Daytime Running Lights

GalwayKiefer

I always turn my lights on when I'm driving regardless of the time of day, whether in my jeep or on my bike. Anything can that make me more visible to other drivers is a plus, automatic drl are a great idea in my opinion - though the design of some mentioned here (on at the front and not the back) seems a bit stupid.

CiniO

robbie99 wrote: »

Lot's of good information here:

http://rsa.ie/Documents/Vehicle%20Std%20Leg/Consultations/Daytime%20Running%20Lights%20Consultation.pdf

Interesting article.
I actually read it all.

Every person who read's it, will be probably convinced, that DRL is a good thing. But is that right?
I think, that whole article (or consultation - whatever it's called) is intentionally written in that way.
I wouldn't trust the facts from it.
There's lots of statistics, but how can we know they are right?
Most of the statistics that were there, I can't deny, but also can't corraborate.

Only few thing's I knew before, and they are not correct in the article.

1. It states that additional fuel consumption with dedicated DRL is about 1% and with normal dipped headlights is 1.6%.
How is that possible? If you turn dipped headlights, you need at least 150W up to 200W of power. For dedicated DRL it's 40W or less. So difference in fuel consumption is much bigger between these two.

2. Cyclists and pedestrians. According to that consultation, because of car's use DRL they are safer. It was tested in many different countries - and that's not true. In the situation when all vehicles use DRL, cyclists and pedestrians will always be worse visible on the road (because drivers mind subconsciously will just be scanning only for lit objects).
And that will obviously cause more cyclists and pedestrians killed.
That was actually the reason, why Austria canceled the regulations for obligatory DRL, after less then 2 years them being obligatory.

3. That has actaully nothing to do with statistics, but it states (in the table within other countries) that Poland had obligatory DRL from October to February on outside-urban roads. The truth is, that DRL are obligatory at all time (since 2007). OK - before it was October to February, but it's been over two years since it changed. Also it never was only on outside-urban roads. It was always on all road. I know this is little mistake, but considering there is lot's of that kind of mistakes, the whole data from that consultation is not reliable to me at all.


Personally, I'm against making DRL obligatory, but I'm absolutely for Guards to start checking, enforcing, and penlising drivers for improper use of lights. (using fogs when there's no fog, not using dipped lights during rain, snow, late in the evening, in the tunnels, etc).

On a nice sunny day, using your lights doesn't really make any sense.

CiniO

GalKiefer wrote: »

- though the design of some mentioned here (on at the front and not the back) seems a bit stupid.

Why?

GalwayKiefer

CiniO wrote: »

Why?

I suppose its just in my head that if you are putting on lights to make your vehicle more visible, rather than to actually help you see where you're going, then do it with the lights front and rear.

Eric Cartman

GalKiefer wrote: »

I suppose its just in my head that if you are putting on lights to make your vehicle more visible, rather than to actually help you see where you're going, then do it with the lights front and rear.

the easiest method - pretend the DRL's arent there, if you need light turn on your dipped lights , if not, dont,

Cookie_Monster

Saruman wrote: »

Indeed, so many people think that lights are there to let you see when its dark. They are not, they are there so other people can see you coming. That is far more important.

I almost never even use my high beams as I can see perfectly with just my normal dipped headlights on (good night vision).

Any lights on will destroy your night vision, even a cigarette tip glow will.
Driving on unlit roads with no high beams is just stupid IMO

-Corkie-

opinion guy wrote: »

I like the Audi ones - particularly the A5 designs.
I also like the newer BMW ones - bright circles of light - pretty cool you can't really make out any bulb

I like the bmw and the opel ones are nice too. The A5 and the A8 are class looking but the A6 ones look tacky and aftermarket looking. I drive with my dipped headlights on all the time though.

CiniO

GalKiefer wrote: »

I suppose its just in my head that if you are putting on lights to make your vehicle more visible, rather than to actually help you see where you're going, then do it with the lights front and rear.

Tail lights don't make your vehicle visible any more then without them, during the good weather during the day. That's why there's no point for the to be lit.
Whenever it get's darker, or weather get's worse, you are supposed to turn on your dipped lights, and this turns your tail lights on automatically.

Sofiztikated

Wow. Just wow.

Op, you complain about cars not having lights visible on the back, so you want to have the lights on the front turned off? I really don't get that argument at all!

They don't have them on the back (I would imagine) because that side of the car is going away from you. Its not so much a danger. The front of the car, which is coming towards you needs the extra light to warn you of an incoming vehicle.

Back, going away. Front, coming towards.

The first thing I do when I get into my car, is stick my low beams on. Sunshine, rain, snow, whatever. If it gives other people an indication that I am there, happy days. It also lights my way, should I happen to enter a dark area, due to shadow. Does it put an extra load on my car? Yes. Do I care? Nope. They are consumables. If that was the case, I wouldn't brake, in case I wore out my brake pads, I wouldn't use my window pishers, in case I used up the washer fluid.

Gah, this country annoys me. (Secondary rant, I was parking a car for someone the other day, an 08 5 series. The engine management light was on. The onboard computer was worried because there were no brake pads. The pisher bottle was empty. And when I got out, I checked, the tyres on the back, wires coming through, and the front tyres were down to minimal thread. But the car was polished. God, you have to have a shiny car.)

Merch

Carson10 wrote: »

whats next automatic brakes incase the driver thinks they dont need to brake??

I'm sure i've seen that on top gear, I've definitely seen it, just not sure what programme, think it was a Merc with auto brakes in case you get too close too quickly

CiniO wrote: »

Any difference to DRL? Huge!!!
Side lights (front) are barely visible to others.
By turning on your sidelights, you turn on front 2 sidelights, 2 rear taillights, numberplate lights, and dashboards lights. All this can consume up to 100W of power. And pretty much this power goes nowhere, because no one can really see you better if you have your sidelights, in comparision to situation you wouldn't have any lights at all.

What stops you to turn on you dipped headlights? At least you would be seen then.

PS. During the day in good weather noone need your tail lights, numberplate lights. You also don't need you dashboards lights.

By side lights (front) I assume you mean parking lights? mine light up the whole lens albeit at 5watts each

I'd be happy if people ran with side/parking lights on rather than nothing in dull/rainy weather
As for penalising, I wouldn't be for it, wouldn't be enforced,
I would go for enforcing switching off fogs when they are not needed, particularily front fogs.
Asked a guy I knew that drove with them on, why do you have them on?
He says he thinks it looks cool! wtf??

opinion guy

-Corkie- wrote: »

I like the bmw and the opel ones are nice too. The A5 and the A8 are class looking but the A6 ones look tacky and aftermarket looking. I drive with my dipped headlights on all the time though.

Ah I' haven't noticed that A6 ones but I have seen some that look aftermarket - maybe those are A6. Was up North today saw soooo many nice audis. Couple of mizuno red S4's an S5 and even an RS8 (white)!!:D

I park undergounrd so i need to turn my lights on to even get on the road regardless of the weather. I usually just leave them on if its in anyway dull out

pajero12

Merch wrote: »

I'm sure i've seen that on top gear, I've definitely seen it, just not sure what programme, think it was a Merc with auto brakes in case you get too close too quickly

Yeah there is such a thing.It's called adaptive cruise control! Volvo are still working out the bugs though
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNi17YLnZpg

Merch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nNf1ceiJZc

This is the one I was thinking of
but
its been a while since I saw it, however when tested it worked, I think it was 5th gear and the presenter might have been Tom Ford or the other guy that kinda looks like him

GTE

Carson10 wrote: »

Does anyone else find the daytime running lights on most new cars both stupid looking and dangerous? I've lost count of the number of new cars like golfs, polos Audis and the new astra driving in heavy rain on a dark day or dusk time with dipped headlights on and no tail lights at all on the back. Surely this is a road safety issue.

The problem is, when you start up these new cars the dash lights up as if you have your lights turned on.

I know when i get my new golf next year iam making the dealer switch off the automatic lights.

Whether they are stupid looking or not doesnt really matter. They are a safety feature and soon will be a manditory one so we will have to live with it.

Dangerous? It sounds like your complaint is about people who dont know how to operate their cars and your solution is getting rid of the lights are are switched on.

For all the hate threads we have about Fog lights and about how they should only be used in the fog lets use the same logic for DRL's. Daytime only.

Any driver should be able to realise when standard lighing is needed for the front and rear, cant you?

By side lights (front) I assume you mean parking lights? mine light up the whole lens albeit at 5watts each

Indeed but even one good LED puts out at least nearly as much light as a standard 5 watt bulb.
There can be no question that a group of 12 directional LED's do a much better job at getting your car noticed by pedestrians and other motorists then standard 5 watt bulbs which as you sayyourself, fill up the whole light in your car but to be fair in others that may not be the case.

Merch

bbk wrote: »

Whether they are stupid looking or not doesnt really matter. They are a safety feature and soon will be a manditory one so we will have to live with it.

For all the hate threads we have about Fog lights and about how they should only be used in the fog lets use the same logic for DRL's. Daytime only.

Any driver should be able to realise when standard lighing is needed for the front and rear, cant you?


Indeed but even one good LED puts out at least nearly as much light as a standard 5 watt bulb.
There can be no question that a group of 12 directional LED's do a much better job at getting your car noticed by pedestrians and other motorists then standard 5 watt bulbs which as you sayyourself, fill up the whole light in your car but to be fair in others that may not be the case.

I'd prefer LED's myself, partly because of their lower power consumption and because they should last longer, but to save the confusion for those that might not able to discern the difference when front and rear should be on, I think I'd be ok with a few red LED's at the back/side clusters too (that are obviously differant to the brake lights)
or possibly a green light (LED) on the dash for dipped beams, like my old renault/previous poster has mentioned. I was used to it (first car) and kinda missed the obvious indication for a while when the car was first replaced.I still think that some dipped lights are very bright even during the day, thats why when it's normal summer day or even slightly dull I usually drive with my parking lights, (as the light fills my whole lens) plus back lights are on, if its rainy or duller than above, then dips.

GTE

Merch wrote: »

I'd prefer LED's myself, partly because of their lower power consumption and because they should last longer, but to save the confusion for those that might not able to discern the difference when front and rear should be on, I think I'd be ok with a few red LED's at the back/side clusters too (that are obviously differant to the brake lights)
or possibly a green light (LED) on the dash for dipped beams, like my old renault/previous poster has mentioned. I was used to it (first car) and kinda missed the obvious indication for a while when the car was first replaced.I still think that some dipped lights are very bright even during the day, thats why when it's normal summer day or even slightly dull I usually drive with my parking lights, (as the light fills my whole lens) plus back lights are on, if its rainy or duller than above, then dips.

Yes, I like the idea of having some rear lighting on as well as the front DRL's however I still think its an issue of drivers not knowing how their car works that leads to this. Though with my DRL setup I need to have the front and rear parking lights on since that is the only time I can use the front fog switch for the DRL's. With regards to front parking lights in general having them on like you do is well intentioned but in a lot of cars they do feck all.

Dipped lights that blind you in the daylight would be awful in the night. Alignment and level settings, another thing not many know how to use.

Mc Love

Think i read somewhere before that fog lights can be used as DRL's (as in parts of canada) - surely the same could applied here as we hardly ever use them. And plus the fact that on most cars that have them fitted seem to drive around with them on, even though afaik you have to switch your fogs on.

Are there any cars where fogs are switched on with the other lights? If not, then why do people turn them on when there is no fog?.....did i just open a can of worms?

CiniO

Mc Love wrote: »

Think i read somewhere before that fog lights can be used as DRL's (as in parts of canada) - surely the same could applied here as we hardly ever use them. And plus the fact that on most cars that have them fitted seem to drive around with them on, even though afaik you have to switch your fogs on.

But can you explain why would anyone want to do it?
Just any pros of using fog lights instead of dipped head lights as DRL.
Because I can't see a single one.

Alanstrainor

Mc Love wrote: »

.....did i just open a can of worms?

You did. And i'll close it now.