car-fi - Page 55

 

No, I mean to say that replacing headlights from "normal" to "new aftermarket with PROJECTORS" is pretty rice-tastic, like the typical Honda Civics with no-name Headlight conversions. Hmm... Maybe 7000k might be a bit overkill, but with that said, here HIDs without projector seems perfectly legal. Heck, they even offered HIDs on the Acura CSX as an option and that doesn't have projector headlights. 

Id be willing to bet those civics you are seeing are running what you planning (hid no projector), it is much cheaper than converting your whole headlight to projector housing. Believe me HIDs with the projectors are nice (4500k to 6000k), above 6000k or no projectors or even worse both is not so great. At least if you go with that system you will have Laker color lights thats a massive plus (purple RL and yellow FL)

Hahaha some has no projector, some does. Some Civics with the Aftermarket Projector headlights has some REALLY COOL carbon fiber trim along the headlamps . But converting looks SO stupid... I hate this word and often people get angry, but it's so "ricer"... Might as well throw in a useless spoiler. Yea, I never said projectors looked bad, and of course I know what looks nice and doesn't look nice. Ya, Lakers look Purp on Yellow. Meh, I just want HIDs so I can see more of the road while doing some backroad Rallying.

Then for that I would recommend you get some better halogen bulbs for your RL and convert the FL or maybe even High beams to HID and only use them in those situations where they are needed.

I put HID's in the second car I owned. Since then I have not had a car without them. Just saying...
 

Edited by Ponefish - 11/1/12 at 12:07pm

 

That's why I was contemplating HIDs because since I'm replacing the headlights, I was on the fence about HIDs

I'm certainly not suggesting you get some ebay craptastic projector HID bs lights... I was simply stating that they are not designed to be used in the manner you are suggesting that you'd like to use them in. I do HIDs in every car I have which came with projector housings (my BMWs for example), but I wouldn't put them in any which came with reflectors without first modding them to use a projector.

If you get decide to get some HID lighs you should buy Phillips or osram brand. But make sure they are real, I bet most or all of those brands on eBay are fake.
The real bulbs don't come cheap though. Id say the whole project after converting first to projector housing could cost $500+.

Or you could spend $50 on the DDM HID bulbs and ballasts and call it a day (aside from fitting some kind of projectors). Chinese for sure, but lifetime guarantee I believe. They work nicely on my BMW.

I bought my car with 8000k, they looked awful and didn't really illuminate the road that well. I replaced them with 5000k and aimed them fairly low so that I wouldn't blind people, but they still glare like sh*t. I'm considering a projector once I get the funds for it. I'm sure you could find a set of headlights that don't have that aftermarket look while still being properly functional with HIDs.

Here are my two cars... I can't remember the brands of some of the parts.

 

 

 

My Daily Driver

 

1999 Eclipse GS (Non Turbo)

AEM v2 Cold Air Intake

Header/Test Pipe/Catback (no catalylic converter)

underdrive pulley

custom ground kit

Eibach Sportlines

Tokico Shocks

Greddy strut bars

18" Enkei Rims

Chinese Sport Tires

aftermarket cd player with aux in

Pioneer Speakers

Random other bits I can't remember at the moment.

 

 

1998 Buixk Regal GS (Supercharged)

Intake

Catless 2.5" downpipe

Custom Ground Kit

Otherwise stock

Chinese tires and no cat makes me 

 

Removing the Cat Conv completely is pointless in my views. All it does is make a ton of noise and pollutes the air heavily.

Catalytic converter's mounts had rusted off.. road salt and cheap steel. The Buick's catalytic converter went bad.  It does makes more power without the cat.  Personally I think if the car isn't running rich the cat really doesn't make a difference. The tests that sport compact car magazine did back in the day support this to an extent.   I live in an area that doesn't do emissions testing, so spending out the wazoo to replace a defective part with another part that can become defective, is restrictive in stock form, and I consider useless....

 

I never remove a functioning one.... but I feel that replacing it is a useless gesture.  I was broke and the Chinese tires were well reviewed... They are z-rated sports tires, relatively sticky, and have worn well. A choice made from necessity that worked out well.

 

Oddly the Eclipse is still quieter than most around here, the test pipe has a resonator to replace it.  The Buick does sound a bit off without it but it was worth it.

Edited by cheapfi - 11/4/12 at 6:45pm

Here,s my babies:

 

A 2003 Alfa Romeo 166 and a 1999 Jeep XJ. Both very well looked after and almost impossible to find in similar shape.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tires I understand now because tires ARE expensive and seeing how the perform relatively well it seems like the good choice if you're running on a budget. But there are so many toxic elements and compounds that are being released into the air now after removing the Cat Conv. For me, I was shocked how much a Cat Conv does in reducing toxic elements and compounds. And since I actually enjoyed Chemistry in school, I know how harmful these elements and compounds actually are. Maybe I'm just a hippie 

 

Hmm... I heard that removing the Cat DOES give more power, but it's pretty much insignificant from what I was told. The majority of people will agree that removing a Cat has less benefits than negatives so to people like me, it's not really worth it in everyday driving. Luckily I don't live in an area where the air quality isn't bad, but I try to do my part in reducing emissions here and there.