Slashdot Mirror


BMW Working On Laser Headlamps

MrSeb writes "LED headlamps are only just trickling onto the market — mostly on high-end cars — but now it seems a certain German automaker has plans for laser headlamps. 'Laser light is the next logical step in car light development ... for series production within a few years in the BMW i8 plug-in hybrid,' says BMW. Lasers have the potential to be simultaneously more powerful, more efficient, and smaller than other headlamp types. Before you get too excited, though: the output of laser headlights will be modulated for safety."

330 comments

  1. Ah wonderful by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its not like the HID lamps fucking blind you enough as it is, we need LASERS! so we can be blinded up to 2 miles away

    1. Re:Ah wonderful by Scutter · · Score: 1

      So, you didn't even read the summary, much less the article?

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    2. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OK, how difficult is it to "unmodulate" the lasers? Inquiring minds want to know.

    3. Re:Ah wonderful by barlevg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They can say all they like that they'll be "modulated for safety," but the truth is that THIS GENERATION of LED headlights are too bright. My car is low to the ground, and I don't have the best of night vision, so on more than a few many a dark, rainy nights, I've been nearly blinded by the LED headlights of the SUV behind me to the point that it took several such incidents for me to realize these assholes didn't just have their high-beams on.

    4. Re:Ah wonderful by Osgeld · · Score: 0

      um yea I did, so they are modulating the lasers so it wont burn your retina, great, but you can still be blinded temporarly when its pitch dark out and some cockgobbler in their bmw SUV is behind you with 120,000 candlepower beaming in your rear view mirror.

      you would know this if you ever left the basement.

    5. Re:Ah wonderful by jandrese · · Score: 2

      Those HID headlamps are "modulated for safety" too, and that doesn't stop them from blinding every oncoming motorist the instant they're knocked even slightly out of alignment or those crazy cases where people drive on roads that aren't perfectly straight and level.

      I especially can't wait for the knockoff aftermarket replacement versions that don't even pretend to care about the safety of the other drivers.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    6. Re:Ah wonderful by nschubach · · Score: 2

      LED or Xenon?

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    7. Re:Ah wonderful by Osgeld · · Score: 2

      yea really, unmodulated HID lights can be bought at any hot rod shop, in microprint on the back it says "not for stree use"

    8. Re:Ah wonderful by mcvos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Its not like the HID lamps fucking blind you enough as it is, we need LASERS! so we can be blinded up to 2 miles away

      My thoughts exactly. Biking in the dark and rain, oncoming headlines make it impossible to see anything other than painful light surrounded by a lot of dark. I'd like to see headlamps toned down a bit.

    9. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you've never driven a car at night?

    10. Re:Ah wonderful by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      bypass the 2 solder points

    11. Re:Ah wonderful by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      yeah i've had that problem too. my ride was so damn low (~125cm from ground to highest spot) and big rear window (coupe model) that i ended up turning my rear view mirror towards roof on many occasions.

    12. Re:Ah wonderful by Splab · · Score: 1

      Don't look into oncoming trafic with remaining eye...

      I'm not too worried about the BMW version, they are not the xeon lights blinding you - I'm worried about the cheap knock offs bound to hit the shelves and be put into some youths car with absolutely no safety.

    13. Re:Ah wonderful by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      I disagree, BMW lights are obnoxiously bright, not nearly as bright as the vin desil wanna's but still retarded

    14. Re:Ah wonderful by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see headlamps toned down a bit.

      Reflective road signs, too.

      Around here they're so reflective and so frequent that they might as well flash spotlights in your face while you're driving.

      While you're at it, make it legal shoot assholes who come up behind, move out to overtake, put their indicator on when they get to the driver's window then slowly drift back into your lane two feet in front of you to make sure you see it properly in all it's daytime-brightness glory. On dual lane roads with nobody else around....

      [mutters something about lawns]

      --
      No sig today...
    15. Re:Ah wonderful by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

      By blinking your eyes.

      Do not look into laser headlight with remaining eye.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    16. Re:Ah wonderful by realcoolguy425 · · Score: 1

      The BMW Shark - 'with lasers' would market very well I thinks.

    17. Re:Ah wonderful by realityimpaired · · Score: 2

      My first thought was more along the lines of "what kind of idiot thought a laser would make a good flood lamp?"

      You don't need a point of light in your car headlights, you need a flood lamp that illuminates a large area. Either they're putting the mother of all lasers on their car, or they're running it through a light diffuser which would rather defeat the purpose of it being a laser. Or maybe it's not actually a laser, and this is just marketing drivel.

    18. Re:Ah wonderful by squizzar · · Score: 1

      On that note, someone needs to educate people on the correct occasions to use foglights (there's a clue in the name somewhere). Yes it's cool to have front foglights on your car, but you don't actually need them for anything but very bad conditions (so bad you should be turning your headlights off and using the front foglights exclusively). Turning them on in the rain reflects a lot of light back into your eyes and makes your night vision worse, and reflects a lot of light into my eyes, making me very scared. Heading towards some idiot who can't see where he's going, and is preventing you from seeing where you're going when you don't have the big steel safety box around you is not pleasant...

    19. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 2

      So, less work than installing aftermarket headlamps that are too bright, aimed wrong, and miscolored, the way people do currently?

    20. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Part of the problem is that most headlamps aren't aimed any more, but more of it has to do with the ridiculously large SUVs people are driving, that put the headlights higher and higher off the ground. Not to mention the modified lifted pickups that put the headlights even higher, and often lift the bumper well above legal limits so in a collision it will ride right over the hood or trunk of whatever they hit. I'm convinced that equipment rules need to be revisited and actually enforced, for public safety.

      Also, many of those oversized SUVs ought to have stricter licensing requirements, but that is another rant.

    21. Re:Ah wonderful by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      Yeah, those Opteron lights are really killer.

    22. Re:Ah wonderful by twistedsymphony · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure VW/Audi is the only manufacturer with LED headlights in production cars at this point... IIRC the 2010 Audi Q7 is the only production SUV with LED headlights, so unless you live in some really strange area where the entire population decided to buy Audi Q7s this year, I think you're confusing LED with HID, which are two COMPLETELY different technologies.

      Not to mention HIDs, despite being brighter, when designed and installed PROPERLY will actually do much less blinding than traditional halogen headlights.

      The problem are these jokers who install cheap retrofit kits in headlight housing that weren't designed for HIDs, this results in glare and uncontrolled light that will blind other motorists... Properly designed and tuned HID housings will produce a very sharp light cut-off that should have zero light spilling in through the rear windows of the other vehicles on the road...

    23. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Or aimed properly. At the road, rather than at other driver's eye level.

    24. Re:Ah wonderful by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      The 'flashes' I get when such cars hit a bump or crown a hill is far worse. I can adjust to just plain bright lights, but I cannot adjust to flashing/strobing lights.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    25. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      They aren't too bright, they're just pointed wrong. Just make automatic adjustment a requirement and the problem goes away. Or require that they automatically dim when following another car. Depending on how they do it, you could even make headlights which light up everything except the already-brightly-lit car in front.

      Really, the only problem with the factory-installed lights of high-end cars right now is that in many cases the rear LEDs flicker. This means that when you look away from them for a moment they appear suddenly brightly lit, like the stop lamps. Hopefully the lasers won't have that problem, or at least flicker at 10kHz+.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    26. Re:Ah wonderful by muindaur · · Score: 1

      This makes me glad I have the tab on the rearview. Even if you don't you might be able to achieve the same effect. All my tab does is point the mirror downwards. Get a friend, and try adjusting it down until you see the headlights reflected, but much dimmer. Remember the setting to switch for day/night. Might be annoying, but you might be able to get some relief if you don't have that tab. Though they are supposed to be much more common these days, as auto dim is the luxury feature.

    27. Re:Ah wonderful by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Hrm, I can't imagine any case where you'd want to use HID lights with stree... unless perhaps you're trying to start a fire?

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    28. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      1.25m from the ground is low?

    29. Re:Ah wonderful by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Its not like the HID lamps fucking blind you enough as it is, we need LASERS! so we can be blinded up to 2 miles away

      My thoughts exactly. Biking in the dark and rain, oncoming headlines make it impossible to see anything other than painful light surrounded by a lot of dark. I'd like to see headlamps toned down a bit.

      A .22 pistol with good laser sights. Tones those headlamps down in a snap. And if you miss and clobber the radiator, at least you've helped the next guy.

      (Disclaimer: Stunt performed on a closed circuit with professional drivers, do not attempt this by yourself)

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    30. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      My car auto levels the HIDs and I've never had someone flash their brights at me, but I've noticed that SUV lights can be blinding. It has made me want to install a mirror designed to help them out with realizing how annoying it is.

    31. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 1

      In the US, there is a federal mandate for all street signs to be converted to High Intensity Prismatic (retroreflective material) over the next few years.

    32. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mixture of misalignment, single failed headlight (causing the other to receive twice the current) and morons who do it deliberately. Fearing I needed glasses, I went for eyetests when I first started noticing this. Despite the constant attempts by motorists to blind me, it turns out my vision is almost perfect.

      I sold my coupe and have been driving trucks for 8 years, this was one of many reasons for the change. I've no rear view yet I still FREQUENTLY have to shield my eyes from reflections in my side mirrors due to misaligned headlights.

    33. Re:Ah wonderful by exploder · · Score: 1

      ~125cm from ground to highest spot

      My CRX is 127cm (I just looked it up), and I assure you that's quite low.

      --
      Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
    34. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Apparently most people don't know that the human eye can't resolve blue light as well as the other end of the spectrum, so blue-tinted headlights trick your brain into the sensation of being brighter but actually cause you to be able to see less clearly (shapes and textures harder to make out, plus it seems to screw with your depth perception.)

    35. Re:Ah wonderful by Electric+Cartographe · · Score: 1

      I believe you are confusing LED headlamps with HID or Xenon headlamps. VW and Audi are the only ones using LED. I have Xenon on my Audi. They don't blind oncoming drivers because they continuously auto-level while I'm driving. It's a German/EU headlamp law that HID/Xeon headlamps must auto-level to avoid blinding oncoming traffic. They also rotate with my steering into turns which is kinda cool. The trouble is, that American manufacturers have started putting Xenon/HID on domestic cars and there is no law about keeping them aligned or auto leveling. So, we get Cadillac Escalades with mis-aligned Xenon headlights 4 feet off the ground totally blinding oncoming traffic. Or even worse, the Escalade has a load in the back, causing the headlights to aim even higher since they don't auto level.

    36. Re:Ah wonderful by tragedy · · Score: 1

      The summary says that they have the potential to be "more powerful", also smaller. It's hard to imagine any way that doesn't mean brighter. If they could find a way to distribute the same amount of light from a much larger area efficiently, that would be much better as it wouldn't blind oncoming cars at night.

    37. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Seeing the number of poorly-maintained cars on the road, would you trust the auto-leveling to be high on peoples priority list of car repairs? When that auto-leveling system breaks/gunks up, I suspect people will just drive around not even noticing. State vehicle inspections used to mean that your headlight aim was tested at least annually, but now they just check to see if they come one, at least around here.

    38. Re:Ah wonderful by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      I don't know if it's just a British thing, but most rear view mirrors here have a little tab that changes the angle. There's a second, partial, mirror angled over the main one so when you flick the tab you get the same rear view but with only 50% or so of the light transmitted. It's designed specifically for this situation.

      Outside of that, they're seriously going to go to the bother of using a laser and then de-cohering the light? Kind of defeats the purpose in the first place, surely? You've got to wonder if this isn't simply a ploy to push the cost of replacement parts up - 10% margin on a £5 bulb is less than a 2% margin on a £5k custom de-cohered laser after all.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    39. Re:Ah wonderful by Pope · · Score: 1

      Well, a lot of them DO have their high beams on, ALL THE GODDAMN TIME.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    40. Re:Ah wonderful by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 1

      My first thought was more along the lines of "what kind of idiot thought a laser would make a good flood lamp?"

      You don't need a point of light in your car headlights, you need a flood lamp that illuminates a large area.

      Or maybe it's not actually a laser, and this is just marketing drivel.

      Such marketing drivel does little good when people can't even afford to read TFA.

      It will be a blue laser internally. The laser will be converted by a "fluorescent phosphor material into a pure white light".

      The phrase "pure white" always stuns me. White is made by a soup of frequencies that trigger the red, green, and blue receptors equally for humans. Any light that is white is clearly not of a pure frequency. This not withstanding, the rest of the explanation makes sense.

      --
      Free unix account: freeshell.org
    41. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how will your "requirements" prevent them from temporarily blinding cyclists and pedestrians?

    42. Re:Ah wonderful by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      My first thought was more along the lines of "what kind of idiot thought a laser would make a good flood lamp?"

      You don't need a point of light in your car headlights, you need a flood lamp that illuminates a large area. Either they're putting the mother of all lasers on their car, or they're running it through a light diffuser which would rather defeat the purpose of it being a laser. Or maybe it's not actually a laser, and this is just marketing drivel.

      Diffusion would be the answer; lasers already require a lens to become a tiny beam so all it takes is a slightly different lens to allow it to become a flood. The important bit is that the laser technology is apparently more energy efficient and compact, or did you miss the part of the article where they got to the purpose?

    43. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Cyclists are all the way over on the other side of the road. It would take a severe misdesign to blind them. Pedestrians rarely wander on unlit streets, and where they do I bet they prefer being blinded and seen by the driver instead of being run over.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    44. Re:Ah wonderful by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It's not that I'm too low but there are too many SUVs who drive with high beams on. Lots more of these incredibly large autos on the roads now so that you can be in a family sized sedan and still be sitting low to the ground relative to the lights shining from behind. And I know their high beams were on because they dimmed them when there was oncoming traffic.

    45. Re:Ah wonderful by ryanov · · Score: 1

      I trust you realize that at least by the laws as I learned them, you're required to back off to let an overtaking vehicle back in your lane, yeah? Not saying they're allowed to cut you off, but I sometimes have to cut things closer than I'd like because the guy I'm passing suddenly found the gas pedal when he should have coasted a bit, apparently in response to the emasculating feeling of being passed.

    46. Re:Ah wonderful by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that large pickups and SUVs that are used for work (business logo on the side or they're hauling something in the back) have reasonable lights. However large pickups and SUVs that are purchased as commuting vehicles more often seem to be the ones that have the brightest lights and the jacked up suspension to make them higher or the row of lights on the roof, fog lamps aimed up instead of at the road, etc. They want you to see their auto and how much they paid for it.

    47. Re:Ah wonderful by Dr.+Hok · · Score: 1

      So, you didn't even read the summary, much less the article?

      You mean the part where BMW claims the light is "pleasant to the eye"? I'm sure they claim their xenon light is pleasant to the eye, too. The question is to whose eye.

      --
      Say out loud: I'm an Aspie and I'm somewhat proud, I guess. Uh. Can I write an email in all caps instead? Hm...
    48. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There should be serious fines for idiots with those badly adjusted aftermarket kits driving around blinding other drivers at night.

    49. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that second mirror is what normal people call glass (so you are getting the reflection from the glass surface at the front of the mirror, rather than the mirrored surface at the back. And I always assumed that tab was so parents could quickly flick the mirror down to check on the kids in the back, but I could be wrong.

    50. Re:Ah wonderful by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      You need to run out of gas on a dark unlit road somewhere, next to a huge ravine, river, thorn bushes etc. Then also try riding a bicycle at night under the same conditions.

      As it is I am very close to taking a bat to every HID light I find. Lasers belong on sharks, not cars.

      - Dan.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    51. Re:Ah wonderful by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      Ohhhhhhh they will still be buying those as well.
      redneck can't see at night, must get bigger lights!

      I have no problem with lasers but this is seriously close to being 100% pure stupidity.

      --
      -- no sig today
    52. Re:Ah wonderful by dodobh · · Score: 1

      As a pedestrian, I prefer to be seen but not blinded. Blinded, I am just as likely to wander into your path instead of safely moving out of your way (if I am on the road by chance).

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    53. Re:Ah wonderful by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Cyclists are all the way over on the other side of the road.

      Cyclists are anywhere a car might be in the same situation, including right next to the centerline if they're about to turn left.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    54. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you ever driven on a real road at night in a normal car (not an SUV)?

      Any fucking idiot in an SUV who prefers to drive closer than the recommended 2 second following distance (at highway speeds) will blind the occupants of a normal height. The headlights on these vehicles are simply placed too high! Even "correctly" aimed down, they shine directly into the rear window of my car.

    55. Re:Ah wonderful by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      you should be turning your headlights off and using the front foglights exclusively

      On many cars that's impossible because the switch is designed so that the headlights must be on in order to turn the foglights on.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    56. Re:Ah wonderful by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      Ah, interesting (@ both posters), I hadn't realised it was just the glass, I'd always presumed it was something slightly more complicated. So the mirror isn't parallel with the glass I'm guessing?

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    57. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Cyclists are anywhere a car might be in the same situation, including right next to the centerline if they're about to turn left.

      At night on an unlit stretch of road? Brave cyclist.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    58. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Of course you prefer to be seen but not blinded. So do I. However, you need a good bit of light to see a pedestrian in dark clothes without reflectors at 80km/h before you hit them -- or a deer, for that matter. Since attempts at getting pedestrians (and deer) to wear reflectors have not been universally successful and similar attempts at getting drivers to go slower than 80km/h on country roads seem doomed to failure, the only option left is to have enough light on the cars.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    59. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything you said is spot on. However, I think you missed OP's point: that if your eye level is below where the headlight is situated you'll be blinded. I drive a coupe that is low to the ground and routinely am blinded by HID low-beams on SUVs. I drive on tons of roads with no street lamps too. I am usually compelled to leave my (halogen) high beams on when passing.

    60. Re:Ah wonderful by hplus · · Score: 1

      I don't understand this sentiment, at all. Are coward cyclists supposed to limit themselves to right hand turns at night, then?

    61. Re:Ah wonderful by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      Left turns? Who gave this commie a bicycle?

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    62. Re:Ah wonderful by Nyder · · Score: 1

      .... it took several such incidents for me to realize these assholes didn't just have their high-beams on.

      So your saying, not only did they have high beams on, they use LED lights to blind you?

      Dang.

      good thing i don't drive, people are evil.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    63. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So, you didn't even read the summary, much less the article?"

      Five digit UID and so naive?

    64. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or HID.

    65. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cyclists are all the way over on the other side of the road.

      Cyclists are anywhere a car might be in the same situation, including right next to the centerline if they're about to turn left.

      In which case it is better they get blinded as opposed to riding into the oncoming car's way.

    66. Re:Ah wonderful by PeanutButterBreath · · Score: 1

      Cyclists are all the way over on the other side of the road. It would take a severe misdesign to blind them

      Or any situation where roads are not perfect, straight lines. Otherwise, even perfectly aligned but overly bright headlights have many opportunities to create a hazard by blinding oncoming traffic.

    67. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They are pointed right in every manufacturer installed case. The whole HID hate thing is fueled by a logical fallacy - the only HIDs you ever notice are the ones that are aimed wrong, so you assume all HIDs are as bad as that, when the truth is that nearly every HID on the road is aimed right and just looks like any other headlight.

      The problem is that idiots buy badly made kits from ebay and jam them into their existing headlight housing, designed for incandescents. HIDs need an auto levelling projector housing and that's what they have whenever they're installed by the manufacturer.

    68. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, "pure white" quite obviously means a perfectly even distribution of the intensity across all visible frequencies. What a shitty thing to be a pedant about.

    69. Re:Ah wonderful by AaronW · · Score: 1

      The newer Toyota Prius cars also have LED headlights. I prefer my older Prius with HIDs which also are used for the high beams. I've not had a problem with people flashing their highs at me and the self-leveling works. Also, they're not located high like they are on trucks and SUVs. The LED headlights are not as bright (but brighter than halogen) and only work for low-beams.

      I think a lot of the problem is after market HIDs and poorly maintained vehicles, especially the bluish HIDs. When mine went out I bought replacement bulbs and saw that there's a wide range of color temperatures available (up to around 10K which isn't legal). The lower color temperature bulbs are brighter and cause less glare issues IMO but are not as "cool" looking.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    70. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      It all depends.

      In my experience, the HIDs which are fucking painful tend to be on modified rice burners or pickups, both of which have a tendency to be hacked by people who were born with only half a set of clue. These are the fuckers who install 15,000 degree Kelvin bulbs because "blue is cool," modify OEM housings to make HIDs fit, or install aftermarket assemblies of questionable performance and otherwise generally fuck with things in ways that the DOT (or any oncoming driver/biker/walkist) would vastly prefer that they not.

      OEM systems (as in, those that are equipped on a new vehicle) tend to be a lot more peaceful. You get a bit of flash from them on irregular roads, but that's it. And their color temperature is a lot closer to 3000-5000K, which is far more appropriate for actually seeing things at night for everyone involved. Unless fucked with, they're quite likely to be aimed in non-annoying ways with a vehicle under typical load.

      Back to TFA: Some higher-end cars, in particular BMW, offer self-leveling HIDs principally to make them as least-painful as possible for whatever is oncoming, hypothetically regardless of suspension loading. It's not a big surprise to me that BMW is considering other new technologies, such as laser. OTOH, it would be a huge surprise to me if they implemented such a system in production and fucked it up, since that's generally not their style.

      [The above is just some verbiage from an armchair engineer who needs to buy new headlamp assemblies for his old BMW, who has researched the hell out of HID "upgrade" options, and has decided that common halogens in well-designed housings will quite work well enough. YMMV.]

    71. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      Around here, we don't even have annual vehicle inspections.

      The only time an inspection happens is if you lend your car to someone to take their license exam in, or are lucky enough to be selected for a "random" roadside inspection stop at some surprise location.

      Otherwise, folks here just drive...

      But back in the context of TFA, I expect BMW's auto-leveling system HID system (or this new-fangled laser system) to fail gracefully, much as the rest of the car tends to do.

      These are cars that come with a toolkit that includes a manual crank for the power windows and sunroof, just in case you happen to be somewhere with precipitation and the electric motors won't run for whatever reason, a pull-string to unlock the gas filler door in case the electric lock on it fails, and an array of extra fuses in the underhood panel. They have sensors to detect when the brake linings are thin, and to let you know that you're out of windshield washer fluid, or if there is a brake light out, or if the brake light switch itself has gone wonky.

      They're built with the quite rational expectation that -- some day -- the parts will wear out and fail. I expect no less redundant engineering from any magical headlamp system that they devise.

    72. Re:Ah wonderful by black+soap · · Score: 1

      I'm not worried about the well-maintained BMW, I'm worried about the poorly maintained 12 year old car that has a cheap copy of the fancy systems BMW used.

    73. Re:Ah wonderful by toddestan · · Score: 1

      They are pointed right in every manufacturer installed case. The whole HID hate thing is fueled by a logical fallacy - the only HIDs you ever notice are the ones that are aimed wrong, so you assume all HIDs are as bad as that, when the truth is that nearly every HID on the road is aimed right and just looks like any other headlight.

      The thing is, a mis-aligned standard halogen or sealed beam headlight is not nearly as blinding as a mis-aligned HID headlight. That's why the mis-aligned HID headlights are the ones that get noticed, while the other types don't get as noticed when they are out of alignment.

    74. Re:Ah wonderful by Chris6502 · · Score: 1
      --
      UNIX: 'cuz you can tattoo it on your knuckles!
    75. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously?

      Turn in your geek card right now.

    76. Re:Ah wonderful by st0nes · · Score: 1

      And they come with a coloring-in book instead of a user manual. The arseholes who drive these things NEVER turn off their fog lamps.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
    77. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      Hacking headlights is already illegal in the US, as is "upgrading" from halogen to HID. The little diddy in the corner of OEM headlight lenses that starts with "DOT" is an indicator of compliance, not just something to add extra ugly to the assembly.

      But I guess my point is, I'm not all that worried about a poorly-maintained BMW in stock form. Of all the various brands out there, they seem to be among the most likely to have their stuff engineered to fail with an abundance of safety.

      Meanwhile, nothing will stop folks from performing unsafe modifications to their vehicles other than enforcement. In my state, driving without a seatbelt is a primary offense worthy on its own of being stopped and ticketed for. I see every reason for drivers with "ZOMG! I can't fucking SEE!" headlights to be treated the same, whether because of half-functional newfangled LED or laser tech, a botched aftermarket HID installation, or simply using highbeams inappropriately.

      It should be easy, especially since LEO can spot the offending vehicle from orbit...

    78. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      No, they are supposed to stop on the right side, wait for a break in traffic, and cross the road in a straight line.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    79. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      *shrug*

      Mine are off.

    80. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Or any situation where roads are not perfect, straight lines. Otherwise, even perfectly aligned but overly bright headlights have many opportunities to create a hazard by blinding oncoming traffic.

      Modern headlights follow the turns. Really, we are talking about headlights of the future here. We can expect them to at least have the technology of today available.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    81. Re:Ah wonderful by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously claiming that HID lights are indistinguishable from halogen lights? You have seen HID lights, right? Do you also have difficulty distinguishing between fluorescent and incandescent bulbs?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    82. Re:Ah wonderful by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      The light emission angles should probably be included in the road safety checks then. Too high an angle and your car is no longer road-worthy.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    83. Re:Ah wonderful by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      So why aren't the cars that have "not for street use" parts installed pulled from the road at the first safety inspection?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    84. Re:Ah wonderful by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You can see the laser sight dot on a bright-ass headlight?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    85. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Head lights need a lot more umph yet maybe 130 watt HID's will be getting close to decent lighting it is not that light output that you should be wetting your undies at it is the crap design of modern headlamp lenses , Have you ever even bothered to look at the pattern of modern headlamps it has zero focus zero range why because of bad design if we were to use 70's design lenses with modern bulb technology there would be no problem .

      Leave the bulbs alone it the lenses you need to kick off about crap crap crap

    86. Re:Ah wonderful by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Maybe BMW cut a deal with Arctic ?

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    87. Re:Ah wonderful by Datamonstar · · Score: 1

      There are DOT-compliant HID kits available for most cars.

      --
      The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
    88. Re:Ah wonderful by BigDogCH · · Score: 1

      That seems like an odd solution to me.....at some intersections this wouldn't even be possible. Even still, you mention an unlit stretch of road. Funny thing is, on my bike, my lighting is great for unlit stretches. The lights are visible for well over a mile. It is the brightly lit areas that are a problem....too many other lights competing for drivers attention. I much prefer biking at night on pitch black roads. I can hear the cars begin to slow down a quarter mile back.

    89. Re:Ah wonderful by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if it's a safety design, but I had the auto-levelling system completely fail on my (now 11 year old) Audi TT. By default, it seems to level completely downwards and that's how I noticed that something was wrong. I basically didn't see the road ahead any more, but the lights were clearly on. From afar it most likely looked as if I had my parking lights on.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    90. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Car headlamp design cannot depend on cyclists being brightly lit. Around here perhaps 3/4 of bikes have some kind of light at night, the rest rely on their reflectors and/or luck. Of the ones with actual lighting, a good portion have those silly little button-lights which shine somewhat ok in one specific direction (for a few hours until the battery dies) and are almost invisible from other directions.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    91. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      I think you meant to write "there are DOT-compliant halogen kits for most cars which have been modified by a reseller to accept HID bulbs and which are of universally questionable merit and no longer resemble their previously-compliant self."

      Or, perhaps you meant "there are replacement bulbs that just snap into existing halogen housings, which are not at all designed to deal with the different light output of HID effectively, and never have been legal to use on a public road."

      But don't take my word for it, because I'm not the smartest guy in the room.

    92. Re:Ah wonderful by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Around here, we don't even have annual vehicle inspections.

      Or, in slashdot terms, you are free from the tyranny of the evil government interfering AT GUNPOINT in your right to drive whatever vehicle in whatever condition you like, which they do (AT GUNPOINT!) purely to rob you of more taxes to fund their socialist plan for world domination.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    93. Re:Ah wonderful by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Pedestrians rarely wander on unlit streets, and where they do I bet they prefer being blinded and seen by the driver instead of being run over.

      Not all the world conforms to the US model of having to drive everywhere and making it almost impossible to walk safely any further than from your car to your front door.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    94. Re:Ah wonderful by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Of course you prefer to be seen but not blinded. So do I. However, you need a good bit of light to see a pedestrian in dark clothes without reflectors at 80km/h before you hit them -- or a deer, for that matter. Since attempts at getting pedestrians (and deer) to wear reflectors have not been universally successful and similar attempts at getting drivers to go slower than 80km/h on country roads seem doomed to failure, the only option left is to have enough light on the cars.

      It depends on what sort of country roads you;re talking about. Where I live, most smaller country roads are just about wide enough for two cars to pass slowly, and 80kph feels like you're in Tron, complete with near right angle bends.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    95. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      Something like that. Although I have had such jackbooted thugs stop by and demand AT GUNPOINT that I cut back some weeds in the lawn...

      But, no. We don't have regular vehicle inspections (AT GUNPOINT! or otherwise), nor does anything even require a smog check.

      This gives us the freedom to work on old cars in a practical fashion, but also allows poor repairs. I've seen folks drive for years around here with a ratchet-strap holding down a mangled hood, or with a pair of vice grips clamping off a bothersome brake line leak, or with 3 bald tires and a donut, or...

    96. Re:Ah wonderful by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      No, they are supposed to stop on the right side, wait for a break in traffic, and cross the road in a straight line.

      In my country (the UK) cyclists have no legal or moral obligation to give way to cars in this way.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    97. Re:Ah wonderful by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      lolz what safety inspections? The only mandatory inspection is for emissions. I once drove a bucick with a broken strut though one of those and got a 98% ok

    98. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's nice. In my country, getting hit by a car will likely kill or at least severely injure a cyclist, even if the cyclist didn't have a legal or moral obligation to give way to the car.

    99. Re:Ah wonderful by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
      This new generation of Techno-lights is seriously flawed technology. Nothing like having a vehicle following you at night and having their lights look like the are flashing you every five seconds.The "auto-leveling" system is a fine piece of technology that only works if the roads are level. But when one of these vehicles is going up or down a hill, and I'm on a different level. Then their lights shine right at me. Fortunately they are bigger vehicles and will kill me if I run into while blinded.

      And to be quite truthful, those Beemers with the HID lights that blind drivers coming in the other direction is simply another manifestation of the SUV/HummVee disdain for other people on the road.

      And now they want to show even more disdain by putting frickin' lasers on them?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    100. Re:Ah wonderful by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I measured my AE92 the other day and it's about 123cm, HAW! :-P

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    101. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually my neighbour has a brand new Hyundai that has LED Headlights

    102. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bloody right. I'm already planning my next vehicle has to be something high off the ground, cos driving at night is pure torture now cos it seems like nobody ever gets their lights aligned, especially when they have murdering headlights. Bring back little yellow candlepower!!! It made you drive more carefully. These idiots who can see to eternity with their lights are fine, but everybody else is driving blind. I tend to drive "toward the light" though, so if thats all i can see i go straight for it... after all that must be where the road is, right?

    103. Re:Ah wonderful by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously saying that you didn't even read my post before hitting the reply button?

    104. Re:Ah wonderful by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Why do you assume I'm speaking of the US? You can safely walk lots of places here, generally on pavement or paths separate from the road, and with street lights at night. Walking at night on an unlit road can be necessary but it is by far the exception where trading a bit of convenience for safety is surely worth it.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    105. Re:Ah wonderful by dodobh · · Score: 1

      Pedestrians can see oncoming cars and get out of the way. Blinded pedestrians have it far harder. Deer in the headlights.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    106. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      That is a good idea for when the sensor fails, but for the motor there isn't a clear similar failure mode.

    107. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      How many dash lights are in that thing?

    108. Re:Ah wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the article, they are using a diffuser. Of course if the diffuser is the safety "modulation" device, what happens when someone gets in an accident and busts the diffuser and keeps driving the vehicle without replacing/repairing it, either because they're waiting on insurance, or because they can't afford the repairs? Even if they use a low-power laser such as those used in laser-pointers, it would still be dangerous, if not to human vision, then as a distraction. It's not fun to have ANY laser shined in your eye! Basically to make this safe they'd have to add sensors that would detect a breach in the diffuser, and the system would have to fail upon sensor failure of any kind or tampering with or disabling the sensor. Which means that your vehicle would have to be disabled if the diffuser failed or the sensor malfunctioned--otherwise you'd have people driving without headlights. Not good. So...count me out on this technology. I'll take a light-bulb or LED any day. :)

    109. Re:Ah wonderful by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Do you have a tab on the sideview mirrors too? I sure don't, and really despise the SUVs blinding me there too, and adjusting them off just makes for dangerous driving...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    110. Re:Ah wonderful by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Factory fog lamps don't work that way. They light up the area immediately in front of the car, they aren't long range lights. Also, as they other reply stated, they don't work without the headlamps, though I wish they did as they would be more useful in fog that way.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    111. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      heh.

      Not many dash lights, really. Just the usual warning indicators for oil pressure, voltage, and the like...

      I can't speak much for other models, but my (rather old) 325i has an on-board computer with a dot matrix LCD display for the other functions, and it spits out problems in plain English. It's a handy thing, with a myriad of trip computer stuff built in: Two sets of resettable average MPG, estimated fuel remaining in miles, distance remaining and ETA, average speed, accurate outside temperature, warning tones when temperature drops near freezing, time and date, stopwatch, selectable warning tone over a user-specified speed, etc.

      And there's a bunch of hidden stuff, too, like a digital voltmeter, some simple diagnostics, and various other ways of displaying fuel consumption (like, say, in liters-per-hour). IIRC, one can even recalibrate the speedometer right from the front panel...

      They're very geeky cars, tend to be reliable even with a lot of miles on the clock, they're fun to work and hack on, are well-documented to in books and by random folks online, have excellent parts availability, are a blast to drive, and are reasonably efficient. They're often a steal on the used market. I think everyone here should have at least one BMW, out of principle.

    112. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      I think you just notice the "special" drivers. Personally, I'd rather see fog lamps on than no headlights on in the rain (very common here).

    113. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      I sat in the driver seat of a 325 once and got the feeling that their cars are completely different than everybody else's. This LCD is in the instrument cluster or is part of a nav around mid-dash? I don't see how you get ETA without a nav, but maybe I misunderstand. Does all this ever get in the way of, you know, driving?

    114. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      I think you just replied to the wrong person...

      That said: OEM fog lamps usually have a very low cutoff, since that's what's needed to actually aid vision in dense fog (you want the polar opposite of high beams, as anyone who has driven in fog will readily admit that high beams do far more harm than good). So, glare toward other drivers should be far less than even the low-beam headlights.

      Nevertheless, the fog lamps on the BMW are off unless they're needed, or it is convenient (think "driving around a campground at night").

    115. Re:Ah wonderful by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Guess that's a difference between where BMW is deciding on laser headlights and where you are, in Germany there's a mandatory inspection of the car every two years that covers all kinds of defects. Also I believe any modifications to the car have to be inspected by the same authority immediately, any failures there have to be fixed immediately or the car is banned from being used on public roads.

      By the looks of it about a third of the US has similar inspections. Considering cars can move across state boundaries I would really have expected that to be something mandated on the federal level instead of the state level.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    116. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      Oh wait, you're not talking about iDrive are you? I remember reading a review of the 7 wherein they took 1/3 of a page with instructions for how to change the volume on the radio. It made me think that (were to own a 7) I would have to purchase a radio for the car separate form the installed radio.

    117. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      It's pretty dumb, really: Just enter the distance to destination. Combine that with speed and RTC, and you get ETA.

      The car is from 1995 (though this incarnation of OBC dates to 1991), so no nav. It's right above the sunglasses tray, in front of the gearshift.

      In terms of driving...no, not really. It's easy to cycle through the couple of different modes I find useful (mostly temperature, and range) by pushing in on the turn-signal stalk (toward the steering column).

      And that, as I guess goes without saying at this point, is also programmable...

    118. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      No. iDrive is an abomination, and should never have been created. While there's something to be said for simple interfaces, I think there's a lot more to be said about using humans effectively. With an interface consisting of knob+button, muscle memory is no help at all because the whole thing requires visual queues to tell where you're at. (And while it can be argued that one doesn't necessarily need two hands on the wheel to drive safely, the same can't be said for eyeballs.)

      With a small array of buttons for common functions, though, I don't have to look at or think about it before reaching my hand over and activating some widget or other.[1]

      Instead, I mean one of these.

      I don't really like the 7s anyway -- they're very cool machines, but they're just way too big for my taste, and their relative scarcity causes them to lack the awesome support community that surrounds the 3-series. So even if I could easily afford one, I doubt I'd buy one.

      [1]: FWIW, I feel the same about professional mix consoles, and vastly prefer the limitations of an old analog board over the features and flexibility of a newfangled digital one. The former I can operate by feel without ever really looking at what I'm doing (which lets me pay attention to the stage), while the latter requires at least one hand and both eyes to get anything done.

    119. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      Ah, I see, thanks. I always thought I'd hate a BMW, but maybe I was wrong.

      My 1st gen. RL is less fussy but far less hackable (I don't have the Navi). i.e. I have a defrost button instead of instructions, and the temp controls default to (and returns to with one button push) auto and then you can futz with it form there. The RL basically gets out of your way and gives you no distractions (again, if you don't get the navigation). I forget sometimes how amazingly difficult it is to make a car that you can sit and and just get everything in it--this fact was confirmed by a friend who hates to drive and hadn't for 5 years saying that the car was a dream to drive. Well, this is after she asked if she wanted D4 or D3.

    120. Re:Ah wonderful by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      to HIGHEST spot, in my case that is sunroof glass which is just a notch higher than roof. The exact height was something like 124 and few millimeters, without engine in. I'm rebuilding that car and target is now 118cm which means i need to remove tow hooks, lift drive axle tunnel, probably lift fenders too etc. so that it still leaves 12cm of ground clearance. Cannot make it any lower without chopping roof, but that is not street legal anymore here.

      that is one damn low car, lowest factory mass produced car has been 128cm in the 50s, super cars are in the 120cm range too. roughly 1210mm to 1240mm

      Apollo Gumbert is probably the lowest super car being produced, it is 1104mm tall.

    121. Re:Ah wonderful by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      yeah, corollas are quite low, even standard! :)

      Car i was speaking of is TE71 Coupe. Even KE70 with stock suspension is kinda low versus other standard cars.

    122. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      I thought I'd hate a BMW, too. The wife found one on a used lot. It was flashy, bright red, and I found the prospect terrifying (having already told myself, long before, that I would never buy a BMW that did not come with a complete and detailed service history).

      But then I drove it, it sold itself based on performance, and I found myself negotiating a deal. After driving it for awhile, I began to appreciate how just about everything about it made sense. And as the parts started wearing out (as parts tend to do as miles wear on), I discovered just how nice it is to work on a car where every system, no matter how complicated it seems, is simple and logical...and that even the fasteners and suspension bits are such that they don't rot in the Ohio winter (unlike every American car I've worked on), so it's painless to take things apart.

      Even little electrical upgrades, like remote start/keyless entry, or an aftermarket radio are a joy. (I still get a kick out of rolling up the windows from the remote, mostly because of how easy it was to get the car to perform that function.)

      And the forums. If there's anything one needs to do to any aspect of this car, someone fairly intelligent has already done it and documented the hell out of it....which is the complete opposite of my experience with a 4th-gen Firebird.

      Anyway, just my experience.

    123. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      Thanks for sharing all that with me. The 2nd gen RL is rumored to be a breakdown-a-thon, so I do need to find a new car when this one runs out. Now, I'll definitely consider BMWs.

    124. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      Oh. And the other thing: BMW has a history of being tight-lipped with their factory service documentation, so there's a similarly long heritage of free and open piracy when it comes to such things.

      It's somewhat like the Streisand Effect: The harder they try to keep information to themselves, the more widely available it becomes. (except, unlike the Streisand Effect proper, nobody at BMW seems to mind when their information is freely shared by third parties after it somehow leaks out.)

      Anyway, based on the RL, you might be looking for a 5 (any vintage) or a newer 3 (which are a good bit larger than the older ones). And if you do find yourself seriously considering one, do your research: Despite me sounding like a used car salesman, BMWs do have issues.

      The early E36 3-series (1993-1996ish) is well-known to be plagued by cooling system issues, for instance. Every single plastic part of the entire bloody cooling system is prone to sudden catastrophic failure, from the thermostat housing, to the radiator necks, to the expansion tank, to the water pump, and even the mechanical fan.

      But what's awesome about this widely-known failure mode is that BMW fixed it by using an improved plastic compound which doesn't fail so suddenly, and they tend to put dates on their OEM parts so you have an idea of what you've actually got, and the problem is widely known, and there are aftermarket and OEM (even if not sourced through BMW) fixes for all of it.

      To be fair, it was their first foray in using so many plastic cooling system parts, and they failed quite miserably. But they've learned from it, I strongly doubt that it will ever happen again, and replacements that aren't inherently flawed are widely available and reasonably cheap -- even if they say BMW on them.

      On my car, the radiator had already been replaced with a new BMW unit made with improved materials, so I don't worry about that (though others often replace it with a third-party unit with aluminum necks). I proactively replaced the plastic thermostat housing with an aftermarket aluminum one, removed the stock mechanical fan (the cars also come with electric fan, which works fine by itself in most normal conditions), and replaced the water pump with a unit using a metal impeller instead of plastic.

      I did not preemptively replace the expansion tank, which exploded one hot afternoon in a parking lot with a noise not dissimilar to that of a shotgun. Which, incidentally, was the only single time my old BMW left me stuck somewhere... But the parts counter at the BMW dealer was flexible enough to let me pre-pay for an expansion tank over the phone and let me pick it up as the dealership was closing up shop for the day, and I got the car back up and running properly right there in the parking lot with a small socket set and a screwdriver. (I probably could have done the whole job using only the BMW factory toolkit*, if I'd bothered to try.)

      Anyway, I knew better: I should have replaced that tank far sooner. It's an easy fix, and I knew it was a problem, and I should've really just taken care of it...especially since I get a much better deal online for BMW parts online than I do from the nearest dealer (this isn't always the case -- in some localities, the BMW parts counter is the cheap place to buy proper parts).

      But the point is, research it. You should do this before you buy anything (would you have bought your RL if you knew it was a timebomb?). Every manufacturer has systemic problems with their cars (though not always as spectacular as Toyota) but at least with BMW, the problems have easy-to-find solutions in these enlightened times of teh Intarwebs, largely because of the intelligent and literate community that surrounds them.

      And if researching BMWs in particular, be mindful that they're referred to by chassis style instead of model and generation, or model year. Googling for "1995 BMW 325i problems" returns rather lacking results compared to "E36 problems," even though the

    125. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      I looked at a few reviews of 5s (admittedly, I wasn't aware the mixed up concepts of naming convention) and the review sites were far harsher on those cars than on even the 2nd gen RL. In fact, most reviews said they had no intention of keeping the car once the warranty expired (I checked twice to be sure, and I wan't looking at Audi reviews either). Is there big differences between 3s and 5s in terms of reliability? I'd never buy a 7 because of iDrive, but is the 3 just sturdier car than the 5? Or maybe I've been spoiled with Japanese cars. My last car (Accord) I looked up the problems it would have and those were the problems: relay in the steering wheel, two CV joints, muffler rattle, total = $1200 + gas + oil for 15 years of ownership. With 35 MPG actual (freeway commute) and a 15 gallon tank, even fill ups only had to happen only six times per oil change. Crappy car in most other ways, but absolutely a piece of cake on maintenance.

    126. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      It's the most reliable car I've ever had.

      Now, granted, I've only driven American cars otherwise...

      But the old girl's got 186k on her now. No electrical problems to speak of (knock on wood). It did eat an automatic transmission once at about 165k, but please realize that the fact that I always drive this car like I just stole it may have had a big impact on the longevity of that part: It's probably more telling of my driving style than the quality of the 4-speed GM-built 4L30E.

      To be clear about the level of abuse given: The car has been been completely air-born on more than one spirited drive, and pretty much every drive is spirited (as my wife would attest). I really must say that it's not the transmission's fault that it died. :) But even in death, that transmission still got me home.

      And the replacement Getrag 5-speed manual is working just fine. The conversion fit together just like Lego.

      I don't know if the 3 is sturdier than the 5, but it's certainly more common around here (mostly because it is cheaper). BMW tends to use the same basic driveline in their models (though the 7 series is obviously very different because it's absolutely huge and heavy, and the all of the M cars are somewhat different because they're intended to be track-ready), so that's all the same. The wiring, accessories, trinkets, interior and bodywork/chassis all tend to be somewhat different between models, but I've never any real trouble with any of that...

      And I don't know where you're from, so it may or may not be important to have the more common model. Where I'm at (small town Ohio) I've had to pay my mechanic (who is absolutely brilliant, but whom works by the hour) to learn my car. Larger cities will already have reputable shops already familiar with the details of a BMW, and/or some that don't work on anything anything but. Not everyone is blessed with a brilliant and trustworthy mechanic, to be sure, but depending on where you're at you might find that it's easy to find an indy shop with folks who can work on one without learning everything.

      The maintenance worth talking about (ie: aside from the transmission), to date, has been as such:

      Valve cover gasket, front brakes, plugs/connectors/coils, the usual tires and oil, front control arms/ball joints, and inner tie rod ends (the outer ends will need done soon), a refill of R-134a, and one small $20 weld on the exhaust system where a short crack formed after the catalytic converter (the rest of the exhaust plumbing, and the muffler, is still working and looking fine and shows no sign of giving up soon). Plus the systemically-bad cooling system stuff I referred to earlier, all of which I knew was coming.

      Most of it just seems completely reasonable to me, and seems likely to happen on anything with enough time or miles (how many miles were on your Accord?) no matter the driving style.

      Other than the tie rod ends, welding, and transmission swap, I've done done that all myself in my driveway, usually in the winter, with basic tools (a torque wrench, a socket set, and patience). The car is holding up extremely well, I think, especially given my preferred driving style.

      That all said: It's really a matter of budgeting. BMW does have maintenance schedules for their vehicles (known as "Inspection I" and "Inspection II"), which if followed both conservatively and with a great deal of prudence, should result in an eternity of a well-running car. I can't currently afford that level of perfection, but if you can then it's easy.

      I did tally up my expenses not so long ago, and I figure I've got $10,000 total in this car that I've absolutely flogged for the past 6 or 7 years, including everything (and the tranny, and the car itself) but fuel.

      Which is about $0.16 per mile driven. For the silly grin it gives me every time I get behind the wheel, and the knowledge that it has so far neglected to fail getting me from A to B in badness ranging from a tornado, to several massive fl

    127. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      As for mechanics, I'm in a big city, no issue. I think there are more European cars parked on my block than anything but Japanese cars. There is even a fool who parks his tripple-black Porsche convertible on the street.

      But we drive very different numbers of miles. I've but 4k on my RL in two years... I get 10 to 15, rarely 18 MPG and I don't really care, I never drive it anyways.

      The accord went to 140k, but a family members went to 250k with his before it started having real problems, but I suspect that came form the fact that many of those miles were (real) offroading--as in his employer payed him $300/month to do the offroading in his car instead of theirs.

      Anyways, based on your description, your 3 has been far more reliable than the reviewers 5s were, but nowhere near as reliable as a Japanese car.

      That said, you would probably hate the RL. Today I was stuck behind a volvo having a hard time comprehending the concept of freeway, so he was going 20 MPH by the time we hit the merge. There was a Mercedes with a V12 in it about two car lengths behind me. When we hit the merge, I floored it and moved left a lane, the German floored it and moved left two lanes, I'd bet he was going 20MPH faster than I was when his back passed my front (thus, I didn't catch the model, just the V12). I've never wished there were more power, but the car would never, ever, win a race against an actually fast car. I don't much care.

    128. Re:Ah wonderful by adolf · · Score: 1

      It's probably fair to say that my 325 might be less reliable than a (good) Japanese car, but I might also be pickier about my car than others might be and fix things more readily: Someone who did not push the car hard would probably have never noticed the failing ball joints, for instance, and I don't know that a casual inspection (when getting brakes or tires or whatever) would have uncovered it either. (I noticed it on a right turn on the interstate at a triple-digit speed as a slight but sudden change in steering angle, and thereafter drove the thing very softly until I got it sorted. I don't know that the forces applied by a mechanic doing routine maintenance would simulate that very well, or that an average driver would notice it at all in normal driving conditions. A less-aggressive driver might have safely ridden upon those ball joints for a hundred thousand more miles...)

      So I think we're splitting hairs there, honestly, though it's interesting to me that you think a 5-series would be substantially worse. (I've never made that comparison before.)

      But it'd also be fair to say that I'd never have as much fun in a (good) FWD Japanese car as I have in my RWD BMW, and I like having fun with cars. I want a clear choice between slight natural understeer*, power oversteer, and throttle-lift oversteer, with neutral handling being somewhere in between the latter two, all under the command of the loud pedal. A FWD vehicle doesn't normally give me anything but variations on understeer unless I'm particularly and bruskly abusive with very late braking, handbrake turns, or other techniques that I just don't enjoy.

      I find myself more able to deftly avoid other drivers' stupidity when driving the BMW than I have anything else, just because it is both predictable and quite fast in its handling...plus, the brakes are able to leave a bruise across one's chest from the seatbelt.

      *: I can eliminate the tendency for the BMW to understeer with a slightly larger rear swaybar and an hour or two, but meh: I sometimes lend the car to others for days at a time, and I want to get it back in one piece, so I err toward BMW's better judgement and focus my improvements elsewhere.

      I admit that 140k doesn't sound too surprising for a sanely-driven Accord. But what sort of off-road activities was that other Accord tasked with? 250k is getting right up there in impressiveness, with any normal car, without regular and expert maintenance. I had a boss (and good friend) once who had a middle-90's Accord which was creeping up there in mileage, but it took some major internal engine work to get it there. (On the other hand, he was more picky than I am.)

      And you're right. I would probably hate the RL: I've never really taken Honda/Acura very seriously because they never seem to produce a good RWD car that isn't absolutely silly-expensive, and I've had my fill of FWD cars.

      The 325i, with its 50/50 weight distribution, goes like a tractor when fitted with good winter tires in up to 8 or 9 inches of fresh snow, and handles completely boringly on glare ice (which is a very good thing)...despite its absurdly-low factory "sport" suspension, worn and haggard over 16 years, which currently leaves the meat of the front end about 4.5" off of the ground. I've had far worse luck, particularly on ice, with absolutely everything else I've ever driven -- irrespective of speed. I trust this car to get me where I've got to go, damn near no matter what, and I've pulled other cars out of ditches with it. My friends joke that they're surprised I don't have a plow attachment for it.

      I have considered, and not completely ruled-out, buying some Nascar-style spring rubbers to temporarily increase the ground clearance for occasions of particularly-deep snow: Beyond about 8 or 9 inches, it can have a very hard time successfully pushing/digging through the stuff, and my job sometimes requires that I get there even if it's impossible.

      Your on-ramp story is amusing, though: Volvos are mostly known to be saf

    129. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      Well, I do like the RL. You point it and it goes there, the engine makes a pleasant sound that reminds me of the American V8s I've driven, gets almost its final power at 2k RPMs, the accelerator pedal is an absolute wonder in terms of feedback and doing what I expect, and the turn radius is very small--impressive considering the wide tires. I've never driven it in snow, so i can't comment on that, but it drives in rain like it dives on dry surfaces. I've never had reason to apply the brakes full but 1/2 of the way down stops me far faster than I would expect, so I've always eased off from that point. The latter part turns emergency breaking into trying to make sure the car behind you doesn't rear end you.

      Again, I have no plans to buy the AWD RL, so I need another car to look to next.

      As for milage, well, if you don't drive a car they often rack up repair needs as fast as if you did.

      Oh, and the off road was to a remote site on unimproved (rutted) roads, the $300/month was for 3 days a week of driving. Apparently you went less than 5 MPH for several miles (I never did it since I didn't work there). Personally, I wondered why they didn't just buy used tractors. Anyways, the car had regular oil changes (at home) but not regular maintenance, i.e. only two timing chains and thus two water pumps (replaced at 80 k miles nonetheless).

      Finally, the Volvo was absolutely pilot error or a broken car that was unfit for highway speeds. Both of us wanted to kill the guy, in any case.

    130. Re:Ah wonderful by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      BTW, the only Acura that is RWD is the 2011+ RL, which is actually SH-AWD, but when the system is not engaged at all (when traction is fine) it is RWD, It has been SH-AWD since 2005, but only in 2011 did the switch to RWD as the default. But I'll bet they mess up the RWD feeling with the traction control so that it would not do what you expect when you push it. Editors of magazines love it, it sounds like it is basically glued to the road and gives you ample warning before breaking lose.

  2. Yeah thanks..... by jhoegl · · Score: 2

    Even my local news reported this before ./

    And as they stated, the LEDs are bright enough.. WTF we need lasers?

    1. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because they are more efficient for the same brightness levels, which is especially important for electric cars, since they'll be less of a drain on the batteries.

    2. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Fnord666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And as they stated, the LEDs are bright enough.. WTF we need lasers?

      Among other things, laser light is a lot more energy efficient. According to the article, BMW is getting 170 lumens per watt as compared to 100 lumens per watt for LED lights.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    3. Re:Yeah thanks..... by nschubach · · Score: 2

      I certainly hope so. dotslash.com looks to be some kind of East Asian search engine and dotslash.org is a parked domain.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    4. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      Also, as coherent light they can be focused better (much much better) than normal beams. Actually the problem will be making them unfocused enough to see the whole road.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    5. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Attila+the+Bun · · Score: 1

      According to the article, BMW is getting 170 lumens per watt as compared to 100 lumens per watt for LED lights.

      Ahhh, it's a money-saving measure. Of course.

    6. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because they are more efficient for the same brightness levels, which is especially important for electric cars, since they'll be less of a drain on the batteries.

      The typical sedan needs about 20-25 hp to maintain highway speeds. That's 15-19 kW. Car headlights are about 50 Watts each. If as a post above says, laser headlights represent a 70% improvement in efficiency, that means you could replace 100 Watts of headlights with about 60 Watts of laser headlights - a 40 Watt savings.

      40 Watts is 0.2%-0.3% of 15-19 kW. If you take the Nissan Leaf which has a nominal 70 mile range at highway speeds, saving 40 Watts will get you about 800-100 feet (240-300 meters) in additional range on a full charge compared to regular halogen headlights. So they represent a trivial amount of energy savings which nobody is going to notice, even on an EV.

      That said, BMW is a luxury brand (in the U.S.). So they'll probably be able to sell enough of these to rich people (early adopters) to justify the R&D costs, and it'll help improve the state of the art for everyone. But don't make the mistake of thinking that this will result in any significant energy savings for EVs.

    7. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, freaking lasers!

    8. Re:Yeah thanks..... by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Among other things, laser light is a lot more energy efficient. According to the article, BMW is getting 170 lumens per watt as compared to 100 lumens per watt for LED lights.

      I'm sure a 40% reduction in power usage for the headlights is really important when I only have a 200kW engine to power them.

    9. Re:Yeah thanks..... by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      What else would it be? We already have headlights. They already work.

      Saving the driver money in fuel costs doesn't seem such a bad thing.

      Though of course you know there's an idiot somewhere planning to put ten of them on their car and run them at twice the old power level in order blind some drivers.

    10. Re:Yeah thanks..... by canajin56 · · Score: 2

      This change will probably save you about a dime for every $100 you spend on fuel. Assuming you only drive at night, of course.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    11. Re:Yeah thanks..... by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Also, as coherent light they can be focused better (much much better) than normal beams

      Except, according to TFA:

      . . . before the light from the tiny laser diodes is emitted onto the road, the originally bluish laser light beam is first of all converted by means of a fluorescent phosphor material inside the headlight into a pure white light which is very bright and pleasant to the eye.

    12. Re:Yeah thanks..... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Several countries require cars to have some kind of light on during the day as well.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    13. Re:Yeah thanks..... by black+soap · · Score: 1

      100 is old news. LEDs that get 160 Lumens per watt are already available. LED efficiency improves all the time.

    14. Re:Yeah thanks..... by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Yes, nothing says "pleasant to the eye" like staring into a headlamp...

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    15. Re:Yeah thanks..... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      "very bright and pleasant to the eye"

      Just a small oxymoron for today's viewing pleasure.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    16. Re:Yeah thanks..... by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Maybe the solid-state laser diodes are longer lasting than conventional headlight filaments? Just a guess, but I'd also guess that the phosphor will have a shorter life that defeats the savings.

    17. Re:Yeah thanks..... by exploder · · Score: 1

      That's still on the order of a million gallons of gas saved each day in the US.

      --
      Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
    18. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Premium headlamps such as Xenon and LED have had upcharges of as much as $1,000 on premium cars."
      You get a lot of fuel for $1000...

    19. Re:Yeah thanks..... by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So?

      Are you claiming $99.90 is more than $100. No? Then it's a saving which was the only point being raised in what I responded to.

      Sure, more likely BMW is doing this because they think there are enough idiots who will say "Laser headlights? Sold!" when buying a car. But that doesn't negate the fact that the same light for less watts is a good thing.

    20. Re:Yeah thanks..... by slashdottedjoe · · Score: 1

      Great post! Great data!

      The one thing that could really stink about these lights will be the replacement cost post warranty. I doubt they will be 10-20 bucks at Autozone. Early on they may be several hundred dollars each when compared to other high end laser products.

    21. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cree Breaks 200 Lumen Per Watt Efficacy Barrier

      http://www.cree.com/press/press_detail.asp?i=1265232091259

    22. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I am not sure what kind of lamp my 2005 Mazda 3 has, but I bought the car new and I haven't had to replace either headlamp due to a burnout. (One was involved in a collision. I don't remember if it was replaced.)

    23. Re:Yeah thanks..... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      And as they stated, the LEDs are bright enough.. WTF we need lasers?

      Among other things, laser light is a lot more energy efficient. According to the article, BMW is getting 170 lumens per watt as compared to 100 lumens per watt for LED lights.

      They're using older numbers for LED's. Cree's at 231 lumens per watt. They hit 200 lumens/watt in 2010, and 170 back in 2008. The 100 lumens/watt numbers are likely accurate for currently-available LEDs and more specifically the packaging that is required for automotive environments (wide temp range, high reliability, vibration-withstanding ability) but higher-efficiency LED's will be qualifying for that within a couple years.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    24. Re:Yeah thanks..... by CdBee · · Score: 1

      Electrical efficiency in cars matters. I keep detailed brim-to-brim fuel records going back years for my car. Over the last 18 months as LED aftermarket technology improved I have changed all bulbs bar the main and dipped-beam headlamps and some inaccessible panel backlights over to LED. I have seen a detectable improvement in fuel economy (about 1.5%) from knocking barely 50 watts off the power load. I am pretty sure it starts better too, as the battery is in an improved state of charge perhaps.

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    25. Re:Yeah thanks..... by Attila+the+Bun · · Score: 1

      I can't tell if you're serious. On my car arc-discharge headlamps are a thousand-euro option; goodness knows what BMW will charge for laser-beams.

      Meanwhile my oh-so-inefficient filament headlamps consume about 100MJ/year. Accounting for engine and alternator efficiency that's about half a tank of petrol per year, or 500 euros over the lifetime of the vehicle.

    26. Re:Yeah thanks..... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Not only do I not believe you have knocked off an average of 50W from your power load, but alternators normally overcharge batteries.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    27. Re:Yeah thanks..... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The very best LEDs are now about 10X as efficient as incandescents. This would put a pair of premium LED headlights at 10 W, and any improvement by using lasers would be meaningless.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    28. Re:Yeah thanks..... by anubi · · Score: 1

      With solar panels and backup DC systems becoming more popular, light sources giving 100 lumens/watt or more of high quality white light will be quite useful for a lot of stuff besides cars.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  3. Almost Obligatory... by Jawnn · · Score: 2, Funny

    OK. Fine, but will the sharks be able to operate the headlight switch?

    1. Re:Almost Obligatory... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      Jumped the shark with lasers...

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Almost Obligatory... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Get me a big enough shark, a plastic vat, and two sufficiently dissimilar metals, and I'll jump the lasers with a shark

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Almost Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well knowing the kind of tools that tool around in BMWs, I'm pretty sure they're going to make a lot of loan sharks laser equipped.

  4. why lasers? by Iamthecheese · · Score: 1

    Laser light has significant disadvantages compared to the other kind. (what's the word for non-laser?) It may be less efficient to just spread several shades of light everywhere but it's kind of necessary to see everything.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    1. Re:why lasers? by barlevg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (what's the word for non-laser?)

      incoherent?

    2. Re:why lasers? by otis+wildflower · · Score: 3, Interesting

      incoherent light?

      IMO I'd rather see laser 'sparkplugs' first, I know Ford is working on them..

    3. Re:why lasers? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      yeah, was curious about this...lasers are a very specific frequency, yeah? A blue laser won't let a red sign look red, for instance. Also, there's the fact that we WANT the light to be diffused. Headlights should fade out in a couple hundred yards, not be blinding people from 10 miles away. LED lights are already enough of a problem (as others have said).

    4. Re:why lasers? by poity · · Score: 1

      Because it ain't a "luxury" car if it drives on the same tech the plebes drives on.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    5. Re:why lasers? by Megane · · Score: 2, Informative

      Headlights should fade out in a couple hundred yards, not be blinding people from 10 miles away.

      That's called "collimation", which is not an inherent property of laser light, just a typically desirable one. Laser light is monochromatic (one frequency) and coherent (all waves in the same phase). Collimation is the focusing into a narrow beam. Some laser types are inherently collimated, some aren't.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    6. Re:why lasers? by tophermeyer · · Score: 1

      Is there a significant power savings there? Lasers seem like an overly complicated replacement for spark plugs, especially considering the inevitable degradation of the sparky end. Or are they part of a totally different engine design?

      I am intrigued.

    7. Re:why lasers? by rdpratt · · Score: 0

      Non-gaussian? That's my guess at least. The point spread function of a point source, like a laser, is distinct from that of any other. This is a good question though, maybe non-laser is the best answer :D

    8. Re:why lasers? by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Laser light has significant disadvantages compared to the other kind. (what's the word for non-laser?) It may be less efficient to just spread several shades of light everywhere but it's kind of necessary to see everything.

      They won't be using the laser light directly. It will be passed through a secondary material to convert it into white light.

      Laser headlamps would be safe, BMW says, because the illumination leaving the headlamp is indirect. The blue laser beam is also converted by a fluorescent phosphor material into a pure white light - "pleasant to the eye," BMW says...

      The article did not indicate what that might do to the collimation though.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    9. Re:why lasers? by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      what's the word for non-laser?)

      "Light"

      A "laser" is a device that emits light. The product of that device is light, or a "laser beam" -- the process of lasing just (big simplification) gets all the light going in the same direction at the same frequency. That results in a brighter / stronger beam of light, rather than allow the light to do what it is naturally inclined to do -- fly off in every direction.

      Today I can see no reason why I would rather have a laser light than ... say.. LED or Xenon (which are both pretty damn bright) . . . other than "lasers are neat."

      -GiH

    10. Re:why lasers? by jittles · · Score: 4, Informative

      The laser plugs aren't to save electricity. The laser burns so hot that you get a much better "spark" if you will. In other words, more complete combustion and therefore more power, less gas fumes in exhaust, and (I am no expert but I imagine) less CO as well.

    11. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FTA - "The blue laser beam is also converted by a fluorescent phosphor material into a pure white light"

    12. Re:why lasers? by vlm · · Score: 2

      That's called "collimation", which is not an inherent property of laser light, just a typically desirable one. Laser light is monochromatic (one frequency) and coherent (all waves in the same phase). Collimation is the focusing into a narrow beam. Some laser types are inherently collimated, some aren't.

      Those properties also make lasers idea for projecting holograms.

      I assume the same crowd that considers "naked lady outline" truck mudflaps to be tasteful and classy, will soon have ladies with "high beams" when the brights are turned on.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    13. Re:why lasers? by nschubach · · Score: 1

      If you could focus the laser on objects in front of you, it might be kind of neat/beneficial. Something like a night vision camera that identifies objects in the distance and the laser fill is drawn on that object to accentuate it.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    14. Re:why lasers? by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      incoherent light?

      this is exactly the problem with a laser beam. Not having read TFA, I dunno whether the summary's "modulation" means a coherence-spoiler, but if it doesn't, the laser beam is going to be a lousy illuminator.
      Ooops, also not mentioned in summary: if , like current so-called white LEDs, this new headlamp uses a laser to stimulate a high-efficiency white phosphor, then we can all stop worrying: the emitted light will be incoherent.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    15. Re:why lasers? by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      Yes, I thought it was pretty funny how they first said that laser light is monochromatic, and then a bit further they're saying how nicely white the light from these new headlights is. Something tells me that the author of the article does not know what "monochromatic" means. True, if I read it again, it does talk about the conversion, but the way the article is written does give me the suspicion that the author does not know what "monochromatic" means. Otherwise he might have added a few words here and there to explain the difference.

    16. Re:why lasers? by rfuilrez · · Score: 1

      In addition to what jittles said, you can time the firing of a laser a lot more precisely than you can a spark. And, you can do things like multiple bursts (aka sparks) for a more complete combustion cycle a lot more efficiently.

    17. Re:why lasers? by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      Today I can see no reason why I would rather have a laser light than ... say.. LED or Xenon (which are both pretty damn bright) . . . other than "lasers are neat."

      Exactly. Let's take light, bounce it back and forth so every photon is going the same direction, then put it through a headlamp that is designed to diffuse it. Seems much simpler to take the light that was already going in every direction, put some mirrors on the sides that you don't need, and done.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    18. Re:why lasers? by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      A laser that doesn't produce a coherent beam of light is called a light-emitting diode....

    19. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The A in LASER stands for Amplification, so non-laser light would be unamplified light.

    20. Re:why lasers? by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that the author of the article does not know what "monochromatic" means.

      Or what "The blue laser beam is also converted by a fluorescent phosphor material into a pure white light" means

    21. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually wouldnt it be more CO2? As it is more efficient at turning gas into its byproducts to create heat...

      Now however you can use less gas to produce the same amount of heat. Which is where you get less C02...

    22. Re:why lasers? by black+soap · · Score: 1

      And yet they all get their fuel from the same holes in the desert.

    23. Re:why lasers? by black+soap · · Score: 1

      So, what is the phosphor life, and what does it do when the phosphor burns out? Does it get dimmer, or just let the laser straight through?

    24. Re:why lasers? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension fail. The poster you replied to said "less CO", not "less CO2". That is an important difference since CO is indeed a pollutant, while CO2 is a normal component of the atmosphere.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    25. Re:why lasers? by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      Yes, even though he does say that, it's weird that he first seems to be extolling the many virtues of laser light, monochromaticity being one of them, before saying that they're converting it to white light. I dunno, maybe it's just me, but it made me do a double-take the first time I read the article.

    26. Re:why lasers? by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Maybe more complete combustion? Less partial combustion products, less need for catalytic converters and emissions control systems?

    27. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the funny thing about the way human minds work is that drivers steer towards were they are looking, especially in panic situations. Lighting up obstacles with the lasers will make drivers look at the obstacles.

      ever notice how many cars crash against that single telephone pole in an otherwise completely clear corner?

    28. Re:why lasers? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      There are several reasons that I can think of off the top of my head.

      1) The area on the piston head for a spark plug clearance will no longer need to be present. Smaller combustion area means more energy transfer.
      2) It will eliminate the spark plug gap. This will effectively eliminate the need to replace spark plugs in the "tune up" process.
      4) The area of the head where there was once a large hole for the spark plug can be reduced to a micro pin hole.
      5) The angle of the plug to the intake valve will no longer be a factor in combustion.
      6) The location of the heat that starts the explosion will be closer to the head.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    29. Re:why lasers? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      w00t! i removed 3 and forgot to change the numbers.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    30. Re:why lasers? by ryanov · · Score: 1

      Is it somehow cool to intentionally spell grammar wrong? Ignorance is the new intelligence or some such?

    31. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      less CO is possible... less CO2 is not.

    32. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "less CO" is the same as "more complete combustion". CO is a fuel itself. 2CO + O2 = 2CO2 and heat.

    33. Re:why lasers? by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      It is meant to annoy you, and it worked. I understand being irritated by bad spelling & grammar, but I don't get why people take the discussion off-topic so they can bitch about the form of the comment instead of the substance.
      I'm equally annoyed by people that can't take the time to communicate properly. However, I've noticed that most of the grammar complaints are of the "I have no idea what you mean by 'teh', don't you mean 'the'?" variety.
      In other words, if you can't understand someone's post because it is so poorly written, skip it or mod it down. If you can understand it, respond to the substance instead of pointing out that the person made a mistake while typing on their smartphone.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    34. Re:why lasers? by dstar · · Score: 1

      A *lot* of heat, if you're converting an entire oxygen atom to energy....

    35. Re:why lasers? by dstar · · Score: 1

      Note to self, never post while waiting on the code you're debugging to get to the bit you're working on. I read that as C2O, not 2CO, thus resulting in an oxygen atom going missing....

    36. Re:why lasers? by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      bmw actually uses an amazingly obvious yet genius method of timing sparks in the newer motors. They spark when the resistance on the plug gap reaches a certain level meaning the air/fuel mix is at the right compression level and piston position to fire. It works correctly every spark and causes a more efficient combustion. No distributors, no need to sense crank position! It could have been incorporated on cars a long time ago! So simple!

      --
      Balderdash!
    37. Re:why lasers? by jittles · · Score: 1

      "less CO" is the same as "more complete combustion". CO is a fuel itself. 2CO + O2 = 2CO2 and heat.

      That's not entirely true. Because you have to have enough oxygen to get less CO. Also, a big component in exhaust fumes is unconsumed gasoline vapors, which is a bad thing (and the reason for an EGR valve, for instance). Gas fumes do not generate CO, but a lack of O2 does result in more CO.

    38. Re:why lasers? by spauldo · · Score: 1

      That depends. Complete combustion is more energy efficient than incomplete combustion. Depending on how much more power you get out of using these plugs, you very well might lower your fuel usage enough to produce less CO2 overall.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    39. Re:why lasers? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      6) The location of the heat that starts the explosion will be closer to the head.

      This is actually the primary reason for it. Spark plugs generally fire at the top of the cylinder, which causes multiple wavefronts in the air/gas mixture which causes uneven burning. If they can cause the ignition source to be in the center of the cylinder, then the wavefront becomes smooth and they can get a complete burn out of the fuel.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    40. Re:why lasers? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Yes, phosphors are used.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    41. Re:why lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cold air, hot fuel, smallest possible combustion chamber, no plugs to blast out of the head, and an explosion starting at the center. all now possible and just in time for people to start moving to electric. talking about an engine having timing problems.

  5. Great, NOW Can I... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...get them fitted to the heads of my friggin' sharks?

    1. Re:Great, NOW Can I... by bughunter · · Score: 1

      Only if BMW names one of their vehicles "Shark."

      On that note, a BMW 550i GT "Shark" would be pretty frickin' cool. Make mine Gray with P-40 "Flying Tiger" graphics...

      --
      I can see the fnords!
  6. sharks are optional by roman_mir · · Score: 4, Funny

    Beamers always looked nice, now with the optional tiny sharks inside the headlamps they'll be simply irresistible.

    What would PETA say?

    1. Re:sharks are optional by nschubach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Lasers give new meaning to "Beamer".

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    2. Re:sharks are optional by avandesande · · Score: 1

      ....do not look at headlights with remaining eye.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  7. ROFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Warning: Do not look into BMW with remaining eye.

  8. WHY WAIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I Am Going to Put a Laser on My Car Right Now. My Pet Shark is Next!

  9. obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not look into headlights with remaining eye.

  10. Excellent by 0123456 · · Score: 1

    Next time a moose runs out in the road in front of us we'll just have to switch to high beams and it will be a cloud of moose vapor.

    Though cleaning the car afterwards might be gross.

    1. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's only true if you use photon torpedoes. If the "laser"vaporized the moose, there's nothing to clean.

    2. Re:Excellent by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Moose-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization? Sorry, one for the biochem geeks...

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    3. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about moose vapor condensation? If you drive through the cloud, you're bound to get some on you.

    4. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be great. A moose once bit my sister...

    5. Re:Excellent by badbart · · Score: 3, Funny

      Forever more I will be stuck with the image of Bullwinkle in a lab coat, saying "watch me pull a spectrum out of a hat!"

    6. Re:Excellent by jittles · · Score: 1

      You don't want to be starting an arms race with the moose population. You thought sharks with laser beams were bad? Just wait until the moose get their hands on some real lasers!

    7. Re:Excellent by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      My work is done here.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    8. Re:Excellent by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Depends on how long it takes to condense; perhaps we should apply for a research grant.

    9. Re:Excellent by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      You need to get out more.

    10. Re:Excellent by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      I would not completely rule out the possibility that you might be right. Then again, out? There's them moose out there, man! They come out of the trees! It's horrible, I tell you, horrible!

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    11. Re:Excellent by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      I now feel the uncontrollable urge to find some way to insert the phrase "moose vapor" into a conversation today. Thanks!

    12. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mynd you, moose bites Kan be pretti nasti...

    13. Re:Excellent by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      It's meant for traffic jams. Power up the lasers and clear the lane.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  11. Car Analogy + Lasers + Sharks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Put them on the Hyundai Tiburon.

    1. Re:Car Analogy + Lasers + Sharks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a Corvette Stingray...

  12. My eyes! Zee goggles, they do nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    --Radio Active Man and Fallout Boy

  13. Great idea! by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

    Now when it comes time to replace a head light, it will become a major spending decision!

    1. Re:Great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It already is.

    2. Re:Great idea! by formfeed · · Score: 1

      Now when it comes time to replace a head light, it will become a major spending decision!

      Not really, you will still be able to have it done at a backyard shop or at home with unlicensed "just for off road use"-parts. Burning off parts of other people's retina is just a risk one has to take.

      At least someone will come up with a great money saver like that. Probably the same people who let their 10 year old kids run around with 200mW lasers.

  14. Yeah, fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While they're there, can they fix the windscreen so that the vehicle in front actually looks like it's the fag-paper away that it actually is while some of these cocks are driving them?

    Odd bloody thing, but the captcha is "eyeball". Perhaps it knows something...

  15. Sales Point: Pink Floyd by gregg · · Score: 2

    The only car where the Pink Floyd music library is included as a feature; complete with laser light show.

    1. Re:Sales Point: Pink Floyd by Pope · · Score: 1

      Back in high school, I took a girl I liked to the Laser Floyd show at the Boston Science Museum. Afterwards she said snarkily, "If you ever want to do that again, let's just drop acid and save the drive into town."

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  16. Are lasers really more efficient? by drnb · · Score: 1

    I love lasers, but are lasers really more efficient in this particular application? The laser was stated to be 70% more efficient than the LED. However the laser light is not used directly. How much of that efficiency is lost as the light is converted in something "suitable for road traffic" and also something "pleasant"? Perhaps the real advantages lie in the design (more compact) and in the marketing.

  17. No Mr Bond, I expect you to die. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    I guess Jimmy's going back to driving BMW now...

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  18. Comments practically write themselves on this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LASERs will be modulated for safety? No one ever customizes/hacks their means of locomotion do they? Can the modulation be used for data (combo higway/optical link)? How long until we see lightshows at old drive in theaters?

  19. next logical step by Krau+Ming · · Score: 2

    why the hell are lasers for headlights the next logical step? i think everyone agrees that headlights all do their job adequately given the limitation of not being allowed to completely blind oncoming traffic. the next LOGICAL step (assuming we are trying move in the direction of eliminating visibility issues/unknown elements from nighttime driving) should be to have some kind of sonar/radar device that can detect and relay a warning to the driver...maybe by having a terminator-esque translucent LED screen overlay on the windshield that would highlight things out of range of the regular headlights (eg: deer getting ready to pop out of the forest). if BMW customers are willing to pay for frickin' laser beams then surely they'd pay for this.

    1. Re:next logical step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An unlikely movie to cite for this perhaps, but what was shown in "Children of Men" would be nice to have.

    2. Re:next logical step by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      the next LOGICAL step (assuming we are trying move in the direction of eliminating visibility issues/unknown elements from nighttime driving) should be to have some kind of sonar/radar device that can detect and relay a warning to the driver

      Lasers could probably help with this...

      I was about to say "unless they run the beam through a diffuser and whitener like they've said they'll do." But even if the beam is turned white and spread around, if it stays in-phase in at least one frequency, maybe they can still do something with it.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    3. Re:next logical step by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Free with every purchase of strawberry delight.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    4. Re:next logical step by egburr · · Score: 1

      "adequate"? My headlights do a perfectly fine job of illuminating the road in front of me. That is, until someone with HID or LED headlights comes up behind me. Then all I can see is the cone of shadow my car casts in its own headlights, and a pretty brightly illuminated shoulder of the road, so bright that I find it difficult to see the actual road where I am trying to drive.

      Are people really so blind that they must have the road lit to daylight levels to be able to see?

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    5. Re:next logical step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the next "logical" step would be a IR heads up display. Radar or Sonar plus the target recognition HW/SW needed would be too expensive. Hell, if they can see ghosts with IR just think what you see on a long road trip (maybe though Gettysburg) !

    6. Re:next logical step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The correct solution to the blinding problem is to polarize the glass at 45 degrees in windshields and headlights. This will reduce blinding effect from direct light since oncoming cars will be polarized at 90 degrees to you (a little less might be wise so you can still see them! ;-). Now YOU can patent polarizing the rear window in the opposite direction!

  20. bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is really stupid. The point of a laser is that is dumps a lot of power into a single spatial mode (it's spatially coherent). The illuminated scene then produced coherent backscatter which you see as lots of small interference patterns (aka speckle) imposed on the whole scene. This is not a good thing for your brain to process. You can try to make the laser light less coherent and in the process reduce te efficience. Might as well have stuck with the LED at that point.

  21. Lasers are not necessarily expensive by drnb · · Score: 1

    Now when it comes time to replace a head light, it will become a major spending decision!

    Lasers are not necessarily expensive. Look at, figuratively since we are discussing lasers :-), CD/DVD players, laser pointers, etc.

    1. Re:Lasers are not necessarily expensive by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know, but something tells me these won't be cheap.

    2. Re:Lasers are not necessarily expensive by drnb · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know, but something tells me these won't be cheap.

      Well that's due to the BMW logo on the box. Whether its halogen, LED or laser in the box doesn't matter that much.

    3. Re:Lasers are not necessarily expensive by toddestan · · Score: 1

      You're talking about a BMW here. Parts are outrageously expensive, at least in the US. It's not unfeasible that older cars will be scrapped just because they have a headlight go out on them.

  22. zero CRI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm all for efficient lighting, but when the color rendering index (CRI) goes to zero, all the photon in the world won't allow you to see better.

  23. Advantages? by webdog314 · · Score: 1

    About the only advantage I see in this is the possible efficiency (which doesn't really make sense unless the car is electric). I mean, bright is bright. Screw "modulated for safety". If the point is it's brighter, then it's brighter at both ends. This just means that when they come over a hill, they can blind you from a mile away. We don't even need high beams anymore.

    Could they maybe tie this into a range finder or adaptive landscape mapping or something? I'd hate to see what their laser headlight would do to a puddle of water, or god forbid a fog or rainstorm. It would look like an IO tower from TRON was slicing apart pieces of the sky.

    1. Re:Advantages? by CdBee · · Score: 1

      the generator causes parasitic drag when under load from electrical usage. More efficient headlamps > lower current > less generator drag > same speed with accelerator under less pressure > improved fuel economy

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    2. Re:Advantages? by CityZen · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling that the main advantages of this tech are:
      1. It keeps some BMW engineers employed.
      2. It gives the body designers even more freedom for how the lights should look.
      3. It makes BMW seem even more cool.

      They'll probably be able to design cars that don't appear to have any headlights at all (except for a few tiny holes at the front corners).

  24. Illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unrestricted/uncontrolled Class IV lasers are illegal in the US... I can't wait for the class-action lawsuits.

    1. Re:Illegal by arisvega · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, it is illegal to mount lasers (whatever that is) on your vehicle (whatever that is) in the U.S. (whatever that is!)

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  25. Electric cars by Quila · · Score: 1

    Every Watt of power drawn by the car's accessories is very important. Look for many more efficient accessories to come on the market.

  26. Could give new meaning to the lyrics by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

    "blinded by science"

  27. Vermin by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    If they can tie the lights into a dection system for deer, that would be sweet; drop Bambi like a bad habit to prevent major-league crumplage.

    1. Re:Vermin by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      The best deer avoidance system I have been able to come up with is a valid hunting license and a rifle or shotgun. During deer season you won't see them, but once the season closes they are thick as thieves. On a more serious note I have seen some semi trucks with what appears to be deer catchers on the front attached to the bumpers.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  28. Bet you 10-to-1 by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    This shows up on the next James Bond or MIssion Impossible flic.

    Laser Headlights, with booster to turn them into weapons grade headlights.

  29. The real reason for the laser lamps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is to blind the cops who use lasers to nail the speeding beamers!

    1. Re:The real reason for the laser lamps by CdBee · · Score: 1

      or blow out the CCD in the speed camera

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  30. geeks gotta get some by ae1294 · · Score: 1

    "modulated for safety"

    That sounds like it should be on a box of "star trek" brand condoms...

    1. Re:geeks gotta get some by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      I guess if your going to have a box of condoms sitting around with no chance of ever being used they might has have a theme.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  31. White and monochromatic? by wgoodman · · Score: 2

    I'm just curious how they are making white lights? "...laser lighting is monochromatic, which means that the light waves all have the same length." followed by "...resulting light is very bright and white"

    The bigger news is that they've found a single wavelength of light that is white!

    1. Re:White and monochromatic? by jbengt · · Score: 2

      As it says in TFAs, they are shining the lasers onto phospors to create white light. So, in spite of the hype, no laser pinpoint straight lines, no monochromatic, locked-in-phase laser light in the eyes, just another headlight that's too bright.

    2. Re:White and monochromatic? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I'm just curious how they are making white lights?

      LEDs are essentially monochromatic too.
      You get white light from LEDs by generating UV and using that to excite a phosphor which generates photos at a variety of visible frequencies. Presumably the lasers will work the same way,

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    3. Re:White and monochromatic? by dr2chase · · Score: 2

      There's a big difference between actually monochromatic, and essentially monochromatic. The phosphors, as I was told by a physicist carpooling on a boy scout ski trip, are wavelength multipliers of some sort. You can see this when you look at a fluorescent light through a diffraction grating; you'll see 6-12 images of the light, each an exact different color, offset from one another. 2-3 spectral lines get multiplied out to 6-12 lines.

      An LED emits a continuous range of frequencies tightly clustered around a particular wavelength; fed through wavelength multipliers, you get multiple overlapping smears, making a good-sized blob of frequencies. Through a diffraction grating, you do not get multiple images, you get rainbow smears.

      I don't know exactly what the wavelength multiples are; I only know what I see with my eyes through a diffraction grating. I also took pictures for comparison: http://dr2chase.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/spectrum-led-vs-fluorescent/ (and I just rechecked it again). The LEDs emit a continuous smear; the compact fluorescents (and presumably, the phosphor-enhanced truly monochromatic lasers) do not.

    4. Re:White and monochromatic? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      "Smearing" isn't necessary. Laser televisions works with just 3 lasers, RGB, to fool the eye into seeing white (and all the other colors in whatever ISO gamut the HDTV spec calls out). So all you need is a phosphor with 3 multipliers that work out to have enough coverage in the red, green and blue parts of the spectrum.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    5. Re:White and monochromatic? by erice · · Score: 1

      "Smearing" isn't necessary. Laser televisions works with just 3 lasers, RGB, to fool the eye into seeing white (and all the other colors in whatever ISO gamut the HDTV spec calls out). So all you need is a phosphor with 3 multipliers that work out to have enough coverage in the red, green and blue parts of the spectrum.

      Reality check: the world is not RGB. Objects that reflect pure violet light do not reflect any red or blue light. Shine and RGB light on them and they show up black.

    6. Re:White and monochromatic? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Reality check: the world is not RGB. Objects that reflect pure violet light do not reflect any red or blue light. Shine and RGB light on them and they show up black.

      And just how many objects in the real world are that monochromatic.?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:White and monochromatic? by erice · · Score: 2

      Only humans paint using RGB/CYMK. Almost all natural scenes are going to come out with the wrong colors under pure RGB lighting even if very few are fully black.

    8. Re:White and monochromatic? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      "Wrong colors" isn't a problem for headlights.

      Furthermore, if you disagree with my premise that they are most likely using a basic posphor frequency multiplier to get multi-spectrum coverage out of the monochromatic laser, then perhaps you'd light to inform me what they really are doing. Or perhaps you wouldn't.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  32. Let's get this straight. by smcdow · · Score: 2

    When referring to a vehicle manufactured by BMW, the following rules should be used:

    2 wheels: "Beamer"
    4 wheels: "Bimmer"

    --
    In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
    1. Re:Let's get this straight. by amicusNYCL · · Score: 0

      Any number of wheels: "Beamer" (while flipping off those who insist otherwise)

      I prefer that people refer to 2-door Ford vehicles as a "Furd", and 4-door vehicles as a "Fooooord". That makes a lot of sense. Also, any Toyota cars are to be referred to as "Toyota", while Toyota trucks should be called "BMW" (not to be confused with Beamers).

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Let's get this straight. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      When referring to a vehicle manufactured by BMW, the following rules should be used:

      2 wheels: "Beamer"
      4 wheels: "Bimmer"

      Either one at end of warranty period "Bummer"

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Let's get this straight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bartender: So, how did you get to town?
      Palindrome Man: A Toyota.

    4. Re:Let's get this straight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 wheels: "Beamer"

      "Beemer" but often mispelled[sic] "Beamer"

    5. Re:Let's get this straight. by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Fords with two doors are Tudors and their four doored brethren are Fordors.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    6. Re:Let's get this straight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only if youre a douche who owns an 80s bmw because its cool. For the rest of us plebs, either applies to either vehicle

    7. Re:Let's get this straight. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Only motorcyclists use that convention.

  33. Not Laser headlights by jklovanc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Read this sentence from the last paragraph of the article; "Importantly, therefore, before the light from the tiny laser diodes is emitted onto the road, the originally bluish laser light beam is first of all converted by means of a fluorescent phosphor material inside the headlight into a pure white light which is very bright and pleasant to the eye." Therefore no lase light escapes the headlight. This is in effect laser stimulated florescence. The one number they miss in the article is what is the conversion ration between the light incoming to the phosphor and the light given off by the phosphor. It could be 100% but I don't know. After this conversion the light is probably no longer coherent and will disperse like a headlight should.

    1. Re:Not Laser headlights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It only took 2 hours for someone to read the article? A new record!

    2. Re:Not Laser headlights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. I was wondering for a while why having 6 - 12 lasers (red blue and green x 2 headlights x 2 beam strengths) would be efficient except at extracting cash from a wallet when you buy the thing. :-)

    3. Re:Not Laser headlights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it can't be 100%.

    4. Re:Not Laser headlights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It physically cannot be 100%, because phosphors work by absorbing a higher frequency photon and emitting a lower frequency photon. This drop in frequency is energy lost, and dictates the efficiency of the phosphor.

      Also coherent =/= collimated. A lot of people seem to confuse this.

    5. Re:Not Laser headlights by formfeed · · Score: 1

      .. a pure white light which is very bright and pleasant to the eye. ...

      Somehow doesn't go together. This sounds like "extremely bright HID headlamps that will cause tears of joy"

  34. Yellow Tinted Glasses for Night Driving by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    I wear yellow tinted glasses day and night, and I can't remember driving without them. The glare is gone in the day, and my night vision is greatly improved, especially with jerks following and coming towards me with either brights on, or those ultra-bright lights. It also helps driving fatigue immensely.

    I've often fantasized about carrying a 2 million candle power hand held rechargeable spotlight to flash people behind me with their brights on. But rather than go to prison for manslaughter when the go flying off at 70mph into a ravine, I just wear my tinted glasses.

    --
    I8-D
  35. Ob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not drive at night with remaining eye.

  36. Fan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't you want a beam that is NOT parallel? If you're driving down a country road with little to no lighting, you'd want the headlights to illuminate more than just what's directly in front of the lights.

  37. They are missing a big point. by Gription · · Score: 1

    One of the reasons they are trying to do this is to make the lights smaller.
    That is one of the big problems with HID bulbs. The smaller the point source of the light the more blinding it is. They should be trying to make the emitting surface larger so they can make it less blinding to someone in the beam path.
    Example: If you doubled the light output of a modern HID automotive lighting system but made the emitting surface 10 times as large the driver would be able to see much better and people in the beam pattern wouldn't be blinded anywhere near as much as they are currently.

    The other bit is blue light stinks as an illumination source. Your eyes don't work well with that portion of the spectrum and it reduces your depth perception.

    1. Re:They are missing a big point. by black+soap · · Score: 2

      My point was that people would misuse and alter these things probably as much as they do current technology.

    2. Re:They are missing a big point. by neokushan · · Score: 1

      Make it illegal/fail MOT?

      --
      +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    3. Re:They are missing a big point. by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      It mostly is already, but it's hard to enforce and people do it in droves.

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    4. Re:They are missing a big point. by black+soap · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen, enforcement of equipment violations has actually gone down in recent years, and I suspect it will continue getting worse.

  38. Turn signals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they're not wasting money putting R&D into making laser turn signals, since I've never ever seen a turn signal in operation on a BMW anywhere!

  39. Pure marketing bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

    First off, regular LED lamps are way more efficient than a laser. It's already got a great dispersion pattern, and it's focusable with a simple lens to keep it tight. I have a 12w LED lamp that replaced my 100w MH porch light. I can still see just as well.

    There is almost zero point in decohering a laser, and in fact odds are you're going to have that decohering surface wear out over time (as well as the laser as it gets way hot.) Sounds expensive to replace, too! Oh, this is BMW, you say? That would figure.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:Pure marketing bullshit by raygundan · · Score: 1

      According to the press release, BMW is getting 170 lumens per watt from the laser headlights. That's substantially higher than the efficiency of most LEDs on the market-- even the very best are less efficient than that, and most are more like 90-100 lumens per watt.

    2. Re:Pure marketing bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

      The very best LED from Cree top 230 lux/w @ 6500 CCT.

      So, no.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    3. Re:Pure marketing bullshit by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Just so you should know, I am DEEPLY entrenched in this particular field of optoelectronics.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  40. No man, that little switch is an amazing bit.... by way2trivial · · Score: 2

    it's the neatest bit of engineering in your every day life.

    it's calculated to change from the mirror's silvered reflection (dead on) to the natural reflection angle of plate glass...

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  41. Robin Williams was just a little behind the times by Quila · · Score: 1

    He once said, "Don't you wish instead of those cute little headlights you had twin .50 caliber machine guns?"

    Now the headlights themselves become the weapon.

  42. Blind Spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gives new meaning to "blind spot."

  43. Re:Robin Williams was just a little behind the tim by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Robin Williams you say? With his record for lifting jokes, I'm sure someone else said it first. I read an article that said comedians would walk offstage if they heard he had entered the venue (same with Mencia).

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  44. Mirror design by overshoot · · Score: 1
    What you want is a reflex reflector. E.g. traffic signs: they reflect incident light back to the source rather than the way a mirror does.

    I confess to having long lusted after a way to paint the backs of my cars with the stuff, but I understand it's actually a plastic film. Wonder if I can get it applied the same way ads and such are?

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Mirror design by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      I've seen strips of it applied to fleet vehicles. Usually on the bumper or tailgate. I'd guess you could put it up your rear window if you wanted.

      A bit evil, maybe. :)

    2. Re:Mirror design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you want is a reflex reflector. E.g. traffic signs: they reflect incident light back to the source rather than the way a mirror does.

      Problem is: it will reflect back to the headlights, not the driver.

    3. Re:Mirror design by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, it can be cut out into decals and put on anywhere you like. The grade to look for is "High Intensity Prismatic," or HIP grade. Available in a rainbow of colors. Letters cut with a stencil are used for the white lettering on some street name blades, for example (the green background us sometimes only Engineer Grade).

      If you are putting it on your vehicle, be sure to know your state's laws - certain color reflectors might be construed by the nice officer pulling you over as "impersonating police markings," "improper emergency signals," or "incorrect display of white tail-lights" (unlikely, but possible). A strip of red that tricks them into thinking you are braking when their headlights hit it, or white dots that convince them you are in reverse as they follow behind you, probably won't get you into trouble.

    4. Re:Mirror design by black+soap · · Score: 1

      The 3M 3930 (a common High Intensity Prismatic sheeting w/ adhesive) isn't a perfect retroreflector the way a cube-corner retroreflector would be - it is assumed that the driver's headlights are below and out of line with the driver's vision, and ideally you want either of the driver's headlights to reflect off the stop sign (mounted high and to the side) such that at least some of it will make it to the driver's eyes. It doesn't come back perfectly parallel to the incoming path, but it is close enough that the retroreflective Stop sign will appear significantly brighter than other objects the headlights illuminate.

    5. Re:Mirror design by spauldo · · Score: 1

      Any decent size truck stop will have a selection of them. You're pretty much guaranteed to find rolls of orange and while striped reflective tape, since those are applied to the side and rear of trailers. Dirt and weather make them peel off after a while, but you're unlikely too see the kind of mileage those tapes are made to deal with.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
  45. Rear-facing headlamps by overshoot · · Score: 1

    I've often fantasized about carrying a 2 million candle power hand held rechargeable spotlight to flash people behind me with their brights on.

    Stifle that thought. I've seen it in practice.

    Quite some years back I was driving home with the kids from the mountains on a Sunday night in the usual heavy two-lane traffic. With a few dozen cars ahead of me there was a major asshole in a jacked-up pickup behind me who kept flashing his high beams, presumably to get me to move over so he could do the same to the next 40 or so cars in line.

    We finally got down into four-lane territory (still mountainous) and as we were coming to a turn he whips around us and then lit off a pair of headlamps under his rear bumper. I damn near went into the guardrail as he smoked off.

    A while later, down in the valley, I saw him again (I got a good look at him as he was passing.) He was pulled off the road with a patrol cruiser behind him, another diagonally in front of him, and a third blocking him from the highway side. He and his passengers were face down on the dirt (Arizona desert: that sharp stuff isn't just stones) with officers well back with drawn weapons while other checked them over.

    My best guess: he tried that trick on the wrong person.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Rear-facing headlamps by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

      Now that's some justice! Of all the places in the world to be an asshole, the highway is NOT one of them.

      --
      I8-D
  46. The story is about BMWs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    surely you mean "Put them on the E24 six-series."

  47. Before you get too excited...? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    The whole bloody thing isn't worth considering if they're only offering it on the 8-series. I'm a software engineer, not a CEO. Modulated indeed, I'll just build my own and save myself a mortgage.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  48. Next Up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    X-ray headlights! Found to be far more lethal to yourself and others than simply blinding oncoming traffic!

  49. Hate them ALL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate xenon and led head lights. I drive a 2004 kia rio and no matter if they're coming at you or from behind you can't see. It lights my car up so bright I could turn off my inside lights and still see my speedometer.

  50. Instead of traditional lighting through lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about an infrared laser head light along with a camera system and translucent display for a windshield?

  51. True laser headlights would be even more useless.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...than the ridiculously narrow beamed torches Sculley and Mulder used to use on the X files.

  52. One Simple Solution To Blindness By Drive Lights! by BlackHole+Basement · · Score: 1

    When lights are upgraded, retro-fitted, jammed into housings with tape and glue; have the damn lights aimed proper by a competent mechanic or a person with experience.

    I have had to "adjust" quite a few lights for weekend light install festers. I cannot even fathom the amount of driver owners who upgrade their lights with or without headlamp housings that do not re-position their lamps.

    There are many nights that I wish for a bazooka to fix these cross eyed headlamps or the ones that try to help the moon lunar surface with more light or both!!!

  53. It's strange that... by Issarlk · · Score: 1

    plasma headlights came up before laser ones. Somebody seriously pushed for researches of the cooler techs first in their technological tree.

  54. In other news, BMW's new car ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... will be called the BMW Shark. Naturally it will be equipped with at least one pair of frickin' lasers. And the first one off the line will sell for - BWA HA HA HA HA - one MILLION dollars!

  55. Monochromatic Light Is Hard to See By by careysub · · Score: 1

    Having some experience with trying to view things with laser red light and LPS yellow light I am inclined to think that monochromatic light sources make perceiving scenes correctly relatively difficult, and visually tiring also. I'd like to see the traffic safety implications of this studied.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  56. Forget Lasers by n0tquitesne · · Score: 1

    I want Phaser headlights.

    --
    These opinions are mine, mine I say! Piss off and get your own.