1157 LED Replacement 1973 Charger

Quote:

---

I love the ledtronics.com parts for 1157 replacements in my '69 Charger. They drop right in.

They are stinking expensive @ $28.50 each, but they do a GREAT job, and they have LED's that backfill the taillight housing. You will need a solid state turn signal relay because they do not draw enough power to pull an old mechanical relay, this is available at any parts store.

Here's a link to the bulbs:

http://www.ledtronics.com/Products/ProductsDetails.aspx?WP=1168

---

Quote:

---

I love the ledtronics.com parts for 1157 replacements in my '69 Charger. They drop right in.

They are stinking expensive @ $28.50 each, but they do a GREAT job, and they have LED's that backfill the taillight housing. You will need a solid state turn signal relay because they do not draw enough power to pull an old mechanical relay, this is available at any parts store.

Here's a link to the bulbs:

http://www.ledtronics.com/Products/ProductsDetails.aspx?WP=1168

---

Quote:

---

Dave do you have any pics of these bulbs "in action" on your car?

Do they light up the whole lens or just the center where all you actually see is the bulb lit up?

---

Quote:

---

For comparison, when I was installing them I put in one side and turned on the 4 way flashers - the LED's had come on and gone off before the regular bulbs had come on - I was sold right then and there.
Plus, the power draw is so much less the gage needle doesn't swing nearly as much with the brakes and turn signal on.

---

These are the main reasons I am going LED on my car. They come on about 1/2 sec faster than the incandescent bulbs which have to warm up to light, and the LED bulbs use roughly 1/10th the current and produce more light.

We all know the weak link Mopars have is the OEM charging circuit and there are numerous threads here about going to hi-output alt's, bypassing the ammmeter, etc. I see this as another plan of attack to try and put less stress on these old wires/gauges is to drop the load.

A standard 1157 bulb will draw ~2 amps each on the hi mode! My Charger has 3 of these flashing + a fender turn bulb ~.5 amp so just to make a turn, you are switching on and off 6.5 amps! Add this to my 4 markers at night which draw around 2-3 amps total, gauge lights, headlights, etc and you are seeing a 20-25 amp draw for BULBS alone. No wonder these cars are discharging at idle with dimmed out lights!

As said before, you coudl watch the ammeter needle swing wildly into discharge zone when at low speeds/idle with the flashers on. Since going to LED on my car, that needle barely budges now.

All in all I have "saved" around 18 amps of current draw by converting to LED bulbs. This is 18 less amps through my harness/bulkhead and like having an extra 18 amps output on the alternator.

Yes, you have to do you homework measuring dimensions, testing brightnesses but most of LED bulbs are only slightly brighter than stock and "fill" the housings nicely without the bright dots. However, I have had a lot of time researching these and trying them out to find what worked for me.

I am happy to share my experieces with these bulbs with anybody who is curious and there are a few members here that have used them and are very happy.

Quote:

---

Do you have any pics of these bulbs "in action" on your car?

Do they light up the whole lens or just the center where all you actually see is the bulb lit up?

---

Fronts. Don't have pics of rears, but they look a lot better than these - I think because of the prisms molded into the lenses on the rears. Also, ran into the same problem you did - some LED 1157s didn't fit far enough into the socket because of surrounding lens assembly bucket. Can't remember which ones worked finally, but it took three or four different purchases to find some. Very happy with them, though.

Quote:

---

LED retrofits
LED signalling lamps (brake, tail, turn...) are appearing on cars, and are
widely used on buses and trucks, but are really cannot safely be retrofitted by replacing the bulb with an LED device. The signalling lamps of your car rely on a point source of light (glowing filament), collecting that light with a parabolic reflector and dispersing it with optics in the lens. An LED is a vastly different kind of light source. Unlike a glowing filament, it does not produce light in an even sphere. Instead, it projects a very narrow beam of light in ONE direction. That's why these so-called "LED retrofits"
are unsafe; there's no way you can get enough light through a wide enough angle (horizontally and vertically) to create a safe and legally-compliant lamp. Pulling up behind a car equipped with these "LED bulbs" is really obvious; there's a tiny spot of light right in the middle of the lens, and the rest of it is dark. This applies even to the clever $50 units with some of the LEDs pointing sideways.

There are other considerations, too -- it is tricky to get the right ratio of bright-to-dim intensities both on axis (straight behind the lamp) and also through the entire vertical and horizontal beam spread. Look at the optics of the Cadillac DeVille that has LED tail/brake lamps, or the high-end Mercedes S-class that has LED brake lamps. You'll see some very fancy optics used to coordinate the light from a lot of LEDs to get everything right in terms of brightness in both dim and bright mode, uniformity of brightness throughout the visibility angles required by law, ratio of intensity between "bright" and "dim" mode, etc. These kinds of optics are not something that can be kludged in the garage, let alone achieved with these "LED bulbs". Leave 'em on the shelf for the kids with Honda Civics to get tickets with.

Bulb-type brake (etc.) lamps really need to use bulbs. The model-specific LED "retrofits" are certainly less godawful than the so-called "LED bulbs" (1" wafer of LEDs on a bulb base), but they still mostly aren't a good idea. The performance of all exterior signalling functions (brake, tail, front and rear turn, parking, back-up, sidemarker, etc.) is regulated in great detail. It's not just a question of how bright they have to be!

There are specifications for minimum and maximum intensity, for each different function, through a large range of horizontal and vertical angles. That's to make sure that not only can the guy directly behind you see and recognise your brake lamps as brake lamps when he's sitting at about the same height as you, but so can the guy in the next lane over to the left, sitting down low in his Corvette...and so can the guy in the next lane over to the right, sitting way up high in his semi truck...and so can the guy on the on-ramp in his SUV. There are also specifications for the minimum intensity ratio, again through a large range of H and V angles, between functions that share a lit compartment (brake/tail, for instance, or park/turn). That's so that your taillamps can't be mistaken for brake lamps, or your brake lamps for taillamps. There are specifications for minimum projected active illuminated surface area, to make sure that the lamps, when lit, are "big" enough to do a reliable job of grabbing attention and quickly and accurately conveying the intended message.

When you use a bulb in a bulb-type lamp, the entire reflector is illuminated when the bulb comes on. Now, leaving aside the photometric requirements (intensity through various angles, bright/dim ratio), take a look at these two Hi-Tech "conversions" and think about that last requirement I mentioned (active illuminated area):








H'mmm...now, without some very fancy measuring and calculating, I can't determine if these LED "conversions" will reduce the active illuminated area below the legal minimum, but it will certainly reduce it. Safety...?

As far as intensities and intensity ratios, the only way to test this is with a goniophotometer, which is just as specialised a piece of equipment as the name suggests. It's a machine that measures the amounts of light being emitted by a device, over a range of angles relative to the axis of the device. It produces a plot of the intensity that looks like this (this one's for a low beam headlamp), and from that plot and the raw data, it can be determined whether the device meets all the requirements. Snapping a picture or filming a video of taillights and saying "Gee, wow, lookit how bright they are!" just plain doesn't cut it. Neither the human eye nor a camera is an appropriate or valid measuring device for assessing the safety performance of vehicle lighting devices.

There is an additional issue with LEDs that is not at all addressed with these "conversions": Heat. Everyone knows LEDs produce hardly any heat, right? Wrong! LEDs are commonly considered to be low-heat devices due to the public's familiarity with small, low-output LEDs used for electronic control panels and other applications requiring only modest amounts of light. However, LEDs actually produce a significant amount of heat per unit of light output. Rather than being emitted together with the light as is the case with conventional light bulbs, an LED's heat is produced at the rear of the emitters. The difficulty is that LEDs' light output is extremely variable depending on temperature, with many types producing at 30° C (85° F) only 60% of the rated light output they produce at an emitter junction temperature 16° C (60° F). Take one hot day...add one traffic jam with extended brake light "on" time...and it is extremely likely that these LED "retrofits"' output will drop to such a degree that the lamp assembly will no longer produce minimally adequate safety performance.
The opposite case is also true: Many types of LEDs produce at -12° C (10° F) up to 160% of their 16° C (60° F) rated output. Take one cold night, add LED "retrofits"...and the lamps will not perform safely.

All of these factors can be managed, otherwise we wouldn't see LEDs showing up as original equipment on some cars (and the almost complete adoption of LEDs in the standard-size lighting devices used by heavy trucks and buses). Thing is, all of those devices are engineered and tested from the start as LED devices. They are not bulb-type devices with LEDs "retrofitted" into them. They contain intricate control circuitry that compensates for output change with temperature, and advanced heat sinks that minimize heat buildup behind the emitters (with resultant output drop). They contain optics specifically designed to collect and distribute the light from LED emitters, which bulb-type lamps do not. All of that engineering and testing is missing from these LED "retrofit" kits.

It is possible that some of Hi-Tech's "retrofits" may result in safe, legally-compliant lamps. But none of the relevant information is present on their website, and their response to my inquiries was not confidence inspiring ("They're bright enough. They're really bright. Don't worry about it.") In order to know for sure, each retrofit kit would have to be tested in the lamp for which it is marketed. My experience in such matters tells me there would be a large number of failures.

That said, some of our cars' lights lend themselves more easily to a good LED retrofit job than others. The reason why so many more trucks and buses than cars use LEDs is because all trucks and buses use standard-format signalling lights. With just four size formats of complete self-contained LED lamp assemblies, virtually the entire on-road North American fleet of trucks and buses can be serviced. The formats are roughly: 7" round (used on buses and ambulances), 4" round (used on the majority of semi tractor-trailers), 3" x 5" rectangular (used on semi tractor-trailers) and 2" x 6½" (used on semi tractor-trailers). If your car happens to have lamps of about this size, with some creativity it's probably possible to remove the bulb, socket and reflector assembly and install a truck-type LED module behind the lens. Round-taillamp cars like '61-'62 Lancers, '60 Darts, '63-'64 Darts and A100 vans come to mind here.

If you decide to try and retrofit LEDs in this manner, be sure to observe and stick to the intended function of the LED lamp you buy. Marker and clearance lights will fit where brake/tail ("S/T/T, Stop Tail Turn") lights won't, but marker/clearance/side turn lights do not produce anywhere near enough light for use as brake or front/rear turn lights.

I guess that's enough rambling for now...if I've left anything out, I'm sure someone will ask about it.

---

Quote:

---

Bulbs
Original equipment bulbs on most pre-'72 cars was as follows:

1034: dual-filament park/turn and brake tail. Clear bulb for use with red rear or amber front lens.

1034A or 1034NA: dual-filament park/turn. Amber bulb for use with clear front lens.

1141 or 1073: single-filament bulb. Reversing/backup lights (and single-function—brake-only, turn-only—lights not frequently found on old Mopars).

In the early '70s, the 1034 was replaced by the 1157, the 1073/1141 by the 1156. These 1150-series bulbs put out the same amount of light, but draw slightly more current and last quite a bit longer. When changing from 1034s to 1157s, often it was (and is) necessary to replace the turn signal flasher, because the original would flash too fast if used with 1157s. Nowtimes, it's difficult to find a flasher calibrated for 1034s.

So, what to use for upgrade bulbs? Well first, here's what NOT to use: 2057s! People sometimes assume that because it's a higher number, it's a brighter bulb. No. The difference between 1157 and 2057 is in the "minor" (dim parking or tail) filament. On the 2057, the dim filament produces 2 candlepower. On the 1157, the dim filament produces 3 candlepower. The difference doesn't sound like much, but it's very large as a percentage. Both 1157 and 2057 produce 32 candlepower from the bright (brake or turn) filament.

Though they are spendy, the best bulb you can use in place of 1157 is a 3496. You can get them from your local Honda dealer. Part number is 34906-SL0-A01. It draws the same amount of current as 1157, but is much more efficient. It produces 43 candlepower on the bright (brake or turn) filament, and 3.5 candlepower on the dim (tail or parking) filament. It also has a nickel-plated base that is much more corrosion resistant than the plain brass base of an 1157, so it's less likely to stick in the socket.

The best replacement for 1156, 1141 and 1073 in all applications *except* reversing/backup lights is a 3497. You can get P3497 bulbs from your local Honda dealer, too. Part number is 34903-SF1-A01.

3497 produces 45 candlepower. (Yes, the 6 and the 7 in P3496 and P3497 are reversed from the 6 and the 7 in 1156 and 1157 relative to how many filaments the bulb has. This is not a typo.) The 3496 and 3497 bulbs have a life span about double that of an 1157. It is worth your time, money, and trouble to get the 3496 and 3497 from a Honda dealer rather than a parts store...the parts store items are of much poorer quality and don't last as long.

The best bulb for use in backup/reverse lights is a 796. It is a 35W halogen bulb that produces 62 candlepower, or about double the light of an 1156 and about triple the light of an 1141. The extra wattage is minor (35W vs. 28W, the wires and lenses will not notice or care) and the filament is in the right place. Neither of these compliments can be said of those 50W halogen backup bulbs you see in the parts stores! 50W is wayy too much current draw (100% overload!) for the stock wiring and switch, they produce way too much heat for safety near plastic lenses, and the filament's in the wrong place so the reflector doesn't work correctly with them. The P796s work great, and you finally get to see where you're going when backing at night.

Amber bulbs are a special case. The amber coating "steals" some of the light, so the output is lower. The bright filament inside an 1157A or 1157NA produces 32 candlepower, but what comes through the amber coating is 24 candlepower. Unfortunately, there's no amber equivalent of 3496 for use in park/turn lights that have clear lenses. The next best thing is 2357A or 2357NA, which draws the same current as an 1157 and produces 30 candlepower despite the amber coating. 2357NA (or 2357A), as well as their non-amber 2357 counterparts, are considerably less expensive than P3496, but they lack P3496's anti-corrosion nickel-plated base, and they also lack P3496's Krypton gas fill, so they tend to blacken sooner than other bulbs if used in "bright" mode for prolonged periods (e.g. using a 2357 in brake lamp service). The 2357NA or 2357A works fine in front park/turn service because turn signal service is short and intermittent, which limits bulb blackening and makes overall bulb life acceptable.

Be careful when buying any of these bulbs. A lot of the major parts outlets are switching from name-brand bulbs worth buying to 3rd-world crapola not worth its blister pack. Only one company makes quality 3496s and 3497s, for example, that is Stanley. GE and Sylvania used to supply Stanley-made 3400-series bulbs, but both marketers went to Chinese lookalikes, and then to even cruddier Chinese ones that don't even look right. That's why to buy those particular ones at the Honda store.

The '68-'71 sidemarker lamps can be made about 60% brighter with 3886x bulbs, which also fit directly in place of the 1895s and 57s used in instrument cluster lights that take the metal bayonet-base bulbs.

1972-up sidemarker lights (and a lot of the '66-up instrument cluster lights) take an all-glass wedge-base bulb, which can be upgraded with 2886x bulbs - about 75% brighter than a 194, 60% brighter than a 168.

If your car has the little turn signal indicators mounted on top of the fenders, and one or both of them no longer flash, you can either spend $3.40 apiece at Year One for a replacement bulb with a plain brass base, or you can spend $10.60 and get a 10-pack of 'em with corrosionproof nickel-plated bases.

---

Quote:

---

Thanks Dave, still love to see them in action in a 69 Charger taillight before I plunk down the bux..

Were you able to find a "matching" bulb for the inner 1095 bulb?

Pet peeve of mine not to have all 3 tail light bulbs match....hate the brighter 1156 look on the inside bulb faux pa

---

No, unfortunately I suffer from the 1156 look on the inside bulb faux pa

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Thanks Dave, still love to see them in action in a 69 Charger taillight before I plunk down the bux..

Were you able to find a "matching" bulb for the inner 1095 bulb?

Pet peeve of mine not to have all 3 tail light bulbs match....hate the brighter 1156 look on the inside bulb faux pa

---

No, unfortunately I suffer from the 1156 look on the inside bulb faux pa

---

LOL oh no!!

All the other bulb info posted is good as well...something to consider!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Seem to illuminate the whole lens like the incandescent's do. Kinda hard to tell though.

Which bulbs did you go with?

---

I went with four of these in RED color.

1157 LED Bulb

Now with the hazards on, I cannot even see the ammeter move where as before it would swing wildly into discharge city if the car off/idling.

They fill the housing about like the incandescents do and take so much of a load of the charging system. Those bulbs alone save about 6-7 amps for a turn signal and ~13 amps for hazard lights.

I would guess they are maybe 150-200% as bright as standard 1157's but not too bright where it's annoying. It really just brings it up to about the brightness of a modern car.

Now all the incandescents I have left in the car are 4 bulbs total -- two fender turn signals, dome light, and license plate light which I am going to leave as standard bulbs.

It is real nice to be able to hit the parking lights and not even see the ammeter budge when the car is off! This is night and day (no pun intended) to the wild swing you get when you hit the lights before and get that 15-20 amp draw. Now the parking lights might pull 2 amps and half of that is the license plate bulb.

Again, not for everyone and many don't care but anything to unload the notorius Mopar charging circuit is not a bad idea. Just another avenue of attack....

---

Quote:

---

if you are not going to do the LED lighting the proper way {full boards) i would go with this method to get brighter,safer lights.

Quote:

---

Bulbs
Original equipment bulbs on most pre-'72 cars was as follows:

1034: dual-filament park/turn and brake tail. Clear bulb for use with red rear or amber front lens.

1034A or 1034NA: dual-filament park/turn. Amber bulb for use with clear front lens.

1141 or 1073: single-filament bulb. Reversing/backup lights (and single-function—brake-only, turn-only—lights not frequently found on old Mopars).

In the early '70s, the 1034 was replaced by the 1157, the 1073/1141 by the 1156. These 1150-series bulbs put out the same amount of light, but draw slightly more current and last quite a bit longer. When changing from 1034s to 1157s, often it was (and is) necessary to replace the turn signal flasher, because the original would flash too fast if used with 1157s. Nowtimes, it's difficult to find a flasher calibrated for 1034s.

So, what to use for upgrade bulbs? Well first, here's what NOT to use: 2057s! People sometimes assume that because it's a higher number, it's a brighter bulb. No. The difference between 1157 and 2057 is in the "minor" (dim parking or tail) filament. On the 2057, the dim filament produces 2 candlepower. On the 1157, the dim filament produces 3 candlepower. The difference doesn't sound like much, but it's very large as a percentage. Both 1157 and 2057 produce 32 candlepower from the bright (brake or turn) filament.

Though they are spendy, the best bulb you can use in place of 1157 is a 3496. You can get them from your local Honda dealer. Part number is 34906-SL0-A01. It draws the same amount of current as 1157, but is much more efficient. It produces 43 candlepower on the bright (brake or turn) filament, and 3.5 candlepower on the dim (tail or parking) filament. It also has a nickel-plated base that is much more corrosion resistant than the plain brass base of an 1157, so it's less likely to stick in the socket.

The best replacement for 1156, 1141 and 1073 in all applications *except* reversing/backup lights is a 3497. You can get P3497 bulbs from your local Honda dealer, too. Part number is 34903-SF1-A01.

3497 produces 45 candlepower. (Yes, the 6 and the 7 in P3496 and P3497 are reversed from the 6 and the 7 in 1156 and 1157 relative to how many filaments the bulb has. This is not a typo.) The 3496 and 3497 bulbs have a life span about double that of an 1157. It is worth your time, money, and trouble to get the 3496 and 3497 from a Honda dealer rather than a parts store...the parts store items are of much poorer quality and don't last as long.

The best bulb for use in backup/reverse lights is a 796. It is a 35W halogen bulb that produces 62 candlepower, or about double the light of an 1156 and about triple the light of an 1141. The extra wattage is minor (35W vs. 28W, the wires and lenses will not notice or care) and the filament is in the right place. Neither of these compliments can be said of those 50W halogen backup bulbs you see in the parts stores! 50W is wayy too much current draw (100% overload!) for the stock wiring and switch, they produce way too much heat for safety near plastic lenses, and the filament's in the wrong place so the reflector doesn't work correctly with them. The P796s work great, and you finally get to see where you're going when backing at night.

Amber bulbs are a special case. The amber coating "steals" some of the light, so the output is lower. The bright filament inside an 1157A or 1157NA produces 32 candlepower, but what comes through the amber coating is 24 candlepower. Unfortunately, there's no amber equivalent of 3496 for use in park/turn lights that have clear lenses. The next best thing is 2357A or 2357NA, which draws the same current as an 1157 and produces 30 candlepower despite the amber coating. 2357NA (or 2357A), as well as their non-amber 2357 counterparts, are considerably less expensive than P3496, but they lack P3496's anti-corrosion nickel-plated base, and they also lack P3496's Krypton gas fill, so they tend to blacken sooner than other bulbs if used in "bright" mode for prolonged periods (e.g. using a 2357 in brake lamp service). The 2357NA or 2357A works fine in front park/turn service because turn signal service is short and intermittent, which limits bulb blackening and makes overall bulb life acceptable.

Be careful when buying any of these bulbs. A lot of the major parts outlets are switching from name-brand bulbs worth buying to 3rd-world crapola not worth its blister pack. Only one company makes quality 3496s and 3497s, for example, that is Stanley. GE and Sylvania used to supply Stanley-made 3400-series bulbs, but both marketers went to Chinese lookalikes, and then to even cruddier Chinese ones that don't even look right. That's why to buy those particular ones at the Honda store.

The '68-'71 sidemarker lamps can be made about 60% brighter with 3886x bulbs, which also fit directly in place of the 1895s and 57s used in instrument cluster lights that take the metal bayonet-base bulbs.

1972-up sidemarker lights (and a lot of the '66-up instrument cluster lights) take an all-glass wedge-base bulb, which can be upgraded with 2886x bulbs - about 75% brighter than a 194, 60% brighter than a 168.

If your car has the little turn signal indicators mounted on top of the fenders, and one or both of them no longer flash, you can either spend $3.40 apiece at Year One for a replacement bulb with a plain brass base, or you can spend $10.60 and get a 10-pack of 'em with corrosionproof nickel-plated bases.

---

---

The 3496 is available from AutoZone...
http://www.autozone.com/autozone/parts/S...dentifier=16862

Just my $0.02...