Headlights Still Largely Suck, Just Not As Much As Last Year

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

A collective groan must have echoed through the automotive industry a couple of years back, after the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety began testing headlight performance. Early results showed that most headlights, even those on expensive vehicles, fell well short of optimal performance. Most fell short of acceptable performance.

Since then, improvements have begun — slowly, but surely. It’s in an automaker’s best interest to slap a couple of bright peepers on the front of their vehicles from a PR and marketing perspective, but there’s cost issues to be considered. Still, no vehicle can take home that coveted Top Safety Pick+ rating without good headlights.

In its 2018 testing, some 32 models offered standard or available headlights worthy of a “good” rating. That’s out of 165 models.

Not a great ratio, though it’s better than in 2016, when just two out of 95 models offered good headlights. The writer can’t help but notice that his personal vehicle is not among these top-ranked 2018 models, but that doesn’t come as a shock — headlight performance took a backseat to MSRP reduction when he walked into his local GM dealer.

This year, the best-available headlights on 58 new cars rate an “acceptable” rating, which is the institute’s version of “sorta good” or “pretty alright.” Compared to 2016, the number of new vehicles with headlights (of all types) rating a “poor” is just over 25 percent, down from nearly 50 percent. Those with available lights rating “good” climb to a tiny fraction to roughly 20 percent.

While that sounds like impressive progress, of the 424 separate headlight systems among the 195 models, 67 percent earned a rating of marginal or poor. Just because a fancy LED unit is available on an upper trim level, or as part of a pricey package, doesn’t mean drivers are going to drive away with those lamps leading the way. Two-thirds of all new headlamps still blow. Meanwhile, the IIHS isn’t pleased that the majority of drivers are faced with significant additional costs in order to get into a safer vehicle.

Of this diverse group of contestants, just two models carry “good” headlights at every trim level. Those models are the Genesis G90 and Lexus NX. Remember, it’s not just overall dimness working against a headlamp’s rating — there’s also glare for oncoming drivers to be considered. Some 21 models manage to not fall below an “acceptable” rating in base or high-zoot trim. These models include the two aforementioned vehicles, as well as the Chevrolet Volt, Genesis G80, Toyota Camry, and Mercedes-Benz E-Class, which carry good headlights on upper trims and acceptable ones at lower price points.

The rest of the high-ranked group, carrying only acceptable lamps, include four Acuras (MDX, RDX, TLX, and old-generation RLX), BMW’s X2 and X5, the Jeep Cherokee, Lexus IS, Tesla Model 3, five Toyotas (Corolla, Highlander, Prius, Prius Prime, Sienna), and the Volvo XC60.

At the bottom of the list are 43 2018 models that only rate a “poor,” regardless of trim or headlight choice. Among its members are a model that saw a complete overhaul for 2019 (Chevrolet’s Silverado 1500 crew and extended cab), one that’s already dead (Volkswagen Tiguan Limited), and six more destined for the grave (Ford Taurus and Fusion, Buick LaCrosse, Chevrolet Impala and Cadillac ATS and CTS).

While we won’t list them all, here’s a selection of worst offenders: Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Ford F-150 crew and extended cab), all three Honda Civic bodystyles, Chevrolet Bolt, Malibu, and Colorado, Dodge Charger, GMC Terrain and Canyon, Jeep Renegade, Nissan Frontier, and Toyota C-HR.

Oh, and the Hyundai Accent, as well as the Volkswagen Passat. Then there’s the Infiniti QX60. And the Kia Niro Plug-in, Honda Fit, Ford Edge and Explorer, Mercedes-Benz CLA, Dodge Journey and Grand Caravan, Fiat 500X, Chrysler 300, Audi Q3, Toyota 4Runner, and Toyota Yaris iA.

Hey, look — we did list them all.

[Image: Ford, Lexus, Honda]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 21 comments
  • Cactuar Cactuar on Dec 13, 2018

    My comment awaiting moderation (why?). Will repost it with the bad words filtered: It would be awesome if automotive journalists would, you know, actually do journalism stuff. Why doesn’t anyone demand answers to the companies making cars with *****y headlights instead of just parroting what the IIHS says? Where’s the deep reporting about the poor state of stock headlights on cars? We’re car guys and we don’t even know why the hell NEW lights are so pitiful. How aware do you think the average consumer is? I have a feeling that the industry in general is working hard to ignore the issue. Option packages that include LED’s and other fancy lights mean big margins, and no one wants to see those go away.

  • Speedlaw Speedlaw on Dec 13, 2018

    I don't get it...this isn't new. My first Gen Scirocco (I'm old) had Ciebie Z Beams, four rounds. Amazing light, even if I had to take them out every year to pass NJ inspection. I had a Jeep with H4 7 inch Squares. Excellent light, primitive truck. Modern era. HID projectors from a 2003 BMW. Excellent. Shutter for high/low beams 2008 HID projectors low with halogen highs...Acura...Excellent. No shutter for Low, always on. 2010 Caddy...HID projectors, same as the 2003 BMW. Excellent, and swivel to follow the road. Not a gimmick. Shutter for high/low again. My ace of base VW Jetta. For 17k you get a four light system, with the separate High/low bulbs. I'm used to the swivel now, but still adequate,...not bad. I am curious to see how the current MB and HD light systems are..

  • Marcr My wife and I mostly work from home (or use public transit), the kid is grown, and we no longer do road trips of more than 150 miles or so. Our one car mostly gets used for local errands and the occasional airport pickup. The first non-Tesla, non-Mini, non-Fiat, non-Kia/Hyundai, non-GM (I do have my biases) small fun-to-drive hatchback EV with 200+ mile range, instrument display behind the wheel where it belongs and actual knobs for oft-used functions for under $35K will get our money. What we really want is a proper 21st century equivalent of the original Honda Civic. The Volvo EX30 is close and may end up being the compromise choice.
  • Mebgardner I test drove a 2023 2.5 Rav4 last year. I passed on it because it was a very noisy interior, and handled poorly on uneven pavement (filled potholes), which Tucson has many. Very little acoustic padding mean you talk loudly above 55 mph. The forums were also talking about how the roof leaks from not properly sealed roof rack holes, and door windows leaking into the lower door interior. I did not stick around to find out if all that was true. No talk about engine troubles though, this is new info to me.
  • Dave Holzman '08 Civic (stick) that I bought used 1/31/12 with 35k on the clock. Now at 159k.It runs as nicely as it did when I bought it. I love the feel of the car. The most expensive replacement was the AC compressor, I think, but something to do with the AC that went at 80k and cost $1300 to replace. It's had more stuff replaced than I expected, but not enough to make me want to ditch a car that I truly enjoy driving.
  • ToolGuy Let's review: I am a poor unsuccessful loser. Any car company which introduced an EV which I could afford would earn my contempt. Of course I would buy it, but I wouldn't respect them. 😉
  • ToolGuy Correct answer is the one that isn't a Honda.
Next