Jump to content

LED-Lightning on US Vehicles


pete41
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hallo everybody!!!

Has somebody already made a experience with LED-Lightning on a WWII US vehicle?

I wan´t to know how to do it or if somebody already offers sealed "LED-Lights" for sale.

Need some indicators for the front and the complete rear lights for a Dodge WC.

 

All informations and experiences are welcome!!!!

 

Thank you

Pete 41

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought about it, most WWII MVs are 6 volts so with a current limiting resistor it should be an easy project.

 

There are two problems. First, most of the sealed 6V lamps are designed for a specific luminance that would not work well if super-white-led-bright. Mainly the marker lights lights (the 'cat eyes') and the BO driving lights.

 

Also the marker lights are set an a specific angle (it was described in an WWII Army Motors article) to make the distance setup work and the highly directional LED light might not work well in a BO driving light because you need that light to diffuse.

 

Other than those two night-driving specific issues they should work fine in the Service Stop and BO stop lights.

 

Many places do sell 'drop in' LED 'bulbs' that go right in most standard sockets. They may or may not be street legal in the US and run about $8 per 'bulb'

 

 

http://www.superbrightleds.com/cgi-bin/store/index.cgi?action=DispPage&Page2Disp=%2Fother_bulbs.htm

6 & 24VDC Single & Dual Contact

 

1156 (BA15S) & 1157 (BAY15D). 12 & 19-LED replacement bulbs for 6 and 24 Volt applications. NOT used for interior lighting applications in RVs, Boats, etc.

Edited by deadline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone on the old Ferret heaven forum fitted LED bulbs to his Ferret (Ian Wallace) I'm sure he had problems in that the indicators didn't work correctly not enough resistance at the flasher unit for the bulbs to flash. Everything else worked fine brake and side lights.

 

The only problem you might have is with you're vehicle insurance in that you're modifying the vehicle (for the better) but you should run it past them before you change anything.

 

You only have to think about the various incidents of tourists abroad who miss something out on the insurance application form and then receive no insurance at highly critical time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LED lighting on a Wartime vehicle.

 

Really authentic! :shocked:

 

 

Quite true, but it might help to avoid avoid an even less authentic Scania front bumper becoming friction-welded to the rear panel of the Jeep :wow::D:cool2:

 

I need some Jeep rear 6v LED light units asap - anyone fancy the job of supplying a pair?

 

(Edit: I meant to add - with indicators incorporated)

Edited by N.O.S.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't want to put a damper on this but unless the side light, turn indicator, stop lights and turn indicator relays are DOT approved and have compliance marking they should not be used on the public highway, -even though they are better than filament lamps.

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't want to put a damper on this but unless the side light, turn indicator, stop lights and turn indicator relays are DOT approved and have compliance marking they should not be used on the public highway, -even though they are better than filament lamps.

 

Steve

 

Not true.

 

It depends on age of vehicle. WW2 vehicles (THE SUBJECT OF THIS ENQUIRY) There is no requirement for markings on lamps on any WW2 vehicle.

 

For Front and rear position lamps the major ruling date is manufactured on or after 1.1.7 (front), 1.1.74 (rear) and for indicators the date is basically 1.4.86.

 

I can't be arsed to give dates for every vehicle trailer etc, but if you are interested you need Reg 18 schedules 1, 2, 7 & 10 Road vehicle lighting regs 1989.

 

Before these dates there does not appear to be any requirement for approval mark or even a kite mark, so don't be put off by legislation, it is probably quite legal to put LED lights on vehicles built or used before these dates provided "they are plainly visible from a reasonable distance" which is the only requirement (although regs re stop lights state wattage must be between 15 and 36 Watts, but only for vehicles fisrt use 1.1.1971, and any indicator lamp not bearing an approval mark must also be 15 to 36 W). This relating to a filament lamp so not sure how you determine output from LED which have a far higher efficiency)

 

For trailer, Motor cycles, combinations pedal cycles and other than motor vehicles, refer to regs, as some classes have different dates.

 

The point about the need to agree changes with insurers is however quite valid.

 

Good point Steve.

 

Forgot about that one!

 

Instant MOT failure and fine from the Police if they are not marked.

 

Not to mention you probably wouldn't be insured in an accident either.

Earlier vehicles do not need approval marks, or kite marks to pass an MOT. Having unmarked lights on a vehicle of an age that does not need them to be marked is not an offence, so again, you can't be fined. Your insurance is valid with no compliance markings if the age of your vehicle does not require lamps to be marked.

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wear modern clothes too. :rolleyes:

 

It has to be said since Jack has been away the standards have been eroding steadily. If he ever comes back he's going to have his work cut out that's for sure.

 

Speaking of which (work) I've had a bit of luck converting what was admittedly an extremely rare WW2 USAAF GMC lubricating oil tanker into a vacuum suction unit to make my now permanent posting on clubhouse latrine duty that much easier. OK a fair bit of the original truck and equipment had to go but I'm all for ease of use as opposed to total authenticity.

 

If anyone would rather see a wartime stamped shovel and bucket used instead, they are welcome to take over the role - the tanker would break for parts to keep a few cargo versions on the road (I did rather hack the tanker unit about so not much is salvageable).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

antarmike

Not true.

 

It depends on age of vehicle. WW2 vehicles (THE SUBJECT OF THIS ENQUIRY) There is no requirement for markings on lamps on any WW2 vehicle.

 

You are probably quite right about pre 1960s or whatever date vehicles not requiring a DOT stamp as such however I am fairly certain, although it is now 30years since I had anything to do with lighting regulations that the "law" requires all lamps originally fitted with a filament lamp to have a filament lamp- and I would think that pre-dates the regulations you quote,ie you cannot retro-fit a carbide or wick or an xeon lamp (why any would do this the law doesn't say -it only proscribes it) -as LEDs were first developed in 1960s and were first commercially available about 1970 (allbeit in very low power red applications) and although superficially a LED does have a wire -it is not a filament therefore cannot be retro fitted in place of a filament lamp.

 

Whether the police would prosecute or fix penalty an older vehicle is debatable -it would have to await a legal case which I am sure there hasn't been one so it is again a case of none legal oppinion (and I am only pointing out a possible problem) -however even allowing for specialist insurance companies any opportunity for a company to void cover is almost always taken with alacricty -especially if the other parties insurer get wind of any "out of the ordinary modification" notifified or not.

 

Steve

Edited by steveo578
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are probably quite right about pre 1960s or whatever date vehicles not requiring a DOT stamp as such however I am fairly certain, although it is now 30years since I had anything to do with lighting regulations that the "law" requires all lamps originally fitted with a filament lamp to have a filament lamp- and I would think that pre-dates the regulations you quote,ie you cannot retro-fit a carbide or wick or an xeon lamp (why any would do this the law doesn't say -it only proscribes it) -as LEDs were first developed in 1960s and were first commercially available about 1970 (allbeit in very low power red applications) and although superficially a LED does have a wire -it is not a filament therefore cannot be retro fitted in place of a filament lamp.

 

Whether the police would prosecute or fix penalty an older vehicle is debatable -it would have to await a legal case which I am sure there hasn't been one so it is again a case of none legal oppinion (and I am only pointing out a possible problem) -however even allowing for specialist insurance companies any opportunity for a company to void cover is almost always taken with alacricty -especially if the other parties insurer get wind of any "out of the ordinary modification" notifified or not.

Steve

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/contents/made

 

Lighting regs make no requirement that filament lamps must only be replaced with filament lamps, (unless I have missed it. Unless you can point to specific legislation I feel that you are wrong in your recollections, because I cannot find any prohibition of changing Filament to LED lamps

 

 

all I can find re changeing filament lamps is this clause, applying to much later vehicles

 

Filament lamps

 

14.—(1) Where a motor vehicle first used on or after 1st April 1986 or any trailer manufactured on or after 1st October 1985 is equipped with any lamp of a type that is required by any Schedule to these Regulations to be marked with an approval mark, no filament lamp other than a filament lamp referred to in the Designation of Approval Marks Regulations in–

 

(a)regulation 4 and Schedule 2, items 2 or 2A, 8, 20, 37 or 37A; or

 

(b)regulation 5 and Schedule 4, item 18,

 

shall be fitted to any such lamp.

 

(2) Where any pedal cycle manufactured on or after 1st October 1990 is equipped with any lamp that is required by any Schedule to these Regulations to be marked with a British Standard mark, no filament lamp other than a filament lamp marked with the marking indicated in the British Standard specification for Filament Lamps for Cycles published by the British Standards Institution under the reference 6873: 1988 namely “B.S. 6873” shall be fitted to any such lamp.

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to restoring vehicles as they would of been?

 

Might as well paint a white star on the bonnet of a Land Rover & called it a Willy's Jeep :nut:

 

My Matador (1953) was built without indicators. I ran it for one year like that before I decided I just had to retro-fit indicators. It did not require to have them fitted but I chose to.

 

Externally it will be virtually impossible to see that a modified vehicle has LED bulbs, inside the existing lamps, behind the lenses. Fitting complete units will, admittedly, be more obtrusive. (Which is why, I personally would go the route of replacement bulbs within existing lamps.)

 

The problem with Filament lights is that they take time to reach full intensity, whereas LED are virtually instantaneous.

 

Tests have shown that Filament lights lag 0.2 seconds behind LED's, and for a vehicle approaching from the rear at 70 MPH this extra time before the driver sees the Brake lights represents 14 Feet travelled along the road, where he could have been reacting and braking.

 

If a person wants the best chance of not being stuffed into the back of then fitting LED's are the way forward.

 

Other benefits are that filament indicator bulbs have a life expectancy of 15 hours but LED's promise 1000's of hours service.

 

LED are more vibration resistant, and with WW2 vehicles with rudimentary leaf springs, and often no dampers, this is reliability that is much needed to improve safety.

 

I hope that if you get rear end shunted by an Artic, you feel it was worth leaving in the Filament lamps. A vehicle that has ended up six foot shorter isn't very authentic either.....

 

This is the "Historic Military vehicle forum" and is open to everyone with an interest in historic Military vehicle, which can mean running them in civilian guise, running them as converted in service, running them as converted early on after release, or showing them as barn finds. It may mean modifications made because spares are no longer available, and occasionally be legislation requires modification (such as underun bars on certain vehicles)

 

There is no reason to believe that vehicles have to be restored to their original condition, and that is the only way to go.

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to restoring vehicles as they would of been?

 

Might as well paint a white star on the bonnet of a Land Rover & called it a Willy's Jeep :nut:

 

 

I plan on adding indicators and twin rear lights/braking lights to my dodge however they shall be able to be removed in a matter of minuets for shows. It juts adds a little bit of safety on the road for all the other road users who choose not to keep a safe distance behined you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I plan on adding indicators and twin rear lights/braking lights to my dodge however they shall be able to be removed in a matter of minuets for shows. It juts adds a little bit of safety on the road for all the other road users who choose not to keep a safe distance behined you.

 

 

I must admit I'm now thinking about this option for the Jeep. Mag-mount extra light units with plugs. It should certainly keep everyone else happy :angel: Shame about cutting into the authentic - looking wiring harnesss though....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antarmike

 

In response to your previous query- In 2003 the UK govt. (disprooving the right wing British press ranting that HMG cowtow to EU legislation) broke with the EU directive (EMC Directive 89/336/EEC) which allowed CE marked retro-fit lighting components to be fitted to vehicles in use in the UK- this however has no effect on vehicles built to Unified Type Approval hence many vehicles on UK roads have quite legally LED indicators, the replacement directive Automotive Directive 95/54/EC proscribes use of any retro-fit or aftermarket alterations to vehicles that are not (in this case of lamps) E marked -including LED lamps.

 

As far as I am aware no current LED suppliers have represented to an appropriate EMC testing facility to obtain a E mark as required by Vehicle Certification Agency - if wrong I will be very pleased to know as I am an enthusiast of anything that makes driving safer which LEDs obviously do.

 

A traffic police officer will be well aware of the vehicles likely to be legally fitted with LEDs -last years Renault probably - a 25 year old boy racer Golf probably not.

 

IMO your contention that LEDs can be fiited to older vehicles is unlikely to stand up to scruitiny -additional retro-fits must conform to the requirement at the time they were fitted and any lamps can only be like for like so lamps fitted to vehicles of 1940-50-60 vintage can only use a similar filament lamp as originally fitted not withstanding Kite CE marks etc, LEDs cannot be fitted as they did not exist at the date of manufacture nor were part of an aftermarket device at the time they were fitted unless said aftermarket device is E marked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antarmike

In response to your previous query- In 2003 the UK govt. (disprooving the right wing British press ranting that HMG cowtow to EU legislation) broke with the EU directive (EMC Directive 89/336/EEC) which allowed CE marked retro-fit lighting components to be fitted to vehicles in use in the UK- this however has no effect on vehicles built to Unified Type Approval hence many vehicles on UK roads have quite legally LED indicators, the replacement directive Automotive Directive 95/54/EC proscribes use of any retro-fit or aftermarket alterations to vehicles that are not (in this case of lamps) E marked -including LED lamps.

 

When new legislation is enacted, then previous legislation is taken off the books. Any legislation that was in force in 1945 has long since been taken off the staute books, A ww2 Vehicle has to comply with current lighting regs, The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989,

(http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/contents/made)

 

The 1989 Regulations are the only legislation relating to lights and they exempt vehicles of certain ages from complying with some or other of the clauses, For a pre 1971 vehicle the only requirement relating to side lights etc is that they be "clearly visible. A pre 1971 vehicle is exempt from needing E mark.

 

Provided the requirement to be "clearly visible" is met, I cannot see any other Motor vehicle or lighting legislation that relates to a pre 1971 vehicle, Pre 1971 vehicles do not need E marks, Conformity marks or even kite marks. They merely have to be clearly visible, to comply with Lighting regs. LED lights are clearly visible or they would not be allowed in modern applications.

 

I cannot see the relevance of Electromagnetic Compatibilty legislation to which you refer, Legislation whose primary requirement is protection of the electromagnetic spectrum rather then safety of the equipment.

 

Particularly since "The Directive requires that products must not emit unwanted electromagnetic pollution (interference) and must be immune to a normal level of interference. Compliance with these requirements is usually demonstrated by testing to harmonized standards but testing is not mandatory and a manufacturer may choose provide a technical assessment for compliance as an alternative."

 

With regard to the Automotive Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive 95/54/EC This has nothing to do with the quality of the light, the output, visibility etcetera. of either complete lamps or replacement LED bulbs. (This is one of a number of directives which are intended to promote free trade throughout the European Union and the wider EEA). It has to do with Electromagnetic emmisions, and seeing as the lamps have no direct control of the vehicle, the standard they have to be tested to is very simple. "Products that have direct control of the vehicles must not emit EMC emissions above the limits and must be immune to interference levels stated in the directive. Products without direct control only have to meet the emission requirements."

 

Whilst this legislation says that any electronic equipment supplied for fitment to a vehicle must be E-Marked, (in repect of electromagnetic emmisions only) it does not say what vehicles they can or can't be fitted to.

 

Antarmike

A traffic police officer will be well aware of the vehicles likely to be legally fitted with LEDs -last years Renault probably - a 25 year old boy racer Golf probably not.

 

 

Traffic police will not be enforcing Electromagnetic radiation protection legislation, so they won't be looking for the E mark associated with EMC will they? In the UK, the enforcing authority is the Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) which is an agency of the Department for Transport.

The traffic Police will not be looking for any other E marks on lighting on Pre 1971 vehicles, since they will know of the exemption given to these vehicles in the in the 1989 Lighting regs.

How do you see Traffic Police being involved with a 1945 vehicle? Which particular legislation do you feel they will be enforcing?

 

Whether these are E marked for EMC i don't know but they are openly being sold as automotive bulbs.

http://www.autobulbsdirect.co.uk/led-car-bulbs/

http://www.norbsa02.freeuk.com/goffyleds.htm

http://www.sourcingmap.com/white-led-bright-car-vehicle-front-lamp-light-bulb-blue-p-37526.html?currency=GBP&utm_source=google&utm_medium=froogle&utm_campaign=ukfroogle

http://www.ringautomotive.co.uk/product_list.asp?cat1=1&cat2=49&cat3=6

Ring Automotive are well known and respectable, I would have thought their LED Vehicle bulbs are E marked.

 

Antarmike

As far as I am aware no current LED suppliers have represented to an appropriate EMC testing facility to obtain a E mark as required by Vehicle Certification Agency - if wrong I will be very pleased to know as I am an enthusiast of anything that makes driving safer which LEDs obviously do.

 

 

Plenty of E marked LED auto bulbs here, so they do exist. (although which directive they comply with is not clear!)

http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/e--marked-led-bulb.html

 

Ring specifically state their DRL LED lamps are E marked.

http://www.ringautomotive.co.uk/product_list.asp?cat1=1&cat2=8&cat3=207

 

You again say

Antarmike

.......additional retro-fits must conform to the requirement at the time they were fitted and any lamps can only be like for like so lamps fitted to vehicles of 1940-50-60 vintage can only use a similar filament lamp as originally fitted .

Can you point me in the direction of that legislation? Without stating which piece of legislation contains this requirement, there is no way to substantiate whether this is a genuine requirement of UK law, whether it only relates to vehicles first use after a certain date or if it is just something from a "Barrack Room" Lawyer. Which legislation contains this requirement for a pre 1971 vehicle?

 

Sorry I remain unconvinced, I still think you are wrong. I am happy to admit a gap in my knowledge, if someone can show I am wrong. I am completely unfamiliar with the "like for Like" requirement, so please someone identify the legislation so I can check it out. Thanks Mike.

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike

 

After reading your post no#23 my response will be very brief -I find your comment as the forums self appointed legal expert both offensive and vexatious -that's a legal term meaning some-one that uses mendacious, time wasting and unnecessarily convoluted arguments.

 

As far as I am concerned if you disrespect people by using terms such as barrack room solicitor (the term is barrack room lawyer anyway) I think in future the best thing is that we ignore each others posts.

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike

 

After reading your post no#23 my response will be very brief -I find your comment as the forums self appointed legal expert both offensive and vexatious -that's a legal term meaning some-one that uses mendacious, time wasting and unnecessarily convoluted arguments.

 

As far as I am concerned if you disrespect people by using terms such as barrack room solicitor (the term is barrack room lawyer anyway) I think in future the best thing is that we ignore each others posts.

 

Steve

 

That's fine, but you were the first person to put an unsupported legal opinion on this thread,(ref your post #10) I am only trying to examine your claim and see whether it holds up. I cannot see that it does.

 

When I give my views as to a legal position, I always try to include reference to the legislation to which I refer. This enables others to go off and study the legislation and to reach an opinion. You have offered a viewpoint, claiming it to be the law, but despite being asked to identify the legislation to which you referred, you are unable or unwilling to do so.

 

I will leave this discussion here and let others read the Vehicle lighting Regulations 1989, and see whether they agree with my viewpoint. It is a pity you are unwilling to cite the legislation which says replacements must be "like for like", because you have made a claim that people cannot , similarly, go off and check. Mike

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...