ultimate driving light combo?

[greenraptor]

so you have no dog in the fight, other than to just start shit. cool.

I'm good on getting help from anyone else...

I appreciate the offer, but you go ahead and have yourself a fantastic day.

You also don’t own the BD SAE lights that are the topic of discussion here. So, I guess you don’t have a dog in the fight either, other than to show your bias fanboyism towards lights we aren’t even talking about (regardless of brand).

And no, I’m not starting shit. Just providing factual information that should’ve already made it out to our community here and has so far, been handled less than ideal.

 

[4x4TruckLEDs.com]

This is a relatively new development FYI on the SAE lights being changed. We were only told about the plan a few day ago. In fact dealers have not received an official email yet. What I can share with you is what was publicly posted by Trent on another forum.

If you're suddenly anti-Baja I assume you are anti-everybody else, since nobody else "passed" that test made by the dude in his garage (from the other forum post)

We let people know the plan as soon as we knew. This isn't something that's been known about for months now, it only came to our attention recently.

Baja didn't keep it hidden either. If you read the message I had posted which their CEO posted on another forum they only learned about this recently as well. It's not like they developed an SAE product and said "ehh it failed, but let's stamp it anyway" that's not the case at all.

Corrections are being made for existing customers and for the new shipments coming out. So Baja certainly stood by their name and is making it right for all customers.

 

[greenraptor]

This is a relatively new development FYI on the SAE lights being changed. We were only told about the plan a few day ago. In fact dealers have not received an official email yet. What I can share with you is what was publicly posted by Trent on another forum.

If you're suddenly anti-Baja I assume you are anti-everybody else, since nobody else "passed" that test made by the dude in his garage (from the other forum post)

We let people know the plan as soon as we knew. This isn't something that's been known about for months now, it only came to our attention recently.

Baja didn't keep it hidden either. If you read the message I had posted which their CEO posted on another forum they only learned about this recently as well. It's not like they developed an SAE product and said "ehh it failed, but let's stamp it anyway" that's not the case at all.

Corrections are being made for existing customers and for the new shipments coming out. So Baja certainly stood by their name and is making it right for all customers.

Again, not anti anyone and you clearly never read that thread on the Tacoma forum. KC, Rigid and other cheaper alternatives did pass. Not everyone failed, far from it. Be honest. Link to that thread from page 1 https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/the-led-sae-j583-fog-pod-fog-light-review.554813/.

Funny how “the dude in his garage” can find a product that isn’t compliant, but the company that created it couldn’t.

Baja Designs was testing the prototype fix at SEMA. You and other vendors on here, as authorized BD dealers, should have been aware of this issue by SEMA timeframe, if not before, since BD was already in the process of fixing what they knew wasn’t compliant.

BD as well as the vendors on here should have made a statement, letting folks know what the problem was (not just the Tacoma forum) and what they are doing to fix it. Instead, they stopped selling it quietly and appeared to try and sweep it under the rug in hopes folks wouldn’t notice.

So, when I PM’d you on Nov 19th, you knew or you at least should have (if you didn’t, BD failed you). I’m sure you knew by the start of last week and you did by the start of Black Friday. Yet, your customers are now only aware of the issue because they found it themselves, rather than you (venders) or BD letting them know upfront. Now their options are deal with it, return it and or wait for a fix, instead of having the options and the knowledge they should have had before the sale.

All I can say is, no matter how big or small the issue...be honest, be honest, be honest. Own a mistake, fix it and move on.

 

[4x4TruckLEDs.com]

While I have nothing to prove to you, I only found out the details on the 22nd. Details were not provided to dealers in any "official" statements either. Baja is most likely busy preparing the "fix" at which time they'll let us know the actual gameplan (as outlined in their CEOs message on the Tacoma forum). For now, we can only go by what they wrote online.

Furthermore, as dealers we don't make public new product announcements until Baja has done so. That's why you didn't see any of us dealers talking about the new LP4s until they were officially released at SEMA, yet most dealers knew about that product line.

We also don't make public statements about the plans Baja has regarding any issues that may have come up, until Baja does so. Since we just found out about this a week ago we were in no position, as a dealer, to go around making statements. We've talked to people 1 on 1 who brought it up but we're not about to go recall every conversation we have with every customer to let them know about an issue that Baja has not made public on their site yet (or via email). Once they do so, we'll let our own customers know the plan (once Baja puts it into place of course).

As you saw in their post on the Tacoma page, when they have a plan ready they are going to let the dealers and the public know officially. Until such time, we're going by what they've made public which is sending the lights in for a lens swap or providing a lens swap free of charge.

I honestly don't see where your trying to go with this. You act like buying and using the current SAE lights is going to cause a HUGE problem. You're talking about a minor fix to the lenses (from what I can tell in what I read on the Tacoma site). It's not catastrophic but you're making it seem like it is.

 

[zombiekiller]

You also don’t own the BD SAE lights that are the topic of discussion here. So, I guess you don’t have a dog in the fight either, other than to show your bias fanboyism towards lights we aren’t even talking about (regardless of brand).

And no, I’m not starting shit. Just providing factual information that should’ve already made it out to our community here and has so far, been handled less than ideal.

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.

 

[melvimbe]

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.

 

[Speeddeacon]

Something that has been bugging me during this heated diatribe is what SAE’s obligation is in this? If a companies market a product as SAE compliant, shouldn’t those companies have had to produce documentation or provide their products to SAE for testing first? Or can a company just make any claim they want and SAE accept it as fact? And, for that matter, does being “SAE compliant” have any value at all outside of perhaps some marketing.

I own BD but have been very interested by the Diode Dynamics SAE SS3 cubes. They haven’t been released yet so real world experience isn’t available, but from
the photos they have published, they put
put a ton of light but they don’t show any cutoff views. They also surprisingly offer a driving version. All this has me wondering if their newest SAE standard compliance is truly valid. Again, it may not matter at all.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[4x4TruckLEDs.com]

I believe they did. Based on what I read in their CEO's original message on the Tacoma forum, they originally had someone test them and the #'s came back fine. But they later learned the equipment was not setup correctly I guess. Thus sending the lights out again to another place for further testing. And since it didn't pass at the other place, they are fixing it. That's the gist of it anyway.

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.

 

[smurfslayer]

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

Now their options are deal with it, return it and or wait for a fix, instead of having the options and the knowledge they should have had before the sale.

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.

 

[4x4TruckLEDs.com]

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.

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)