2005 Outback dash light always-on feature - turn off?

I share the same concern. On many occasions I was driving at night with only day time running lights. While I think Outback 2005 is an excellent car, it's pretty lame in the "user interface" area .

I won't, I'll just agree to disagree.

Barry

This has been argued here ad nauseum. People really seem to get berserk over DRL's- me, I'm glad to have them.

And I do think they are a valuable safety device (anything that improves your visibility is).

I know however, that nothing will change your mind.

Just as you won't change mine.

Dukephoto

Say it ain't so, Joe!!! What the heck are ya driving?!?!?!

The current flowing thru the DRL circuit should be much less than the current flow for normal lamp illumination. E=IR, Ohm's Law, tells us so, and Mr. Ohm's loves us. Since R is significantly higher in DRL operation, I will be commensurately less.

More than no DRLs/less than regular headlite operation. Do you lose, oh, 8 MPG when you turn your regular headlites on?

Also very easy to find during accident investigations ;-) "Your claim has been denied due to owner/operator defeat of safety devices".

What B.S. !!!! The few accidents I've had involved calling in a claim and waiting for a check. Since DRL's are not required devices there is no consequence for disabling them.

Pete,

Can you explain a bit more as to why you consider this an "unsafe" feature????

Thanks

I have a 2005 Legacy wagon, and it has a nifty feature that lets you turn the dashboard lighting off OR on during the daytime. The dash lighting comes on automatically when you turn on the headlights, then shuts off when you turn them off. That leaves the dash very dim in limited light (cloudy day, dawn and dusk, etc.). It's a button on the center console next to the temp/gas mileage/gas remaining LCD screen, and has a little "flash" symbol like a sunburst.

That feature isn't on the Outbacks?

As for the DRL issue...EPA says the gas mileage diff is more like .5 mpg. I'll admit that that number adds up, but I'm guessing that being a slightly less agressive driver would save you more, and IMHO the DRLs are certainly not making me LESS safe.

I have a 2005 Legacy wagon, and it has a nifty feature that lets you turn the dashboard lighting off OR on during the daytime. The dash lighting comes on automatically when you turn on the headlights, then shuts off when you turn them off. That leaves the dash very dim in limited light (cloudy day, dawn and dusk, etc.). It's a button on the center console next to the temp/gas mileage/gas remaining LCD screen, and has a little "flash" symbol like a sunburst.

That feature isn't on the Outbacks?

As for the DRL issue...EPA says the gas mileage diff is more like .5 mpg. I'll admit that that number adds up, but I'm guessing that being a slightly less agressive driver would save you more, and IMHO the DRLs are certainly not making me LESS safe.

My wife's 2004 Honda Civic LX has this "feature" too. She hates it. If her car had DRLs, no doubt she'd drive half the time without any other lights on.

Jay M Hillsboro, VA

Yes, it is on the 2005 Outback and I don't find any problem with the dash lighting system at all.

I think there is some confusion in these postings about what "dash lighting" is.

With the headlights OFF, the essential instrument lighting is on at all times at a fixed brightness, as is the center display of audio, fuel consummption etc.

With the headlights ON, the instrument display brightness is dependent on the little dimmer roll switch on the left, but the center audio/computer display is very subdued until you press the little button described above by Mischa42.

As for DRLs, for years on new cars sold in Canada they have been required to be on all the time, after statistics proved conclusively that they reduced accidents significantly on several test sections of highway.

Absolutely.

If the dash lights are on, as well as the headlights in DRL-mode, it's really easy to think your headlights are on period. I've driven home several times at night now, without realizing this.

In this mode, my tail lights are not illuminated, which is a *big* problem:-]

-pete

It doesn't improve my visibility whatsoever to have my lights on in the daytime. The best it could possibly do is allow someone else to see you but then again if they are so blind they can't see you without your lights being on, they have no business driving. They will be aiming for you anyway and you have just made their target easier to get a fix on! Far from being "valuable" it would seem to be much more a liability. Common sense tells you when you need to have light on or not but then if you are admitting to be entirely without common sense, yes, I can see where we need to put lights on your vehicle which are on all the time. A warning to others that the driver is entirely lacking in any common sense. Similar to that idiot alarm we require in our area; the one which requires all idiots to make sure their radio is able to be heard for a city block to warn everyone in the area that an idiot is behind the wheel of that car. Works well here! Yep, we out to make it part of the driving test to require lights on the cars of those individuals which are completely unable to think for themselves. Then we ought to pass a statewide tax in order cover the expense of a proficiency test for having those who give the tests that they are able to determine whether or not their candidates pass or fail a common sense test! Next thing you know you'll have us re-electing Bush!

To which you responded:

If it allows someone else to see better, then obviously it IS improving your visiblity- if only by definition of visibility. And common sense.

Why would they be aiming for you? Paranoia is a terrible affliction.......

I find people that rant against DRL's to be lacking in common sense, but you don't seem to agree.

And as a good, law abiding citizen, you probably comply.

of those >individuals which are completely

order cover the expense of a proficiency >test for having those who give

I think you'd fail.

It's too late- you've already succeeded.

dukephoto