How to Bimmercode VLD and Anti-Dazzle (GFHB) with your adaptive LED headlights

[Blue Angel]

I just picked up a (new to me) 2016 F10 535d M-Sport XDrive with the Adaptive LED Headlight package a couple of weeks ago.
So far I'm very pleased with it and was delighted to find out about this coding option. This is by far the highest "tech" car I've owned... soft close doors, really? It's no M5 in the GO department, but it's an impressive machine none-the-less.

I coded both VLD and GFHB last night using Bimmercode and the OBD Link MX+ Bluetooth adapter. I mention the adapter specifically because my Bimmercode experience is unlike what I've seen displayed here, and perhaps the interface changes based on the adapter? No idea.

Difference #1:

Of the two coding options presented Method 2 seems to be the closest to my experience. What was different for me was, when selecting to enable (mit) the F025 option, the checkmarks beside both the F010 and F001 options would switch to mit as well. To be clear, it didn't matter which of the three options I enabled, all three would check at the same time from disabled to enabled. All three were displayed at the same time with checkmarks beside them, and all three are either enabled or disabled, no choosing individual options.

Difference #2:

Similar to what was reported by member mdimbler, when coding GFHB the second and third options were already set to enabled (with F001, F010 and F025 all displayed simultaneously as described above), so I only had to change the first one (3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_ENA > F025_enable 0x01).

Difference #3 (maybe?):

I'm using an iPhone 8 with IOS 14.3, and Bimmercode version 4.0, which may or may not explain why my experience is different than others. I would imagine as the software matures the interface and perhaps even the coding "smarts" could be updated. Perhaps it's linked (haha) to the MX+ adapter, as previously mentioned?

I also saw a video on YT where the guy codes a F10 535i Xenon car for VLD and is only checking the F010 options. The reason I find his method interesting is not only can he select individual radio buttons (instead of my forced three checkmarks), but he is going from F025 disabled to F010 enabled, and leaves the other two as-is. No idea why, or if it works properly this way?

OBSERVATIONS:

I took the car for a brief drive after coding. It was dark, slightly foggy, and very light precipitation mix of rain/snow. The headlights should have been cleaned before setting out as they are surely a bit dirty, but this common-sense thought never crossed my mind until I got home. Duh.

VLD:

With the roads being wet I was unable to notice any activity from VLD, however the curbs and roadsides were very well lit. Without doing a back-to-back comparison under identical conditions I can't confirm that this was because of VLD, or just the relatively nice and wide output of the regular low beams. More feedback to come after driving in dry conditions, and playing with speeds and fog light activation.

GFHB (tunneling for car followed):

Even under these conditions (slightly foggy) I was unable to discern a distinct sharp cutoff on the inside of the split high-beams. I could tell they were moving but I couldn't tell whether there was actually a tunnel being created to shield the car in front of me from the high beams. I will have to test this again in dry conditions to tell for sure.

GFHB (on-coming traffic):

This feature seems to work as intended. The blue High Beam indicator is lit any time the actual high beams are on (as far as I can tell), and there was no denying the high beam was active on the right side of the road while on-coming traffic was passing on the left. During this short test I was always behind another car when on-coming traffic was present, but I can report that none of the on-coming cars indicated they were bothered by my lights. Also, I could see the left low beam pattern adjusting back to the right before the left high beam reactivated, so this portion of the feature appears to be working. Again, more observations are necessary under better conditions for a clear verdict.

I observed what seems to be supported in the BMW video; that there are four separate high beam projectors which all contribute to the regular high beam output, but that when GFHB is active the two center mounted non-swiveling high beams are inactive. This is visible on the road as two different "stages" of high beam output; when the road suddenly becomes clear of traffic, the outboard high beams realign towards the center and then the central fixed high beams come on, brightening the overall output. Starts at 0:59

In this regard, the BMW video is a little misleading. It demonstrates a simple parting of the high beams when approaching a vehicle from behind without demonstrating that the overall light output is reduced. Not a big deal, but it makes me wonder why they didn't just use two more powerful high beams in the outer swiveling positions? Perhaps in the EU spec cars with the sharper vertical cutoffs the fixed beams are needed for blending?

Mine is a Canadian car but is very likely identical to US cars as far as the headlights go; Canada's regulations are usually pretty much in lock-step with those of the US. I will assume then that if the US cars have an inferior-to-EU designed vertical cutoff that mine is no different. Lack of an obvious cutoff in foggy conditions seems to support that assumption.

I'm looking forward to trying this out in clearer conditions to get a real feel for exactly how good this decoded North-American version of the technology is behaving. To be completely honest, I will not feel at ease following traffic with this engaged until I have a chance to get someone to follow me with it while driving another car so I can judge for myself. The last thing I want is to be blinding the car in front of me. mdimbler's testimony based on using his wife as a test subject (nicely done, BTW!) is certainly encouraging, but since it's a different platform I'm not going to assume his F01 is an identical case to my F10. Hopefully it is!

[Emcee]

2018 M3 (F80) checking in. Coded using the first example, most of the code was very similar the only difference being F025 I think was different. I also had 4 options for the first parameter but they appeared to look the same.

I tested it today and while it didn't look just like the perfect BMW video, I could definitely see the tunneling and the lights dodging oncoming traffic. It was so amazing, so much that I was staring at the light instead of watching the road.

EDIT: Upon further research it appears that the US-Spec cars indeed have different headlight units versus the Euro-Spec cars. Check out this thread for more info. It could explain the weak "tunneling" I was experiencing, but since I live in the city and high beams aren't something I use often I figure it's probably ok.

[rockyfeller]

Originally Posted by Emcee

2018 M3 (F80) checking in. Coded using the first example, most of the code was very similar the only difference being F025 I think was different. I also had 4 options for the first parameter but they appeared to look the same.

I tested it today and while it didn't look just like the perfect BMW video, I could definitely see the tunneling and the lights dodging oncoming traffic. It was so amazing, so much that I was staring at the light instead of watching the road.

EDIT: Upon further research it appears that the US-Spec cars indeed have different headlight units versus the Euro-Spec cars. Check out this thread for more info. It could explain the weak "tunneling" I was experiencing, but since I live in the city and high beams aren't something I use often I figure it's probably ok.

Great to know it works on the F80! I was curious to hear it working with the F80 because most of the coding amongst F series seems to be similar. As long as the hardware is there. Good to know that it's a "yes".

Excellent find with the thread you posted, thanks! I've actually read the first 5 pages couple years back. Hence why I said earlier on this thread that coding this is controversial to some and they advise not coding this feature in on US cars. Some have even reverted to decoding them after trying it out.

But I haven't seen the new updated recent pages till now, so thanks for posting the link here. On page 8, it's now been definitely confirmed that BMW has used different headlight hardware on N American headlights as compared with Euro. Even inexplicably using the same part numbers! Even though they're talking about the F80 headlights and not the F10, it's safe to assume BMW has done the same on the F10. If they did it on one model, you can bet they would follow suit on another. Who knows what their weird corporate justification was for it but it's petty to say the least. The evidence that makes me feel they did the US F10 same as the US F80? The beam behavior that we're observing here on coded F10 US cars is the same they are observing on their US F80s.

They've mentioned that coding GFHB requires 12+ lines, maybe because that's on e-sys? We surely didn't have to do so much via BimmerCode to get it working as described on this thread. Perhaps a few important parameters are missed? Guess I have to look into that.

After reading that thread I surely have to disagree with some of the naysayers saying that coding on US cars is dangerous or glaring other drivers. Ok, so the hardware is different. Sure the cutoff is not as sharp and that's going to mean that there is some light bleed. Agreed. But I think it's a exaggeration to say it's dangerous and blinding other drivers. I've driven plenty of miles and have been watching the headlight behavior very closely. NOT ONCE have I ever been flashed by another driver. Directly incoming or otherwise. Not one time. Whenever I've followed another vehicle I can tell I'm not glaring the other driver in their rear view/side mirrors. Whenever I followed my friends I'm sure they would have told me something. Never happened.

IMO I disagree with those who think that US cars are decoded for safety because the hardware is different, and thus the coding makes the headlights operate inappropriately/outside of parameters. My observation is there is no glare to other drivers. The cars are decoded simply to adhere to DOT regulations. Nothing else. All in all, I still stand by what I said earlier. It's still coding worth doing and it makes a difference. Hands free, safe high visibility driving.

If any of you guys are observing other drivers getting glare let us know.

[Barry_S]

Originally Posted by rockyfeller

Great to know it works on the F80! I was curious to hear it working with the F80 because most of the coding amongst F series seems to be similar. As long as the hardware is there. Good t know it's a "yes".

Excellent find with the thread you posted, thanks! I've actually read the first 5 pages couple years back. Hence why I said earlier on this thread that coding this is controversial to some and they advise not coding this feature in on US cars. Some have even reverted to decoding them after trying it out.

But I haven't seen the new updated recent pages till now, so thanks for posting the link here. On page 8, it's now been definitely confirmed that BMW has used different headlight hardware on N American headlights as compared with Euro. Even inexplicably using the same part numbers! Even though they're talking about the F80 headlights and not the F10, it's safe to assume BMW has done the same on the F10. If they did it on one model, you can bet they would follow suit on another. Who knows what their weird corporate justification was for it but it's petty to say the least. The evidence that makes me feel they did the US F10 same as the US F80? The beam behavior that we're observing here on coded F10 US cars is the same they are observing on their US F80s.

They've mentioned that coding GFHB requires 12+ lines, maybe because that's on e-sys? We surely didn't have to do so much via BimmerCode to get it working as described on this thread. Perhaps a few important parameters are missed? Guess I have to look into that.

After reading that thread I surely have to disagree with some of the naysayers saying that coding on US cars is dangerous or glaring other drivers. Ok, so the hardware is different. Sure the cutoff is not as sharp and that's going to mean that there is some light bleed. Agreed. But I think it's a exaggeration to say it's dangerous and blinding other drivers. I've driven plenty of miles and have been watching the headlight behavior very closely. NOT ONCE have I ever been flashed by another driver. Directly incoming or otherwise. Not one time. Whenever I've followed another vehicle I can tell I'm not glaring the other driver in their rear view/side mirrors. Whenever I followed my friends I'm sure they would have told me something. Never happened.

IMO I disagree with those who think that US cars are decoded for safety because the hardware is different, and thus the coding makes the headlights operate inappropriately/outside of parameters. My observation is there is no glare to other drivers. The cars are decoded simply to adhere to DOT regulations. Nothing else. All in all, I still stand by what I said earlier. It's still coding worth doing and it makes a difference. Hands free, safe high visibility driving.

If any of you guys are observing other drivers getting glare let us know.

I'm in agreement with everything you've stated here. I'm observing the same thing and have never had any one flash me.

[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by Barry_S

I'm in agreement with everything you've stated here. I'm observing the same thing and have never had any one flash me.

Since doing this on my '16 F10 w/Adaptive LED I've had three people flash me:

One was a seriously lifted full-size Silverado with terribly blue-ish aftermarket headlight bulbs. In this case the main high beam was not dipped at all, like my car was completely unaware of the oncoming vehicle, but that could have has something to do with that vehicle's particular headlights.

The second and third were regular cars and they appeared bothered by the articulated left high beam that's supposed to tunnel to the left of oncoming traffic and then shut off at the limit of its travel. The center main beams were definitely dipped in these two cases, only the outer two high beams were on.

Originally Posted by rockyfeller

They've mentioned that coding GFHB requires 12+ lines, maybe because that's on e-sys? We surely didn't have to do so much via BimmerCode to get it working as described on this thread. Perhaps a few important parameters are missed? Guess I have to look into that.

After observing the GFHB VLD for a few weeks now, my gut feeling is there's a lot more to getting this working properly than just the few changes made through Bimmercode as described here:

GFHB:

I can confirm the articulation of both outer high beam projectors (#1 and #4 counting from the left sitting in the car) appears to be operating as intended, however, the intensity of 1&4 appears much lower than the two central projectors, #2&3. In the European/Korean demo videos 1&4 appear to be the same intensity as 2&3. This could be a major reason why the tunneling effect is less obvious (in addition to the lack of a sharp vertical cut-off); there's just less light coming from those optics and they are harder to notice.

I can tell the GFHB is attempting to light up the ditches around oncoming and followed traffic, but the effect is MUCH more dim than in the videos I've seen. I'm wondering if the US DOT restrictions on overall light output have something to do with this?

VLD:

VLD seems to work on the left outer module only (#1). When switching the headlight mode from "on" to "automatic" it's easy to see two things when parked in front of a storefront window:

1. Module #1 lowers in height and rotates outward at low speeds/parked, then re-centers and assumes regular height above about 40 km/h, exactly like the VLD description says. The problem is, the right headlight #4 does nothing at all different - it stays fixed regardless of what the left side is doing.

2. Various LED chips within the #1 low beam optics change intensity with VLD engaged, likely to blend better with the output of fixed module #2. Right side #4 has no such changed in intensity, it stays the same under both operating conditions.

====================

I'm going to see if I can get detailed images of the light modules from my Canadian (and US?) spec F10 and post them here. Maybe someone with a properly functioning euro-spec car can post their F10 light guts and we can compare notes like the F80 M3 guys did in the linked post (GREAT info/videos there BTW in case someone is reading along).

BTW, after reading that thread, I might as well mention my car has the KAFAS camera and speed limit info on-dash, since they mention that's a limiting build factor on the F80.

[jacie6056]

Originally Posted by maron

If you have GFHB, adjusting the sensitivity will work even in bright streets

what parameter you adjusted for the sensitivity option?

[GermanKiwi]

Originally Posted by maron

If you have GFHB, adjusting the sensitivity will work even in bright streets:cool!

I would also love to know how to adjust the sensitivity of the GFHB.

@maron could you kindly share how to code this?

[Jbd123]

Coded VLD and GFHB on my 2016 550ix last night. Coding options were slightly different than the original instructions but, the prior feedback from others on this thread got me through it.

Took a drive last night (I live in a rural area) and it worked flawlessly! Not a sharp tunnel but a tunnel just the same! Thanks so much for posting this! I was really disappointed when I got the car and realized this was not enabled in US spec adaptive lighting package. And now I'm very happy!

[rockyfeller]

[Migelito]

Originally Posted by Jbd123

Coded VLD and GFHB on my 2016 550ix last night. Coding options were slightly different than the original instructions but, the prior feedback from others on this thread got me through it.

Took a drive last night (I live in a rural area) and it worked flawlessly! Not a sharp tunnel but a tunnel just the same! Thanks so much for posting this! I was really disappointed when I got the car and realized this was not enabled in US spec adaptive lighting package. And now I'm very happy!

Fellas,
With my Adaptive xenon (non LED) I tried the original suggestions from the first post:

Method 1:
Coding for 8S4 (VLD - works for both HID Xenons and LED adaptive lights):
Footwell Module > Expert Mode >
3073 LaMaster1 > LUT_FLC_FORWARDLIGHTING_Y > F025_mit_AFS > 0x9C,0x9C,0x9C (check this box)
3073 LaMaster1 > C_FLC_ENA > F025_enable > 0x01 (check this box)


I have to say that the settings I have had originally already included the last line enabled (C_FLC_ENA > F025_enable > 0x01), so I only had to enable one setting for LUT_FLC_FORWARDLIGHTING_Y > F025_mit_AFS > 0x9C,0x9C,0x9C.

On the first look nothing changed when I drove after re-coding. However I drove only below 30-40 mph. Next day when I drove over the full speed range (0 to 80 mph and then back to 20 at so on) I can clearly see the change in the light distribution.
The summary is the following: above 50 mph the distribution is what most closely remind 3-Country road light distribution from the file circulated here before. That is to say I see a far, long illumination on the right, wider but shorter illumination on the left, and quite a bit of a sagging of the dark area in the middle. Below 50 mph it goes into a lot more uniform light.

At 50+mph with the high beam engaged, the left light clearly moves to the center to form a pyramid-like shape light with a vertical "line-like" enhancement in the middle.

When go in reverse, the left light shifts visibly sideways.

But what I found is that behavior is not necessarily consistent from one speed cycle (0-80-20-etc) to another. Well, maybe this depends on the amount of time I have to drive, not sure...

Can this be that settings where F025 get enabled are more for x3 and for f10 we need to enable F010 setting like shown in this video:

[704g30]

I looked into Bimmercode on my '17 G30 with adaptive LED lights stock and none of these parameters were there. Kind of a bummer as I wanted this feature! My car also has the Adaptive LED headlight package along with the KAFAS camera. It also has auto high beams and the lights turn the corners with the car. So sad now!

[Richard Tickner]

My UK spec M5 has these functions and it's fantastic. I don't know why in the States your laws don't allow it? It's a safety function.

[704g30]

Good news maybe, I talked with Vic who does my coding and he said this is possible on my car. So when he does the rear fog light coding Monday night for my LCI tail lights he's going to do the VLD and antidazzle at the same time. Fingers crossed!

[Migelito]

Originally Posted by 704g30

Good news maybe, I talked with Vic who does my coding and he said this is possible on my car. So when he does the rear fog light coding Monday night for my LCI tail lights he's going to do the VLD and antidazzle at the same time. Fingers crossed!

704, when you looked into your car with bimmercode, what obd adaptor have you used? Does it support G series?

[704g30]

Originally Posted by Migelito

704, when you looked into your car with bimmercode, what obd adaptor have you used? Does it support G series?

I have a Vgate vLinker MC Bluetooth. It does support G series, and I've done all of the other coding on my car with it without issues. The only coding I have not done was to update the car for the LCI tail lights, which I used Vic for.

[704g30]

As a follow up to this, while I wasn't able to figure it out on my own through Bimmercode, I was able to get Vic to program it in for me and it works perfectly.

[Blue Angel]

Nice!

[passta]

Looks like it is coming finally, in the recently passed Infrastructure bill.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/43146/...structure-bill

Originally Posted by Richard Tickner

My UK spec M5 has these functions and it's fantastic. I don't know why in the States your laws don't allow it? It's a safety function.

[rockyfeller]

Originally Posted by 704g30

Good news maybe, I talked with Vic who does my coding and he said this is possible on my car. So when he does the rear fog light coding Monday night for my LCI tail lights he's going to do the VLD and antidazzle at the same time. Fingers crossed!

Rear fog light coding is not necessary. What you actually need is hardware not software to get it to work.

It's all about the headlight switch. F10s have about 4 different possible variations of headlight switches.

M5s, as you know, don't have front fog lights. Therefore there is no control of any fog lights on the headlight switch on US cars.

Some cars, like the 535i/550i, have control for the front fog lights. (1 extra button)

Cars outside the US have variations of the switch has control for the rear fog lights as well. These are aka "Euro" spec headlight switches. So a euro M5 has 1 extra button for the rear fog lights. Other euro F10s that have front fog lights will have 2 extra buttons as pictured below. One button for the front fog light, another button for the rear.

You might be wondering, ok so is it plug and play? It is! It's all pre-wired and ready to go. No coding necessary. Another inexplicable thing we have been deprived of here in the US.

So all you have to do is get a switch on eBay, it's around $90-$300 (Chinese vs. OEM). If you're lucky you might land a used one for cheaper. The euro M5 one is hard to come by, the 2 button F10 is far more easier to find. The front fog light will be non-operational of course.

I haven't done this modification yet, but I will in the future.

[704g30]

Originally Posted by rockyfeller

Rear fog light coding is not necessary. What you actually need is hardware not software to get it to work.

It's all about the headlight switch. F10s have about 4 different possible variations of headlight switches.

M5s, as you know, don't have front fog lights. Therefore there is no control of any fog lights on the headlight switch on US cars.

Some cars, like the 535i/550i, have control for the front fog lights. (1 extra button)

Cars outside the US have variations of the switch has control for the rear fog lights as well. These are aka "Euro" spec headlight switches. So a euro M5 has 1 extra button for the rear fog lights. Other euro F10s that have front fog lights will have 2 extra buttons as pictured below. One button for the front fog light, another button for the rear.

You might be wondering, ok so is it plug and play? It is! It's all pre-wired and ready to go. No coding necessary. Another inexplicable thing we have been deprived of here in the US.

So all you have to do is get a switch on eBay, it's around $90-$300 (Chinese vs. OEM). If you're lucky you might land a used one for cheaper. The euro M5 one is hard to come by, the 2 button F10 is far more easier to find. The front fog light will be non-operational of course.

I haven't done this modification yet, but I will in the future.

I have the correct switch for my car, with the rear fog light button on it. There is coding that must be done otherwise you don't get the functionality of your inner brake lights on a G30 when using the fog lights.

[rockyfeller]

Oh ok I see, I forgot you have a G30. Yea, quite a bit is different when compared to the F generation.

[WordOnRoad]

Originally Posted by rockyfeller

Method 2:
If for some reason you don't see these parameters on expert mode for your car then try the following alternative method for coding :


Coding for 8S4 (VLD - works for both HID Xenons and LED adaptive lights):

Front Electronic Module > Expert Mode >

3073 LaMaster1 > LUT_FLC_FORWARDLIGHTING_Y > 9C,9C,9C (Both)

3073 LaMaster1 > C_AFS_ENA > Enable (Both)


Coding for 5AP (GFHB - works for LED adaptive lights ONLY):

Front Electronic Module > Expert Mode >

3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_ENA > Enable (Both)

3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_GRHB_ENA > Highway_Standby_AFS

3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_ADAPT_SHUT_ENA > Enable

Sorry to reboot this thread! I gave this a go last night on my 2015 F80 and got a little confused, so ended up just backing off until I got some clarification here.

Car has LEDs (5AC, 5AP, 8S4), but when I got into Expert Mode on Bimmercode, I had two options for each parameter and was not able to check both options as required per instructions above. Some values read 20, 25 or 30, so again, unsure on which to choose.


3073 LaMaster1 > LUT_FLC_FORWARDLIGHTING_Y > 9C,9C,9C (Both)

I had two options for F020_mit_AFS 0x9C 0x9C 0x9C, but could only choose one.

3073 LaMaster1 > C_AFS_ENA > Enable (Both)

This showed F020_enable and F030_enable.

3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_ENA > Enable (Both)

This showed F020_enable and F030_enable.

3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_GRHB_ENA > Highway_Standby_AFS
3073 LaMaster1 > C_HBA_ADAPT_SHUT_ENA > Enable

These were both fine and had one option to choose from.

Hoping for some insight from you coding gurus!