GM head lights

| > >

| > >I wish all GM owners would do this!!! | > >

| >

| > Well, considering I used to run all the time with the lights on in my | > old truck, it's not much of a change for me. The switch on the old | > truck was easy to hit and was on the way to the brake release and | > back, so it was nothing to turn full headlights on (no DRLs on the 94 | > Jimmy). | >

| > I agree, I can't tell you how many times I see a GM vehicle cruising | > around with the amber DRLs on when they should have full headlights, | > especially in the rain, and both my parents have been guilty of this, | > I've even suggested they turn the lights on a few times. It was a | > little weird getting in my dad's Durango back in July when I had to | > drive it at night and I actually had to turn the headlight switch to | > turn the lights on. | | I liked what GM did back on the early Grand Prix Sedan's (90+). The DRL's | were in actuality the headlights on full brightness. Once it got dark, the | only difference was that the tail lights, fog lights and the bar lights came | on.

Except most state laws require tail/marker lights be illuminated in daylight fog situations as well...the ambient "auto headlamp" sensor isn't very reliable for that situation...in fact often can cycle the lights on and off during the course of the trip (and most people don't even notice their car is doing that)

Yes that is true. But it isn't just the models with the amber DRLs that this situation is happening with. The amber DRLs just make the situation more obvious/noticeable.

| especially in the rain, and both my parents have been guilty of this,

No surprise. Nearly everyone (and I mean damn near everyone) at my office that drives a late model GM vehicle is guilty of this. My next door neighbor, is guilty of this (leaves out of here during morning fog with nothing but DRLs (no tail lights), except on the LeSabre where they have yet to figure out how to turn the lights OFF!. My office overlooks the entrance and parking area. Those driving other manufacturers vehicles seem to be better disciplined and actually have their regular lights on whe it's foggy in a much higher percentage compared to the drivers of the GMs. Maybe because operating the lights manually makes it a intuitive habit...something they have to do (thay haven't been trained to do otherwise by a so-called "auto" system, in other words)

| I've even suggested they turn the lights on a few times.

Why? They're "automatic", aren't they? ;-) That's the response I usually get. I don't waste my breath any more.

| It was a | little weird getting in my dad's Durango back in July when I had to | drive it at night and I actually had to turn the headlight switch to | turn the lights on.

Why would it be weird if you were used to the habit of hitting the switch anyway (on your old truck).

My '91 and previous '90 Bonneville used the high beam lights as the DRL's. They are on reduced brightness though.

I had been out of the old truck for about 7 months at that point. I usually rely on the automatic system for the headlights in my S-10, unless it's raining, foggy or that in-between time where the lights cycle on and off. When I leave work, I hop in the truck, start it up, drop into gear, release the e-brake and the lights pop on, so I really don't have a choice on that.

You'd think most people would do that too. Most of my family with cars that have DRLs and no automatic headlights are the ones that drive around at night with just the DRLs lit up. I guess I'm like you and like to be able to make out the stuff on the cluster. Another thing that is really hard to do with automatic lights/DRLs is turn them on and off to show other people that they don't have their lights on.

| >Yes that is true. But it isn't just the models with the amber DRLs that this | >situation is happening with. The amber DRLs just make the situation more | >obvious/noticeable. | >

| >| especially in the rain, and both my parents have been guilty of this, | >

| >No surprise. Nearly everyone (and I mean damn near everyone) at my office that | >drives a late model GM vehicle is guilty of this. My next door neighbor, is | >guilty of this (leaves out of here during morning fog with nothing but DRLs (no | >tail lights), except on the LeSabre where they have yet to figure out how to | >turn the lights OFF!. My office overlooks the entrance and parking area. | >Those driving other manufacturers vehicles seem to be better disciplined and | >actually have their regular lights on whe it's foggy in a much higher | >percentage compared to the drivers of the GMs. Maybe because operating the | >lights manually makes it a intuitive habit...something they have to do (thay | >haven't been trained to do otherwise by a so-called "auto" system, in other | >words) | >

| >| I've even suggested they turn the lights on a few times. | >

| >Why? They're "automatic", aren't they? ;-) That's the response I usually | >get. I don't waste my breath any more. | >

| >| It was a | >| little weird getting in my dad's Durango back in July when I had to | >| drive it at night and I actually had to turn the headlight switch to | >| turn the lights on. | >

| >Why would it be weird if you were used to the habit of hitting the switch | >anyway (on your old truck). | >

| >

| | I had been out of the old truck for about 7 months at that point. I | usually rely on the automatic system for the headlights in my S-10, | unless it's raining, foggy or that in-between time where the lights | cycle on and off. When I leave work, I hop in the truck, start it up, | drop into gear, release the e-brake and the lights pop on, so I really | don't have a choice on that. |

I see. You've been assimilated! ;-)

You have just nailed PA. I wish they had bought I68 on over past Morgantown WV to I77 in OH so I could just bypass that state. When I was in college people in my class would get tickets for doing 57mph when the limit was still 55 not to mention the tickets for a burned out license plate bulb or the guy that got a ticket for parking in the handicapped spot with no handicapped label on his car (WV only has plates on the rear and the handicapped marking is on the plate). I want to find an address with the national DOT so I can ask them to not send my tax money to PA to waste, I think they should have all the bordering states build the highways for PA. I've had to drive through that state since 91 and they have rebuilt I79 three times and every time they do it the same and cut the cement into sections then when it rains the sections move around and the gaps turn into bumps. Try driving in a minivan and you will get a boat rocking effect going where the body will start to sway back and forth in time with the bumps until you get sick.

They will change their mind once they get a $138 citation. The Daulphen county appeals court recently ruled that DRL's are NOT headlamps. I saw the PSP station a trooper at the end of a construction zone on I-83, who was directing those without their HEADLAMPS onto the side of the road where a half dozen other troops where issuing the citations.

mike hunt

"James C. Reeves" wrote:

And to think that some people think we don't have the resources to fight terrorists or crime.

Luckily we don't need law enforcement officers reviewing the Heinz - Kerry taxes or the Bush family's drug habits, otherwise some might think what you are describing as a flagrant waste of tax dollars.

Sorry all, I was going to stay out of this thread but it looks like it refuses to die, so..............

Hard to tell the difference between a DRL and a headlamp on some cars since some cars it's one in the same. The Volvo DRL implementation run the markers and taillamps (just not the dash). Seems a impossible thing to ask of the troopers to decide. I guess they don't have anything better to do in PA except try and figure out what cars are running DRLs in construction zones so they can fine them. Sort-of a waste, don't ya think? Our lawmakers really have to find something worthwhile to do!! I suppose they've found a good revenue stream!

| > Probably no change since the last time you cruised through there Harryface. | > I've been in most of southern PA several times this year and nearly all the | > cars that do have lights are the ones that already have mandatory DRLs. | > Seemingly no one else turns them on. I suppose there are a few exceptions, but | > damn few that I saw (including me). The interesting thing is that PA must have | > spent millions of dollars on the very elaborate signs (and they get more | > elaborate every time I'm there, it seems) warning of the law, the fines, etc. | > and everyone still ignores them. Obviously, the citizens of the state are | > voting with their lights off!!! ;-) | >

I believe those cuts are called expansion joints and are needed to prevent worse situations than you describe. Concrete needs these joints, pavement doesn't. It allows movement and expansion/contraction in the winter months.

The purpose of highly visible enforcement is not to raise money but to make it obvious to other drivers that the law requiring the use of headlamps in a construction area is necessary for the safety of the workers and that it will be informed. Anyway what is so hard about illuminating ones headlamps when you see sign with a flashing light warning you to do so?

mike hunt

Full_Name wrote:

I think the critical line in the post was "I saw the PSP station a trooper at the end of a construction zone"

Being at the END of the construction zone negates the "highly visible" aspect you may be referring to. Being at the END of the zone, they are there, not to protect the workers, not to remind the people of the law, BUT to collect revenue, pure and simple. One trooper before the beginning of the zone would have been all that is required to ensure compliance. Over 1/2 dozen troopers at the end is just a tax grab pure and simple.

PS I've always wondered why the punishment in the construction zones in America is so severe. Do many US drivers run down construction workers as sport? Do the construction workers have a tendency to walk backwards out into traffic? Do they not ensure adequate working room? Or is it cheaper to put a person in Jail for an accident than to ensure the workers have an adequate safety margin?

Generally there is a trooper stationed just before the construction area with all of his lights flashing, in an effort to slow down drivers. Pennsylvania has more miles of state roadways than all of NY, NJ and the New England states combined. Many construction workers are killed and injured annually by stupid drivers, hence the necessity of the law. There is a blinking strobe light on top of a sign advising motorist that headlamps are required in the upcoming construction. Anybody fined for not doing so, deserves to be fined. That is just my opinion apparently you think differently.

mike hunt

Full_Name wrote:

The highway workers suddenly going blind and can't see a car during the day. I don't buy it for a second. But whatever.

try depressing your parking brake pedal slightly and see if that turns off your headlights. it works on my 98 gmc.

Nope, The problem is more with the workers unions than the actual laborers, That is why you go by a work site and see 10 guys watching two others actually work. Heck by the time you have a "Safety officer", "Shop Steward", "Transportation Supervisor" And the 2-3 planners and engineers and their assistants. That work area gets crowded...

And at any given time every one of those roadways is being dug up for one reason or another.

All that is, except on the mountain tops. The freeze thaw cycles take their toll in the valley, however. What other state has to build a roadbed five to seven feet deep? Here in Delaware they just run a grader through the sand, lay down a foot of stone and four inches of tarmack. In Georgia they don't even need to use the stone LOL

mike hunt

Bobby The D wrote: