Re: Urgent LED Selection Question
Wow, that's really interesting that they're making this demonstrably false, dangerous claim. Perhaps truth-in-advertising laws are among the regulations that are regarded as burdensome by the current US Government administration.
Let's look at their claim word by word:
Philips said:
Is it legal to use Philips Ultinon LED in the United States?
Yes, the Philips Ultinon LED range is first to market exterior LEDs as a direct replacement for exterior incandescent bulbs. The light output of Philips Ultinon LED lights is not only bright, but also creates a well-focused light beam on the road. Thanks to their beam pattern, Philips Ultinon LED lights are legal to use on the roads in the United States.
the Philips Ultinon LED range is first to market exterior LEDs as a direct replacement for exterior incandescent bulbs
That's a lie. Sylvania's two Zevo lines (the first one with the translucent plastic dome, completely hopeless in any/every lamp, then their current one with the Y-shaped frame and the rear-firing emitters that works well in
some lamps and poorly or not at all in others), Sylvania's non-Zevo line, Philips' own Vision line that's structurally similar to the present Zevo with a row of rear-firing emitters, and Philips' own Xtreme Vision line with the A-frame design, all were put on the market as direct replacements for exterior incandescent bulbs long before this Ultinon line.
The light output of Philips Ultinon LED lights is not only bright, but also creates a well-focused light beam on the road.
That's also a lie. For one thing, the lamps in question are not road-illumination devices. They do not create a "light beam on the road" (well-focused or not). That's just not in their job description. But OK, let's assume this language was written by marketers whose job is to sell bulbs, not to describe the world accurately. They are claiming these bulbs are a one-for-one, direct-swap replacement in any/every lamp, and we don't even have to buy one to know that's flatly not true. The Ultinon bulbs don't have any forward emitters, only side-shooters. The side-shooters will work OK in some lamps with reflector optics, maybe acceptably in some, poorly in others, and not at all in still others. They will not work at all in lamps that have fresnel optics in the lens. Those require light coming out the front of the bulb. Fresnel optics were more common in the past than they are now, but they're hardly unknown on late-model vehicles that have sold in high volume. The Jeep Wrangler type JK (2007-2018) is a great example. It's only one example, but there are plenty of others, and one is all that's required to falsify a blanket claim such as Philips is making here. Another great example of an incompatibility, this one without fresnel optics, would be the '08-'14 Chrysler Voyager/'11-'18 Dodge Caravan front turn signal, which needs rearward and frontward light (not much use for side-shooters).
Thanks to their beam pattern, Philips Ultinon LED lights are legal to use on the roads in the United States.
It's really fascinating that they give this assurance. It opens them up to massive legal liability. False and misleading advertising, product liability, fraud, and probably other kinds, too. Moreover, they also give advice on how to choose their so-called "CAN-bus Enabling Adaptor", which is a device specifically designed and intended to defeat a mandatory safety feature on vehicles certified by their manufacturer as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. That would seem to expose them to additional layers of potential legal jeopardy.
OK, so moving on from that, because the country has bigger problems right now than companies selling illegal vehicle equipment and lying about it, let's ask a "real world" question as favorable as possible to these bulbs: ignore the lights with fresnel optics, and ignore the ones with intricate reflector optics that require a filament-shaped line of light in the right place to work. Only look at lamps these bulbs could conceivably work reasonably well in. That would be a simple parabolic reflector bowl with the bulb entering straight in at the center of the reflector, and a lens with conventional spreader optics. That kind of lamp is well represented in what buyers are saying (we know because some of them were kind enough to provide photos or state what kind of car they have) at places like
here and
here and
here. These are all comments from people who probably don't know or care a whit about regulations or how car lights work, they just wanted to upgrade to LEDs, and they spent money on them, so they were really primed to like these bulbs. And yet:
"Very dim, half as bright as an incandescent."
"These lights are not bright at all !!! Cant even see the turn signal when the headlights are on.Will not buy these again my stock incandescent are way brighter"
"Provides good coverage of light within the lamp housing (no unsightly dark spots), but it's significantly dimmer on HIGH (21w-equiv) than the standard 1157 incandescent bulb. On LOW (5w-equiv) it's about the same. The difference is large enough in daytime that I didn't feel safe using these Philips LEDs, so I returned them."
"Do NOT buy if you care about safety at all. bought these hoping for a decent road legal replacement to my incandescent bulbs on my motorcycle. They are awful. I would say the light output is maybe 1/3rd of incandescent. These act as marker lights and turn signals on the front of my bike and I absolutely do not think I would be safe riding at night with these. I am returning them ASAP. The 1156a version of these were just as bad."
"Less brightness than the original incandescent bulbs. I'm sure the reliability behind the Phillips name is genuine (unlike cheaper no-name Chinese alternatives that last 6 months), but I won't accept reduced visibility as a trade off. Sorry Phillips, but I had to put the original bulbs back in and send these back."
"The fit and finish is very good, the color is spot on white and looks good in my opinion. They appear no brighter, perhaps less bright, than the standard incandescent bulbs that these replaced. The lack of output was disappointing."
"Very disappointed in the brightness on these bulbs. Far dimmer than the traditional incandescent bulbs I was attempting to replace. Turn signal function only illuminates more LED's, but of the same brightness as the running light LED's. This makes the turn signal hardly noticeable."
"Nowhere near the brightness of the regular incandescent bulb that I was trying to "upgrade". Nice build quality, what you would expect fro Philips but very disappointed in the light output. The light output was uneven and since the are no top facing LED's they are very dim in the brake reflector housing. These are getting returned as they are unsafe to run as brake lights."
"Nowhere near as bright as they are made out to be. Significantly less light output than the factory incandescents."
"Not very bright! These are maybe a 1/3 as bright as the original rear turn signal lights on my 2017 Chevy Volt Gen 2. The LED layout is great meaning they cast light in a pleasant looking way when installed in the housing but they are just not bright enough."
"These are not bright enough. They can only barely be seen in daylight. See photo, passenger side (left in photo) is regular bulb, other side is this LED bulb."