day time lights

Page 9 of 11  


The only problem with your reasoning in this case Larry, is that it all revolves around your preferences. It's a case built upon the premise that if something bothers me, then others should not do it. That's what is commonly called an attitude of "it's all about me". One might counter your position with the question - why does this bother you so much?
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No sir, it is all about you. You want so much to do whatever you want to, you could care less what impact it has on anyone. The only moral you follow is to "get yours" and everyone else can fall of a cliff.
What you haven't realized is that this discussion is not about what people think is cool or what they prefer. It is about safety and common courtesy in the impact that your actions have on others. Before DRLs, no one had this kind of issue, but since then we have issues. The answer is to be kind to other drivers and stop causing issues because you so want to think you are safe. Well sir, you are just creating issues for others, whether you want to believe it or not.
The mere fact that you continue to go round robin on this points to the fact that you know that you are in the wrong for being so selfish in making sure that your lights shine in the eyes of others that you have to beat down everyone that might complain. You are the one who should be ashamed, a person with lights on is adding to the visual pollution to another driver, but a person without lights on is not having a similar impact. You are the one trying to inflict your desires on others, not me.
Get real and stop discussing this, as I will have to keep reminding you as to how self centered you truly are.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Here's the difficult part about you Larry. I have told you repeatedly that I don't care one way or the other about DRL's. It's not about me at all. I'm fine letting people do what they feel is best. It is people like you who get so upset over others doing what they don't like. As you can easily see by re-reading this thread Larry - the only getting upset because the world is not marching to his drum is you. 80 Knight and I do not agree with your position, have called your contrived reasoning when you've posted it, and you're just fit to be tied. Yeah Larry - it's all about you.

You need to make that point to the advocates of DRL's Larry. You are so blinded by your own zealous mission that you don't even realize that I am not an advocate of DRL's.

No - I simply told you how lame your made up little claims were. Admit it Larry - you're just upset because we didn't fawn all over your ideas.

Admit it Larry - by continuing your little crusade, it is you who is contributing to the polution of the internet and the wasting of precious electrons with your every post.

First you have to successfully do so Larry, before you can use the word "continue". So far, you've only succeeded in proving how poorly you debate.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mike,
I do realize fully that you could care less about all of this. I remember that from the first time you posted on the subject. That makes this most puzzling as to why you have such a bleeding hear for all of this. It isn't my fault that you joined back in or that Knight had to put his foot in his mouth. It is yours and Knights attacks that have fueled the negativity on this thread. You can keep badmouthing me, but I don't care :).
Now onto what will be the final responses, unless you have something relevant to say:
A reminder: This thread is a discussion of the pro, cons or indifference towards daytime running lights.
Your comment is a personal attack and will not be addressed. If you would like to carry out an intellectual discussion on the actual topic, feel free. Any future personal attacks will be thoroughly ignored.
Thanks for your time and God bless
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As well Larry - this will be my final comment on this thread. Please note your very words above. I will quote them here for you...
"A reminder: This thread is a discussion of the pro, cons or indifference towards daytime running lights."
I chose the "indifference" position which resulted in continued accusations and attacks from you. Please note that I've never attacked you Larry. I've only pointed out where you are doing the things you accuse others of, and where your reasoning have been contrived and weak.
It has been a bit fun toying with your position on this matter Larry. You've proven repeatedly by your own contradictions and your own dancing on the topic that you are really only here for the purpose of stirring up crap. That's fine - it's usenet and that stuff happens from time to time. I elected to play with you for a while since you clearly had no other purpose here other than to stir things up. Now, I'm tired of the game and I'm happy to let you go away frustrated.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mike,
I remember your indifference position, it made it all the more puzzling that you would carry out such tactics on something you don't care about. Thanks for telling me that you were playing around, I knew that. I don't see the point of toying with people and stirring them up, I wish you had not done that. I called you on it a long while back, but you kept acting as if you were trying to contribute. Please don't do that to people it is very irritating (but alas, no one is perfect, I know that I am not).
Cheers and have a great day,
Larry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Larry - please try to keep up. I never stated or even suggested I was trying to contribute. I simply rebutted your claims when they were contrived and weak. As well, I pointed out behaviors of your own that were abominations you accused others of. One might even argue that I was contributing by calling you on inadequately supported claims.
So - you want a contribution? A real contribution? Fine. Please state the vehicles that use full power high beams for DRL's in the US. You have made numerous mentions of blinding light from full power high beam DRL's and I've never encountered any such vehicle. I'm curious what the list of vehicles equipped this way is, according to you.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Fine, you have already acknowledged that you were just playing with me. However you said that you were done posting, correct?

I never referenced any DRLs that use "full power" high beams. The list would be empty, there aren't any. You have mistaken the high beam implementation for being "full power", that is not the case.
The glare is worse from high beam positions, even at reduced power. This is due to the lights being focused down the road and into the other drivers eyes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
THIS thread started with a question can I hook up the DRL on my 96 Buick.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on Tuesday 04 September 2007 05:34 pm, someone posing as Tim took a rock and etched into the cave:

Oh, is that all?
Heck, after running for the past five days with no power in the house I can tell you what to do.
Go down to your local autoparts store and buy one of those flashlights that plug into your cigarette lighter. (I don't know why they include those things anymore...)
Then go down to your local hardware store and buy some duct tape.
You strap the flashlight to the hood of your car/truck and have it go on when the engine is running.
Instant daytime running light.
--
www.perfectreign.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Radio off would save fuel.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And you can go to a home store and buy a generator.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You might search the Congressional Record for the result of the test conducted for the US Senate
Vehicles passing on two lane roads is listed as just one of the reasons why the engineers, from several Universities that did the research for the US Senate, determined DRLs can be DANGEROUS.
The majority of drivers are accustomed to seeing headlamps, not the less dimly lit DRLs, and in that situation they tend to perceive the DRLs a headlamps and thus judge the distance between their vehicle and the approaching vehicle as being far greater than it actually is, leading to a head-on collision.
Every state requires the use of headlamps during times of limited vision and it is common around here in Pennsylvania to see the State Police stopping Canadian drivers traveling I-81, relying on only DRLs, when they should be using headlamps such as at dusk or in fog.
mike

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I do recall many years ago being taught never to use the parking lights at any time for the reason you cited. Wasn't that also on reason they went from a clear bulb to an amber to avoid the confusion?

Good for PA. I've never seen a car pulled over for lack of lights in foul weather. Still a huge number of vehicles with no lights at all in the rain. My Buick turns the headlights on when you turn the wipers on so you can't forget.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on Tuesday 28 August 2007 10:55 pm, someone posing as Larfx took a rock and etched into the cave:

Mine be amber!
http://www.perfectreign.com/files/images/av_ambers_800x600_0.jpg
I personally really like DRLs. They help out a lot in attracting attention to others.
--
www.perfectreign.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
From http://www.nordicgroup.us/drl /
What's bad about DRLs? 1. You lose critical traffic signaling methods. Flashing your headlights is a) the accepted signal to a trucker that it is safe to change lanes b) a signal to alert drivers that have forgotten to turn on their headlights c) a signal at a 4-way stop or in a parking lot to let the other driver go first d) a signal to other vehicles that you are traveling with that you need to stop.
2.You can't turn off your lights when a) they are glaring into another vehicle b) they are shining into a house at the end of a cul-de-sac or tee intersection c) they are shining at a pedestrian. d) You are sitting with the engine running on the side of the road, in someone's driveway, etc. e) you want to be able to see outside your side windows.
3. There are places where you need to drive with only your parking lights, i.e. drive-in movie parking lots, astronomical gatherings, military bases, etc.
4. Drivers with DRLs often forget to turn on their low beam headlights in rain or fog and at dusk or dawn. This is especially dangerous because the taillights do not come on until the low beams are turned on. Many drivers believe that in rain or fog the DRLs are sufficient and fail to turn on their low beams to activate their tail lights. When it is dark, the lack of dashboard lights is an indicator that the low beams and tail lights are not on, but in daytime conditions where the low beams should be used there is no indication that the DRLs, not the lowbeams, are on.
5. They make your bulbs wear out a little faster; not a big deal if they really provided a safety advantage.
6. They decrease your gas mileage slightly. See: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/dearmfr/cd9402.pdf . The decrease in mileage due to the increased load on the alternator is very small, but it is still measurable. One one of the biggest proponents of DRLs, GM, asked for and received permission to disconnect DRLs when doing tests for their fuel economy ratings.
7. They annoy other drivers. This is a biggie. "In 1998, after receiving hundreds of complaints, NHTSA acknowledged that the intensity limits were too high and proposed reductions in DRL intensity. NHTSA cited a study by Kirkpatrick, et. al. (1989), that said that at 2000cd, the glare from DRLs was rated at no worse than "just unacceptable" in 80% of the responses. At 4000cd, the glare was rated no worse than "disturbing" in 80% of the responses. These subjective ratings are based on the DeBoer scale. Corresponding to these ratings, they found that at 4000cd the probability that the rearview mirror would be dimmed was about 70%. At 2000cd the dimming probability was 40%. At 1000cd, the dimming probability dropped to 10%." The NHTSA has now proposed that the European standard for DRL brightness be adopted. Expect the automakers to oppose this since it would add cost to do DRLs properly.
8. The people in favor of DRLs are so dimwitted and have such weak positions that DRLs must really be bad. Yeah, no one should be against something just because some really stupid people are in favor of it, but doesn't it make you uneasy to support something when someone else is supporting the same thing based on inaccurate and misleading "data?" In California, the way the majority of voters determine how to vote on ballot measures is by looking at the groups and people that support and/or oppose the measure, because it's very difficult for a layman to figure out what the ballot measure really means when each side is claiming that it will be better for the children if it passes or fails.
What's good about DRLs? 1. They are proven to reduce head-on collisions on two lane roads, especially at dawn and dusk. This is what they were designed to do, and if they were implemented just to do this then you wouldn't see much opposition to them. You often see signs on roads in California proclaiming "Daylight Safety Test Section -- Turn on Headlights." These are the places where DRLs would be useful. Sadly, instead of coming up with a way to use DRLs only when appropriate, certain parties would like them to be on all the time. Why? Money. It's cheaper to implement a lame system than a well-designed system.
2. They counteract the lack of common sense of dimwitted drivers that fail to turn on their headlights when it's foggy, rainy, or dark. Of course this is only a positive because these drivers are not doing the proper thing and turning on their headlights AND taillights. If the presence of DRLs causes drivers, who would normally turn on their regular lights in these conditions, to not turn on their regular lights, then this is a negative. A better solution to this problem would be sensors that trigger a warning to the driver to turn on their lights.
3. Some of the cars bought by the worst drivers come with DRLs, i.e. Saturns and Volvos. Thus the presence of a DRL equipped vehicle is a warning to other drivers to be careful.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim wrote:

Excellent points all. There is increasing evidence that DRLs are far less effective than once believed, and can actually be detrimental to road safety, for drivers AND pedestrians. Here's a paper on the subject from the UK: http://www.dadrl.org.uk/whatsnew.html
Of course, DADRL in the USA has been up in arms about these things for years. See: http://www.lightsout.org/story.html
I urge everyone that believes these things (DRLs) are just claptrap designed to play to manufactured fears of road collisions to join the lightsout.org and make their voices heard in Congress. As far as the DRL believers go, I hope they are buckled up (a REAL safety device) tight if they have a daytime collision with another DRL-equipped vehicle, so they can live to enjoy an epiphany (in case it DOES trigger one).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Good information and resources, Tim and Sharon.
Why would people want to do something that is a distraction and irritation to other drivers. We shouldn't be doing things that are detrmental to the safety of others. The folks that support DRLs don't realize what their lights are doing because they simply aren't looking out for the real impact of their lights on others and would rather "feel good" about being "so safe".
DRLs are an answer to a problem that really doesn't exist. Go down any highway in broad daylight and tell me that you can't seriously see a non-lit vehicle way down the road. If a person can't see cars without their lights on, then they seriously need their eyes checked. There are only a few exceptions where DRLs seem to work, as noted by Tim, but they aren't enough to justify lights on 24/7/365.
The folks on this thread that are pro DRL are using the typical tactic when there is nothing more to say to shore up their side of the argument. They resort to name calling and belittling others, well that doesn't stand up and makes them look silly.
I did see one reference, in this thread, to some kind of study, but no citation. Lightsout has studies for review at: http://www.lightsout.org/studies.html . Also you will want to check out the U.K. site and other sites including a good explanation at NMA http://www.motorists.org/drl/ .
One last thing, Sharon spoke about the masking affect, it is very real and makes it hard to see motorcycles, pedestrians, byciclists and road hazards because our eyes focus briefly on the extra light pollution from DRLs. U.K. Dadrl has more information on that and links to pedestrian and cycle groups. The European Union stopped their plans to implement DRLs based on outcries from advocate groups, so there is precedence to stopping the DRL progression in its tracks.
Before you go and call me names and tell me how stupid I and others are, go and educate yourself beyond your own feelings and stop shining your lights in our eyes (we could already can see your car, but I am more concerned about that kid on the bicycle).
Cheers,
Larry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ALL personal opinions aside, any debate on the subject is moot. The US government made a factual determination that DRLs create MORE problems than they may eliminate, and made a decision NOT to make DRLs a safety requirement for vehicles sold in the US several years ago, so get over it.
If you want to buy or use DRLs you are free to do so, just remember to turn on you headlamps under those conditions where headlamps are required by your states motor vehicle code, so you don't get sited, WBMA. ;)
mike

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You did not read down about the good points of DRL.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.