Following on from the recent threads discussing HID's and the new incoming MOT and the fact that it seems my current car, even with headlamp washers and self levelling suspension would be illegal with aftermarket HID's due to the lack of projector headlamps, I decided to take advantage of a current 20% discount on Osram Nightbreakers from PowerBulbs and ordered 2 sets @ £43.98 for the 2.
I then went to look at the PowerBulbs HID bulb page, aimed at OEM bulb replacement, out of interest:
and this is what it shows:
HID bulbs are priced individually rather than in pairs so a pair of the cheapest OEM fitted comes at £90.00 without any discount.
Various 'upgrades' cost somewhat more. HID's are supposed to be longer lasting but on my early morning (~6.30 start) journey to work when many drivers now have lights on as the days draw in (some of these may be DRL's), it's notable how many HID equipped cars have a bulb out and they're not near 4 yrs old!
So, with that difference, are HID's likely to really be any cheaper to maintain over high intensity filament bulbs?
It remains to be seen how long a set of Nightbreakers, installed early August, will last on my current DRL equipped vehicle. A set lasted almost 2 yrs on my Vectra and one failed just before I sold it!! Although it wasn't DRL, I always had the dipped headlights on in any remotely dubious lighting situation.
Regarding HID's being 'better', looking at similar comparison discussions on the Volvo boards, it seems that the HID vs filament performance difference is far less distinctive than on Vec C's due to the headlamp units being more optimised for the bulb type fitted. This is such that some even feel they have wasted money on having the OEM bi-xenon option fitted. I have heard similar comments regarding the difference on BMW's.
An interesting point.