How to disable DRLs and auto-headlights on 2001 Camry?

There are only three solutions: The factory method is probably a collar style shroud around the photosensor CDS Cell or phototransistor to cut down the ambient light reaching it. Second being the "external shroud" dodge with the sunglass lens.

There is probably an adjustment trimmer potentiometer somewhere, but under the dashboard on the 'amplifier module' or whatever they call it for the DRL trigger. Most likely not easy to get to, and overly sensitive and easy to mis-set, so you leave it alone...

A piece of black electrical tape over part of the face of the sensor works, or a shroud out of "field expedient materials" like a chunk of plastic pipe slid over the working end of the sensor - Do it all the time on lighting photocontrols.

You could also use a blob of clear silicone sealant over the sensor eye, that's translucent enough to diffuse and cut down the light and not liable to fall off easily.

-->--

Just wanted to give a more comprehensive answer from the anti-DRL side. I do know that perspectives differ, just conducting an open dialogue here.

Don't believe the hype machine on DRLs . On the basis of my research and feelings on the suject, any contribution is miniscule, but the lights shining in others eyes (specifically glare) can cause distraction from seeing everything and can lead to more issues. When a driver encounters a DRL equipped car with glare, they have an increased tendency to not see other cars, byciclists, pedestrians or non lit objects. The safety negatives generally outweigh any safety gains. I have been thinking about this for awhile. As such, if all DRLs did not produce glare (some don't) and instead just a glow to be seen in low light conditions, it wouldn't be as much of a problem or concern.

I won't pretend to not be against DRLs, as you will see from one of the below links. By the way, I do realize that perspectives differ and I am just spreading some information. Here are some links, I don't mind if there is no room for debate, as I just want to be informing and contributing here.

There are not any studies that independently confirm anything but the smallest increase in safety attributable to DRLs (and at what cost in other areas?). In some of the links below are studies that indicate harm to safety via DRLs. There are also, multiple bike, pedestrian and automotive enthusiast groups that are against them. Of course the fact that the majority of manufacturers in the US do not have them as standard equipment, stands as a testament against it being a true safety accessory, since if it was truly safe it would be cheap to implement and the public would beat down their doors (but it hasn't happened for GM, they are taking losses, hmmm).

Here are some links, pro, con and discussion:

I was a participant in this discussion (be aware there were some folks that just wanted to be negative :

Another discussion, but I had no involvement in it : These are all links that came about from the 300c forum discussion.

Again, my purpose is to educate others about how many drivers, including myself, feel about the impact of DRLs in the U.S.

Please, if you disagree with me deeply and feel like flaming me, please do not, I don't want what happened on the other forum to happen here.

God bless,

Larry

Headlights should be on 99% of the time, anyway. Many vehicles have stronger headlights than their DRL's.

Only idiots would adjust their lights to come on later. We have enough idiots up here in Canada who ALREADY seemingly refuse to put on their headlights UNLESS it is bloody PITCH black outside.

Then shut the FUCK up and don't add fuel to the flames because, I guarantee it, your bullshit will NOT go unanswered.

Psst! Tape or adjusting makes them come on earlier. I don't know if there is a setting you can find to make them come on later.

Myself, I just wish there was an override switch, so you can turn the stupid lights off by hand to signal truckers at night.

The basic idea behind DRL's is sound, it's the "Force it on you" attitude that bugs me.

"We're from the Government, and We're Here To Help..."

-->--

Ummm... they were talking about adjusting them so that they'd come on

*earlier*.

Cathy

You lose key signaling methods with DRLs. It would not be difficult to design a system that got around those problems.

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.

It's not just the forcing, it's that if they insist on forcing it, then they should also be setting standards for the design, so that the negatives can be mitigated, and so that the system can be over-ridden when necessary.

It would not be difficult to design a DRL system that would overcome all the negatives of the present systems, but it requires more than just a relay. Unless all manufacturers are forced to implement a system with specific features, intensity, aiming, etc., it's not going to happen, as such a system would actually cost $20-30 to implement.

At least the Toyota Camry system automatically turns on the real headlights when it gets dark. One of the biggest problems with DRLs is people that don't turn on their headlights when it gets dark, because they think that they are already on. This is especially bad when the DRL system doesn't turn on the tail lights as well as the headlights.

If they really wanted to get fancy, they could link the DRLs to a navigation system, and turn them off on freeways where they are not necessary, and have them on when driving on high speed rural roads (the same places where they now advise you to turn on your lights for safety).

Unfortunately, there are a lot of brainwashed people out there, that have forgotten how to think critically. You get statements like "Lights ON is always safer for everyone in every situation at any time. Period." And "they are NEVER a problem." Does he really believe this, or is he just trolling? It's hard to tell. Neither of those statements are true, but it's clear that some people don't understand that there are pros and cons with DRLs.

I certainly share in your suspicion of big government...in many areas. However, mandatory PROPER DRL's make sense. Separate lights...short-term override for certain situations such as entering a military base, ferry, etc..

>

I certainly agree that there should be a common standard for DRL's, along the lines you have mentioned. Separate lights. Short-term override. Signalling ability. etc etc.

I feel strongly about DRL's. I lived for years in Scandinavia where you must have your lights on all the time. In my opinion, it is a definite safety factor.

Now in Texas, I see so many people that do not turn their lights on in the rain, or in poor visibility conditions of all times. This is super dangerous, as well as being illegal in this state.

I have been guilty of it on occasion when driving my van which does not have DSLs and would gladly change over.

People against DRL's are usually in the following categories:

1. They bitch about slightly reduced life of their lights as they are on for longer periods.

1. They moan about the marginally increased draw on their battery and the subsequent reduction in engine power---about one millionth of a horsepower.

2. They bitch about Big Brother making them do this or that..just like they bitched about seat belts being made mandatory in many jurisdictions.

1. They bring up situations like entering military bases or ferries--something that only applies to a minuscule fraction of motorists.

2. They bring up b.s. like how there is no need for DRL's at latitudes lower than, say Canada or Sweden.

1. They think that just because THEY have (or THINK they have) the eyes of eagles that everyone else on the road does too. They fail to realize that if someone else can see them, the accident rate is reduced.

I could go on and on. The ONLY drawback for DRL's is that SOME of the systems are pure idiocy. The industry should be forced to adopt a standard which would involve light bulbs SEPARATE from the head lights but almost as bright. Also, any system SHOULD also activate the vehicle's tail lights.

I will add to this that DRLs should be required to use only low beam lights instead of using high beams. Even when the high beams are on at lowered power, they still are aimed up into the oncoming traffic's eyes (like mine). The lower power argument to me is analogous to sticking a knife into one's heart, but only doing it 70% of the way. I really despise this. I also consider it to be illegal because the driver is not dimming high beams to oncoming traffic.

Use the low beams (or separate lights aimed properly) and also have the rear lights on as well. Tomes

My wife's Buick has an automatic light system which includes DRLs. At night or in low light, the full lights come on. During the day, the DRL system functions. It concerns me that I dont really know what happens to the taillights in various levels of rain.

Running in rain and depending on DRLs can be dangerous.

In rain, the clueless driver probably will not turn their lights on, with or without DRLs, even when the law requires it.

At night is the real problem. A clueless driver thinks that their lights are on by virtue of the DRLs, but usually the tail lights don't come on with the DRLs. I see this all the time on the freeway.

Not to worry, they will come on if you simply follow the law. Every state of which I am aware requires the us of headlamps, from sunset to sunrise and other hours of reduced visibility. All marker lights come on with the headlamps. DRLs are designed to be on only when the conventional lighting system is not in use

mike