IIHS tests headlights on midsize cars to shocking results (a wake up call for ALL automakers)

[CIF]

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/deskt...-headlight-ratings-show-most-need-improvement

First-ever IIHS headlight ratings show most need improvement

ARLINGTON, Va. — The Toyota Prius v is the only midsize car out of 31 evaluated to earn a good rating in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's first-ever headlight ratings.

The best available headlights on 11 cars earn an acceptable rating, while nine only reach a marginal rating. Ten of the vehicles can't be purchased with anything other than poor-rated headlights.

A vehicle's price tag is no guarantee of decent headlights. Many of the poor-rated headlights belong to luxury vehicles.

"If you're having trouble seeing behind the wheel at night, it could very well be your headlights and not your eyes that are to blame," says David Zuby, IIHS executive vice president and chief research officer.

The ability to see the road ahead, along with any pedestrians, bicyclists or obstacles, is an obvious essential for drivers. However, government standards for headlights, based on laboratory tests, allow huge variation in the amount of illumination that headlights provide in actual on-road driving. With about half of traffic deaths occurring either in the dark or in dawn or dusk conditions, improved headlights have the potential to bring about substantial reductions in fatalities.

Recent advances in headlight technology make it a good time to focus on the issue. In many vehicles, high-intensity discharge (HID) or LED lamps have replaced halogen ones. Curve-adaptive headlights, which swivel according to steering input, are also becoming more widespread.

Research has shown advantages for the new headlight types, but they don't guarantee good performance. The Institute's headlight rating system doesn't favor one lighting technology over the other, but simply rewards systems that produce ample illumination without excessive glare for drivers of oncoming vehicles.

How headlights are evaluated
Headlights are evaluated on the track after dark at the IIHS Vehicle Research Center. A special device measures the light from both low beams and high beams as the vehicle is driven on five different approaches: traveling straight, a sharp left curve, a sharp right curve, a gradual left curve and a gradual right curve.

Glare for oncoming vehicles also is measured from low beams in each scenario to make sure it isn't excessive.

Headlights are tested as received from the dealer. Although the vertical aim of headlights can be adjusted on most vehicles, IIHS doesn't change headlight aim because few vehicle owners ever do and some manufacturers advise consumers not to.

After a vehicle is tested on the track, IIHS engineers compare its visibility and glare measurements to those of a hypothetical ideal headlight system and use a scheme of demerits to determine the rating. Results for low beams are weighted more heavily than high beams because they are used more often. The readings on the straightaway are weighted more heavily than those on the curves because more crashes occur on straight sections of road.

Vehicles equipped with high-beam assist, which automatically switches between high beams and low beams depending on the presence of other vehicles, may earn back some points taken off for less-than-ideal low beam visibility. This credit is given only for approaches on which the glare threshold isn't exceeded and on which the high beams provide additional visibility compared with the low beams.

A vehicle with excessive glare on any of the approaches can't earn a rating above marginal.

One good rating out of 82
Vehicles can be equipped with different headlights, so there are a total of 82 headlight ratings for 2016 models even though there are only 31 vehicles. The Institute is rating every possible headlight combination as it becomes available from dealers.

The Prius v earns a good rating when equipped with LED lights and high-beam assist. To get those headlights, consumers must purchase the advanced technology package, which is only available on the highest trim level. When equipped with regular halogen lights and without high-beam assist, the Prius v earns a poor rating.

"The Prius v's LED low beams should give a driver traveling straight at 70 mph enough time to identify an obstacle on the right side of the road, where the light is best, and brake to a stop," says Matthew Brumbelow, an IIHS senior research engineer. "In contrast, someone with the halogen lights would need to drive 20 mph slower in order to avoid a crash."

Among the 44 headlight systems earning a poor rating, the halogen lights on the BMW 3 series are the worst. A driver with those headlights would have to be going 35 mph or slower to stop in time for an obstacle in the travel lane. A better choice for the same car is an LED curve-adaptive system with high-beam assist, a combination that rates marginal.

Curve-adaptive systems don't always lead to better ratings. The Cadillac ATS, Kia Optima and Mercedes-Benz C-Class all earn poor ratings even when equipped with adaptive low and high beams.

In the case of the Optima, a big problem is glare. Its curve-adaptive system provides better visibility than its non-adaptive lights, but produces excessive glare for oncoming vehicles on all five low beam approaches.

One of the best headlight systems evaluated has none of the new technology. The basic halogen lights on the Honda Accord 4-door earn an acceptable rating, while an LED system with high-beam assist available on the Accord earns only a marginal.

2016 midsize cars
Best available headlight system for each model

Good
Toyota Prius v

Acceptable
Audi A3
Honda Accord 4-door
Infiniti Q50
Lexus ES
Lexus IS
Mazda 6
Nissan Maxima
Subaru Outback
(built after Nov. 2015)
Volkswagen CC
Volkswagen Jetta
Volvo S60

Marginal
Acura TLX
Audi A4
BMW 2 series
BMW 3 series
Chrysler 200
Ford Fusion
Lincoln MKZ
Subaru Legacy
Toyota Camry

Poor
Buick Verano
Cadillac ATS
Chevrolet Malibu
Chevrolet Malibu Limited
(fleet model)
Hyundai Sonata
Kia Optima
Mercedes-Benz C-Class
Mercedes-Benz CLA
Nissan Altima
Volkswagen Passat

So only ONE vehicle out of 31 got a good rating.
Those 31 vehicles have a total of 82 total standard and optional headlight combinations, and only ONE earned a good rating.
Absolutely embarrassing and unacceptable.
Not a SINGLE midsize luxury car tested here earned a good rating. Only the mass-market Prius V earned a good rating, and that's only with an optional package on the highest trim level.
Nobody should be forced to get a top trim optional-equipped Prius V just to get good headlight performance.

I KNEW there was a serious issue with headlights on modern cars, and now the IIHS has confirmed my worries. This is an issue that has been close to my heart for quite a while now. Over the years I've driven a variety of modern and new cars, and for most vehicles I often wondered why was the night low beam illumination so mediocre or poor. Very rarely was low beam night illumination good or great on modern vehicles that I've driven.

Every time I drive at night, it feels like it gets more and more dangerous, even though modern cars are supposed to make things less dangerous. Any time I drive at night nowadays, I am almost literally blinded either by excessive glare or by people with high beams constantly turned on. Yes even with my dimmed mirror, this still happens as I often get tremendous glare on my side mirrors. This is what happens when automakers get addicted to chasing the trend of the day and gimmicks instead of providing real world, genuine improvements.

Technology like high-beam assist should be mandatory or standard on as many vehicles possible. It helps protect everyone else on the road from ignorant or poor drivers by automatically adjusting the high beams for those drivers, since seemingly many people on the road aren't able to do so themselves.

Additionally, auto-dimming rearview mirrors should be mandatory or standard on as many vehicles as possible. This is a genuine and legitimate safety improvement and advantage. A lot of drivers with manual dimming mirrors don't even realize they have a manual dimming feature on their rearview mirror.

Automakers should further innovate and improve side mirror technology. Auto-dimming side mirrors should be mandatory or standard on as many vehicles as possible. Either that, or come up with another alternative technology that reduces excessive glare at night on side mirrors, and make that as mandatory or standard as possible.

IMHO, automakers are wasting too much time and money on gimmicks and trends like "internet connected" cars, touch this, gesture that, instead of genuine advancements and innovations like mentioned above. A great example of this is in the above IIHS results. Even some cars that have LED or HID curve-adaptive low and high beams still score poorly. So having the latest technology trend doesn't guarantee good headlights whatsoever.

All of the above is even more-so relevant to luxury vehicles. I have rather high expectations for luxury vehicles, but I feel that most people should. In a true luxury vehicle, I expect the vehicle to anticipate or at least have capability to reduce or eliminate annoyances and inconveniences. Over the decades there's been lots of focus in luxury vehicles on NVH, ride quality, comfort, durability, overall quality, technology, and so forth. There's still lots of improvement that can be done, given the above headlight issue as a glaring example.

I hope this is a serious wake up call that pushes automakers to drastically improve their headlight systems.

 

[Och]

I personally try not to drive at night on remote roads after a few incidents with deer, moose, foxes, and other wild animal - but if I have to drive at night for an extended period of time, I prefer to drive an SUV over a sedan. It is just so much less tiring due to not being blinded by oncoming cars, thanks to higher seating position. This is not something that dimming mirrors or better headlights could help with.

 

[RAL]

I personally try not to drive at night on remote roads after a few incidents with deer, moose, foxes, and other wild animal - but if I have to drive at night for an extended period of time, I prefer to drive an SUV over a sedan. It is just so much less tiring due to not being blinded by oncoming cars, thanks to higher seating position. This is not something that dimming mirrors or better headlights could help with.

I agree with your point ... if I have to drive at night I prefer our NX to our ES. Pre-dawn last year we were driving to the hospital for a scheduled test. Out of the darkness a deer struck our RX. The front wheel absorbed most of the energy. It might have been a very different story had we been in the lower profile ES with the deer landing on the hood and possibly coming through the windshield. But, back on thread point, better head-lighting technology may have well helped us spot the deer earlier in order to avoid the accident.

 

[CIF]

I personally try not to drive at night on remote roads after a few incidents with deer, moose, foxes, and other wild animal - but if I have to drive at night for an extended period of time, I prefer to drive an SUV over a sedan. It is just so much less tiring due to not being blinded by oncoming cars, thanks to higher seating position. This is not something that dimming mirrors or better headlights could help with.

Valid point, except that sadly this does not work too well in some parts of North America, as well as other countries. For example, here in my part of Canada this just doesn't fly. The problem is that there are tons of jacked-up SUVs and trucks driving around here. So even if you're in an SUV, you'll still be blinded by these jacked-up rigs at night. It becomes a losing battle, because then at this point to be at a higher seating position, you literally have to be driving a monster truck. On top of this, some of these jacked-up rigs also have light bars on the roof, which are semi-legal here, and in other parts of North America I imagine. So in such situations, a high seating position won't help you. In such situations, technology like inside and outside auto-dimming mirrors genuinely does help.

Of course when it comes to the issue of actual collisions, then yes due to the laws of physics SUVs and big trucks do better than sedans in collisions. I'm sure everyone here would agree that avoiding a collision in the first place is more important.

I agree with your point ... if I have to drive at night I prefer our NX to our ES. Pre-dawn last year we were driving to the hospital for a scheduled test. Out of the darkness a deer struck our RX. The front wheel absorbed most of the energy. It might have been a very different story had we been in the lower profile ES with the deer landing on the hood and possibly coming through the windshield. But, back on thread point, better head-lighting technology may have well helped us spot the deer earlier in order to avoid the accident.

I'm curious to see future results of IIHS testing SUV and truck headlights and seeing how those do.

 

[Och]

Valid point, except that sadly this does not work too well in some parts of North America, as well as other countries. For example, here in my part of Canada this just doesn't fly. The problem is that there are tons of jacked-up SUVs and trucks driving around here. So even if you're in an SUV, you'll still be blinded by these jacked-up rigs at night. It becomes a losing battle, because then at this point to be at a higher seating position, you literally have to be driving a monster truck. On top of this, some of these jacked-up rigs also have light bars on the roof, which are semi-legal here, and in other parts of North America I imagine. So in such situations, a high seating position won't help you. In such situations, technology like inside and outside auto-dimming mirrors genuinely does help.

When being blinded from the rear, dimming mirrors pretty much solve the issue completely, no matter what kind of car you're driving. But when being blinded by oncoming traffic, its still better to be in an SUV - even if you're still being blinded, its not going to be as bad as in a sedan.

With that said, there are a few tips I wanted to share about proper use of headlights. Many people use their headlights improperly. For example, some people drive with their high beams in fog conditions - and all that light is just being reflected from the fog, making visibility even worse. Or, some people drive on dark highways with their fog lights on - that bright spot of light directly in front of the car may make them comfortable, but its actually preventing their eyes from seeing further ahead. By the time they see anything (say an animal) in the spot of light, it will be too late to avoid it.

And then of course you have people driving cars with dirty headlights, headlights that have completely yellowed, headlights that are misaligned, cheap HID conversions, and who could forget the old fart doing 10 below limit in the left lane with his high beams on.

 

[IS-SV]

Good points on need for better headlight technology, especially in the US where other safety regs have progressed successfully and contribute to lower death rates.

 

[spwolf]

Good points on need for better headlight technology, especially in the US where other safety regs have progressed successfully and contribute to lower death rates.

better headlight tech does not exist... problem is that current headlight tech is used badly - it is optimized to look cool not to cover most parts of the road.

It is silly that Prius v gets the best rating and that cars like C class with expensive headlight technology gets worst rating... or that BMW 3 series halogens get worse rating than 50% cheaper regular cars with halogen lights.

What i personally find interesting is that when German magazines like AutoBild test headlights, they get opposite results from these. I wonder if they calibrate the headlights on the test to score better, there is no other solution since in their test, German cars light up the road like there is a sun outside while every other manufacturer you can barely see in front of the car (Toyota/Lexus always ends up rating as if you cant see anything).

 

[mikeavelli]

Well the IIHS can only blame themselves and other government agencies for their ass backwards 1960s requirements for headlights. We don't get the best a car manufacturer can offer.

To be honest not sure how they can say an Accord with Halogens is better than an Acura or many of these cars with LED lights. Its a night and day difference. I'm not even sure how halogens are legal anymore, they are nowhere as bright as LED's. I agree some LED's are worse than others.

So great, now cars will get even more ugly lol.

We keep TRYING TO MAKE CARS BETTER while NOT MAKING BETTER DRIVERS. Its a ridiculous circle. We need better DRIVER EDUCATION.

 

[spwolf]

Well the IIHS can only blame themselves and other government agencies for their ass backwards 1960s requirements for headlights. We don't get the best a car manufacturer can offer.

To be honest not sure how they can say an Accord with Halogens is better than an Acura or many of these cars with LED lights. Its a night and day difference. I'm not even sure how halogens are legal anymore, they are nowhere as bright as LED's. I agree some LED's are worse than others.

So great, now cars will get even more ugly lol.

We keep TRYING TO MAKE CARS BETTER while NOT MAKING BETTER DRIVERS. Its a ridiculous circle. We need better DRIVER EDUCATION.

I suggest you read the report.

a. Only technology not available in the US is partial light (high beam) blocking which has nothing to do with this report and would not improve results.
b. They can say Accord with Halogens is better because they tested it and they show in little video some of the differences. Ratings are based on how far you see in the night based on real life testing - so Accord with Halogens lights up the road further ahead than C class with their best LED headlights.

That little video they have explains a lot by just watching it... it shows the difference between Prius and 3 series I believe and it is easily seen on video.

 

[mikeavelli]

I suggest you read the report.

I suggest you dont believe everything the government says. I drive dozens of cars a year, I'll trust my take on things thank you.

 

[Och]

Don't be so quick to discount halogens. On a really dark pavement they seem to work better than HID/LED. The blush light of HID and LED seems to be absorbed too much by dark asphalt, but yellow halogen light is providing a nice contrast.

 

[mikeavelli]

I just drove a 2016 Avalon hybrid with halogens...in my personal opinion they are awful compared to a HID or LED setup. I had a base model so it came with halogens which shocked me.

 

[Gecko]

Seems to me like mainstream brands are moving towards offering HIDs as an option, and many premium makes are going to full LED with HIDs standard.

Audi's laser lights would be awesome to see... but our laws here are ass-backwards.

 

[CIF]

What i personally find interesting is that when German magazines like AutoBild test headlights, they get opposite results from these. I wonder if they calibrate the headlights on the test to score better, there is no other solution since in their test, German cars light up the road like there is a sun outside while every other manufacturer you can barely see in front of the car (Toyota/Lexus always ends up rating as if you cant see anything).

It's a German magazine, covering German brands...what do you expect? As the VW scandal has very clearly shown, the German media is very protective of the German auto industry and goes out of its way to make all German brands look great. In fact, even outside of the auto industry, if you look at big German brands in all industries, there is an important and common marketing theme which is "German made" or "German engineering". A huge part of Germany's economy is purely based on marketing and branding. Whether or not the marketing and branding is accurate or reflects reality is irrelevant, because a lot of people buy into it either way.

I personally would definitely trust the IIHS results over any Autobild results.

Well the IIHS can only blame themselves and other government agencies for their ass backwards 1960s requirements for headlights. We don't get the best a car manufacturer can offer.

To be honest not sure how they can say an Accord with Halogens is better than an Acura or many of these cars with LED lights. Its a night and day difference. I'm not even sure how halogens are legal anymore, they are nowhere as bright as LED's. I agree some LED's are worse than others.

So great, now cars will get even more ugly lol.

We keep TRYING TO MAKE CARS BETTER while NOT MAKING BETTER DRIVERS. Its a ridiculous circle. We need better DRIVER EDUCATION.

With all due respect, I think you might be confusing the IIHS with other government agencies.

The IIHS, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, is a private, non-profit organization funded by insurance companies. It is not a government agency. Government agencies love regulations because they make money on more regulations. The IIHS on the other hand, being funded by insurance companies, is different. Insurance companies make the most money when you simply pay your fees every month and there are no accidents. So therefore, it is in the best interest of the IIHS to reduce accidents. The IIHS has no role in vehicle regulations. However automakers do pay attention to IIHS results, for safety reasons.

That's why I mostly agree with these test results. As the test results showed, it's not simply a matter of brightness. It's a matter of whether the headlights are accurately calibrated from the factory, whether they cast an effectively wide beam, whether the beam effectively lights up a far distance of the road ahead, and whether the beam does not produce excessive glare. As I posted above, that's a major issue that I personally have; excessive glare from oncoming vehicles when I drive at night. As the IIHS rightfully points out, excessive glare is a safety issue, and they docked points in this test for any vehicles with excessive glare.

I also agree with these test results because I have driven many of the cars on the list, and honestly yes, a lot these models have mediocre or poor headlight performance. Sure many of them are bright or have "OMG HID" or "OMG LED" features, but brightness means very little in terms of effective headlight illumination of the road. Some vehicles I've been in that have very bright factory low beam HIDs or LEDs did not light up the road very far.

 

[mikeavelli]

It's a German magazine, covering German brands...what do you expect? As the VW scandal has very clearly shown, the German media is very protective of the German auto industry and goes out of its way to make all German brands look great. In fact, even outside of the auto industry, if you look at big German brands in all industries, there is an important and common marketing theme which is "German made" or "German engineering". A huge part of Germany's economy is purely based on marketing and branding. Whether or not the marketing and branding is accurate or reflects reality is irrelevant, because a lot of people buy into it either way.

I personally would definitely trust the IIHS results over any Autobild results.



With all due respect, I think you might be confusing the IIHS with other government agencies.

The IIHS, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, is a private, non-profit organization funded by insurance companies. It is not a government agency. Government agencies love regulations because they make money on more regulations. The IIHS on the other hand, being funded by insurance companies, is different. Insurance companies make the most money when you simply pay your fees every month and there are no accidents. So therefore, it is in the best interest of the IIHS to reduce accidents. The IIHS has no role in vehicle regulations. However automakers do pay attention to IIHS results, for safety reasons.

That's why I mostly agree with these test results. As the test results showed, it's not simply a matter of brightness. It's a matter of whether the headlights are accurately calibrated from the factory, whether they cast an effectively wide beam, whether the beam effectively lights up a far distance of the road ahead, and whether the beam does not produce excessive glare. As I posted above, that's a major issue that I personally have; excessive glare from oncoming vehicles when I drive at night. As the IIHS rightfully points out, excessive glare is a safety issue, and they docked points in this test for any vehicles with excessive glare.

I also agree with these test results because I have driven many of the cars on the list, and honestly yes, a lot these models have mediocre or poor headlight performance. Sure many of them are bright or have "OMG HID" or "OMG LED" features, but brightness means very little in terms of effective headlight illumination of the road. Some vehicles I've been in that have very bright factory low beam HIDs or LEDs did not light up the road very far.

I stand corrected on the Gov't agency part. Thank you. I still disagree with the results from my personal experience.

 

[mmcartalk]

I'm probably not the best source for comments on this issue, as I also test-drive a lot of vehicles, but mostly in the daytime when the regular headlights are not a factor except in long tunnels....just the DRLs (Daytime Running Lights). Nevertheless, what limited experience I DO have test-driving at night, plus my own experiences over the years with personal vehicles I've owned and driven at night, is that there really isn't that much difference, overall, between halogens and more expensive Bi-Xenons or LEDs. A FAR bigger difference, in my experience, was between halogens and the old rounded (sometimes square) sealed-beam headlights, which, in comparison, were absolutely primitive. The halogens were a tremendous advance in lighting over sealed-beams.....the Xenons and LEDs, another step forward over halogens, but IMO less so than the previous giant step.

 

[CIF]

I think that, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the results, one's view on this subject partially depends on where you live. If you live in an area of poorly lit roads, or lots of curvy, winding roads, your view on this may be different than if you live in an area with highly lit night roads, and straight and perpendicular roads.

 

[mmcartalk]

I think that, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the results, one's view on this subject partially depends on where you live. If you live in an area of poorly lit roads, or lots of curvy, winding roads, your view on this may be different than if you live in an area with highly lit night roads, and straight and perpendicular roads.

Absolutely. An excellent point. :thumbsup:Where I live, for example, you probably have to drive 40-50 miles in any direction (sometimes more) to reach truly rural, unlit conditions. That distance, of course, continues to increase with ever-growing suburban sprawl...it's getting like Los Angeles.