Consumer Reports' 50th Anniversary Auto Issue Puts a Premium on Safety:
YONKERS, N.Y.--March 10, 2003--CR's First-Ever Tests of HID Headlights: How Do They Fare Under CR's Glare?
Consumer Reports April auto issue sheds some light on a new type of headlight designed to help drivers see better at night. While high-intensity discharge (HID) headlights tend to produce a wider, brighter, more uniform light than the halogen headlights found on most vehicles, complaints have poured into the government about the glare from HID lights.
In CR's first-ever headlight tests, engineers found that the distribution of HID lights do produce more glare - the temporary annoyance or blindness caused by bright light in your field of view - than halogen lights. CR also found that while many HID lights tested were among the better performers, even the best didn't outdistance the best halogens.
CR tested headlights on 41 vehicles, 10 with HID lights and 31 with halogen. Individual headlight Ratings will soon be a part of every car and truck test CR performs.
In its evaluations, CR also found that an SUV's high-mounted lights can be especially glaring. Our HID equipped 2003 BMW X5 and 2003 Range Rover SUVs prompted many oncoming drivers to "flash" us with high beams, even though we were using low beams that were properly aimed.
While HIDs' blue hue is part of the glare problem, much of it lies in how their brighter light is distributed. An HID beam's sharp edge between light and dark causes the beam to "flash" other drivers when the car travels over uneven surfaces. Halogens tend to produce a more gradual shift from light to dark.
At CR's test track in East Haddam, CT, engineers conducted three sets of tests, measuring headlights' ability to light the road ahead and along the sides as well as checking them for glare. Tests were conducted on moonless nights, in good weather conditions.
CR's engineers put the most weight on the test measuring low-beam lighting straight ahead - evaluated using 10 posts up to 800 feet from the vehicle - because more distance ahead equals more time to react and brake safely. Based on typical reaction times and braking distances, drivers traveling at 50 mph need 237 feet to see a pedestrian, hit the brake pedal, and stop in time.
In this test, the inexpensive, halogen-equipped Mazda Protege5 was the winner. Its low beams illuminated our 600-foot marker without creating a glare problem. Among the worst performers, the HID-equipped Audi TT's low beams lit only to our 200-foot marker, while the halogen-equipped Chrysler Sebring and Pontiac Grand Prix provided weak, non-uniform light.
Based on the varying performance of the headlights tested, CR recommends that car-shoppers with trouble driving at night include night driving as part of their test drive. They should see how well the vehicle lights dark roads, how well the light is distributed, and whether drivers "flash" them with their high beams.
CR's headlights report also includes a sidebar on blue-hued HID headlight knockoffs and what to avoid, and our recommendations for what the government can do to improve forward visibility and the glare problem.
Safety Alert: Mind that Blind Spot
Many consumers would be surprised to discover that there are significant differences between the blind spots - that area behind the vehicle that you can't see from the driver's seat - of a Chevrolet Avalanche, a pick-up truck and a Honda Accord, a family sedan. Kids 'N Cars, a consumer organization working on child-safety issues, is calling attention to the problem of the blind spot, citing that at least 58 children were backed over and killed last year.
To compare differences, CR's test engineers measured the length of the blind spot of a sedan, minivan, SUV, and pick-up. The engineers used a 28-inch high traffic cone to simulate a small child, measuring how far behind the vehicle the cone would have to be before an average-height driver (5 feet 8 inches) and a short driver (5 feet 1 inch) could see it.
The difference between the Avalanche and the Accord for an average-height driver was a striking 17 feet. CR reminds drivers that it's best to always look carefully behind the vehicle before you get in and again before you put the car in gear, and always back up slowly.
Many CR Top Picks Earn Top Scores in CR's Safety Assessment of 85 Vehicles
In CR's 2003 Safety Assessment (CRSA), many of the vehicles earning high marks are also among CR's standouts for overall performance and reliability. This year's Top Pick for family sedan among V6 models, the Volkswagen Passat, was also the number-one ranked vehicle in its class in the CRSA as was the Honda Odyssey, CR's Top Pick in the minivan category. Other high-scoring Top Picks in the CRSA include the Honda Civic (small sedan) and the Toyota RAV4 (small SUV). The Lexus 1S300, CR's pick for best upscale sedan, also earned the top marks for safety.
Consumer Reports introduced the CR Safety Assessment two years ago to provide consumers with comparative safety ratings for vehicles within the same weight and size category. The CRSA helps car-shoppers choose a safer vehicle for their families by combining crash-test results produced by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA), a government agency, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an organization sponsored by the insurance industry, with CR's accident-avoidance performance ratings.
CR's accident avoidance ratings are based on its test results for braking performance and emergency handling-the tests that carry the most weight-in addition to its evaluations for acceleration, visibility, driving position, and seat comfort. CR only includes vehicles in its CRSA for which it has both IIHS frontal-offset-crash results and either frontal- or side-crash results from NHTSA in addition to its own performance tests.
The 50th anniversary auto issue also takes a look back at some of the safety issues covered in CR over the last five decades--safety belts, brakes, air bags, child safety-seats, and vehicle rollover--and the improvements as well as our involvement in these areas.