>
> > I think it is obvious that there are situations where having DRL's on
> > can reduce the chances of an accident. I'm not sure that it is
> > possible to program a computer to consider only those possibilities and
> > exclude all of the others. The better solution is to just run DRL's
> > during the day and run regular headlights when dusk approaches. > >
>
> don't get me started on DRLs.
> I live in Canada where they're mandatory since 1990.
> It's been raining here all week. I live 5 miles outside of Winnipeg and
> drive to work downtown. Less than 25% of the cars have headlights on
> - they're all running DRLs. Big deal you say? Too bad that means only
> 25% of the cars have taillights on in the pouring rain. Idiots. >
> I've disabled the DRLs on my car. The headlight switch now works like
> it's supposed to. On when it's dark or poor visibiliy. Off when I'm
> idling or in rush hour traffic on sunny days.
>
> Ray
This has been a longstanding pet peeve of mine. Lots of drivers here don't turn on any lights under any circumstances...they forget, or just don't give a damn. These are dangerous.
People who have DRLs that don't illuminate the taillights are dangerous too..They may think they are safe and protected, but are very dangerous when you come upon them from behind in rain, etc.
I use my headlight switch, unless - like the objects of my complaints - I forget. Seldom, but it happens.
My wife's car has automatic fulltime running lights ( that include taillights,etc). I have nothing to complain about this car and its lighting.
Mileage, in either case, is so infinitesimally less with lights on that it really doesn't make any difference.