No contest for me Im afraid although I think the difference can be varied... The Octavia xenons, whilst better then the halogen setup imo, are no where near as good as the full BiXenon setup the Yeti uses. Better spread, pattern and intensity and the cornering function is brilliant on my local roads. Its only when you drop back to non swivel lamps that you realise how much better the bendy ones are! Had a few weeks in different Fabias recently and have to say, I thought the halogen setups on them were amongst the worst Ive ever experienced. I also drive a Fiesta and the standard ones on that arent great. I did a Xenon 50% brighter bulb upgrade on them when the car was new and they are just about acceptable although no where near as good as a true xenon system.

Light intensity is not the point...

So a candle is just as effective as a searchlight?

I take it you didn't look at the website which demonstrates what I am talking about?

http://www.sibirskyextreme.com/hid50/about/advantages-of-hid-light/

Edited 16 November, 201213 yr by nickguzzi

Exactly the response i expected. Light intensity is not the point. Angle of projection is the issue and this angle is the same for all headlights. As i said before there is nom point having lights 10 times brighter if they still point to the deck.

I have a halogen equipped FL Scout and mate has FL xenon AFS VRS Octavia. The Projector lenses look the same except his have gaps so they can turn on the outside but as far as your reference to intensity making no difference that's not right. On mine the light directly in front, say 90 deg spread, is okay as that's where the bulbs filament works best to push out for the reflector design. The other 45 deg either side of straight ahead is less light and not as white and has slight streaking. On Will's VRS it is a much more linear spread with a lot less drop off in light and intensity so end result is better visibility across the whole 180 degrees. Also when you drive on undulating roads as the front of your car points up the lights point further ahead even with AFS adjustment and the higher xenon lux output obviously goes further than the Halogens' output regardless of the default angle of projection so you again get better performance.

It's the same argument as putting a higher output bulb in anything, more energy required (upping the wattage) but more light lumans too which is the point. They might all point 50m in front of you i.e same spread and angle as you said but with the xenons you can see more at that 50m mark where with the halogens it's not the same.

Xenons put out that much more light that with the non bi-xenon set up on the Octavias they make the halogen main beams look fairly lethargic and the colour difference is even more apparent. It seems quite common to go for uprated whiter main beam bulbs in xenon equipped cars from what I've experienced if you drive out of town a bit as it supplements the low beam even better and lessens the ugly orange effect of the standard main beams.

Edited 17 November, 201213 yr by snala

On my previous car I had a set of spot lights that supplemented the main bean which made country road driving easy at night in the Pennines. From that I have come to an Octy with factory xenons and I find that I don't even use main beam now, the xenons are that good.

I have hids fitted to my classic, if I where to find an octy with xenon's fitted in a scrappy, could I just do a strait swap for them to work, yes I know about the leveling and the washers, I was thinking more along the lines of just having them set with a beam leveler

Don't some Audi's already have this?

My brother's E-Class has this feature. It is incredible the way it dips the beam the moment a light appears ahead. This is with Bi-Xenon. Not sure if one bulb with a shutter, or two bulbs?

No contest for me Im afraid although I think the difference can be varied... The Octavia xenons, whilst better then the halogen setup imo, are no where near as good as the full BiXenon setup the Yeti uses.

I find the pre-facelift (2004-08) xenons to be slightly better thanks to a wider spread. That might be because they don't swivel like the facelift lights but they also seem slightly brighter. Not sure why. I would try those Philips "50% more light" bulbs, but they're twice the price of normal bulbs and D1S bulbs are expensive enough as it is.

My 2012 Octavia xenons are better than any Halogen headlight for sure, but it's not the best xenons I've seen.

Edited 17 November, 201213 yr by Perc

Ahhh.....There's a statement from someone who's never has Xenon headlights.

Replace the word "marginal" with "immense" and you're closer to the truth. I'm not sure what cost/liability you are referring to. Sure, Xenon bulbs cost three times the price of a decent Halogen bulbs, but they have three times the lifetime.....so cost the same to run.

Xenons are that good, they should (and maybe someday will) be made compulsory.

+1 :-)

Xenon headlights are also outrageously expensive, so make sure you've got insurance. 5-6x the price of a normal halogen headlight is pretty normal.

My vRS had xenons, and the Mazda I changed to has halogens. I have put night breaker plus H11s in but they still aren't a patch on the xenons. I do a lot of early morning starts and back late in the evening and it's one of the reasons I've put my Mazda up for sale.

I am kinda tempted by a Fabia vRS at the moment though!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Xenon headlights are also outrageously expensive, so make sure you've got insurance. 5-6x the price of a normal halogen headlight is pretty normal.

As a complete unit yes, but if you only need to replace the headlight cluster (stone chip, cracked bracket etc.) then the price is the same.

It is the ignitor, ballast and bulb (all bolt-on) that is where the costs is.

What I do think is the next bright idea is the lights that automatically switch between full and dipped automatically.

Don't some Audi's already have this?

Cadillac had it over 50 years ago, but yes, it's catching on again these days. It'll probably be on the next Superb if it isnt already.

I would say that this is the next big thing:

Can you imagine this technology on a ten year old car when its not quite working properly!

Arggghh! My EYES!

Vauxhall garage: "These aren't serviceable sir, you'll need new headlight clusters, level sensors and the radar sensors, that'll be a billion pounds plus VAT."

People have had that attitude towards new car tech for the last 90 years or so.

I don't think it is the technology as such which people object to, but the way it is used as a way to rip you off.

My brother's E-Class has this feature. It is incredible the way it dips the beam the moment a light appears ahead. This is with Bi-Xenon. Not sure if one bulb with a shutter, or two bulbs?

I still can't work out why anyone would think its a good idea to have automatic high beam? I can vaguely see how the system might be able to detect lights from incoming traffic but what about when you're following another car down a country lane? What about dual carriageways and oncoming cars in the distance?

Had a quick google and the first items I found on the matter seem to suggest that at least one of the above problems occurs:

http://www.astraownersnetwork.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-104996.html

I don't think it is the technology as such which people object to, but the way it is used as a way to rip you off.

Succinct and spot on!

Just to add my verdict on xenons, had them for 2 days and can definitely see the benefit and think the £600 option that I paid was well worth it.

I did not choose xenon as an option, I chose a model they are standard on.

^^£600 isn't bad, if you choose these on an Audi they are over a grand for the same thing!

Haven't read all the thread but looking at the OP's thread title, my question is why would you ? The difference is night and day - no pun intended. Well worth the money if you do lots of night time driving or drive at this time of year when it goes dark ridiculously early.

I have a halogen equipped FL Scout and mate has FL xenon AFS VRS Octavia. The Projector lenses look the same except his have gaps so they can turn on the outside but as far as your reference to intensity making no difference that's not right. On mine the light directly in front, say 90 deg spread, is okay as that's where the bulbs filament works best to push out for the reflector design. The other 45 deg either side of straight ahead is less light and not as white and has slight streaking. On Will's VRS it is a much more linear spread with a lot less drop off in light and intensity so end result is better visibility across the whole 180 degrees. Also when you drive on undulating roads as the front of your car points up the lights point further ahead even with AFS adjustment and the higher xenon lux output obviously goes further than the Halogens' output regardless of the default angle of projection so you again get better performance.

It's the same argument as putting a higher output bulb in anything, more energy required (upping the wattage) but more light lumans too which is the point. They might all point 50m in front of you i.e same spread and angle as you said but with the xenons you can see more at that 50m mark where with the halogens it's not the same.

Xenons put out that much more light that with the non bi-xenon set up on the Octavias they make the halogen main beams look fairly lethargic and the colour difference is even more apparent. It seems quite common to go for uprated whiter main beam bulbs in xenon equipped cars from what I've experienced if you drive out of town a bit as it supplements the low beam even better and lessens the ugly orange effect of the standard main beams.

I agree with this above. The problem for me was that the 50m limit or whatever it was ( same for xenons and halogen ) isnt sufficient. I agree they are brighter within that limited range but that still is of no use to me. I need better range and xenons do not offer this. They do offer better illumination at the same range but this same range was way way to short for country roads. The range of the full beams is what you need. I have never had any problem seeing wildlife or whatever within the range of my halogen lights so why would i need to see the same badger better? Its the little bugger way up the road i want to see and only full beams can illuminate him. The extra £700-800 pounds for xenons would be better spent in specsavers if you cant see whats right infront of you.

People keep relpying stating the same facts that we already agree on i.e xenons are brighter. This is not my issue with them. Anti dazzling laws will always limit dipped lights performance irrespective of bulb type fitted. I do agree that xenons are better at illuminating the road directly ahead of you but i could see that with my halogens anyway and dont need a £700-800 improvement on this. If you do wnat this then thats your personal choice and you are welcome to it.

Good improvements worthy of extra money would be things like lights that turn with the stering wheel and potentially a bi-xenon setup with xenon full beams but basic xenons are not worth the money in my opinion as they offer no solution to my motoring requirements i.e driving on unlit rural roads.

Please no more speak about extra range of xenons as this is a myth. Its not complicated. If the halogens were so poor they couldnt illuminate the extent of their range then i can see the point but mine do and have done on every car i have ever owned. Mybe im lucky and your cars have been crap but poor halogens have never been a problem ive suffered and i have owned at lot of cars.

A myth in your mind I presume, as you continue to deny the evidence available. You feel free to make assumptions about the rest of us.

People keep relpying stating the same facts that we already agree on i.e xenons are brighter. This is not my issue with them. Anti dazzling laws will always limit dipped lights performance irrespective of bulb type fitted. I do agree that xenons are better at illuminating the road directly ahead of you but i could see that with my halogens anyway and dont need a £700-800 improvement on this. If you do wnat this then thats your personal choice and you are welcome to it.

Agreed, people keep stating the same facts, but you either don't appear to be reading them, or are choosing to ignore them.

As has already been pointed out, xenon's are brighter right up to the edge of the beam pattern, whereas halogens aren't as bright the further towards the limitations of the beam pattern you get.

Also, simply saying you can see OK with halogens and therefore wouldn't benefit from a brighter light is daft. Again, as has already been mentioned, you could well see the badger if you had candles inside your headlights, however with xenon's (or brighter lights) you'd see the same badger sooner.

...Also, simply saying you can see OK with halogens and therefore wouldn't benefit from a brighter light is daft...

+1

When a group of us evaluated various bulb options (see post #37), we liked various aspects of the halogen bulbs but at the end of the day the extra brightness trumped all. We really liked the characteristics of the Pure Visions, but found ourselves saying that it was a shame they weren't brighter.

I agree with this above. The problem for me was that the 50m limit or whatever it was ( same for xenons and halogen ) isnt sufficient. I agree they are brighter within that limited range but that still is of no use to me. I need better range and xenons do not offer this. They do offer better illumination at the same range but this same range was way way to short for country roads. The range of the full beams is what you need. I have never had any problem seeing wildlife or whatever within the range of my halogen lights so why would i need to see the same badger better? Its the little bugger way up the road i want to see and only full beams can illuminate him. The extra £700-800 pounds for xenons would be better spent in specsavers if you cant see whats right infront of you.

People keep relpying stating the same facts that we already agree on i.e xenons are brighter. This is not my issue with them. Anti dazzling laws will always limit dipped lights performance irrespective of bulb type fitted. I do agree that xenons are better at illuminating the road directly ahead of you but i could see that with my halogens anyway and dont need a £700-800 improvement on this. If you do wnat this then thats your personal choice and you are welcome to it.

Good improvements worthy of extra money would be things like lights that turn with the stering wheel and potentially a bi-xenon setup with xenon full beams but basic xenons are not worth the money in my opinion as they offer no solution to my motoring requirements i.e driving on unlit rural roads.

Please no more speak about extra range of xenons as this is a myth. Its not complicated. If the halogens were so poor they couldnt illuminate the extent of their range then i can see the point but mine do and have done on every car i have ever owned. Mybe im lucky and your cars have been crap but poor halogens have never been a problem ive suffered and i have owned at lot of cars.

So it doesn't matter how bright a light is it doesn't travel any further???