testy

Author Topic: #1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight  (Read 3960 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kframe

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
  • Life is good!
#1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight
« on: April 18, 2010, 03:15:03 PM »
I read on here somewhere that the #1034 tail/brake lamp is about as bright as the stock #1157 but draws less current.
So, today I picked one up to see for myself.

I haven't measured the difference in current draw (yet) but I snapped a few pics to show the apparent difference in brightness.
This isn't a scientific measurement of lumens or anything, but I held the camera about as far away and at the same angle in all of these, and just a few minutes apart so the ambient lighting condition didn't change.  

Here's the stock 1157 taillight on top, and below the 1034 taillight.



And here they are with the brake applied, 1157 top, 1034 bottom.



It does seem like the 1034 isn't quite as bright, but not so much of a difference that I'm going to switch back right away.
I'll see what they look like at night, and also will check to see how much less current it's drawing.  
If I'm not saving that much on current, I'll probably go back to the 1157.

Anyway, just thought others might find this interesting.
:)
-K
« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 03:17:54 PM by Kframe »
2007 Triumph Bonneville T100, ARK'd, Pods, TOR's, Napoleon's, Innovate G5 Air/Fuel Gauge, Ignition Relocation by D9, Stebel Nautilus, Avon Roadriders
1984 Honda Shadow VT700c, Stock
1974 Honda CB550K, In rehab
1986 Honda Helix

Offline cb350twin

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 670
    • http://mail.google.com/a/sohc4.net/
Re: #1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2010, 04:22:50 PM »
Whoa you got some cool plates in MN.  ;D
1975 CB 750 K5
1972 CB 350 Twin K4

Offline 333

  • Time for change
  • Really Old Timer ...
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,810
  • Mail List Member #162 - Call me Stan
Re: #1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2010, 06:32:48 PM »
I'm not sure of your ultimate goal.  If it is to have a lesser chance of being seen, I think you have succeeded.  And if you use either of these bulbs in their standard automotive forms, you will also have an increased chance of corrosion in the socket.  They use a brass alloy in the base, as opposed to the nickel that is in the Honda bulbs.  Nickel stands up to moisture better.  The Honda bulbs will also last longer, as they have thicker filaments, and in some cases, they also have a "mid-filament" support.  This makes them tougher than a T198(rough service version of a 1157).

If your goal is to lessen the burden on the electrical system, your best bet is to convert to LEDs, without using balance resistors to make use of the stock flasher.  There are a few threads describing exactly how it can be done.  And it will be brighter than any bulb can be.
Go metric, every inch of the way!

CB350F0  "Scrouching Tiger"
CT70K0    "Sneezing Poodle"

www.alexandriaseaport.org

Offline Kframe

  • Hot Shot
  • ***
  • Posts: 576
  • Life is good!
Re: #1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2010, 07:01:20 PM »
The goal is to tax the meager charging system less.
This tip, using a 1034 instead of the 1157 is recommended by HondaMan here ---> LINK

And the quote is:
Quote from: HondaMan
Install a #1034 tail bulb, as it was the original type (today's #1157 non-Stanley bulbs use considerably more current).

But, I think I'm going to go back to the 1157.
Tonight I tested both bulbs with my ammeter and here are the results.
1157 tail = 0.55A
1157 stop = 1.82A

1034 tail = 0.55A
1034 stop = 1.58A

So, both tail filaments draw the same amount of current, and appear almost equally bright to my eye.

The 1034 brake filament does draw less current, and appears dimmer.
The brake light is only on a tenth of a percent of the total time you are riding, so its drain on the battery is basically negligible.
 
When the brake is on, you really want to be noticed from behind, so any tiny savings on current draw over the 1157 is not worth the loss of visibility given by the 1034. 

(Anyone want to buy two 1034's? I'll let 'em go cheap!   ;) )
-K
2007 Triumph Bonneville T100, ARK'd, Pods, TOR's, Napoleon's, Innovate G5 Air/Fuel Gauge, Ignition Relocation by D9, Stebel Nautilus, Avon Roadriders
1984 Honda Shadow VT700c, Stock
1974 Honda CB550K, In rehab
1986 Honda Helix

seanlindsley

  • Guest
Re: #1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2010, 10:35:33 AM »
yeah I want those 1034's how much?

Offline CB750Ken8

  • I wanna ride...I wanna ride......Rawr MUST RIDE!
  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  • It's looking better everyday...jones'n to ride!!!
Re: #1157 vs #1034 Tail/Brakelight
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2010, 10:48:48 AM »
+1 on LED conversion if you want to reduce current I'll give a good example (the one I'm using) I had to get new front turn signals since I originally had a Vetter fairing I ended up getting some little LED arrows while building the flasher unit I decided to use a watt meter I had, I measured .250A and a total of 3watts to run 2 turn signals at once, compared to the stock filament bulbs in the old turn signals using 15-23 watts or about 1-2A.
78' CB750 K8

 

;
Honda