If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sylvania Silverstar headlights
I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a
little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here got them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about them? Thanks in advance; SRG |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
He probably won't answer, as I (and probably a few others) have written to
him regarding this subject. He's dead-set against them according to his website. I like them though. The light is whiter, but that only refers to color temp and not brightness. They only last a year according to Sylvania, maybe longer depending on usage. "SRG" > wrote in message m... >I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a >little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 >watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here got >them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about them? > > Thanks in advance; > SRG > > |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
soxinseven wrote:
> He probably won't answer, as I (and probably a few others) have written to > him regarding this subject. He's dead-set against them according to his > website. > > I like them though. The light is whiter, but that only refers to color temp > and not brightness. They only last a year according to Sylvania, maybe > longer depending on usage. > > > > "SRG" > wrote in message > m... > >>I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a >>little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 >>watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here got >>them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about them? >> >>Thanks in advance; >>SRG A google search on this newsgroup will reveal DS's opinions of the SilverStar (generally negative). I've also seen a lot of complaints on various forums on their short life. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, soxinseven wrote:
> He probably won't answer I already *did* answer. Extensively. > as I (and probably a few others) have written to him regarding this > subject. I answer all my e-mail. DS |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, SRG wrote:
> I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a > little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 > watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here > got them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about > them? In addition to my earlier, long response about why Silverstars aren't better (let me know if it doesn't show up for you -- I might be having trouble with my news host), note that there is no wattage difference between your originals and the Silverstars. 51w is the European rating (at 12v), 55w is the US rating (at 12.8v). DS |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, soxinseven wrote:
> The light is whiter, but that only refers to color temp and not > brightness. The light is *bluer* (not "whiter") and dimmer. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message .umich.edu... > On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, SRG wrote: > >> I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a >> little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 >> watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here >> got them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about >> them? > > In addition to my earlier, long response about why Silverstars aren't > better (let me know if it doesn't show up for you -- I might be having > trouble with my news host), note that there is no wattage difference > between your originals and the Silverstars. 51w is the European rating > (at 12v), 55w is the US rating (at 12.8v). > > DS I may be off on my Ohm's Law, but does not a load draw more current at a lower voltage? Give me a reality check on this Dan. Richard. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message > .umich.edu... > >>On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, SRG wrote: >> >> >>>I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a >>>little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 >>>watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here >>>got them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about >>>them? >> >>In addition to my earlier, long response about why Silverstars aren't >>better (let me know if it doesn't show up for you -- I might be having >>trouble with my news host), note that there is no wattage difference >>between your originals and the Silverstars. 51w is the European rating >>(at 12v), 55w is the US rating (at 12.8v). >> >>DS > > > I may be off on my Ohm's Law, but does not a load draw more current at a > lower voltage? Give me a reality check on this Dan. > > Richard. Think about it - if that were true, then at 0 volts, the device would pull more current than at 13.8 volts, and at 100 volts, it wouldn't pull much current at all. Doesn't make sense does it. For ohmic devices (passive devices like resistors), ohms law is ohms = volts/amps, so amps = volts/ohms. For a given resistance, amps go up as volts go up. Light bulbs are not linear because their resistance changes with filament temperature. The hotter the filament, the higher its resistance, which is why you get inrush current at initial turn on. The result is that you won't get as drastic a change in current with a given change in voltage, but still, you do get increase in current with increase in voltage (i.e., it's less than a factor of 1). Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message > .umich.edu... > >>On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, SRG wrote: >> >> >>>I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a >>>little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 >>>watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here >>>got them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about >>>them? >> >>In addition to my earlier, long response about why Silverstars aren't >>better (let me know if it doesn't show up for you -- I might be having >>trouble with my news host), note that there is no wattage difference >>between your originals and the Silverstars. 51w is the European rating >>(at 12v), 55w is the US rating (at 12.8v). >> >>DS > > > I may be off on my Ohm's Law, but does not a load draw more current at a > lower voltage? Give me a reality check on this Dan. No. I=V/R. Assuming that the load resistance is constant, lowering V will lower the I (current). I suspect you are thinking about keeping the power constant. It is true that to maintain the same power, more current is required as the voltage is reduced since power is the product of current times voltage. However, maintaining constant power would require an "intelligent" load that could vary its resistance in response to changes in available voltage. Matt |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message ... > Richard wrote: >> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message >> .umich.edu... >> >>>On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, SRG wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I just bought the 9006XS 's (low beam) for my PT Cruiser. They look a >>>>little whiter and brighter than the 2.5 year old originals. They are 55 >>>>watts and the originals were 51 watts, I think. Has anyone else here >>>>got them? What do you think? DS could you explain what you think about >>>>them? >>> >>>In addition to my earlier, long response about why Silverstars aren't >>>better (let me know if it doesn't show up for you -- I might be having >>>trouble with my news host), note that there is no wattage difference >>>between your originals and the Silverstars. 51w is the European rating >>>(at 12v), 55w is the US rating (at 12.8v). >>> >>>DS >> >> >> I may be off on my Ohm's Law, but does not a load draw more current at a >> lower voltage? Give me a reality check on this Dan. > > No. I=V/R. Assuming that the load resistance is constant, lowering V > will lower the I (current). I suspect you are thinking about keeping the > power constant. It is true that to maintain the same power, more current > is required as the voltage is reduced since power is the product of > current times voltage. However, maintaining constant power would require > an "intelligent" load that could vary its resistance in response to > changes in available voltage. > > > Matt Yep; thanks for getting my tired old brain back into focus on this point. Richard. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Silverstar commercial | Bill the second | Driving | 7 | February 8th 05 05:20 PM |
'04 Neon Headlights | NewsGroupie | Dodge | 2 | November 23rd 04 09:21 AM |
96 Blazer and 01 headlights | Sam Sedlak | 4x4 | 1 | October 26th 04 10:32 PM |