28 Votes

Audi first with full-LED headlights

rybo submitted on 6/1/2008 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 5:13:23 AM

41 user comments | Category: Misc News | Source: | SOURCE: www.motorauthority.com

Audi is now offering full-LED headlamps for its R8 super-sports car as a €3,590 option.

While currently the R8 gets LED daytime running lights, which use 54 LEDs per headlamp, the new option will get you LEDs for the turn signals, low-beam, and high-beam headlights.

While the option may be expensive, Audi argues that the prominent advantages are lower energy consumption and a color that more closely resembles daylight, providing greater contrast and is easier on the human eye.

Read Article

About the Author

— rybo (View Profile)

User Comments

as long as it's not as blinding to other drivers as Xenon headlights are...
— DiamondJim (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 11:23:28 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Xenons aren't blinding. They draw attention and people tend to stare directly into them. I'm Not sure why. I have no problem with Xenons. The next time you see a Xenon equipped vehicle on the road, try not to stare at the headlights.
— LexSucks (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 12:54:53 PM | | Votes: 11

Ya xenons should actually be less blinding b/c the light is more directed down at the pavement, away from oncoming traffic. They are a lot brighter though, so if there's rough or uneven terrain, causing the lights to get directed eye-level, you better look away!
— budfrogS4 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 10:05:37 AM | | Votes: 0

Bull sh*% they're not blinding! Every time a stupid Escalade gets behind me with Xenon lights, I cant see anything because the lights in the rear view mirror are so blinding. I dont mind Xenons on sports cars or small cars where they're low to the ground and pointing downward but once the headlight is dead level with my rear view mirror, it doesnt matter which direction the light is pointing.
— Threepoint1415926 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 2:39:45 PM | | Votes: 4

I get that problem with tall vehicles with Halogen bulbs as well. It isn't only xenons.
— LexSucks (View Profile)

Posted on 6/3/2008 3:28:48 PM | | Votes: 0

Should look sick
— BJS470 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 12:23:31 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6

yay....
— Peyton18 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 12:33:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Wow, gonna be bright as hell. I wonder if you turn on the high beams, the low beams stay on.
— lakerfan213 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 5:20:35 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

We did some development work for a company building advanced LED back-lighting for LCD panels, and you could permanently damage your eyes if you looked at the LEDs at high-brightness.
(we were working on panels with > 1 kilowatt of LEDs per circuit-board, adhered to "cold-plates" with liquid cooling)

You shouldn't look directly at any headlights, but I hope they aren't the most powerful LEDs out, as those can cause damage.
— DieselRules (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 7:04:33 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

That was a concern of mine, Aside from that very serious safety question they are great. Just because the goverment allows it doesn't mean the LEDs are safe.Are they safer since you worked on them Dieselrules?
— truckmen (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 4:43:17 AM | | Votes: 1

I agree on the gov't, becaue there are alot of cars that i can't see the fron turn signal unless I am directly in front of it. from an angle, I can't see them on alot of new Domestic cars, like the F150. The turn indicators need to be on the fron corner so they can be seen by people that aren't facing the vehicle head on. Also I think all cars should have side indicators. How many times have you been in the left lane and the other car is in the right lane and you both want to get into the middle lane or get over to get into the right lane and you can't see his turn signal and he can't see yours so you both move into the venter lane at the same time and nearly cause a pile up. Had one or both of the cars had a side indicator the drivers would know the other driver is trying to get into that lane and one couls yield to the other, provided at least one of the drivers had their turn signal on. Howz that for safety overlooked?
— 85bmw745i (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 7:47:35 PM | | Votes: 3

If an R8 is crap car, I hate to think what the M5, M6, and M3 are in relation to it? Diarrhea I guess.
— VISO (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 9:37:10 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 7

Don't feed the trolls
— Matthew1 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 11:00:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

Man I am a BMW fan, and you make us look bad, and the R8 is not FWD based. You are almost acting as bad as Michael Taylor, but I won't be that cruel and say you are acting the same him, just that that comment is close to his level of ignorance.
— 85bmw745i (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 7:50:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

Amazinbimmer has a point. There isn't an Audi under $45k that is competitive with the cars in which it competes against.
— LexSucks (View Profile)

Posted on 6/3/2008 3:30:55 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Actually, the ONLY Audi for under $45K that's not competitive is the A4 3.2. The 2.0T, both A3s and the TT lineup are all very competitive.
— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 6/4/2008 1:45:28 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Your such a twat amazinBimmer, geez u sound like what a 5 year old? I'd actually hate to know how old your are because if your are a respectful age, i feel for you cause your soo retarded.

Becuase FWD is silly, and LED are random lights, oh Audi making crap cars??? Please....get over your BMW fanboism. At least have a properly structured argument with some fact and maybe people won't think your such a tool
— DasAuto (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 8:17:16 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5

What are you going to use as a reference?

A BMW advertisment feature?

You couldn't give a structured argument if your pathetic excuse for a life depended on it.

How's the country club?
— Matthew1 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/1/2008 11:36:20 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5

@ amazinBimmer,

I'll engage you in that argument.

But first you must do me a favor, please?

Since this all got started over LED headlights on an Audi (or as you prefer, VW), let's do a little role-play, no?

I'll play the part of the "headlights".

You'll play the "deer"!

Ready?
(...Ah, who am I kidding? You won't see it coming!)
— Bored (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 1:39:28 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

Well, fwd cars are not as inferior when there is snow and ice on the ground. Although I hate fwd, they do have some positive aspects. Not many, but they still don't outweigh the negative aspects of fwd. still they have much better traction in the snow.
— 85bmw745i (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 7:52:29 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

"amazinBimmer" No one is that far ahead of anyone in the car biz when talking about technology. This is evident because of the fact that all car companies steal technological advancements from each other.

Yes even BMW! Their newest piece of borrowed technology is the M-DCT gearbox modeled after Audi's market leading DSG.
— MunichRob (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 12:50:41 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5

The V8 and the V10 that Audi uses have similar bore and stroke to the four and five cylinder engine that the Jetta uses. Lamborghini uses the same exact engine with a few modifications. So you are saying that the Gallardo uses a Jetta derived engine. It really doesn't, but the bore and stroke are similar.

DO YOU KNOW THAT BMW USES CHEVY TRANSMISSIONS IN ITS CARS?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_6L50_transmission

Anyways, moving on. Lets compare the "Jetta derived, so it must be crap" Lamborghini Gallardo engine to the BMW V10.

Gallardo: 560 horsepower (ps) and 398 lb-ft of torque from 5.2 liters.

BMW M5/M6 V10: 507 horsepower (ps) and 383 lb-ft of torque from 5 liters of displacement.

So please tell me exactly how the M5/M6 V10 is better than the one that Audi and Lamborghini use???
— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 10:01:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

haha keep up the good work amainbimmer. im tired of these audi guys thinking fwd or awd is better for the snow or something equally obnoxious. if a japanese automaker ever slapped on LEDs and called it a day, everyone would cry bloody ricer.
— gsh23 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 12:35:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

LOL M6 engine more advanced than Audi's R8?

Too bad BMW's engine in the M5 and M6 is placed in the front of the car and not in the middle the way the R8 has its engine....clearly a flawed placement of the engine for BMW.

No wonder the Audi R8 spanks the BMW M5 and M6 routinely.

Look at BMW rushing to copy Audi's DSG gearbox which first appeared in the Audi A3 more than 3 years ago.

Looks like BMW has to rip its technology from Audi in order to achieve a nice transmission because the BMW SMG is the biggest piece of junk known to man.

NO wonder the Audi S6 defeated the BMW M5 twice. The RS6 has also defeated the M5 and I can't wait for the Audi R8 to lay the smack down on BMW's M6 harder than the M6 has been kicked before.
— GermanNut (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 12:57:25 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

BMW desn't make anything to compete with the r8. the 6 is a large coupe, the R8 is more of an exotic, lightweight speed machine, more comparable to the carerra gt. The M1 concept would be more of a competitor to the R8.
— 85bmw745i (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 7:55:42 PM | | Votes: 2

Everyone copies. forst it was the 5 spd auto then the smg, even toyota put an smg in the mr spider. then the 6 spd so on and so fourth. you can't have one car maker make a leap in technology and expect everyone not to follow suite because they don't want to copy, otherwise no-one else would have fuel injection, power steering, ABS, Airbags, variable valve timing, seatbelts, run flat tires, the list goes on and on. ETC.
— 85bmw745i (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 9:01:39 PM | | Votes: 1

Audi's LEDs are a lot more striking than BMW's corny corona rings. Don't worry amazinIdiot, you will start to see A4s all over the place in a few more months.
— GermanNut (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 1:06:29 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Oh please, I'm and Audi fan, but BMW's corona lights are a tie in to the company long history of four headlamps, Audi LEDs are just trendy eyebrows.
— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 4:23:46 PM | | Votes: 3

Why does it matter if Audi is the first with full-LED headlights? Lexus was the first ever with led highlights and came out more than a year ago on the LS600h. Kia used led front turn signals years ago... All Audi is doing is putting past technology together in one package.. There is no innovation for that.. Why didn't Lexus get as much news for being the first production car actually on the streets with LED headlights? Thats a true accomplishment.

I'm not sure many people here understand the challenge in getting LEDs bright enough to use as headlights. I bet even less know what the LEDs look like. There might only be a few people who even know the company that made the actually LEDs and headlights that are going to be used.. When dealing with LEDs in headlights, there are numerous problems with heat, optics, protection, etc.. You can't just drop these high powered LEDs in like regular bulbs or 5mm and 3mm LEDs. Lexus was the first to implement LED headlights and should be getting the attention for innovation. Audi is a couple years late to the game and wants to make a statement by saying that they use an all LEDs like they really developed something new... It pisses me off how ignorant and hard headed some people on here are..

— SilentNightR34 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 9:03:31 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

Ha and lower energy consumption?The most efficient LED dies are at about 100lm/W at full power which recently came out from Cree. The dies used in this headlight are probably running at 70 lm/W maximum. You would need at least 45 watts to run at 3000lm which is about equal to HIDs. They probably run more LED's to get the same light output on low beams and prevent overdriving the LEDs when the high beams are turned on.
— SilentNightR34 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 9:13:09 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

I think Audi said that the power comsumption might be a little higher/about the same as HID, but you get much more usable/whiter light.

Lexus had low beam LEDs, Audi has 100% LED lighting. You can say both are milestones in lighting techonology.

The V8 and the V10 that Audi uses have similar bore and stroke to the four and five cylinder engine that the Jetta uses. Lamborghini uses the same exact engine with a few modifications. So you are saying that the Gallardo uses a Jetta derived engine. It really doesn't, but the bore and stroke are similar.

DO YOU KNOW THAT BMW USES CHEVY TRANSMISSIONS IN ITS CARS?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_6L50_transmission

Anyways, moving on. Lets compare the "Jetta derived, so it must be crap" Lamborghini Gallardo engine to the BMW V10.

Gallardo: 560 horsepower (ps) and 398 lb-ft of torque from 5.2 liters.

BMW M5/M6 V10: 507 horsepower (ps) and 383 lb-ft of torque from 5 liters of displacement.

So please tell me exactly how the M5/M6 V10 is better than the one that Audi and Lamborghini use???
— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 10:00:19 PM | | Votes: 1

High beams is only a matter on either turning on or passing more current through the LEDs that are already there... More current only shortens the lifespan. Heat is added when additional LEDs are turned on which also reduces life and maximum light output... I'm sure Lexus could have done the same but wanted to maintain the lifetime by reducing any added stress onto the LEDs.. They probably isolated each of the LEDs so there is less heat transfered between them....
— SilentNightR34 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/2/2008 11:28:02 PM | | Votes: 1

If Audi was able to do this, and Lexus couldn't = advantage Audi.
— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 6/3/2008 12:29:41 AM | | Votes: 1

What? Lexus could have done it but probably wanted to maintain the lifetime.. Its not like the lifetime will reduce to a few hours but instead of a 30% light output decrease in 50,000 hours, there would be a 50% decrease in light output or more. The R8 would probably be out of use by the time the headlights degrade to that amount unless the driver drives only at night for years and years. Lexus probably doesn't want the owner to deal with the hassle and expense of changing the headlight assembly or replacing the LEDs. Lexus made that call because of reliability, not because they couldn't.
— SilentNightR34 (View Profile)

Posted on 6/3/2008 2:08:22 PM | | Votes: 1

BFD. They will get stolen just like my HIDS.
— NoFHoes (View Profile)

Posted on 6/3/2008 10:03:51 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

COULD WE PLEASE BAN THE TROLLS???
— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 6/4/2008 1:47:11 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]

Email Me When Someone Replies To My Message

Audi first with full-LED headlights

About the Author

User Comments

Add your Comments

Submit an article

Photo Galleries

Cars

Autoshows

Latest Articles