[obazavil]

From what I have been reading in the last 2 days seems that VLD (low lights, headlights turns with wheel) can be enabled with Bimmercode or esys.

For Glare-free high beam (GFHB) apparently no-one has been able to enable it on M2C and you just blind people because it looks like we are missing hardware in our US versions (that would be pretty sad if that is a fact).

[Ceramic Rabbit]

Originally Posted by obazavil

From what I have been reading in the last 2 days seems that VLD (low lights, headlights turns with wheel) can be enabled with Bimmercode or esys.

For Glare-free high beam (GFHB) apparently no-one has been able to enable it on M2C and you just blind people because it looks like we are missing hardware in our US versions (that would be pretty sad if that is a fact).

Well at least VLD can work if you code it, that one seems more valuable to me anyways. I'm honestly surprised it can't turn headlights with the wheel as standard, Im almost positive I've driven other cars in the US with that feature.

[Project_F87]

Originally Posted by Ceramic Rabbit

Well at least VLD can work if you code it, that one seems more valuable to me anyways. I'm honestly surprised it can't turn headlights with the wheel as standard, Im almost positive I've driven other cars in the US with that feature.

It absolutely can turn the headlights standard on auto mode. VLD just also allows your headlights to change the distance and location of exposure of light depending on speed.

[MMMBRAP]

Still a lot of confusion here, as I am reading a lot of contradictory comments.

Can we code to enable all the features, or at least 75% of the features in the Adaptive LEDs for the M2C or not?

[AndrewC1989]

Originally Posted by MMMBRAP

Still a lot of confusion here, as I am reading a lot of contradictory comments.

Okay let me break this down for people not getting it.

We (people in North America with adaptive headlights) already have a standard High Beam Assistant (HBA) active from the factory. What that does is automatically turn your high beams on and off in the presence of other cars at night. (This is not the same thing as Glare Free High Beams, aka GFHB).

Another separate feature we also already have is that our low beams will automatically move around at night when you turn your steering wheel. (This is not the same thing as Variable Light Distribution, aka VLD).


So what is VLD and GFHB and how do they differ from the standard features we get?

Read this: https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...8;postcount=10


Now, onto your question.

Originally Posted by MMMBRAP

Can we enable all these features in the Adaptive LEDs for the M2C or not?

AFAIK yes, you technically should be able to enable both VLD and GFHB on an LCI/M2C with coding, no problem.

So what's the issue? Why is there contradiction in many of these comments?

It's been speculated (and somewhat proven) that GFHB will not operate safely on North American cars as the European and North American headlight hardware is different, and therefore poses the danger of blinding others on the road.

What about VLD?

It only seems logical that this safety concern would not apply to VLD as it is strictly a low beam feature, although you have to keep in mind that with the different headlight hardware it's uncertain if it would function 100% as intended.

So can you? Yes. Should you? 🤷🏻

[MMMBRAP]

Originally Posted by andrewc89

Okay let me break this down for people not getting it.

We (people in North America with adaptive headlights) already have a standard High Beam Assistant (HBA) active from the factory. What that does is automatically turn your high beams on and off in the presence of other cars at night.

Also, our low beams will automatically move around at when you turn your steering wheel.

So what exactly are we missing out on?

VLD and GFHB.

What are they and how do they differ from the standard features we get?

Read this: https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...8&postcount=10


Now, onto your question.

AFAIK yes, you should be able to enable both VLD and GFHB on a an LCI/M2C with coding, no problem.

So what's the issue? Why is there contradiction in many of these comments?

It's been speculated (and somewhat proven) that GFHB will not operate safely on North American cars as the European and North American headlight hardware is different, and therefore poses the danger of blinding others on the road.

What about VLD?

It only seems logical that this would not be an issue affecting VLD, as it is strictly a low beam feature.


In summation, my take away from all of this is that you should feel free to code in and enjoy VLD but probably shouldn't add in GFHB as it's somewhat of a serious safety hazard.

Thank you!

[NY135ivishnu]

Has anyone done this ? I'd like to code this to my M2c

[Ceramic Rabbit]

Try search there are a lot of threads about it

[NY135ivishnu]

Originally Posted by Ceramic Rabbit

Try search there are a lot of threads about it

I found a huge thread but wanted to see if someone knows how to do it and be able to do it remotely. BimmerCode doesn't have the function available

[BAN_M2C]

Originally Posted by NY135ivishnu

I found a huge thread but wanted to see if someone knows how to do it and be able to do it remotely. BimmerCode doesn't have the function available

Keep searching there was one posted this same week asking again. OP was pointed to the bigger thread and also got posted the details on coding.

Bimmercode does allow you to do it in Expert Mode.

LED Adaptive Headlights w/ Variable Light Distribution (VLD) - High Beam Assist (HBA) https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1459620

[Robin_NL]

What's the difference between EU and US spec?

Dutch M2C have adaptive lights as standard.

Cheers
Robin

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Robin_NL

What's the difference between EU and US spec?

Dutch M2C have adaptive lights as standard.

Cheers
Robin

The US version pre-LCI Xenon adaptive headlights were missing a flap that would block the headlights from pointing at cars, the anti-glare was said to not work correctly with these models. The new LED Adaptive headlights (which is written on the US version headlights as well) may or may not work properly when anti-glare is re-coded back in. I haven't seen any proof that the current US Adaptive LEDs are lacking the required functionality for anti-glare to operate properly.

[Ceramic Rabbit]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

The US version pre-LCI Xenon adaptive headlights were missing a flap that would block the headlights from pointing at cars, the anti-glare was said to not work correctly with these models. The new LED Adaptive headlights (which is written on the US version headlights as well) may or may not work properly when anti-glare is re-coded back in. I haven't seen any proof that the current US Adaptive LEDs are lacking the required functionality for anti-glare to operate properly.

People who have coded it back in say that it doesn't work, the shadow tunnel isn't created so it looks like the US spec is missing some hardware.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Ceramic Rabbit

People who have coded it back in say that it doesn't work, the shadow tunnel isn't created so it looks like the US spec is missing some hardware.

That is all well and good, but until someone shows me a picture of the hardware difference I'm going to reserve my judgement.
I coded it back in for testing. The right headlight shines on the shoulder of the road and the driver headlight points down.

[AndrewC1989]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

That is all well and good, but until someone shows me a picture of the hardware difference I'm going to reserve my judgement.

Here you go:

https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...php?p=23993829

[AlpsRider]

I agree that it is possible, even likely that the M2C US version Adaptive LEDs lack the required hardware for anti-dazzle. I've seen the photos of "proof" which were taken years ago on outdated hardware. The M2C has a new headlight design and have different part numbers than any of the models I've seen listed. Anyone can make an off handed remark on the internet that something doesn't work. I'd like to see documentation of the hardware design on the M2C Adaptive Headlights, perhaps someone has info on "current" Adaptive LEDs?

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I agree that it is possible, even likely that the M2C US version Adaptive LEDs lack the required hardware for anti-dazzle. I've seen the photos of "proof" which were taken years ago on outdated hardware. The M2C has a new headlight design and have different part numbers than any of the models I've seen listed. Anyone can make an off handed remark on the internet that something doesn't work. I'd like to see documentation of the hardware design on the M2C Adaptive Headlights, perhaps someone has info on "current" Adaptive LEDs?

Where do you see the M2C headlights are different from the LCI Adaptive headlights? Part numbers are the same on realoem.com

[AlpsRider]

I believe that the photos that were posted in this thread were from a M240 LCI. I thought they were different part numbers from the M2, but you are correct, they are the same. I checked realoem and the M2 has the same part number as M240i LCI. I stand corrected on that.

I still wonder what the hardware inside the M2 Adaptive headlights actually looks like since the photo of the non-euro Adaptive Headlight units linked earlier in the thread appear to be from a Mini and not an M2. Maybe they are the same, maybe not.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I believe that the photos that were posted in this thread were from a M240 LCI. I thought they were different part numbers from the M2, but you are correct, they are the same. I checked realoem and the M2 has the same part number as M240i LCI. I stand corrected on that.

I still wonder what the hardware inside the M2 Adaptive headlights actually looks like since the photo of the non-euro Adaptive Headlight units linked earlier in the thread appear to be from a Mini and not an M2. Maybe they are the same, maybe not.

Well, I have a crashed LCI headlight from my accident I was hoping to dissect, but the dealership wants $400 core deposit to give it to me so doesn't look like that's happening anymore.

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Well, I have a crashed LCI headlight from my accident I was hoping to dissect, but the dealership wants $400 core deposit to give it to me so doesn't look like that's happening anymore.

Why would you have to give them a "core" deposit if they already got paid by your insurance company for new headlights? Technically, the old headlights belong to the insurance company.

What it sounds like is that there are getting paid to replace the whole pair of headlights and all its related parts. They could probably salvage most of old headlight (modules, bulbs, etc), maybe even the whole light on one side and just pocket the money.

By you asking back for it, it would force them to 'actually' purchase everything they were paid for.. So the 'core' charge is bullcrap, as they are just trying to dissuade you from messing with their master plan.

There is no such thing as a core charge for headlights; I've been paid $7,000 by my insurance company for some water-filled headlights and the modules. Only needed to purchase like half the parts that they paid me for. I profited about $3,000 in the end. And sold old lights for $900.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Poochie

I understand your skepticism, if you look my previous post, I was avid believer that GFHB could be coded in the US spec headlights. However, after some research, I've confirm that the hardware is indeed different for the LED headlights, based on how it's engineered to perform.

How GFHB works is there's a precise deviation of many individuals LED 'bulbs' in the headlight's PCB, behind the projector/reflector. Based on the KAFAS camera data, each one turns on/off individually based on exact need and to avoid blinding other oncoming motorist.

Since the US market doesn't yet allow GFHB, there are less LED diodes built in, per headlight PCB, as oppose to the European spec version.

As a result, the headlight hardware (including part numbers) are different between the US and European spec versions and cannot be decoded to work properly.

Like I mention before, the US DOT finally joined the 21 Century and amended the lighting law to allow GFHB standard for model year 2021 and beyond. So future vehicles will all have the same LED headlights as rest of the world and this dispute will be moot.

I went on a drive at night through the mountains with Anti-Dazzle coded in. I was so excited about the headlight performance that I just wanted Anti-Dazzle to work on my car. I guess I'll have to just leave in VLD for now. It is so frustrating!

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by Poochie

Why would you have to give them a "core" deposit if they already got paid by your insurance company for new headlights? Technically, the old headlights belong to the insurance company.

What it sounds like is that there are getting paid to replace the whole pair of headlights and all its related parts. They could probably salvage most of old headlight (modules, bulbs, etc), maybe even the whole light on one side and just pocket the money.

By you asking back for it, it would force them to 'actually' purchase everything they were paid for.. So the 'core' charge is bullcrap, as they are just trying to dissuade you from messing with their master plan.

There is no such thing as a core charge for headlights; I've been paid $7,000 by my insurance company for some water-filled headlights and the modules. Only needed to purchase like half the parts that they paid me for. I profited about $3,000 in the end. And sold old lights for $900.

Insurance didn't cover it... I am paying for the repairs.