I been talking about it since i joined the forum about getting the HID kit and converting them, and now it has finally been done! I got my Mcculloch's in about three weeks ago but didnt have time installing it with school and daily life crap. I also changed out the DRL/highbeams to the silverstars and they look pretty crisp. I pretty much have to say that the look of the my accord headlights now are pretty darn sick. In one of the pictures I compared my HID's to my friends STI and even though his are better in terms of lighting distance mine looks brighter from directly looking at them.

[IMG]local://upfiles/2482/463E371845314064B274161800E67775.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/2482/2EAB14804F3645C793DE38E1D0691BAC.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/2482/3A8F2F3225154F7AA1B2C8C8110A4ACD.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/2482/26860B9634C540DDA2661635F0512DF2.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/2482/8D6D1C47920046C8AA3E869AFEDE1434.jpg[/IMG]

 

Looks tight. Where did you getthat conversion kit.

 

They are Mcculloch's and i got them from xenonpros.com

 

Isn't installing HID's and using them on the road illegal?

Sean

 

In actuality they are... but unless they look ridiculously obvious and a really bright odd color then you would not get pulled over for them. It’s like looking at an Acura and a Honda and trying to see if the lights are modified or not. The HID kit that I have on my car looks no different from Acura HIDs.

 

absolutely....that color is gorgeous. a+ on those lights. your car really is a road eating machine now

 

its only illegal if you get caught
as a side note, dont moon people while your driving........

 

Borrowed from DriveAccord. Thanks to OwAce for the post and information.

SEMA has prevailed and the NHTSA has agreed that HID retrofits are legal.

here is the text of the article.

SEMA Prevails on Motor Vehicle Lighting Rule; NHTSA Alters Interpretation on Enhanced Replacement Headlamp Systems

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 1, 2005--Following a challenge by the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has withdrawn a controversial interpretation of the federal lighting standard. SEMA disputed NHTSA's constitutional and statutory authority to prohibit vehicle headlamp replacement systems that are different than the headlamps and components which came with the original vehicle. The agency's latest action reverses this ruling.


In a Nov. 1, 2005, notice published in the Federal Register, NHTSA agreed with SEMA that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 108 is a performance standard that allows for different types of replacement headlamp systems, lamps and sources so long as the system meets the photometry and functionality requirements of the standard. It had been NHTSA's contention that replacement headlamps must comply with all applicable photometry requirements using the same light source as the original equipment. This interpretation would have prohibited, for example, replacing a halogen-based system with high-intensity discharge (HID) headlamps that otherwise meet all requirements of FMVSS 108.

"NHTSA's reversal is wholly consistent with the statutory requirement that replacement lighting equipment meet an objective performance standard. We applaud the agency for issuing this revised ruling," said SEMA President and CEO Chris Kersting. "A policy limiting the consumer's choice of design runs contrary to long-standing precedent, is beyond authority as delegated by Congress and could have threatened other equipment beyond lighting in the future. We are pleased that by acting on our members' behalf, we were able to overturn this policy."

NHTSA first issued its controversial interpretation in 2003 as a draft opinion letter subject to public comment. None of the 25 organizations and businesses that commented agreed with NHTSA's proposal that replacement equipment conform to the standard in the same manner as the original equipment. Instead, commenters argued that aftermarket manufacturers should be allowed to certify replacement lighting equipment under FMVSS No. 108 in such manner as complies with the performance standard it sets forth. Despite these recommendations, NHTSA stuck with its position and published a final opinion letter in October 2004. SEMA immediately petitioned the agency to reconsider its action.

"SEMA continues to stand for the right to responsibly accessorize, modify, and improve vehicles with enhanced aftermarket lighting," said SEMA Chairman Mitch Williams. "Enhanced headlamp lighting systems improve safety aspects of the vehicle and can be fully compliant with all relevant federal standards. SEMA vigorously opposed this interpretation of a long-standing regulation. It threatened to inhibit many legitimate companies who are in the business of improving vehicle lighting to the benefit of the motoring public. SEMA welcomes NHTSA's reversal and will continue to work with the agency to ensure fair and accurate implementation of this new interpretation."

Founded in 1963, SEMA represents the $32 billion specialty automotive industry of 6,466 member companies. It is the authoritative source for research, data, trends and market growth information for automakers and the specialty auto products industry. The industry provides appearance, performance, comfort, convenience and technology products for passenger and recreational vehicles. For more information contact SEMA at 1575 S. Valley Vista Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 91765-0910; call 909-396-0289; or visit www.sema.org and www.enjoythedrive.com.
__________________

 

looks good dude, and good choice of brand. i got the same hid kit on my '97 accord. I had it in my '04 rolla, but took it out when i bought the accord. it's a 6000k, right, atleast it looks like it?
had mine shipped all the way from japan.
also they are not illegal, unless you got the old kind of headlights.

 

what if you get a 92 accord and then hid that?