GMS & Saturns DRLs

On GMs the headlights are on full time,on Saturns,it's the park
lights.Is this how it ended up?.In my opinion,if you have to see
lights on in daytime,you shouldn't be driving,plus the battery has
enough to do.

 

Uh, this is not sarcasm, so dont take it that way, this topic is a real pet
peeve of mine but -
The idea is not so YOU can see, the idea is OTHERS can see you. Simply put,
it is a proven fact that having some form of DRL's (any kind) helps to
prevent accidents by aiding other drivers to see you, (ex: oncoming drivers
and at intersections).

Here in FL it drives me nutz when it is downpouring rain and I see so many
people that have NO lights on at all. Can you say "camoflage"? Many ppl just
dont get the concept of having lights on for safety of themselves and for
others. Thats why DRL's are a good idea.

DRL's do not drain as much power as having al l external lights on,
therefore they really don't tax the alternator much. And besides, DRL's are
alot cheaper than having some old person mess up your nice shiny car because
they didn't see you.

marx404

 

I'm with you on that. Definitely improves your visibility to others. I think
the next move should be to make the directional signals visible more from
the sides. I often get someone abreast of me on my left, who I later find
has his right turn signal on, and is mad because I didn't yield. There are
some cars now that have a turn arrow embedded in the side mirrors. Looks
strange but is effective. Not as strange as the (British?) car that had a
illuminated stalk unfold from the mirror when the turn signal was on.

I'm sure that at some point strobe lights similar to the ones on airplanes,
but lower intensity, were proposed as marker lights. That would drive me
nuts in traffic. The emergency and slow moving vehicles now mostly have
strobes that flash three times fast, a pause and then 3 times again. The
syncopation is more likely to be noticed than a steady pattern.
Some cars and many trucks now have a system that pulses the brake lights
when your foot is steady on the pedal. This does make it much more
noticeable.
Oppie

 

When it's actually darker, sure, but it's a minor peeve of *mine* that
FL (and NY and probably other) state law requires headlights when it's
raining even when it's just as bright and sunny as when there is no rain
(for example, at 9 AM or 4 PM, with the sun at a sufficient angle as to be
unaffected by clouds overhead)!

Hey, at least other drivers where you are *use* their turn signals!
Here in Southeast Michigan, drivers typically act as if they don't even have
them!

 

You're right that DRLs are not indented to illuminate the road for
you, the driver, during daylight hours, but for others; it ostensibly
helps them see you better.

I would argue that if you can see them when they have their lights off
while it is raining that you don't have much of a complaint. I am
noticing more and more vehicles that do not have DRLs, and I seem to
recall that the law requiring full-time DRLs were repealed at least in
NYS. Can anyone confirm that? If not, can anyone explain why so many
late-model vehicles don't have DRLs?

When it rains, I usually turn on my headlights if visibility drops
appreciably. But I like having the choice, which is why I disabled the
automatic DRL nonsense in my car. While running DRLs may not impact your
electrical system all that much it most certainly *will* impact the life
of your bulbs. I drive mostly during daylight hours. Headlights are
unnecessary.

And if some old person hits me, my insurance will cover it. Hopefully,
their insurance will drop them and they'll be forced to ride as passengers
if they are unable to see well enough to drive.

 

Brian said: " And if some old person hits me, my insurance will cover it.
Hopefully,
their insurance will drop them and they'll be forced to ride as passengers
if they are unable to see well enough to drive."

Here it can pour rain on one side of the street and be sunny on the other in
an instant, silver, grey and light color cars "dissapear" in the rain. Aslo,
even though the sun is out, espacially here, when it is only partly rainy in
the bright sunshine, it can render your car invisible to other drivers.

It aint just "old ppl", it could be anyone who doesn't see you. And once you
get in an accident, your fault or not, your insurance rates go up, period.
Weigh it out, Accidents suck, repairing your car sucks, dealing with traffic
cops suck, insurance claims suck. Injuring yourself and others suck. Do
DRL's outweigh all of that? you betcha. ;-)

marx404

 

DRLs are not a good Idea see www.lightsout.org They do waste gas. There
is now way the don't and it is a strain on the alternator.

I have them turned off on my saturn.


Paul

 

And if turning your lights on helps increase visibility, then do so! I
have no problem with people using their lights during what might normally
be daylight hours. I have a problem with "on" being the default.

You used the expression.

You're welcome to your opinion.

Is that an abbreviated way of saying "Communism Not Found"?

Brian

 

The URL you posted is about Audi DRLs, not DRLs in general.

Of course they "waste" gas, so does your cigarette lighter, AC, and
everything else. The miniscule amount of gas used in DRLs is more then
offset by the increase in safety. In Canada we've had them for at least 15
years and it's a non-issue.

However, I'm sure this issue is like seatbelts. We had a horse's ass
professor of philosophy in our city who claimed seatbelts make you LESS
safe, in spite of having no credentials in engineering, statistics, or
medicine. At least he said that until the courts told him he knew nothing
about it and fined him for not wearing a seatbelt. (Sorry, I rant. That SOB
still burns me up!)

 

My bad, the site is about more than Audi vehicles. Sorry.

 

My question was mainly why are the headlights used on GMs,& park
lights on saturns,but,I guess I got my point across.On Wed, 13 Jul

 

The regulations here in Canada stipulate the required brightness for DRLs.
Either the Turn Signal lamps (brighter than Park Lamps) or 75% to 92%
(typically 80%) of High Beams are typically used by makers, presumably
whichever is easier to configure to the specs. Chrysler seems to like the
Turn Signal approach, GM as you noted is a bit of a mix.

 

C5's and Firebirds didnt have a choice. Generally the DRL's, if routed
through the headlights, only work at 40% of their brightness.

My biggest problem with DRL's is that you cannot flash your lights at
oncoming cars to warn them of a speed trap ahead of them. You cannot
flash your lights at someone looking for a spot to merge. You cannot
flash your lights at some slow poke thats not passing anyone in the
passing lane.

But what about those people who never turn their lights on in the rain?
What about those people who drive at night and forget to turn on their
lights? Those things seem worse since the dawn of DRL's. I see peoples
headlights on but not a single tail light is lit. I see people coming in
a downpoor with DRL's but I cant see the person infront of me until they
hit their brakes. How has DRL's helped in those area's? My father kept
driving home at night with only his DRL's on only because he thought his
lights were on. Gee yeah what a great idea DRL's have been...

My car is equiped with twilight sentinel so even if I did forget to
flip on my headlights my car would do it for me. Nothing beats a smart
twilight sentinel. You can see my tail lights in a downpoor. Thats
something you wont see with DRL's. Of course not all "twilight
sentinel" systems are the same. Chrysler makes a rather stupid lighting
system. The second its dark the lights are on, the second its light the
lights are off. No delay in the system so its on and off on and off.
Cheap cheap cheap.

 

I don't know what you drive, but with my 96 SL2 I can certainly flash my
headlamps because Saturns of that vintage have the dedicated inboard DRLs.
Only problem is how many people know what you're telling them? I know in
some parts of the world it's a universally accepted method of letting the
other driver know you're giving them the right of way.

DRLs aren't a panacea for every form of idiocy, carelessness, or inattention
on the road. Everyone is ultimately responsible to use their own grey
matter. They address one specific issue.

 

Care to share the "proof." All the studies I've seen that show a safety
advantage were in far northern counties (like Finland, Norway, Sweden) and
even then they were often flawed. Data from more southernly climates is not
conclusive. Since GM (and some others) have been installing DRLs on cars in
the US for sometime while Ford, Chrysler, and others have not, it should be
possible to collect good data for US conditions (DRLs vs no DRLs). I have
not seem a complete study that does this. But maybe you have.

http://www.iihs.org/safety_facts/qanda/drl.htm - old data (nothing as new as
1995)
http://www.autointell-news.com/News-2003/October-2003/October-2003-5/October-29-03-p7.htm
(this is a GM study. They only included crashes in the study where DRLs
might be beneficial. They ignored the possibility that other sorts of
accidents might be increased as a result of DRLs. It is essentially a study
designed by GM to "prove" DRL are good).
http://www.motorists.com/issues/drl/DRL_petition.html (Rabid anti-DRL group)
http://www.lightsout.org/studies.html (more rabid anti-DRL information)
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2004/809-760/pages/TRD.html
(check out the line that says "None of these results were statistically
significant" - the actual study is in the next reference)
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2000/DRL7_RPT.pdf - This
the best study I can find and it does not make a good case for DRLs.

Ed

 

What works in Canada might not be appropriate for Florida. Read
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2000/DRL7_RPT.pdf and
then tell me the case for DRLs in the US is compelling.

DRLs and Seat Belts are not the same things. If you want to compare dubious
safety devices compare Center Brake Lights, Air Bags, and ABS.
The case for DRLs and these other safety devices is dubious. It is my
contnetion that in many cases the money spent on these four "safety" device
could have been better spent if you goal is reducing accidents.

Ed

 

How could having lights on in the daytime cause an accident? I'm not trying
to be a smartass but I can't concieve of any situation where a low intesity
light during daylight hours could cause an accident.

 

Distractions. Your eyes are drawn towards the DRLs and away from other
items. They also tend to hide motorcycles. Glare. Inconsistent
implementation. Yada, Yada, Yada. Look through the other references,
particualrly the ones form the anti-DRL sites. The NHTSA reference (last
one) actaully showed an 8% INCREASE in some types of accidents related to
DRLs (like the decreases associated with DRLs, this increase was not
considerdd statistically significant). I have not seen a single study that
was based on US condiutions that showed DRL provided a significant positive
benefit. If there is one, I'd like to see it. I am tiresd of being saddled
with useless "safety devices" (ABS) or dangerous "safety devices" (air bags)
becasue Joan Claybrook, Clarence Ditlow and their ilk whine aboiut
automotove safety. If road safety is the true goal, then there are plenty of
better ways to spend the "safety dollar" than some of the "safety devices"
promoted by self appointed safety experts. What relly tees me off is that
even when safety devices can be shown to be of dubious value ( air bags,
high mounted brake lights), the requirements for these devices are not
removed. I particualrly hate air bags since for people who atually use seat
belts, they are at best marginally useful and at worst dangerous (not to
mention expensive).

Ed

 

The biggest safety issue I've seen with DRLs is that some vehicle drivers
don't realize they don't have their headlights on at dusk since they have
the DRLs and think they have the lights on, but do not. I've even seen some
idiots driving in full darkness with only DRLs and no side markers or tail
lights. You would think they would figure it out since they have no dash
lights, but that does not appear to be the case.

I personally prefer to make the decision on whether to use the headlights or
not myself and not take the decision away from the driver. I also think the
added energy cost should be a factor in the decision.

Bob

 

"Distractions" If you aren't any smarter than a fish (attention drawn solely
to shiny objects) or if you have tunnel vision then you have no business
behind the wheel of a car.
As far as I know this isn't a US only group. Here in Canada where the sun
spends a lot of the winter at a low angle I see a big advantage to DRLs.
As for people driving at night with no headlight, people did that before
DRLs and they will continue to do it as long as there is a switch for them.
I'll admit I did it once when I was in high school, out with my friend on a
well lit street downtown, a little distracted. I only went about half a
block before a nice police officer pulled up beside me and reminded me to
turn em on.
Good talking to ya.