Wheels Weekly (WW) has the heads-up on Ingolstadt’s claim that the LED headlights adorning the front of their uber-R8 are good for Mother Earth. The blogger-in-chief’s prose sounds a bit like the flanking English translation in a German airplane magazine, but he nails it in the incredulity department. “Now as times are tough for manufacturers, every little selling point are scavenged and placed under a magnifying glass looking to woo any sort of buyers they can gather, pretty much the case with this Audi R8 V10, we’re abit loss [sic] reading an entire page of press release which had nothing to do with Nurburgring records or skidpad figures, rather, boasting about its all LED headlamp, how much CO2 it saves.” It’s not an entire page of greenery, and I’m a big fan of incrementalism. And a car nerd. But it is strange world where Audi’s Head of the “Light and Visibility Department” trumpets CO2 savings. [excerpt after the jump]
“The order book opened in Britain for the V10 engined Audi R8 this month (1 January) and with it the German car manufacturer demonstrated another element of its pioneering Vorsprung durch Technik technology. The range-topping R8 is the first car in the world to be equipped with all-LED (light emitting diode) headlamps. For the first time the high intensity diodes have been used for low beam and high beam settings, as well as for daytime running lights and indicators, intensifying the sports car’s visual drama…
Greater safety, lower fuel consumption
LEDs can also reduce a vehicle’s fuel consumption. When daytime running lights become mandatory in the European Union in May 2011, Audi models with on-board LED technology will be ahead of the competition.
Drivers in a lot of European countries – such as Italy, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, and Sweden – already must use their lights during the day. As a result, just one vehicle’s conventional low-beam headlights, taillights, and license-plate illumination consume some 200 watts – which the alternator must constantly generate.
By comparison, a mere 15 watts is required to power the new Audi A4’s modern LED daytime running lights, which have the added advantage of far better visibility for other road users. All in all, that equates to a decrease of about 0.2 litres of fuel per 100 kilometres and about 4 grams fewer CO2 emissions per kilometre.
A statistical example clearly illustrates the significance of these figures: Thanks to this new technology, the Audi models with LED daytime running lights sold in 2008 alone consumed – during just their first year in use – about 10 million fewer litres of fuel and emitted approximately 25,000 fewer metric tons of CO2.
This is great.
Take an achievable technology, apply it and then use it to differentiate your product.
Customers feel comfortable with and more attached to their auto choice.
It shows the European CO2 emissions requirements in action, and why CAFE is broken.
Now, if Audi would reduce the percentage of vehicle equipped with AWD, the world could save some SERIOUS fuel.
Think about it — do you really need AWD on your Audi if you live in California or Phoenix? Hardly.
So, Audi can be seen as an extremely wasteful company, too.
I’ll say that these LED cues are trickling down: The new A5 is flat out gorgeous. Every time I have seen one (alright, two to date) in the flesh I find it to be stunning in execution and better than photos seem to render. One in bright red, the other in black (latter preferred.)
I believe that it will seriously distinguish the brand and build some great brand identity to incorporate that look into the rest of their models and I’m hoping that they do. :)
@ TheRealAutoGuy
Good point.
Now, if Audi would reduce the percentage of vehicle equipped with AWD, the world could save some SERIOUS fuel.…
I couldn’t agree more. This obsession with AWD is nutty.
Are they less blinding than xenon lights? I can’t stand those things, especially on SUVs. Yeah, you see more, it’s because they’re a lot brighter, and I doubt that they’re more safe when the person in the oncoming lane can’t see. Might as well just turn the high beams on.
Some aren’t bad; maybe it depends on the model. The Murano and the Passat are eye scorching.
I hae it when one of these companies talks about how much CO2 their vehicle saves.
The R8’s lamps need to be MANUFACTURED in a FACTORY. Because of that alone, they derive energy from an OIL BASED ENERGY SOURCE. Therefore, whatever emmissions they save fromt he car, they make up at production.
Furthermore, this thing is an inneficient sports car…you’re not helping mother earth at all. Not with those SPECIAL TIRES and SPECIAL PARTS that differentiate it from other cars.
This is why I have no faith in the “green” movement. Its all a bunch of BS.
@ Flashpoint
The R8’s lamps need to be MANUFACTURED in a FACTORY. Because of that alone, they derive energy from an OIL BASED ENERGY SOURCE. Therefore, whatever emmissions they save fromt he car, they make up at production.
Oh please…. You’re talking in absolutes when what we really need to know is the CO2 difference in manufacturing one type of lighting system as compared to another. My guess would be next-to nothing.
In that sense, a proper accounting of the CO2 should be required, but people can’t even grasp that something had to be manufactured for the headlights, so how are they going to deal with more complex CO2 accounting.
LED it be known that TTAC had this story last frikken November, without the silly greenwashery.
“Thanks to this new technology, the Audi models with LED daytime running lights sold in 2008 alone consumed – during just their first year in use – about 10 million fewer litres of fuel.
Huh? As reported in November, the R8 was the one and only Audi sold with those miracle LEDs in 2008. The average yearly kilometers driven in Germany are 12000. So according to my math (pls correct me if I’m wrong, I had a long day) they sold 400K LED-equipped R8s in November and December of 2008?
And by the way, the LEDs cost 3590 EUR extra. In Germany, the liter of gasoline costs 1 EUR currently. You have to drive 500km to save a liter. After 1,795,000km, you have your money back. As the PR-text says: “Common, you guys can do better than that!” – Ingolstadt, fire that PR agency.
# Bertel Schmitt :
January 4th, 2009 at 5:22 am
And by the way, the LEDs cost 3590 EUR extra. In Germany, the liter of gasoline costs 1 EUR currently. You have to drive 500km to save a liter. After 1,795,000km, you have your money back. As the PR-text says: “Common, you guys can do better than that!” – Ingolstadt, fire that PR agency.
As long as potential buyers aren’t checking or don’t care, their jobs are OK!
@ Bertel
It’s 2,382 EUR on the UK site, replacing the 1,800 EUR Bi-Xenon option.
Come on Bertel, do you expect an ROI on the optional sunroof as well???
Not every option on every vehicle has to make economic sense otherwise reductio ad absurdum to …… a Chevy Aveo.
Is the fresh air in Japan messing with ‘ya??
@Pete: Ok, 1,191,000 km then at UK prices. Yes, I will calculate the ROI of an optional sunroof if they tell me that it saves 10 million liters of gas and 25000 tons of CO2. This is Thetruthaboutcars, and we check.
Anyway, I’d fire the PR agency simply for the translation botch job. Sgt. Schultz would have done a better job.
They’re (New “Blue/White” lighting systems) nice and all, but I find that oncoming cars with these lights distract me because of the color – they just stand out as to become (to me) an object of envy/derison.
As “Blue Bloods” used to refer to one born into wealth, I use the term “Rude Blues” to describe HID headlights, as someone likely spent extra cash to leave spots on my retina…
Of course, that all changes if I buy a car equipped with them.
@ Bertel
Well, if you’re telling the truth, then calculate it like most people would.
The option goes into the finance package, and probably gets considered on the exit trade-in or private sale for the new model, so you’re certainly not out-of-pocket cash up front while you’re “saving”.
Same goes for hybrids, diesels etc, and any other car that people say “but it costs more up front!!”. Fractionally if you finance it, and hopefully you get some kick on resale.
Otherwise, the whole market would be more bland than Japanese whale meat.
DRLs are the most hateful, useless, annoying and plain dangerous things in cars today.
If Audi wants to save the planet from the boogeyman of global warming they should 1. stop making cars with 500+bhp and B. turn off the damned lights during the day.
Same goes for some HID front and rear lights. I have little doubt sooner or later I will be involved in an accident because I was blinded by the DRLs on a Lexus RX or by the HIDs on an Escalade. Will I have any legal recourse against the manufacturers?
And, as it couldn’t be any other way, an awful idea is made into a continent-wide law in the EU. Not long before they’re mandatory in America too.
I rue the day…
DRLs are the most hateful, useless, annoying and plain dangerous things in cars today.
Tacky? Maybe. Dangerous? The stats don’t back you up.
I have little doubt sooner or later I will be involved in an accident because I was blinded by the DRLs
If DRLs (which are on in daytime, and are dimmer than low-beam headlamps) blind you, you need your eyes checked. Seriously.
12000km is that the average for cars in Germany or new cars in Germany or for new Audi R8?
@ psarhjinian
I can cite studies too but won’t bother. Common sense tells me that shining a bright light in my eyes is counterproductive to road safety.
If I look hard enough I’m sure I can find a study that says Elvis and Hitler are alive and well and co-owners of a bridal shop on Connecticut.
And if you think DRLs are dimmer than low beam headlamps my friend… two things: you haven’t looked at the ones on the Chrysler Sebring shinning at you and if you need lights on to see a car you’re the one that needs ophthalmic help.
I can cite studies too but won’t bother.
Go on, cite it. Or I’ll save you the trouble: there’s one from 1998, a NHTSA study that says that, for DRLs that leverage the high-beam bulb and are set to high and are shining in the face of drivers with light sensitivity, the there’s a mild possibility of distraction.
Otherwise, I’ll continue to take the word of the IIHS (who have a huge, vested interest in keeping accident claims down) over the other, more rant-ish works I’ve found written by armchair experts
Common sense tells me that shining a bright light in my eyes is counterproductive to road safety.
Then you must have real trouble driving at night, because low-beam headlights are brighter than DRLs. So are store signs, traffic lights, street lamps, Christmas lights, etc, etc.
You don’t want to even think about the lux level the sun puts out, even through an overcast sky.
And if you think DRLs are dimmer than low beam headlamps my friend… two things: you haven’t looked at the ones on the Chrysler Sebring shinning at you
Then that’s a problem with the Sebring, not DRLs in general. There are very strict codes about the amount of light a headlamp can produce at or above horizontal. I’ve tried staring at the DRLs on both my Saab and my Fit and I’ve found:
a) At ten or more feet, they’re less bright than the overcast sky
b) They’re definitely less bright than their low-beam equivalents.
and if you need lights on to see a car you’re the one that needs ophthalmic help.
The point of DRLs is to make a car more noticeable, especially when ambient light levels are high enough to make it difficult to pick them out as moving objects at a distance. It’s an issue with how people perceive their surroundings, not the quality of their vision.
The IIHS, as well as the Scandinavians, have actual accident frequency studies that back this up. Every counterpoint I’ve ever read eventually comes down to subjectivity and/or aesthetics.
I remember the seventies when the U.S. did not allow halogen headlights because they were too bright. This meant all the fancy new Mercedes and Volvos with their aerodynamic rectangular headlights were redesigned for the American market with ugly round candle holders or something. How things have changed!
Pioneering Vorsprung durch Technik :)
Lexus was the first to use LED’s on rear licence plate – GS 2005. And first to use low beam LED’s – 2007 summer LS600h.
But what is impressive about this Audi is its redline – 8700rpm. For a series production 5.2L V10 engine its a crazy number, closing in on Honda S2000’s 9000rpm redline.
LEDs have been the standard in Semi truck land for some time now.
The $2 for a replacement bulb is trivial next to the clerical overhead of a fix it ticket, $80 service call to change it and the downtime on the equipment.
The only downside is that LEDs don’t generate heat and melt off accumulated snow and ice.
AFAIK no class 8 tractor offers LED headlights.
@ Spike_in_Irvine
I recall that the glass aero headlights on 240 Volovs were prohibited due to the lack of alignment bumps on their surface. Thus they did not meet the US code. Today those old aeros are legal in most states, which is fair because they were at least 10 years in advance of the style used in the US market at the time.
Of course alignment bumps would interfere with headlight wipers but US regulators did not have the imagination to think of such things.
The Lexus LS 600h sedan was actually the first production vehicle to use fully LED headlamps:
http://www.webwombat.com.au/motoring/news_reports/lexus-ls-600h-l.htm
I can really do without the tacky string of Christmas lights that Audi is putting around the headlights. I hope this doesn’t start a trend.
@ bertel schmitt
Quote “Huh? As reported in November, the R8 was the one and only Audi sold with those miracle LEDs in 2008. The average yearly kilometers driven in Germany are 12000. So according to my math (pls correct me if I’m wrong, I had a long day) they sold 400K LED-equipped R8s in November and December of 2008?
And by the way, the LEDs cost 3590 EUR extra. In Germany, the liter of gasoline costs 1 EUR currently. You have to drive 500km to save a liter. After 1,795,000km, you have your money back.”
Sorry but thats a load of BS. If your gonna have a go at a company, try and get your facts right. in 2008 audi had 7 models with the led running lights. A3 & S3, A4, A5 & S5 & Q5, A6 (S6 & RS6), A8, S8 & R8. total easily more than 400k and given the lower models do a lot more miles that R8’s will. besides the led headlights are not bought for their eco friendly side. its a style thing that happens to reduce fuel consumption, and the day running lights will be a euro legal requirement may 2011 so your all going to have to put up with it eventually and to be truthfull if they blind you then you seriously need to get yourself checked out. Here in the uk i see 10+ cars a day with led running lights and none of them are that bright.
Full Led Systems are the way car manufacturers need to go. they save power. crisper light so you can see a lot better in adverse weather conditions, they come with the technology to automatically adjust the beam so you dont end up with some tard behind you with a boot full of crap aiming the light too high or in front so your blind and they have a lot longer service life. how many times have you seen a car driving along at night with one or both headlights out so they make up for it with fog lights. that is so much more dangerous. Audi, Lexus & BMW have been running led tail lights for years and ive never seen one of then not working. and FYI lexus never released the full dip/high beam headlights. They were too expensive then. i like the numberplate lights too.
What’s a good headlight upgrade recommendation?