ultimate driving light combo?

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

smurfslayer

Be vewwy, vewwy quiet. We’re hunting sasquatch77
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Posts
16,074
Reaction score
23,555
I’ve had way more serious recalls. Heck, I had an XDs .45 recalled not long after clearing it to carry; around 500 rounds without a choke. The issue was the gun could go off when you were chambering it. I never had it happen, and I’m diligent about loading / re-loading ; safe direction and all but ... whoa! I found out from neighbor, who had just bought one, he tripped over it on the ‘net.

same situation. S/A knew of the problem and halted shipments to distributors, but everything already on shelves they had no control over. Way more serious than some extra glare from some aux lighting.
 

Speeddeacon

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2018
Posts
310
Reaction score
155
Location
NC
Basically what I can gather is Diode is probably using headlight SAE ratings to market their Driving SAE lights. Because fogs are not supposed to throw light down range. They "FOGS"... so that's my thought process. They tend to "HIDE" their facts. Like their "Street Legal" lights they call the SL1s has EVERYBODY thinking they are STREET LEGAL but in reality they are not DOT approved. It's just trickery in their product names to confuse folks who don't know. Same concept here. They'll market it to various places but omit a lot of info to try and trick consumers with marketing terms. It's also why they write how they have SAE lights but in the photos they show their "pro" lights (nice name, sport and pro, where have I heard that before). Again designed to trick the consumer "wow look at all that light, and wow SAE lights" they don't understand the photos they look at, are not the SAE ones but the pro versions.

Unless I am misunderstanding their info, DD is claiming to have two SAE compliant versions each of the Fog and Driving lights, a sport and a pro, e.g. SAE Pro fog, SAE Pro driving, SAE Sport fog and SAE driving. Again I may be incorrect about this.

And yes the similarities in nomenclature and external design between DD SS3 and BD Squadrons cannot be missed.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

6inaRow

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Posts
48
Reaction score
35
Location
BC
Unless I am misunderstanding their info, DD is claiming to have two SAE compliant versions each of the Fog and Driving lights, a sport and a pro, e.g. SAE Pro fog, SAE Pro driving, SAE Sport fog and SAE driving. Again I may be incorrect about this.

And yes the similarities in nomenclature and external design between DD SS3 and BD Squadrons cannot be missed.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You are correct about this. They have SAE pro and sport in both J581 driving and J583 fog and the fog lights also meet the new J583 F3 standard which is the first so far. The selective yellow also uses a 4000k LED so will most likely be the brightest selective yellow auxiliary fog to date, but only time will tell. I'm definitely considering these but will probably wait to see the "fixed" BD output.
 

greenraptor

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Posts
130
Reaction score
384
Location
US
I actually have a set sitting on my bench. I may use them for a different project which I'm sure you'll have a huge opinion on, even though it isn't any of your concern.

enjoy your stress outlet. I honestly don't see any other real reason for whatever your point is on the topic.

I'm not a bd "fan boy". They work, so I use them. If there were another light brand that didn't have issues with functionality due to how I use them, I'd use them. I used to use light force, but BD works much better for me. But, I don't feel obligated to justify anything I do to you beyond that simple statement, so enjoy your opinion and have a great day.

Awesome, so you still have no dog in the fight since you aren't using them (unless sitting on your bench is using them), but when you do I'm sure they'll work out great. I also don't have a huge opinion on anything, much less on something you own, but don't use, nor is this a stress outlet. The whole reason for all this, is to have truth and facts out on a product that the manufacturer themselves stopped selling since approx the 3rd of Nov because it didn't meet SAE J583 compliance and most here were/are unaware. Again, BD make great lights, but they could have handled this better. You could also be more honest with yourself and take facts with what they are...facts and not start crying when truth comes out. Own it and move on.

Last thing for you. What if, when you bought your off road lights, the manufacturer knew it wasn't performing as advertised (no matter how big or small off the mark), quietly stopped selling it and you purchased it through one of their dealers, only to find out after the purchase that they don't perform as you expected (and the company knew this when you bought them). Wouldn't it have been nice to know that before hand to make a better informed purchase decision and not be left out in the dark (no pun intended here, seeing how we're discussing lights)?

Just my opinion, but I don't have a problem with BD, and dealers by extension, holding off on making the SAE announcement more public right now. It seems like it's still really early and they want to make sure they have the problem under control with a solid solution. More importantly, I'm sure a huge portion of their business is done offer Black Friday and holiday shopping. An official announcement right now would have probably caused a significant drop in sales, causing a lot of financial damage to the company, it's employees, and it's dealers. I'm not talking about corporate greed, but avoiding employees layoffs and bad vendor relationships, etc. I'm sure lots of people don't care about that, they just want the facts as soon as possible, but I think it's important to consider other angles to an issue.

I am not suggesting that BD shouldn't be honest with their customers, just that it's ok to factor in when you release information to customers officially. I would guess that if the issue popped up in the Spring for example, information would be out more quickly.

BD themselves stop selling the light around the 3rd of November. Guess they weren't too concerned with sales. A dealer here stated, they were made aware on the 22nd of Nov (though not officially through Baja). BD has already publicly came out on a Tacoma forum, but not here...mmmmmmmmmmk. You could give customers options that likely wouldn't have burned much, if any sales and likely would've appreciated their honesty. What if BD and or their dealers, put a note on their site for those looking to purchase their lights (before the sale has been made), stating:

Unfortunately, BD has recently further tested it's SAE lights and was found to not be compliant. In the meantime though, you could:

a. Purchase any remaining - in stock lights and use as is, understanding they are not currently SAE compliant. Once our new lenses arrive, we can either ship them to you and you swap them out or ship them to us and we'll fix them, free of charge.

or

b. Place an order for the SAE lights now and when checking out, put a comment that you would like to wait for the new lights and we'll ship them as soon as they're in stock.

If you have any questions, you can reach us at 1-800-are-you-*******-serious-this-would-be-so-easy-to-do-and-keep-our-customers-informed.

So... there’s going to be a fix, right?


ok, that’s legit. I can see this point, and I know @zombiekiller is looking at this thread wondering WTF... I can admit I have been too, since the thread was basically trying to elicit thoughts on how to setup a good light combo.

I’d probably be a little torqued if I bought a set of SAE lights only to find out they weren’t compliant / legal ... and fair point, I have a set of SAE I use now. For me, I’ve got a fairly well aimed set I’ve been running for 2 or more months and nobody’s high beaming me or taking offense. I’ve inadvertently left the w/c sports on before and I didn’t make a mile in the dark before someone let me know.

I can also understand the various --FRF supporting-- vendors POV here, they’re not about to put out public statements ‘don’t buy this, it’s not compliant with SAE standards’, it’s not their place, the “evidence” is purely hearsay, not verified from the vendor’s perspective, and I’m sure there would be legal concerns. I’m not saying I don’t think more could have been done by way of notification, however, vendors really cannot be expected to hang out on internet fora all day long and answer questions or concerns. The FRF supporting vendors do a good job of this, but if they’re on the internet they’re not making / finding cool $hit for us.

Maybe a better venue for the SAE compliance discussion would be its own thread in the lighting section.

If BD hasn't reached out to their dealers to let them know about a product that doesn't meet specification and they themselves (BD) has stopped selling it since approx the 3rd of Nov, then BD has failed to communicate with their dealers and in turn, their customers. I don't think BD is a bad company and think they make some of the best off road lightning in the industry, however, this issue could have and should have been handled better.

I agree. As a dealer we can't go around making statement on Baja's behalf. I can share what I know and have seen on the Tacoma forum though, which is what I have. We only out recently ourselves. We were wondering why our SAE orders were on back/order. We figured they were just HOT items. But then someone pointed out the tacoma post to us and it made sense. THAT is why our stocking orders for SAE were held up and why all the dealers have no stock right now. It's all new info that just surfaced, at least in our F150 community. Not sure how long the tacoma guys have been talking about it, can't be that long though I would reckon.

We share what info we have and can share. It's not like im sitting on secret info at this point anyway. What we've shared is what we know. I reckon once the Black Friday smoke clears Baja will make a statement on here and send something out via email. They are probably getting supplies ready so when they send that email the fix is readily available (unlike ya know a *cough* cam phaser issue/back order)

If BD never communicated with you or other dealers on a product that they themselves stopped selling around a month ago, then they failed you and I'm sorry.

As for your little jab on the cam phaser issue, yes, Ford should have better stock for replacement cam phasers, as well as, better procedures set in place for when the repair is performed on this KNOWN ISSUE. Although, this issue isn't largely common. On top of that, has every truck that's been built had this problem? No? Well by comparison, every SAE compliant light that BD has made so far, isn't compliant. If all trucks or the majority of the trucks had the cam phaser issue, then yeah you'd know and a recall would be issued. Freezing door locks anyone? So...not even close and no cigar.

I’ve had way more serious recalls. Heck, I had an XDs .45 recalled not long after clearing it to carry; around 500 rounds without a choke. The issue was the gun could go off when you were chambering it. I never had it happen, and I’m diligent about loading / re-loading ; safe direction and all but ... whoa! I found out from neighbor, who had just bought one, he tripped over it on the ‘net.

same situation. S/A knew of the problem and halted shipments to distributors, but everything already on shelves they had no control over. Way more serious than some extra glare from some aux lighting.

Absolutely, that's a serious safety concern and one would expect a recall on that and you should have been notified if you registered it with Springfield. This however, doesn't relate to the topic at hand here and I never said anyone was injured or killed because of the issue with the lights. I don't even think anyone has been left stranded on the side of the road because of the lights (crazy, I know). I also don't expect a recall of the lights, but who knows. What I would like though, is more transparency and honesty from a company that stopped selling lights with a known issue approx a month ago. When spending around 1,000 bucks on a lightning set up for a specific use case, then I expect them to perform, as advertised, in those cases.
 
Last edited:

greenraptor

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Posts
130
Reaction score
384
Location
US
Unless I am misunderstanding their info, DD is claiming to have two SAE compliant versions each of the Fog and Driving lights, a sport and a pro, e.g. SAE Pro fog, SAE Pro driving, SAE Sport fog and SAE driving. Again I may be incorrect about this.

And yes the similarities in nomenclature and external design between DD SS3 and BD Squadrons cannot be missed.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They do have two different SAE compliant versions. SAE J581 is a street legal beam pattern for auxiliary high beam and should be treated just like your high beams and not used with oncoming traffic. For people who are looking for a beam pattern to run on the street with oncoming traffic and to help with visibility in poor weather conditions, SAE J583 fog is the needed pattern.
 

smurfslayer

Be vewwy, vewwy quiet. We’re hunting sasquatch77
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Posts
16,074
Reaction score
23,555
Yeah sooo can we put this to bed and get back to the question at hand for this topic?

I was gonna say yes but... not quite yet.

Absolutely, that's a serious safety concern and one would expect a recall on that and you should have been notified if you registered it with Springfield. This however, doesn't relate to the topic at hand here and I never said anyone was injured or killed because of the issue with the lights. I don't even think anyone has been left stranded on the side of the road because of the lights (crazy, I know). I also don't expect a recall of the lights, but who knows. What I would like though, is more transparency and honesty from a company that stopped selling lights with a known issue approx a month ago. When spending around 1,000 bucks on a lightning set up for a specific use case, then I expect them to perform, as advertised, in those cases.

Hold up homey.

same situation. S/A knew of the problem and halted shipments to distributors, but everything already on shelves they had no control over. Way more serious than some extra glare from some aux lighting.

hopefully you get that I agree with the basic premise of your assertions within this thread; that if in fact there is a defective beam pattern on the B/D SAE lights and they’ve stopped shipping them, then they should rectify the situation.

That said.
1) Proportionality
2) Acting like an agent provocateur
3) Not really asking for what you type
4) spending so much time defending your position in this thread, you’re missing the forest through the trees.
5) Nobody is trolling you here.

Your dedicated advocacy herein has the appearance of politically feigned outrage. First off, just because you, some Taco owner or friend of a friend of a Taco owner puts up a post on the internet, not matter how well or thoughtfully pointed out, doesn’t make the post true, no matter how many times it’s referenced. Google “limp wristing”. My range partner and I have taken multiple handguns reported as ‘vulnerable to limp wrist induced malfunctions’ to the range. affixed them loosely using zip ties and a bench rest jig - so they are suspended with only enough tension pull the trigger. Fired these guns with literally zero support and they chamber the subsequent rounds all the time, every time. Even using handloads, loaded to lower and lower powder charges, there’s only about a .2 grain difference between a 9mm chambering a follow up round held in the hand or completely unsupported. But people who are dead set in their narrative are not going to hear it.

I can video it, answer internet questions / challenges and post results and there’s always at least one person who simply will not acquiesce to their understanding not being correct even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Here, you’ve posted about an online report and it would appear that most give the allegations fair credit as possibly being true, but at this point it’s only an allegation, whether or not B/D has accepted it as possibly true or not is another discussion. No business can take every, single complaint as 100% factual without at least some level of investigation first and remain in business. I’d also think it would be exceedingly time consuming and counterproductive to chase down every internet forum they’re on, and post up data on it. Again, the time investment there is significant and we don’t even know if the internet post has been validated independently. Additionally, we’re not talking about SAE lights shipping with the existing wide corner lenses, which throw light everywhere, we’re talking about lenses that are way, way, way less out of compliance, IF they are, in fact, out of compliance.

2) There’s posting about the issue and defending your position and then there’s this thread. Reiterating, I get your point and agree, as a purchaser, I can definitely understand the financial and difficulty outlay. Not to mention, one of us could end up with a citation that we’d end up having to pay which we shouldn’t all things being equal. But, this thread reminds me of a kid we all knew in elementary school who always wanted to start a fight between other people. he would circle back and forth between 2 people ‘did you hear what Adam said about you? he said you have a small p@cker!’ and then carry back to Adam some incendiary accusation and repeat this until the 2 were so angry at each other, they couldn’t see they’d been played.

Is that what you’re doing here, because that’s what it looks like.

3) What is it you really want?
I also don't expect a recall of the lights, but who knows. What I would like though, is more transparency and honesty from a company that stopped selling lights with a known issue approx a month ago.

Really? Or is it something else? Because if it’s the former, it would seem to me that there are better venues to raise your issues than this thread. Ask yourself this, if you want to get action out of a vendor, is an internet thread argument buried in a slightly related topic the optimal venue for your objective? Or, would dealing with the vendor directly and / or having a dedicated online discussion be a better venue or venues?
Remember, I agree with your premise, and I have the affected product here. So I’m asking, what is it you really want here? If you want a statement from B/D, I’d suggest you ask them directly. There are a few ways you can do that effectively.

4) Related; you’re spending so much time in this thread, unproductive time at that, and could be better focusing your efforts to get the issue addressed by BD.

5) You are obviously passionately advocating your position here and there is nothing wrong with that position. My overarching point here is that it’s wasted effort to have this discussion buried in a ‘what’s the best lighting combo thread’. Pick up the phone, start a new internet discussion or discussions, post on social media or worst case, take to Fusion GPS to make up an anti-Baja Designs dossier and publicize it.
 

zombiekiller

OG BooBooRunner
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Posts
2,793
Reaction score
3,831
Location
New Orleans
hey so about that ultimate driving light guidance topic?

Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stick...
:beatdeadhorse5:

Since the rest of the POINTS were lost, if all ya want to do is debate about BD's business practices, start another thread.

At least that way it will be easier for me to ignore.
 

Spectragod

FRF Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2019
Posts
795
Reaction score
1,847
Location
Dayton Ohio
I just read through this, wtf was the thread about? BTW, I use my off road lights..... on the road, because I need to see sites in the middle of nowhere so I can service shit.
 
Top