Day Time Running Lights

Niall1234

Time for them to be brought into Ireland.

Why oh why don't people in this country realise that you need to turn on you're lights at Twilight and Dawn ? So many drivers out there who don't bother.

I tend to turn on my dims even during the day time when its cloudy.

Mena

I think we need to sort out the basics before getting this advanced. The amount of people I come across driving in almost pitch black, with no lights what-so-ever is frankly astounding.

I think some people don't comprehend the concept that your lights are not only so that "you" can see, but so that "others" can also see you.

Caoimhín

Yep its crazy with the lights. Ive seen people driving on national routes in mid-winter, raining and getting dark with no lights on. If you flash them to try and alert them they just wave at you like your an old friend saying hello.
How are these people allowed to stay on the road.
I have noticed as-well, a lot of these are "ladies who lunch" in the big SUV's, you know the ones who think they own the road.

Dabko

the masses are generally asleep while driving!

Gegerty

Works both ways. There are alot of idiots that drive around with their headlights on in broad daylight blinding people all around them.

L1011

Gegerty wrote: »

Works both ways. There are alot of idiots that drive around with their headlights on in broad daylight blinding people all around them.

If you've got the dips on and they're correctly aligned, they won't blind people, full stop. Daytime or not.

I have my dips on permanently, as my car is a very, very light colour and is very hard to see in the wet/dark. In very bright sunlight you're more likely to see headlights of an oncoming car than the car itself if its a light colour too.

So, theres idiots who drive around with the high beams or poorly aligned lights, but people with dips on aren't.

Gegerty

MYOB wrote: »

If you've got the dips on and they're correctly aligned, they won't blind people, full stop. Daytime or not.

I have my dips on permanently, as my car is a very, very light colour and is very hard to see in the wet/dark. In very bright sunlight you're more likely to see headlights of an oncoming car than the car itself if its a light colour too.

How can you be so sure you're not blinding people? Personally I don't think you should have to compensate for idiot drivers who cannot see in broad daylight. They shouldn't have a licence.

Have you been told your car is hard to see in daylight? I find it hard to believe unless you have urban camoflague. But if you're sure your lights aren't affecting other drivers then why not be safe for the sake of being safe.

MYOB wrote: »

So, theres idiots who drive around with the high beams or poorly aligned lights, but people with dips on aren't.

Granted it is usually SUV's whose lights shine right in your face.

prospect

I drive with my dipped lights on all the time also. No reason not to.

Recently I gave a quick flash at dusk to a guy coming at me without lights on. (one of the friendly reminder type flashs, as opposed to a long and aggressive flash).
Anyway, as we passed the guy is giving me a filthy look and waving his hands about and mouthing the word 'WHAT?'.
I didn't have time to respond (which is probably just as well), but when I looked in my mirror I saw him swerve back onto the road. He was so busy being an ass, he didn't notice he was heading into the ditch... LOL, serves him right.

Gegerty

prospect wrote: »

I drive with my dipped lights on all the time also. No reason not to.

Recently I gave a quick flash at dusk to a guy coming at me without lights on. (one of the friendly reminder type flashs, as opposed to a long and aggressive flash).
Anyway, as we passed the guy is giving me a filthy look and waving his hands about and mouthing the word 'WHAT?'.
I didn't have time to respond (which is probably just as well), but when I looked in my mirror I saw him swerve back onto the road. He was so busy being an ass, he didn't notice he was heading into the ditch... LOL, serves him right.

Have to take sides with the "ass" on this one. You saw him yeah? So visibilty was fine, no need for him to have his lights on. And well done for nearly causing an accident.

andrewh5

There is no need for day-time running lamps in Ireland. Sweden and Finland have them because they have 6 extremely dark months every year. What we do need is a Traffic Corps clamp down on the morons who persists in driving in normal darkness with front fog lights on! Hello! It is illegal to use them in anything other than fog or falling snow.

woop

to be honest this shouldnt really be annoying you so much,
depends where you live aswell the street lighting is mighty fine round some places

Niall1234

Gegerty wrote: »

Have to take sides with the "ass" on this one. You saw him yeah? So visibilty was fine, no need for him to have his lights on. And well done for nearly causing an accident.

You are trying to get a rise out of people aren't you ? Just because you can see a car it doesn't make it right not to have your lights on. Turning on your lights, even during daylight makes you more visable and therefore less likely to be involved in an accident.


Your comment about blinding people is about an non sensical as it gets. How can dims blind you ?

Gegerty

Niall1234 wrote: »

You are trying to get a rise out of people aren't you ? Just because you can see a car it doesn't make it right not to have your lights on. Turning on your lights, even during daylight makes you more visable and therefore less likely to be involved in an accident.


Your comment about blinding people is about an non sensical as it gets. How can dims blind you ?

Listen there's daytime running lights and there are headlights. I've no problem with daytime running lights, but no I'm not trying to get a rise out of people when I say headlights should be off unless visibility is poor. Fact of the matter is alot of cars on the road do not have daytime running lights. Majority of people have their headlights on as a kind of jewellery for their car. You'll even find people driving around with their headlights and their foglights on. Have a look at the new audi daytime running lights and tell me thats all about safety and not about looking cool.

I'm not trying to get a rise but I do get worked up when the above talk about flashing people for not having their headlights on in broad daylight and get pleasure out of nearly causing a serious accident in the process.

You do not get to make up your own rules of the road and you certainly have no god given right to go around enforcing your own interpretation of the rules.

L1011

Gegerty wrote: »

How can you be so sure you're not blinding people? Personally I don't think you should have to compensate for idiot drivers who cannot see in broad daylight. They shouldn't have a licence.

Have you been told your car is hard to see in daylight? I find it hard to believe unless you have urban camoflague. But if you're sure your lights aren't affecting other drivers then why not be safe for the sake of being safe.

I'd prefer to compensate for people who can't see due to rain/glare rather than die, thanks.

And I know its hard to see in those conditions as I've seen the identical colour/model of car in the same conditions.

You really, really have a poor understanding of whats going on here - just because prospect saw the drive (s)he flashed doesn't mean anyone else was going to. Your lights do not exist solely to increase what you as a driver can see but to let other cars know where you are.

robinph

Gegerty wrote: »

Works both ways. There are alot of idiots that drive around with their headlights on in broad daylight blinding people all around them.

I really doubt that anyone is getting "blinded" by people having their lights on during the daytime. Regardless of if they are on dipped or full beam, there are much brighter things about during the day that your eyes are already adjusted to. The getting "blinded" only occurs at night time when your eyes are fully dialated in order to see in the reduced light and someone then drives at you with their full beams on and thats not possible during the day unless your going through a tunnel or something.

L1011

Gegerty wrote: »

I'm not trying to get a rise but I do get worked up when the above talk about flashing people for not having their headlights on in broad daylight and get pleasure out of nearly causing a serious accident in the process.

He said it was dusk. This is not, under any interpretation of the circumstances, 'broad daylight'.

We rarely get 'broad daylight' in Ireland, realistically. Right now in Tallaght its so overcast I'd suggest anyone driving without their lights on is feeling suicidal, and its just over a week until (Irish calander) summer. But even taking what counts as daylight here, dusk is not daylight.

Gegerty

MYOB wrote: »

And I know its hard to see in those conditions as I've seen the identical colour/model of car in the same conditions.

I'm saying when visibilty is fine. The conditions you describe mean visibilty is poor and I would agree put your headlights on if you don't have daytime running lights.

MYOB wrote: »

You really, really have a poor understanding of whats going on here - just because prospect saw the drive (s)he flashed doesn't mean anyone else was going to. Your lights do not exist solely to increase what you as a driver can see but to let other cars know where you are.

You're going to be a busy person going around flashing people who don't have their headlights on in the daylight. Maybe if you paid more attention to your own driving you might be less likely to have an accident.

I might also add you're adding to your fuel consumption and increasing CO2 emmissions by having your lights on all the time.

Gegerty

MYOB wrote: »

He said it was dusk. This is not, under any interpretation of the circumstances, 'broad daylight'.

We rarely get 'broad daylight' in Ireland, realistically. Right now in Tallaght its so overcast I'd suggest anyone driving without their lights on is feeling suicidal, and its just over a week until (Irish calander) summer. But even taking what counts as daylight here, dusk is not daylight.

I'm near tallaght (nangor). If we have the same visibity here as in tallaght right now then I'd say its just fine.

I cannot believe people are arguing that you must keep your headlights on so other people can see you. This is just madness! Get your eyes tested seriously, and yes that was intended to get a rise.

B00MSTICK

I always drive with my dims on too, its become habitual at this point, no reason not to as has already been said.

Besides we complain that most drivers shouldnt be on the road so we may aswell give them a better chance at spotting us.

Older drivers too may have failing eyesight and find it difficult to spot some cars (especially light and grey cars) like MYOB mentioned.

Gegerty wrote:

How can you be so sure you're not blinding people?

If you're blinded by dimmed headlights during the day then you really have a problem.

L1011

Gegerty wrote: »

You're going to be a busy person going around flashing people who don't have their headlights on in the daylight. Maybe if you paid more attention to your own driving you might be less likely to have an accident.

I don't flash people who don't have their headlights on in daylight. I never said I did. Maybe if you paid more attention to the thread you'd answer the right people :rolleyes:

Gegerty wrote: »

I might also add you're adding to your fuel consumption and increasing CO2 emmissions by having your lights on all the time.

So minorly it doesn't matter. The way I drive will affect it far, far more.

Gegerty wrote: »

I'm near tallaght (nangor). If we have the same visibity here as in tallaght right now then I'd say its just fine.

If its the same there as it is here, the conditions are not fine. Its relatively dark and theres absolutely no quality of light.

Gegerty wrote: »

I cannot believe people are arguing that you must keep your headlights on so other people can see you. This is just madness! Get your eyes tested seriously, and yes that was intended to get a rise.

And I cannot believe you're unable to accept that? Please, please, please tell me you've never driven a car. Please. Because if you have you'll understand that its far, far easier to see a car with its lights on than one without - in any lighting conditions.

If you have, I'm scared theres people are dangerous as you on the roads.

conneem-TT

Even in daylight, DRL's considerably improve the presence a car has on the road especially for predestrians cross the road, and they also give the illusion that your car is closer than it really is, reducing the likelyhood of a car pulling out of a side road in front of you.

But I agree with what has been said already, that it is small fry compared to the basic motoring education that is needed for some of the drivers I see. I mean, only yesterday I saw someone drivnig along with their wing mirrors still folded in :eek:

Gegerty

MYOB wrote: »

And I cannot believe you're unable to accept that? Please, please, please tell me you've never driven a car. Please. Because if you have you'll understand that its far, far easier to see a car with its lights on than one without - in any lighting conditions.


If you have, I'm scared theres people are dangerous as you on the roads.

what gives you the impression I don't understand your argument? I get what you're saying and I disagree with this point only: You must keep your headlights on all the time. If visibility is poor then fine put your lights on.

So lets agree to disagree.

btw, the keep your lights on all the time movement originally came about because of people forgetting to put their lights on when they are needed. The logic being if you have them on all the time then there's no chance of you driving around in the dark.

cjt156

Ever since starting out as a motorcyclist 20 years ago I've driven with dipped beams 24 hours a day.
I work on the basis that the majority of drivers out there are inattentive imbeciles who I wouldn't trust with anything as complex as a can-opener, let alone a vehicle. I haven't yet seen much to change my mind.
DRLs or dipped beams (depending on the car) act as a first line of defence. It makes it far more likely the oncoming idiot will wake up and see me in time.

I can't see why anyone would object to that, given the other cr@p we have to deal with on our roads.

L1011

Gegerty wrote: »

btw, the keep your lights on all the time movement originally came about because of people forgetting to put their lights on when they are needed. The logic being if you have them on all the time then there's no chance of you driving around in the dark.

Thats only a minor factor. The RSA lights-on campaign here is solely down to poor visibility, not people forgetting.

su_dios

I have daytime running lights on my new car and I really agree with the idea that they should be on every new car now. I see much more people with lights on during the day than I used to now and it does make a difference.

For the guy who is putting down the idea of dipped lights.... daytime running lights use the dipped beam!! Its only in the new style audis that have the led drls which are a better idea too but thats down to the styling of the car. Dipped will never blind you unless they're not properly aligned.

It does not harm at all to have the lights on, especially if they automatically come on and they can have a positive effect so why are you against it so much?

Run_to_da_hills

I also ride a bike around the capital and will leave my lights during the day.

Del2005

Niall1234 wrote: »

You are trying to get a rise out of people aren't you ? Just because you can see a car it doesn't make it right not to have your lights on. Turning on your lights, even during daylight makes you more visable and therefore less likely to be involved in an accident.


Your comment about blinding people is about an non sensical as it gets. How can dims blind you ?

cjt156 wrote: »

Ever since starting out as a motorcyclist 20 years ago I've driven with dipped beams 24 hours a day.
I work on the basis that the majority of drivers out there are inattentive imbeciles who I wouldn't trust with anything as complex as a can-opener, let alone a vehicle. I haven't yet seen much to change my mind.
DRLs or dipped beams (depending on the car) act as a first line of defence. It makes it far more likely the oncoming idiot will wake up and see me in time.

I can't see why anyone would object to that, given the other cr@p we have to deal with on our roads.

The reason I disagree for DRLs for cars is becase I believe that at the moment the majority of motorcyclist are using DRLs/Dip Beam and they are noticeable on the road. If all cars had DRLs them motorbikes and bikes would got lost in all the cars again. This is the reason used by FEMA to get the EU to stop the mandatory use of DRLs.

peasant

ok, some terminology first:

Dipped headlights:

Are just that, your normal headlamps on dip. 2x 55/60 watt bulbs. Fairly strong light, dipped in such a way that it lights the road and its edge in front of you at night. Dipped headlights can be seen in daytime as well, problem is, if they are misaligned, they can blind oncomers.
The two big bulbs up front and the rear lights together put a constant load of about 150 Watts on the alternator which leads to higher wear there and slightly increased fuel consumption.


Daylight running lamps:

Are either the dipped or full beam with reduced power, so that they don't blind oncomers or lamps especially designed for that purpose. These ligths come on automatically when the ignition is on and they are on the front only.
Newly designed DRL are in LED technology that throws a bright, non blinding light straight ahead, making the car visible at long distances without blinding.
As they are LED's the energy consumption is negligible.
These lights turn off once full lights (dipped or full beam) are switched on.

http://www.tagfahrlicht.de/EN/index.html



My yoke is painted in lovely olive green camouflage paint . It is therefore very hard to see in anything but a wide open road and bright sunlight. For my own protection I drive with dipped headlights always on.
Heaving read up on new LED DRL technology, I've decided to get me a set of those.
- I won't forget to switch them on or off
- they won't "cost" anything to run
- there is no danger of people being blinded

Gegerty

Very well spoken Peasant. If people are so concerned they should also look into getting these fitted rather than using their regular dipped headlights.

Del2005 wrote:

The reason I disagree for DRLs for cars is becase I believe that at the moment the majority of motorcyclist are using DRLs/Dip Beam and they are noticeable on the road. If all cars had DRLs them motorbikes and bikes would got lost in all the cars again. This is the reason used by FEMA to get the EU to stop the mandatory use of DRLs.

People must realise the importance of this argument and this alone (as a cyclist as well as driver) is enough reason for me to keep my headlights off during the day.

cjt156

Gegerty wrote: »

People must realise the importance of this argument and this alone (as a cyclist as well as driver) is enough reason for me to keep my headlights off during the day.

Good for you, but I won't make my journey less safe just because maybe in ten years time a biker might only be as safe as everyone else...did I get that right?

prospect

Gegerty wrote: »

Have to take sides with the "ass" on this one. You saw him yeah? So visibilty was fine, no need for him to have his lights on. And well done for nearly causing an accident.

L1011

Del2005 wrote: »

The reason I disagree for DRLs for cars is becase I believe that at the moment the majority of motorcyclist are using DRLs/Dip Beam and they are noticeable on the road. If all cars had DRLs them motorbikes and bikes would got lost in all the cars again. This is the reason used by FEMA to get the EU to stop the mandatory use of DRLs.

Cars being more visible due to having their lights on isn't going to make the bikes suddenly invisible. Would suggest you look for crash statistics from countries with DRLs, I'm going to make a wild and dangerous guess and assume they have the same or lower incidences of accidents involving motorbikes - although likely down to Irish drivers being, across the board, fecking terrible.

Gregor Samsa

Del2005 wrote: »

The reason I disagree for DRLs for cars is becase I believe that at the moment the majority of motorcyclist are using DRLs/Dip Beam and they are noticeable on the road. If all cars had DRLs them motorbikes and bikes would got lost in all the cars again. This is the reason used by FEMA to get the EU to stop the mandatory use of DRLs.

Daytime lights (DRLs or dips) are there to make the vehicle stand out from the background, not from other traffic. The fact that cars have their lights on doesn't diminish the visibility of motorbikes against the background. Sure, it might make it more difficult to know whether it's a bike or a car at first glance, but the fact is that when you see a light, you know it's some vehicle - car, bike or truck - and can take the appropriate care and then determine what kind it it.

Its more dangerous not to notice a vehicle at all than not to know whether it's a bike or a car at first glance.

L1011

phutyle wrote: »

Its more dangerous not to notice a vehicle at all than not to know whether it's a bike or a car at first glance.

And many people, intentionally or not, will give something they think to be a car a far wider berth thank a bike.

su_dios

Gegerty wrote: »

Very well spoken Peasant. If people are so concerned they should also look into getting these fitted rather than using their regular dipped headlights.

You cannot get oem conversion kits to do this, and there are about a handful of aftermarket options that require butchering. So its not really an option right now.

As I said before I specced daytime running lights on my car and they use the dipped beams(not reduced at all) but are always on. Only way to turn them off is to turn on the parking lights. They work well and during the day are not blinding.

cjt156

MYOB wrote: »

And many people, intentionally or not, will give something they think to be a car a far wider berth thank a bike.

Exactly; perceived danger. A driver is less likely to pull out in front of a HGV than a motorcycle; as I well know. I've had people stop, look, make eye contact and THEN pull out in front of me when I was on a bike. With some idiots it just doesn't register.

Gegerty

prospect wrote: »

Oh the irony

richie_rvf

I drive with my lights on always.

As soon as I get into my car I turn the lights on and put my seat belt on.

In my experience when driving I notice cars (and motorbikes) that have their lights on much sooner than a car/motorbike with no lights and in my opinion that is safer.

I rode motorbike for years before having a car and I would not dream of driving without having lights on.

Accidents happen so I like to minimize the risk where possible.

Del2005

cjt156 wrote: »

Good for you, but I won't make my journey less safe just because maybe in ten years time a biker might only be as safe as everyone else...did I get that right?

So you will knowing endanger someone else when driving. If a bike is less visable then they aren't as safe as everyone else.

Hence why I think it's safer for bikes to use DRLs and cars not to. If a person can't see a car on a clear day with DRLs on what chance has a motorbike got?

The way I look at it. When drving a car you have crumble zones, airbags and seat belts you have a good chance of surving a crash. Where as a motor bike has none of these and they have a very high chance of being severly injured or killed.

Steve

I drive with dips on all the time, it's safer.

If someone gets 'blinded' by this during the day then THB they have eyesight problems and shouldn't be driving - what happens if they see dipped headlights at night? their head explodes?:rolleyes:

Big hate of mine are the drivers that go around with their parking lights on in poor vis. thinking they can be seen:mad:

unkel

Gegerty wrote: »

I'm saying when visibilty is fine

No you weren't. Prospect gave a friendly warning to the motorist without his lights on at dusk. Visibility is not fine at dusk

Now stop digging. If anyone in this thread is trolling it is you

Saabdub

My Saab has the lights on all the time, no switch to turn them off:D

Saabdub

bonkey

Del2005 wrote: »

So you will knowing endanger someone else when driving. If a bike is less visable then they aren't as safe as everyone else.

Cars having and using DRLs do not make bikes less visible.

As a simple comparison, recent studies showed that silver cars are less visible than red cars to other traffic. This has nothing to do with how many silver cars and red cars are on the road. It has to do with how our eyes and brains process colours, particularly when dealing with a moving background (given that we're talking about the perspective from other traffic, the background is not stationary) and objects moving within that.

Its the same logic that says that all pedestrians should wear reflective clothing at night, because it makes them all stand out from the background. Its not about picking some pedestrians out from other pedestrians...if they all wear them, it doesn't suddenly make them all invisible again defeating the purpose of the reflective clothing.

The same applies to DRLs. They increase the visibility of whatever they are on. Its not about what other traffic, it is (as with the red-and-silver-car example, as with pedestrians wearing reflective clothing) about picking the object out from the landscape, and identifying it as something other than part of the background.

If everything on the road had DRLs, then everything on the road would stand out more clearly from the background.

cjt156

Del2005 wrote: »

So you will knowing endanger someone else when driving. If a bike is less visable then they aren't as safe as everyone else.

Sorry but that's utter cobblers.
As has been posted time & again. Making my car more visible does not make another vehicle less so. By that reckoning I'd be doing bikers a favour if I drive without lights at night.

Cionád

I also drive with my dips on all the time. I drive a dark green car and use a lot of backroads so I feel safer with them on. Also I now have the habit of flicking on the lights just as I start the engine, so theres never an ambigous time between daylight and dusk, clear-sky & rain that I don't have the lights on.

Since I started this the amount of cars pulling out infront of me or cutting into my lane (sometimes without indicating) has decreased somewhat.

I'd like to see DRL introduced so that all cars would have the lower powered lights, thus being more efficient.

nialler

cjt156 wrote: »

Sorry but that's utter cobblers.
As has been posted time & again. Making my car more visible does not make another vehicle less so. By that reckoning I'd be doing bikers a favour if I drive without lights at night.

I have the computer set to have my lights on constantly. Car is very dark burgundy in colour, very wide and very long. Still got a smack on saturday, there's no accounting for someone turning a corner and looking the other direction and ploughing into the front wing and door of your car.

L1011

Wait, other cars make you *turn on* the lights?

Fiats don't. They cancel fogs and beams (the anti muppet device as I've heard it described) when you turn the engine off - and turn off the lights - but the dips or sidelights come back on when you restart...

The colour that makes mine go invisible in bad conditions is an extremely light blue ('azure' according to the colour code), its closer to silver than traditional blue.

biko

Saabdub wrote: »

My Saab has the lights on all the time, no switch to turn them off:D

Saabdub

What model is this?
I can turn my headlights on/off with the switch to the right of the steering wheel. If I leave it "on" the lights will stop when I turn engine off. 1995 900s.

craichoe

Not another DRL thread ... ARRGGGGGGGGHHHHH !!!!

Slidey

Mercedes vans now have it as standard.
I always switch my dips on now. Maybe if i had had them on a few years ago the plank who ran into me might have not done the uturn in front of me
I cannot understand how it is not mandatory.
A certain high profile delivery company now asks that it is turned off now as they reckon it is very hard on bulbs though

E92

Volvos and Saabs have have DRLs for years. Audi are now joining in, the facelifted A3 due here in a few months will have them, and I believe that the recently launched A4 and A5 have DRLs as standard equipment too. Presumably the rest of the VAG range will follow suit in due course. AFAIK BMW also are phasing in DRLs, AFAIK the current 3 series Coupé was the first BMW to have DRLs as standard equipment.