Satan has been cast out of my car!

Definitely the work of Satan - they're not up there along with the people who use full beam and foglights in the day and no lights in fog or at dusk, but they're scummy.

I never use mine on my Subaru - they are dim, they stay on when the key is removed, thus draining the battery, and they serve no purpose. In fact I reckon that sometimes lights increase my invisibility factor!

Training is the way forwards - as mentioned a wee bit back in this thread, if a car is getting bigger, it is moving closer (or I guess it could be getting bigger, but that is awfully unlikely, so we'll go with Occam on this one) so deal with it.

Volvos and Saabs may well have a good reason for running lights in countries well up near the Arctic circle, but they are just a pain in the neck at all other times.

Uhhh, yeah. What HE said.

I was going to shock the world by sticking with a one-word answer, but I just thought of some other drivel on the subject and I don't think I can contain myself.

In the late 60s and early 70s in my neighborhood, some people dropped big Chevy V8s into small Chevys (Novas / Chevy IIs) and then removed every piece of chrome and painted the whole shebang with flat-black primer. They installed a cut-out switch on the license plate light and then dressed in black leathers and *really* pointy black leather boots. These people were referred to as The Rats, and the low-visibility Novas were intended to at least convey the impression that the owner was completely at ease with a routine that consisted of breaking into pharmacies to steal narcotics and then escaping into the night.

It is my studied opinion that all people who remove their DRL modules are expressing the primal Rat Urge -- are struggling to free the Gangsta Within. Their subsequent installation of cut-out switches and the many reported late-night escapes from sushi bars only confirm this.

On a marginally related topic, I must further inflate by posting my recent missive to Click and Clack:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: [email protected]
Subject: Whatsa behind? No matta!

Guys,

The caller Kathie from Kirkland, WA called supposedly to settle a beef with her boyfried about flashing lights to pass.

This was a little disingenuous. What "Kathie" failed to disclose is that she lives in the Washington-Oregon No-Pass Zone where student drivers are whipped with 21-inch premium wiper blades if they so much as *glance* into their rear-view mirror during their instruction. Local preachers exhort their congregations to move to the left-most lane and set their cruise controls exactly to the speed limit so that none of us heathens will be allowed to sin by exceeding it! "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs are exposed for what they really are -- exhortations to sin from heathen, secular humanist government officials!

So, what Kathie failed to mention if that her boyfriend is currently serving time in Walla Walla for the crime of trying to *not* pass on the right and for trying to get another driver's attention. In his defense, he *tried* to stay at a reasonable distance, but the left-lane hugger in front of him just *assumed* that meant that he didn't want to pass. So, he crept closer, even flashed his lights... Sorry, that qualifies for 1 day in the stocks and 6 months-to-life in this state!

So, most people here wouldn't last a minute in a country where drivers actually pay some attention. No matter, though, all those Europeans are going to Hell, aren't they?
--
-*- Jim Hogan
Seattle, WA

Oh, and Bruno, good work on the subject. Agree completely.

I'm sorry, but I have yet to see a statement that rings true in the situation of bright sunlight. I don't know if you people up north know what kind of bright, sunny days we're talking about , but I think that DRLs become more dangerous in this bright sunlight.

I suppose your answers will be opposite to this anyway. I still believe that headlights do not help your visibility, and that I have absolutely no trouble recognizing a car without lights. I also maintain that the optimum solution is automatic headlights, but nobody has commented on that anyway, so I'll let it go.

Now, I lso think DRL should be either the high-beams at low voltage...

I'm sorry, what??

Having never noticed DRLs in bright and sunny Texas, one of three things must be true:

1. People in Texas don't have them.

2. People in Texas have them, but they don't make cars any more visible (as I would have seen them).

3. People in Texas have them and they make cars more visible, but I'm not a very observant driver (which I don’t think is the case, but who thinks they’re unobservant?).

Unfortunately, I really cannot comment much beyond the above.

I don't know if you people up north know what kind of bright, sunny days we're talking about

At least twice a year (like today!) it is really bright here!

, but I think that DRLs become more dangerous in this bright sunlight.

I don't get it. I have never been blinded or distracted by DRLs or daytime headlights whether in gray Seattle or in Mexico at high noon. I *really* don't get it.

I suppose your answers will be opposite to this anyway.

Of course (doing the work of Beelzebub as always!!).

Our weekend provided part of the various DRL cases-in-point. Conditions ranged from really bright (Eastern) Washington sunshine to sudden charcoal-grey thunderstorm conditions (that created all the swell new water hazards). On fast transits on 2-lane highways, I was happy to see DRLs oncoming, whether in the shimmer of hot blacktop or the dull murk of thundercloud overcast. It is my opinion (backed up by nonexistant research!) that "lights-on-for-safety" / DRLs help to moderate FPB (Fatal Passing Behavior) -- make it clearer, *earlier* that you have oncoming so you can pause to reflect on rate-of-close issues...

The thing is, I'm sure that for some people (you), they work for noticing other cars better.

However, for some people they are distracting. My eyes seriously don't like the lights coming at me, mainly on bright days.

There are other drivers who panick when they get too much light. I can honestly say without the shadow of a doubt that the sun, and the sun alone, causes my morning commute to be 20 minutes longer than it should/could be. I'm certain that if all the oncoming traffic also had lights on, it would be even worse and possibly confusing to these people who refuse to wear sunglasses or put their visors down.

There is another possible reason that I don't like DRLs, and that may be that I'm not seeing DRLs at all. It is possible that most of the time I see lights on, they are regular headlights. I gather from what people have said here, that DRLs are dimmer than normal headlights.

Anyway, I think it's a subjective thing, so we're not going to agree on it I just hope it doesn't become a law or anything, because I'll have to stop driving when it's bright out

There is another possible reason that I don't like DRLs, and that may be that I'm not seeing DRLs at all. It is possible that most of the time I see lights on, they are regular headlights. I gather from what people have said here, that DRLs are dimmer than normal headlights.

That's one problem. Until very recently, the intensity of DRLs was not really regulated, so some manufacturers chose to use their high beams at full strength as DRLs. New legislation should help that, though. That might be all that's needed, really, but that still means that we'll have to deal with those cars for years. It's not like anyone even aligns their headlights anymore, much less would think to actually spend money on making their headlights less annoying to other drivers.

It's not like anyone even aligns their headlights anymore, much less would think to actually spend money on making their headlights less annoying to other drivers.

Quite right, thus bringing us back to the other thread

On a marginally related topic, I must further inflate by posting my recent missive to Click and Clack:


Either great minds think alike, or we're both ready for the looney bin, Jim... I suspect we both responded to the same Car Talk episode. Here was my response:

April 23, 2003

YOU'RE the rude, illegal moron, Tommy.

For your information, it is illegal to even BE in the left lane unless you are overtaking another car. It is hard to imagine ruder behavior than that exhibited by the moron who parks himself in the left lane, matching his speed perfectly with the car to his right, holding up every car behind him who might wish to travel faster than what he considers to be a reasonable speed.

"Oh, I'm going the speed limit, so I don't have to get out of the way" he says. Well, when he gets a nice police car with flashing lights, and a badge to go with it, then he'll be entitled to enforce the law. Until then, it isn't his job and all he's doing is creating road rage and causing dangerous traffic congestion wherever he drives.

On the very rare occasions when I have been inattentive enough that someone had to use the right-hand lane to go by me, I have been mortified with embarassment that I could have done such a poor job of paying attention to what's going on around me.

Now, I'll concede that if both lanes are filled and there is no easy way to pull over, and especially if there is another car directly in front of the left-lane bandit so that he couldn't increase his speed even if he wanted to -- then there is no reason to flash at him, and no excuse for doing so.

But in general, if you're gonna run with the Big Dogs in the fast lane, then by God you damn well better RUN with them.

Doug Burnside




I've often wondered whether complaining to the police, asking them to write tickets to people going too slow [in the left lane] as well as to people going too fast would accomplish anything. Probably not...

tanstaafl.

And you were both responding to a re-run of a pretty old episode.

And you were both responding to a re-run of a pretty old episode.

I thought that might be the case, but I was so incited that I figured if they are going to run horseshit twice, they need to be reflamed. I send Tom & Ray encouraging notes about once a year and hate mail about once every 6 months!

I like your e-mail better. More direct! I love the boys, but Tom (in particular) has this habit of talking out his butt on some serious issues.

I've often wondered whether complaining to the police, asking them to write tickets to people going too slow [in the left lane] as well as to people going too fast would accomplish anything. Probably not...

The bad situation here is complicated by bad traffic engineering -- left-hand exits. I doubt the State Patrol will ever get excited about it given that most of the left hand campers have their cruise controls set to the speed limit +/- 1 MPH. What legitimate need could I claim to pass them? I would (shock!!) be breaking the legal speed limit. Also given the tendency of everyone to slow to a crawl when a patrol car is spotted, the only way to catch someone would be with an unmarked car, I think...and then only egregious violators running below the speed limit. Cops, I think, spend time thinking about whether a particular ticket is a loser, court appearance-wise. STKR violations would be a bad bet.

But, DRL only make sense if they are mandatory (and, preferably, automatic); otherwise, if only most drivers use them, those who don't become kind of invisible (and so dangerous for themselves and others).

If DRL are hurting your eyes in broad daylight, then there's something clearly wrong with them. As I said, we use regular low beams here, and they seem (to me) to be just brigh enough to make car visible sooner, and not bright enough to be annoying or distracting.

My estimate is that I notice the incomming car with low beems on at 1.5 to 3 times greater distance than the one without, depending on direction and quality of ambient light, car colour, background etc. The similar is true for that Porshe comming from behind at 200+ km/h on highway.

BTW, headlight alignment check (together with brakes, steering and exhaust) is a part of mandatory annual test every car must pass here in order to renew its 'roadworthiness' license.

But, DRL only make sense if they are mandatory (and, preferably, automatic)

OK, I've mentioned automatic lights, but you're the only other person who has mentioned them. What is your definition?

If DRL are hurting your eyes in broad daylight, then there's something clearly wrong with them. As I said, we use regular low beams here, and they seem (to me) to be just brigh enough to make car visible sooner

OK, that's fine with me, as long as they aren't as bright as what I've seen. And Bruno, I must strongly disagree that it is a good idea to make DRLs use high beams at any intensity. That's just insane to me.

I still think it would not be good to make them mandatory.

BTW, headlight alignment check (together with brakes, steering and exhaust) is a part of mandatory annual test every car must pass here in order to renew its 'roadworthiness' license.

As it is here, but inspectors are remarkably lazy, trying to push as many cars through the system as fast as they can in order to make more money. They can't charge more for better service because the total fee is government mandated. So I try to keep my headlights aligned myself. Judging by the cars on the road, most people don't.

OK, I've mentioned automatic lights, but you're the only other person who has mentioned them. What is your definition?

Simple (and probably different than your definition ), as in Volvos made for domestic market: DRL turn on when you turn the engine on.

OK, that's fine with me, as long as they aren't as bright as what I've seen. And Bruno, I must strongly disagree that it is a good idea to make DRLs use high beams at any intensity. That's just insane to me.

Regular low beams or a bit stronger 'position' corner lights seem better, I agree.

I still think it would not be good to make them mandatory.

Again, if you cannot count on incomming traffic being made more visible by using the lights, you loose half the purpose. I had several, well, not exactly close calls, but unpleasant surprises when starting to overtake a car in front of me after letting ten incomming ones pass (all with their lights on), only to have eleventh one, grey, dirty and without lights emerge suddenly from haze and backdrop of tarmac.

Why it it would be bad idea to make the lights mandatory? What could possibly be gained by not using them when most of other drivers do?

As it is here, but inspectors are remarkably lazy, trying to push as many cars through the system as fast as they can in order to make more money. They can't charge more for better service because the total fee is government mandated. So I try to keep my headlights aligned myself. Judging by the cars on the road, most people don't.

Heh, good, old economic incentive! Here the inspection is done in licensed shops that are also equiped to fix whatever is wrong, so they have incentive to find a fault and charge you for fixing it quickly.

Yeah, the shops here are licensed too, but I don't think that the government really clamps down on it too much, except for one every five years or so when most of the shops lose their licenses and then get them back a few months later.

It's encouraged here for people to take inspection faults to a different shop for repair so that inspectors can't make up faults and charge you money for making an imaginary repair. In fact, it might be the law that a shop that performs an inspection isn't allowed to make those repairs, but I could be wrong about that.

Yeah, the shops here are licensed too, but I don't think that the government really clamps down on it too much,....

Ah, and the joy of 1 country, 51 governments. I *think* I remember Washington inspecting my brand-new GTI when I moved here in 1988, but then they completely ignored it for the next 13 years save for biannual emissions tests (mandatory in *some* counties). The wheels could have fallen off... I think the only real "safety inspections" here are when the State Patrol pulls over a heap with missing headlights...

Yeah, some places have different inspection standards. VA, however, has them every year. However, I don't think headlight alignment is really part of it. They probably adjust them if they're off by a lot.

VA, however, has them every year.

Yeah, I grew up in Massachusetts and we had 'em every year IIRC (at least when I was younger) including headlight test/adjustment. I was amazed when I moved to WA. Nada. Oh, I guess it *is* the Wild West, after all.

I don't know if you people up north know what kind of bright, sunny days we're talking about , but I think that DRLs become more dangerous in this bright sunlight.

I don't know what kind of bright sunny days you're talking about, but when I'm driving on Highway 84 through nowhereville NM, and I need to pass a semi going 45 in a 65, I find that it's much easier to see a vehicle that's 1/4 mile down the road or so when they have DRLs. When it's the middle of the day and the heat rising off the road distorts one's vision a ways down, making out the shape of a car can be extremely difficult. But seeing the DRLs eliminates all question as to whether or not I'm going to cause a head-on by passing. I find myself in that scenario quite a lot in the back highways of New Mexico and I've noted to myself many times how the DRLs have been beneficial; but of course, that scenario is a very specific one. And those particular driving conditions are the only conditions that I have noticed the benefit of DRLs in.

I've also never noticed DRLs being too bright during the day. Even if someone was shining their high beams directly at me in the oncoming lane - there's no way it could ever be brighter than the sun shining directly in my face. I find that I'm often much more distracted by sunlight reflecting off of some freshly polished chrome or off a windshield.

- trs

When it's the middle of the day and the heat rising off the road distorts one's vision a ways down

Then that would be a different kind of bright, sunny day

But I know what you mean.

Just thought you guys might like to see the National Motorists Association's stance on this:

http://www.motorists.org/issues/drl/index.html

I pretty much agree with them. For those of you wondering why we think they are dangerous it has nothing to do with them being too bright. I seem to remember reading in popular science a few years back how the military was trying to make their planes invisable to the eye (since they were pushing the limits of radar stealth) and one of the ways they were looking at was, for daytime flying, big bright lights on the front and underside of the plane. So what we are really looking at here is more of a contrast ratio. In the brighter locations (such as sunny florida where i live) DRLs tend to make a car LESS visible because it brings the brightness of the car up to the level of the surounding ambiant light. on the other hand darker vehicals are easier to see because they are darker than everything else. So what is needed is for the controle to be in the driver and they need to be able to judge whether or not they would be most visible at a particular moment with their lights on or off. The problem is most drivers are not properly trained in how to do this (same as the people who cruise in the left lane) and so you have people running around in low light conditions with no lights on (you also have people running around in high light conditions with their lights on thinking it makes them more visible).

In reply to:

---

You've just alluded to the reason why I think that they are crap. People rely on DRL when they really should turn on their lights. Ok, so DRL may help an oncoming vehicle see you, or for a pedestrian to see that you are coming. But they wont do anything for the car that's speeding behind you in the rain. DRL are front facing only. I also have a suspicion that people would be more likely to turn on their lights earlier if they didn't have DRL.

It's a false sense of security.

---

Genixia, I agree with you 100% here. I HATE when it's raining so hard during the day where everyone should have their lights on but all of the DRL people just blindly drive on (and some non-DRL peeps too I admit). It really causes a lot of problems for people driving behind them.

I also HATE the way Subaru WRX's look (my body style at least) with just the top lights on and the bottom fogs off. I've disabled my Subby's DRL's (a very very easy thing to do and 100% reversable). For some reason, our cars automatically turn the lights off (even when in the "On" position) when the ignition is off. So I can leave my lights turned to "on" all the time and let the ignition turn them off when the car is off. A lot safer that way.