I'm going with the latter. I know that many cars with daytime running lights distract me and make the car itself harder to see. At the same time, I've wondered if that's because I'm more sensitive to light, possibly based on the fact that I have light-colored eyes. I also wonder if it has to do with the fact that to become apparent in the bright North Carolina sun, DRLs have to be quite bright to be seen at all.

Most of the statistics that promote them seem to be based on some flawed methodologies, like assuming the light level in Finland is like the light level in most of the US, or that a small percentage of cars on the road with DRLs will be similar to having a large percentage of cars with DRLs.

Anyway, what do the rest of you think?

I seem to remember that we have similarly sensitive eyes, based on your posts in the other thread about headlights. I have to agree with you on this one. I can't stand them either.

I'd have to say that I like how my dad's car works. If it gets darker, the sensors in his car will turn the lights on. I also think that DRLs do not help me see other cars better, so they are useless, but in lower-light situations, having headlights on are good, so I like the sensor approach. They are pretty sensitive too. If there is a good deal of cloud cover, the lights go on.

I always figured it was the work of the light-bulb companies.

Burning a high-beam filament (which you probably wouldn't have burned out anyway) at a lower voltage seems unlikely to make those companies much money.

Boon.

I have a Subaru Outback with DRLs, and I love them. I never forget to turn my lights off, since they shut off when I turn off my car, and when I need them, they are always there. I also like them on other cars, especially around dusk, when DRLs make cars more visible. This is especially true when it's raining, or in parking lots. It's a law in some states that when you have your windshield wipers on, you must have your headlights on. DRLs make the car more visible and provide assurances that you don't forget to turn your lights on. I almost ran into a truck the other night in a parking lot hat had forgotten to turn it's lights on.

My only beef with mine is that I cannot use the dimmer wire with my Empeg.

Other than making your car more visible during the day (which I don't believe for a minute), aren't all of those problems unrelated to having your lights on during the day? Dusk is not daytime, and raininess is an obvious exception.

I always figured it was the work of the light-bulb companies.

Some folks claim that it was the work of GM, who lobbied to change the NHTSA's stance (after several unsuccessful lobbies by the IIHS), and will now kindly sell you a kit to retrofit your older car with DRLs.

For the record, there's a highway near my home which is tagged as "daylight safety section" and there are signs stating that you're required to turn on your lights at all times on that road. I've heard of people getting ticketed for failing to heed the signs.

In the case of that particular stretch of road, I can understand it. It's rather dangerous. Narrow but high traffic, and traveled at high speeds. I think that tagging specific road sections makes more sense than requiring DRLs on all cars.

That's very interesting. Do you know if they're collecting statistics for the rate of accidents before and after that was enacted?

Personally, I can't imagine that it'll do any good. I find it hard to believe that people are not seeing large 3000-pound masses in the middle of the day and that, somehow, putting lights on them is going to help.

For the record, there's a highway near my home which is tagged as "daylight safety section" and there are signs stating that you're required to turn on your lights at all times on that road. I've heard of people getting ticketed for failing to heed the signs.

IIRC part of the Pacific Coast Highway as you're headed south toward Monterey is signed similarly/the same.

I have a Subaru Outback with DRLs, and I love them. I never forget to turn my lights off, since they shut off when I turn off my car

That isn't a feature exclusive to DRLs. This is also how my father's car works. When he pulls into the garage at night and turns off the car, the lights stay on for about 30 seconds so he can see around in the dark, then they go off. Plus they have the automatic-on feature when it is dim out.

Heck, my minivan doesn't have automatic lights or DRLs, and they turn off after about 10 seconds when the car is turned off.

So basically, I think those automatic lights are the best alternative. I don't see any need for lights being turned on in a sunny mid-day.

My Daytime running light have been disabled. I hate them. Makes it much more difficult to stalk people.

Anyone with a previous generation Saab 9-3, fuse #15 will kill your running lights and the annoying upshift light if you have a manual trans.

The problems I guess are not related to having your lights on during the day, but are related to DRLs as you are freed of the choice to turn your lights on or off.

Motorcycles always have their headlights on, what is the reasoning behind that if not to make the vehicle more visible?

Ahh. Blessed freedom from choice.

You may notice that motorcycles are much smaller, especially when viewed from the front.

I have a Subaru Outback with DRLs, and I love them. I never forget to turn my lights off, since they shut off when I turn off my car, and when I need them, they are always there. I also like them on other cars, especially around dusk, when DRLs make cars more visible.

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.

In my past I have taken a few track driving courses, and one of the things they teach you is if you are coming to an incident try not to look at it too much as your brain will naturally steer you where you are looking (the motorcyclist look 'through' the corner scenario).

Anyway when I see a car with DRL it tends to draw my attention to it, I would have seen it if it didn't have DRL, just now it is distracting me from cars without DRL, also as I am spending more time looking at it I am sure my brain will steer me towards it (or maybe that is just my evil side wanting to ram them to turn the DRL off )

Don't like 'em.
Although I do have them on my Golf, just haven't had the chance to fix it.

I think DRL are another reflection in society stooping to the LCD.
Let Darwin deal with the LCDs and let the rest of us exercise our grey matter.

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.

Ok, you've made me realize that I'm using mine in a different way than most. I don't use my DRLs, I use the feature of my car that lets me leave my lights on all the time, while shutting them off when I turn off the ignition. I leave my light switch switched to ON all the time. This means my taillights are on all the time, too.

Ahh. Blessed freedom from choice.

Yeah, it's great! BTW, I need someone to tell me what restaurant I should go to tonight. And my opinion about the food I will eat there. I'm so glad that Clear Channel has taken over most of the radio in my area, freeing me from the choice of what music I should listen to.

DRLs were an option on my car that I chose to have.

Anyway, what do the rest of you think?

Boon.

It's a false sense of security.

They're worse than that. They condition people to expect the lights to be on when the vehicle is moving, which tends to also create the inverse and incorrect assumption that if the lights are off, the vehicle is stationary, regardless of whether they can see it moving. I know someone from sweden whose 16-year old son was hit and nearly killed by a car he walked out in front of, which was doing about 25MPH with the lights out during the day. According to the driver, the boy looked right at him from fifty feet away and simply stepped off the curb.

The kid claimed with some irritation something along the lines of, "It's lights were out, I thought it was stopped." Apparently the fact that it was getting steadily bigger wasn't enough of a clue to override the conditioned response of ((lights on=moving) <> (lights off=stopped)).

Apparently this sort of thing isn't uncommon in countries that have daylight running lights as a standard.

pca

Boon.

I'm coming from a place where all new vehicles have had DRL for years. DRL on your own vehicle should be neither a positive nor a negative to your own driving behaviour when not factoring other drivers.

DRL on your own vehicle are not there to help you see. They're not lessen or remove your responsibility to turn on your hadlights at dusk and dawn or when it's raining or when going through a tunnel. They're there for other drivers during daylight hours. Let's assume everyone always remembers to turn on their lights when they're supposed to.

DRL, in my opinion, make a car far easier to see on the road. Where one car will blend into the background, one with DRL is instantly identified as 1. a car and as 2. a car that is in operation.

A split-second glance into any mirror will instantly pick up a pair of lights where the car itself may take a few more split seconds to register. I'll see that lights are present long before I'll identify what kind of car it is for instance. I'm not speaking about someone right next to me of course. Their biggest plus comes when checking mirrors - so we're talking about cars coming from behind. BUt I also find them useful for vehicles aproaching from the front.

What I do not like is the fact that because of DRL, some people will forget to turn on their lights in the evening. Some model's DRL light up enough that some poeple (retards I guess) think their lights are on. I wish the DRL principle was extended to include tail lights. Any time the vehicle is in operation, I believe the tail lights should be ON. Again, fr plain identificatoin at all times, but mostly because a large percentage of people do not turn on their lights during circumstances warranting it (fog, rain, snow, etc..)

That's my 2 cents on the matter. Now, I lso think DRL should be either the high-beams at low voltage or dedicated bulbs approximating the same look. I do NOT think they should be oange or yellow or amber corner markers like on some stinking US minivans. I also think all turn signal lenses should be amber with no exceptions and that turn signals should NEVER EVER be allowed to use the same bulb or reflector as a tail light.

Bruno

Many many typos. Absolutely no time.

Boon.


Uhhh, yeah. What HE said.

tanstaafl.

Pithy, the both of you.

I find it interesting that, so far, the people that like DRLs are from Alaska, Toronto, Washington State, and Ohio.

Those first three places are places I'd expect DRLs to actually be useful. I don't know so much about Ohio (I was in Canton once, I believe, but when I was, like, six), but it's not exactly in the Sun Belt.

The people that don't like them live in North Carolina, Virginia, Southern California, Texas, Massachusetts, Massachusetts, and the South of England. Okay, those last three don't fit, but the rest are pretty sunny.

I'm originally from Maine, but in Ohio I've found that the winters here are very dreary and gray. It seems like from late October to March, the sky is dark, with only a few days here and there with any amount of sun at all. In Maine every day was bright and sunny, even throughout the winter, except when it was going to snow or rain.

I've been to the Akron/Canton area, and it's a little different than central Ohio in that they have more hilly areas. Central Ohio is very flat and boring, while the northern and southern parts of the state have more varied terrain.

Boon as long as everyone else doesn't turn their lights on also.

I worked for an OSHA monitored company and some pointed haired safety guru decided anyone driving a company vehicle had to drive with their lights on. They even wired the car's lights to always on. This was in '90 before everyone was on the DRL bandwagon. The basic premise was to make you stand out so other people could see you because if they could see you they wouldn't hit you. Of course, they didn't figure in the fact that was in Southern Louisiana where the locals would chase you down to tell you that your lights were on. This initiative was quickly followed up with Safety Initiative #2 which was to plaster all the cars with large stickers that said "My Lights are on for Safety". Made you feel like you were in Taurus shaped "I'm with Stupid" t-shirt.

Patrick's story pegs it...as soon as it becomes common place, people begin to ignore them or worse.

I wasn't sure what you meant by DRL, so I looked it up.
Well, I didn't know there was a 'DJO Recreational League', nor that it was part of the 'Dark Jedi Organization'

what a strange place this is

The people that don't like them live in [...] Southern California

I live in SoCal, and I like 'em, though they're kinda pointless most of the time. (Of course, I learned to drive in SoOntario and Toronto.)

I agree with Bruno (including the point about color and need to have rear lights on, too). In Croatia we don't have DRL, but recommendation is to have your low beams (and so red rear lights too) on at all times. I find I see other cars emerging from the background much sooner if they have their lights on, even in bright sunlight (actually, especially when they are comming from the direction of low sun).

However, Patrick also has a point, too. Obviously, those lights should be automatic in order to avoid this kind of accidents.