Dear colleagues,
Xenon lights are better, but still rare!
September 2007:a BAST study suggests a possible reduction of 60% of night time accidents on rural roads due to the use of Xenon light.
It means 5,400 accidents, 1,200 fatalities accidents and 18% of the death toll by night, could be prevented in Germany by the use of Xenon lights.
February 2009: a study of University of Cologne calculates a benefit-cost ratio of 3.5 in favour of Xenon, a little lower than ESP but much higher than all the driver assistance systems used today.
1992-2009: Since the arrival of Xenon I always ask myself the same question: Why such low penetration rates in my country France, which was for many years the world leader in automotive lighting innovation? Why such low equipment rate in Europe (excluding Germany) and in the US?
Last question marks: Why a good lighting and safety have less interest than alloy wheels or maplewood interiors? Why H4 bulbs starting more than half a century ago have so success considering low performances and low safety?
For me, altogether, there are 3 reasons:
1) Not enough communication
Not enough communication toward drivers on the safety benefits of Xenon.
Not enough communication on BAST or Cologne results.
Not enough communication toward retailers to involve them in Xenon benefits.
Not enough communication to legislators.
2) High cost of the system because of the cost of the source, the cost of the headlamp, the cost of the cleaning and leveling systems.
3) High margin of the car maker which multiplies the purchase price by 3 and sometimes more. Xenon option at €800 and up explains the low take rate.
A €400 Xenon offer on top of a strong communication campaign should substantially increase the Xenon take rate.
Some organizations like LSS Initiative with Lex Krzyzanowsky at the head, are doing a very good job on communication. We should continue working simultaneously on communication and on system price reduction.
Sincerely yours