Winters - when are yours going on?

realdanbreen

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

And there was no Y2K meltdown because companies paid people like me to trawl through millions of lines of code and fix the issues before they happened.

Yeah!, I know plenty of businesses that did zero upgrade to their systems at the time and guess what, 01/01/00 was just another day like 31/12/99.

Blazer

realdanbreen wrote: »

Yeah!, I know plenty of businesses that did zero upgrade to their systems at the time and guess what, 01/01/00 was just another day like 31/12/99.

hey..don't knock the Y2K bug.
I got quadruple time and a paid holiday for working 8 hours that day

Jesus.

CiniO wrote: »

Now - what am I gaining?Well - safety.
I'm greatly increasing chances that people who would not see me without lights, will see me with them. Obviously vast majority of other drivers will see me no matter if I have lights or not. That's certain.
But even if one in million driver will actually notice me with lights while he wouldn't notice me without them, it's worth it. As this millionth driver, could cause accident by not seeing me, and it could cost me lost time, money or life.

That's a nonsense argument. By that rationale you could keep going further and further down the so-called safety route by putting flashing lights on the top of your car, driving like a granny in case someone might step out of a ditch, never driving if you're on any kind of medication because of the 1 in 1,000 chance practically every box says there could be some adverse effects, never driving if its raining or icy etc etc etc. There's risk involved in life and if you keep going down the silly route, you'd never be able to go outside your front door. Again, my point is that there's a line where common sense stops and daftness begins.

Would you be in favour of putting 75 or 80mph speed governors on cars when they arrive in the Country for example?

CiniO wrote: »

So let me enlighten you.
I'm loosing something.
Having dipped lights on at all times, increases fuel consumption. It's not big amount, but always something.
Also bulbs need changing more often, as they just wear out quicker. Electrical wiring might go eventually at some stage (f.e. my 13 year old car already had a problem with wiring for the light which I had to sort out).
So there are costs. They are not big - probably less than tenner per year or even less, but there are costs. That's what I'm loosing.

Fine, throw in unnecessary waste aswell if you want.

YbFocus

Jesus. wrote: »

That's a nonsense argument. By that rationale you could keep going further and further down the so-called safety route by putting flashing lights on the top of your car, driving like a granny in case someone might step out of a ditch, never driving if you're on any kind of medication because of the 1 in 1,000 chance practically every box says there could be some adverse effects, never driving if its raining or icy etc etc etc. There's risk involved in life and if you keep going down the silly route, you'd never be able to go outside your front door. Again, my point is that there's a line where common sense stops and daftness begins.

Would you be in favour of putting 75 or 80mph speed governors on cars when they arrive in the Country for example?

Fine, throw in unnecessary waste aswell if you want.

Jesus it's ridiculous that you can't see the added safety aspect of having your lights on all the time.
As for adding lights etc that's just silly, this is just having standard lights on to aid visibility.

For your argument that you should be able to see anyway, that's very true but if someone was coming out of a junction and happened not to see me, he'll definitely see me with my lights on.
Completely avoiding an accident, injury and suffering because i had my lights on.

It may or may not ever aid me, but having them on gives me a better chance.

bladespin

YbFocus wrote: »

For your argument that you should be able to see anyway, that's very true but if someone was coming out of a junction and happened not to see me, he'll definitely see me with my lights on.
Completely avoiding an accident, injury and suffering because i had my lights on.

It may or may not ever aid me, but having them on gives me a better chance.

Not picking a side but that's simply not true, you should try riding a motorcycle, even with flashing blue lights there are drivers that won't 'see' you.

YbFocus

bladespin wrote: »

Not picking a side but that's simply not true, you should try riding a motorcycle, even with flashing blue lights there are drivers that won't 'see' you.

True bladespin I agree completely, these are the drivers we need off the road or at least woken up to their obvious inabilities.
My point is though that is undoubtedly safer to have them on than off, anyone arguing against that point is simply incorrect.
As you said though, there are examples on our roads of people that need training at the minimum.

Jesus.

YbFocus wrote: »

As for adding lights etc that's just silly, this is just having standard lights on to aid visibility.

You think adding lights is silly but would it not aid visibility according to your theory?

YbFocus wrote: »

For your argument that you should be able to see anyway, that's very true but if someone was coming out of a junction and happened not to see me, he'll definitely see me with my lights on.
Completely avoiding an accident, injury and suffering because i had my lights on.

Disagree entirely mate. Having your lights on or not on a bright sunny day will not make a blind bit of difference, never mind him definitely seeing you.

Look fair play if you want to have your lights on during the day, whatever floats your boat. But it ain't for me

YbFocus

Jesus. wrote: »

...

Is it not safer to have them on than have them off?
That's all I'm saying here.

Jesus.

YbFocus wrote: »

Is it not safer to have them on than have them off?
That's all I'm saying here.

Personally I think it makes no difference mate. You could say that for any number of things like putting governors on car's accelerators. You can push the safety argument only so far IMO and then it just goes OTT.

To each his own. Respect for a good argument you put forward Yb. I'll leave it at that because I've derailed this thread enough

YbFocus

Jesus. wrote: »

Personally I think it makes no difference mate. You could say that for any number of things like putting governors on car's accelerators. You can push the safety argument only so far IMO and then it just goes OTT.

To each his own. Respect for a good argument you put forward Yb. I'll leave it at that because I've derailed this thread enough

We'll call it a double KO and return to the winter tyres
Now I don't agree with needing winter tyres in Ireland, my car develops 500Nm of torque and I've never had a bit of trouble, in fact i quite enjoy my rwd and power during the snow

CiniO

Jesus. wrote: »

That's a nonsense argument. By that rationale you could keep going further and further down the so-called safety route by putting flashing lights on the top of your car, driving like a granny in case someone might step out of a ditch, never driving if you're on any kind of medication because of the 1 in 1,000 chance practically every box says there could be some adverse effects, never driving if its raining or icy etc etc etc. There's risk involved in life and if you keep going down the silly route, you'd never be able to go outside your front door. Again, my point is that there's a line where common sense stops and daftness begins.

Of course there is a line where common sense stops and daftness begins.
But having lights on a vehicle, even during the day, fits well into common sense, not daftness.
Costs nearly nothing, and can increase your safety considerably.

Would you be in favour of putting 75 or 80mph speed governors on cars when they arrive in the Country for example?

No - I'd be rather in favour of abandoning all speed limits. I don't think it would make roads less safe.

Fine, throw in unnecessary waste aswell if you want.

Well, as I said - costs nearly nothing, and car help. Why not do it then.

Situations where lights are most beneficial during the day are IMO.

1. During rain, even a small one, improves visibility greatly.
2. During fog - they are must have, and they are required by law, but many still don't bohter putting them.
3. During bright sun in shady areas (f.e. driving through forests, etc) - they imporve visibility greatly.
4. They also greatly help to judge speed and distance of other vehicles (which have lights on), especially from far. F.e. for purposes of overtaking.

A very interesting topic...if only we could stay on it :rolleyes:

davycc

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

They're ****e in the wet. Unreal grip in the dry (I've never had better grip in the dry) but lots of sideways action in the wet...and that's a front wheel drive car.

Yeah had them on my old fiat coupe plus 20vt and the extra grip was great over the worn Pirelli and Michelin .
Great value for the modest price too. But not so good in the wet!

Jesus.

Jesus. wrote: »

Personally I think it makes no difference mate.

Start car, turn on lights, put on seat belt.. that's my procedure when I get in the car. Its definitely safer, when pulling out at junctions etc you will notice a car quicker when lights on, you will spot a car in the distance easier on a long straight road and in particular if the sun is strong it can be hard to see a car sometimes and the lights make a big difference.

Why are daytime lights the law in some countries if its so pointless?

davycc

Bruno Tight Fluoride wrote: »

Start car, turn on lights, put on seat belt.. that's my procedure when I get in the car. Its definitely safer, when pulling out at junctions etc you will notice a car quicker when lights on, you will spot a car in the distance easier on a long straight road and in particular if the sun is strong it can be hard to see a car sometimes and the lights make a big difference.

Why are daytime lights the law in some countries if its so pointless?

Agree 100% that is my procedure every time I get into my car wether it is winter or summer