FAQ - Q&A:

You talk about excess changing capacity of the motorcycle. What do you mean by that?
 
   Every motorcycle with a battery and alternator (or generator) produces some amount of electricity (if working correctly). If we take everything on a motorcycle or vehicle that consumes electricity while the bike/vehicle is running (headlights, blinkers, horn, coils & spark plugs, CDI, et cetera) and add it together, we arrive at some amount of electricity required (we'll call this consumption level the Baseline Draw for our purposes). The electrical system of all modern motorcycles is designed to exceed the baseline draw by some percentage (at least by 5k RPM), to ensure that the battery stays charged up, and that the battery recovers whatever power was consumed during starting the bike. For our purposes in explaining these concepts, we'll call the whatever the bike's electrical system produces above required the baseline draw the Excess Charging Capacity.
   Different kinds of bikes come with different baseline draws and differing degrees of excess charging capacity. Pure sports bikes (like the Suzuki GSXR series, or the Honda 954RR) are usually built with minimized baseline draws, and minimum excess charging capacities, to help keep the weight of the bike down (less power moving around means they can use a smaller battery, a smaller alternator or generator, and thinner wires, all of which reduce the total weight of the bike).
   Heavy sports-tourers (such as the Honda Gold Wing, BMW K1200 series) and upper/mid-class sports-tourers (such as the Honda ST1300 and the Yamaha FRJ1300) are designed by their manufacturers to inherently produce higher amounts of excess charging capacity, because the riders of these bikes are expected by the manufacturers to add on additional power-drawing equipment beyond that supplied with the bike (such as heated hand grips, radar detectors, radio & CD players, extra lighting, et cetera).
   Then there's everything else, which falls somewhere inbetween. Some bikes have small excess charging capacities (8% to 25%), while others have larger excess charging capacities (35% to 50%). Even within the same year and model of bike, any two bikes can have significant differences in the actual excess charging capacity due to variations in the charging system (rectifier pack, voltage regulator), battery condition, actual load.

---

Balancing Act:
   It is important that you always leave your bike, even after adding equipment, with a degree of power surplus (excess charging capacity), so that you leave power to recharge the battery from negative draw conditions (such as starting the bike). We recommend at least a 10% excess be left after adding any equipment.
   It is also important to note that some bikes run at a negative excess charging capacity at idle (such as the original Honda VFR700's), and only generate a positive excess above a certain RPM. The best way to be sure you are not drawing too heavily when you plan on adding lighting or other equipment is to add a gauge to inform you of the current status, and to ensure that any additional equipment has a switch to turn it off.

---

I know in certain cars euro spec lights are better than DOT ones.
 
   It's true that DOT lighting specifications (specifically for cars) often result in lense and reflector designs that do not place as much of the light into the sweet spot in front of the car that Euro-spec headlight casings do. Do not confuse this with the lights producing less light -- they usually use the same bulb technology, and produce the same amount of candle power or lumens -- but the DOT standard spreads that light out further, reducing the harshness between the dark and the lighted areas, while the Euro-specs (such as on our Audi) tend to form a harsher line between the lit areas and the unlit areas. It's a matter of taste, where you drive (urban vs. rural) and legalities.
   To the best of my knowledge, Japanese and European-built motorcycles don't have that same twin-market variation for acceptable focus designs. The only difference I know of between the US and certain other motorcycle markets are in the bulb wiring and bulbs. In Europe, pre-1997 motorcycles were only permitted to light up one headlight bulb on low-beam (dim as it's called in the UK); the EU changed that regulation for 98+ motorcycles, although some manufacturers continued to ship single low-beam set-ups on their dual-headlight motorcycles to specific European countries (Denmark comes to mind). Another continental difference is power levels: E.G. - the UK market version of the GSX600F & GSX750F (Katana) uses the same reflectors and lense system as the US model, but the bulb spec (55+55 watts, instead of the US spec 60+55 watts).

As for HID lighting, who would want to put one on a bike anyway... dont the ballasts weigh a lot for those things?
 
   About 10 lbs at most, although weights on ballasts have been dropping in recent years as manufacturers figure out how to make them deal with their own heat better (early models had huge aluminum heat sinks). In the weight category for most sports-tourers (fairly heavy bikes), it wouldn't make a noticeable difference. On the other hand, the start-up surge for igniting the plasma reaction in the gas could be very noticeable (very heavy draw initially).
   As for why to put one on a bike -- the same obvious reasons they put them in cars, both from the factory and aftermarket: 40%-80% more light delivered to the road than the stock H4 halogen lights, in a brighter, higher-contrast lightwave length (higher-contrast in terms of typical human sight).

What about lights that are higher in luminescence (brighter), BUT more efficient, after all heating a wire for light isn't the best energy conversion to light.

1. Cheap enough for mass production;
2. Put out light that's generally yellowish-white or white (good visibility to humans);
3. Stand up to the environment in a car or motorcycle (vibration, temp, exposure); AND
4. Be focusable and from a small source (the reason flourscent technology isn't used in car lighting -- too big a volume requirement for the amount of light needed, even though it's much more energy efficient than halogen).

Could you plug in a bulb into a motorcycle that requires same or less wattage but pumps out better luminescene [more lumens]?
 
   If it drew the same or less electricity and ran at the same temperature or lower, and connected to your existing power type (12-15V DC), created light concentrated in the same spot as the current bulb (to maintain the focus), you could use it with no problems. Does such a creature exist? I doubt it, or else it would be in wide-spread use (of course, there are high-efficiency xenon-halogen bulbs out there, but they are already in wide-spread use).

What's the feasibility of LED Headlights at this point (like those shown on the Audi prototype at the Geneva Auto Show)?
 
   These comments came from a technical conversation I had in late November, 2003, with the US representative for Nachia, one of the world's leading LED manufacturers. If a few years has passed since then, this information may be technically outdated. In a nutshell: we are currently at 3rd Generation LED-technology levels, and that's insufficient. Maybe 4th generation or 5th generation Super-LED's will make it happen.
   Current market leader in the headlight LED game is LumiLex (lumilux?) (naturally I will probably follow up with Lumilux too), who have gotten there by increasing the physical dimensions of their LED's (but even their product isn't ready for prime time by a long shot). It was Lumilux's LED's that appeared in the Audi prototype at the Geneva Auto Show. Still, they are a pipe dream at this stage as a headlight technology, and hopes are pinned on developing a LED light engine in a 3 to 5 year horizon for an 8 year horizon of implementation (a light engine is the back-end of a light assembly, to which auto manufacturers design their casing and glass around). Apparently, LED's are moving along at about half the rate of Moore's law, in terms of progression of light quantity (lumens or candlepower) emitted, so they aren't progressing as fast as some might hope.
 
   The major problems for an effective headlight assembly are:

1. Raw LED cost (preassembly) to do it effectively. We're talking a projected cost of $400 - $1k or so for the number of lumens you need, without addressing any of the other issues below.
    
2. Focus. Hundreds of LED's, each having at least two focal points (one at 90 degrees to the main focal point), provide a serious issue in focusing the light effectively (much less focusing to the degree that it would pass muster with DOT's requirements). On the other hand, wide-spread LED's exist that are excellent for "See Me" requirements (such as marker lights and daytime running lights).
    
3. Heat generated. That many LED's clustered together would generate a significant amount of heat. Since LED's run around 2-3 volts for the brightest ones, even more heat would be generated by whatever is used to step down the voltage and keep it at a stable level as the bike's electrical system varies between 12.2 and 14.8 volts with the RPM.
    
4. Heat exposure. LED's are actually rather heat intolerant, and one of the major issues against putting them in cars is the need to ensure they do not get exposed to temps above 150 - 170¡ (F). This is a design issue for the assembly design, and probably wouldn't be as much of an issue for motorcycles because the headlights tend to be held forward and away from the engines. Still problematic because of heat coming off the oil/water radiator(s), but he didn't mention that.
    
5. Compliance -- with DOT requirements for focus, lumens actively put on the road, etc.
    

He did say there was a conference in the next few days (Friday or Monday) in Southfield, Michigan for the major players in the industry about the direction of LED headlight and daytime running light technologies (GM, Ford, Chrysler, and possibly Harley will be represented).
   He also said that his firm was already working with one particular firm that was trying to design an aftermarket bolt-on LED based headlight for the off-road and Harley markets in particular, with the off-road market as their first target (since no DOT requirements exist for off-road vehicles); they have a projected 18 to 36 month time frame for getting the off-road version out, and the street version after that (with a hint that they weren't worrying about complying with DOT requirements even for the street version at this point -- a disclaimer in the package would be enough at this stage).
   To be effective, what is really needed is a higher lumen to watt ratio (for heat reasons), and a higher lumen to cost ratio (for economic reasons).

What you really need to know...

INCREASING THE LIGHT TO THE ROAD SURFACE:
 
You have five basic choices:

1. Replace the stock bulb (E.G. - 55 watt draw on low beam/60 watt draw on high beam, commonly written 55/60) with a bulb that draws the same current and yet produces more light (Example: for 55/60 H4's, you could try the Sylvania SuperStars or HELLA Part Number 8GJ 002 525-821, both of which are said to be a 55/60 draw with a +50 watt output efficiency, effectively producing the light of a 105/110).
   Short Term: No problems, more light.
   Long Term: Runs somewhat hotter (temperature wise inside the casing), resulting in earlier failure of the silver backing on the back of the reflector housing.
   End Result: More light now is more important, and if you have to replace the reflector in ten years of use instead of in twelve years, so what.
   Final Analysis: Good choice.
    
2. Replace the stock bulb (55/60) with a bulb that draws the more current (say an 85/100 or a 100/110). Use the same wiring. This produces more light and more heat.
   Short Term: More light in the same place, fuses popping every so often, wires running at higher-than-rated loads and thus the wires start overheating. Sooner or later, the wiring or the bulb retainer melts, or the wire catches fire. Fuses are annoying in that they go out regularly too.
   Long Term: Electrical nightmares (melted insulation, melted bulb retainers, wires getting glowingly hot, possible electrical fire, failed headlights and, rare, but does happen -- possible failed rectifier to the alternator). Melted insulation = unexpected shorts, which will kill the battery and/or rectifier pack, requiring replacement. Plus shorter life on the silver reflective coating on the headlight reflector (more watts = more heat, even with the same watt per lumen rating). Less of an issue if you only run short distances (the wires don't have as much time to heat up), but still asking for problems.
   End Result: More light now, but this starts getting really costly, not to mention dangerous, since you have no clue when or how failure will occur, or when you can expect the wiring to fry.
   Final Analysis: Really stupid choice.
    
3. Replace the stock bulb (55/60) with a bulb that draws the more current (say an 85/110 or a 100/110). Upgrade the wiring, fuse and relay to be rated to handle the extra load plus a safety margin. This produces more light and more heat. You can find premade kits to do this upgrade at various vendors, including: SUV Lights@tripod. You can also get the suitable parts at NAPA + Radio Shack, and some better-stocked auto parts stores.
   Short Term: No problems, A lot more light in exactly the same spot.
   Long Term: Bit more draw on the charging system may cause failure of the battery and rectifier pack to the alternator at an accelerated rate, causing failure in 4 years rather than 5 (or 8 years rather than 9). Plus shorter life on the silver reflective coating on the headlight reflector, causing it to fail in 4 years rather than 8 years.
   End Result: More light now, a somewhat accelerated wear schedule for certain components, but a worthwhile trade-off if you drive in unlit locations or have even a hint of night-blindness.
   Final Analysis: Good choice for a serious upgrade.
    
4. Leave the stock bulb (55/60) and wiring alone. Add additional lighting in the form of added driving lights (Halogen, Xenon or true HID) mounted to the underside of the center of the fairing, to a mounting bar, or to the forks. Seriously consider also mounting a charging/discharging anameter gauge in sight.
   Short Term: As long as you don't exceed your excess charging capacity, no problems, about the same useable light, but with a much bigger area illuminated.
   Long Term:Slightly higher probability of rectifier pack and/or alternator failure, plus shorter battery life expectancy by about 15%.
   End Result: More light now is more important, and if you have to replace the battery or rectifier in four years of use instead of in five years (or eight instead of ten), so what. Final Analysis: Good choice for a serious upgrade.
    
5. Replace the stock bulb (55/60) with a HID replacement, and wire in thicker wiring to support the extra draw when the HID first fires up.
   Short Term: You have to decide where to focus the HID, as it doesn't have dual beams (high beam or low beam, not both), unless the secondary beam is a halogen-filament bulb integrated into the HID. So, are you going to focus it as a high-pointing low beam, or as a low-pointing high beam?
   Long Term: Aside from the heat produced by the bulb and the power pack, no draw backs.
   End Result: Quite a lot more light now, with few drawbacks if your bike has the space to store the ballast system in a dry location.
   Final Analysis: Good (if expensive) choice for a serious upgrade.