tom making these. I was surprised by how much labor went into each one and how much planning went into the design and build. The lights certainly aren't just thrown together. Tom is one resourceful dude. I was very impressed by the lights.

MOBEONER

iTrader: (18)

Yeah I agree. I have see these lights on his car and they look awesome and to tell you truth this thread makes me sad. Is not like Tom is a big company he is just a fellow member that came up with a cool idea and cool product so to see all this bashing and finger pointing sucks. I read this whole thread and I feel like S/B garage and Tom are doing the right thing so I dont know why people keep jumping on the bashing train...

2GSLSE

iTrader: (6)

I was in on the original GB and have talked to Tom in person about the brightness and he has been looking into it for some time the prototypes had less led's IIRC so I hope there is a bright idea coming for the tails I only care about the brake lamp and turn signals since the running lights are only on at night anyway.

The lights are still unique and love the look they just need tweaking a bit like any other product on the market.

mar3

iTrader: (8)

Thread cleaned up. This was moved back since other review threads exist in this board. This thread has now been distilled to purely a review thread with rebuttals absolutely allowed by the "mfg" and the distributor of the product at hand.

They call this "fair and balanced."

What this thread is not going to be is a collection of personal opinions, "this guy is great, this guy is horrible" nonsense and a collection of PRIVATE messages for "proof" of such nonsense. It's all hearsay and easily manipulated.

Y'all got bad blood going? KEEP IT IN THE PM'S. If you can't find your post anymore, then it isn't allowed in this thread. Y'all had to chump Rich so much, he's had it with this whole affair.

Now, you got me. Keep the thread focused, keep it civil, back up your claims with facts or solid research or it gets deleted.

Simple as that.

Mario III, SuperModerator

OneRotor

iTrader: (3)

I have been thinking about the issues discussed in this thread for the past day (since I stumbled across it). What made me start thinking was something that the owner of the Hardware store I work at part time told me when we were investigating upgrading the Halogen lighting in the attached gift shop to LED lighting. He mentioned that LED lights can degrade over time and that once we get all of the Halogen bulb replaced, we'd have to source some new heads for the track lighting and install some extra LED bulbs to compensate for degradation.

After doing a little bit of research via Google, I found a peer-reviewed article (if you can't access it, I'll look into getting a .pdf of it and putting it up somewhere) that deals with two different degradation simulations: difference in amperage and difference in temperature.

The author mentions in the article that they did an initial 1000 hour "seasoning" of the LED bulbs that they used for their experiment. The reason that they did this is because of the severe loss in light output over the first 1000 hours that LED bulbs can experience. They then conducted their experiments with their baseline at the lumen output of each set of 1000 hour bulbs.

What David and others may be experiencing is this initial degradation curve that was not anticipated (or even known about) by Tom, and subsequently SakeBomb Garage (when they contracted through Tom for the tail lights). While initial testing may have shown that the LED bulbs meet all of their claims, the first year of use could severely degrade the light output of the LED bulbs, thus causing the issues that David has described.

This initial 1000 hour degradation, coupled with the extreme heat that David and Toyzzz experience in their respective locations, could cause an even faster degradation curve and thus make what may have been acceptable light output when the units were purchased now seem unacceptable.

(The following quote was one that I was looking for and found that, coupled with this thread, makes me think that this "unacceptable light output" thread is caused by LED's natural tendency to degrade over time)

Here is the link to the peer reviewed journal article that I referenced:

http://lightingresearch.org/programs...pdf/guSPIE.pdf

-Jim

theorie

iTrader: (31)

I wanted to save this but I think it' appropriate to share now. Obviously this is just a "teaser" pic but I think it's important to show that I am, and have been, working with my factory to come up with a new version. These lights have been +3 months in development an I only finished this prototype light just 2 days ago after finally getting some new samples. Do we need to continue to beat a dead horse with this joke of a thread?

Parking lights only of Version 1 on the left, Prototype Version 2 on the right (the "halo" effect is due to the higher brightness. the ring shape is just as sharp in person.):

(REMINDER: this is only a new prototype and not the final Version 2 design. More changes are already planned for the new prototype and I will continue to work with the factories to make sure the lights outperform our standards before offering anything to anyone).

David has always been aware that I was working on a new version, long before he ever posted this thread. I told him this via PM, email, in phone conversations, and even in person. I even promised him one of the first upgrades.

I'm not sure what else to say at this point.

mar3

iTrader: (8)

Just state the facts and leave the personal stuff out. The rules for this thread have been made clear.

Vacation time now awaits all the folk who are not getting this...except for the vendor, obviously. Yea, there are a separate set of rules for them.

theorie

iTrader: (31)

Why was the part removed about the reason why David was denied a refund?

David was denied a refund because after months of use, he or someone else damaged his lights (ripped wires out) and then attempted to repair them himself. He claimed the damage was from "road vibrations" however when I received the lights this was clearly not the case. He sent me the lights back with cut, stripped, and spliced wires. Even though I shouldn't have, I fixed the lights for free to make him happy, and sent him the lights back in perfect working condition.

Even after David hacked up his lights, I tried to make sure he was happy as a customer.

Then, after nearly a year of use he started making demands and legal threats. At this point I told David that he would not be entitled to a refund because he previously damaged/modified his lights. That is why he went after SBG and then posted this thread.

It should be clear that I have been in direct communication with any customers who have had concerns about brightness, and have worked with people on a case-by-case basis to make sure everyone is happy.

It needs to be said that most of the customers are happy for the price they paid. There are only a few people who have had concerns regarding brightness, and this should not be seen as a case of the minority speaking for the majority. Those who have concerns with brightness, with the exception of David, are being offered some options for how to move forward.

mar3

iTrader: (8)

"Theorie," that is the last post I will allow directed towards the OP vs. towards the product being reviewed. No further rebuttals concerning personal issues/business relationships will be allowed and month-long "time-outs" are going to be dished out from this point on to anyone not understanding the point that this thread is about a PRODUCT and NOT a person.

It is still due for one more clean up pass to eliminate PM references and "they said this/they said that" hearsay.

twinsinside

iTrader: (34)

I'd just like to verify that this tail light conversion does not affect the center brake light in any way, is that correct?

RotorMotor

iTrader: (5)