Do you believe they should be law?  

189 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you believe they should be law?

    • Yes
      93
    • No
      96


Recommended Posts

one of the most annoying things with car lights is those idiots with powerfull white Halogen lights....when you see them coming at you they make your eyes hurt.

everyone who have seen them say the same thing...it hurts the eyes. they should be banned...they can cause an accident by blinding the other drivers...dumb @sses.

I think some manufacturers used to put them in cars as optional but I think they stopped.... I feel like running the idiots off the ROAD when I see one. :angry:

i dont believe how personally some people here take DRL. about 10 years ago i remember watching some videos during drivers ed. about the topic.

obviously you need to see the cars on the road. but in the distance, even on a sunny day, DRL help you to more quickly notice a vehicle than you would without them

in the vw's i've had, i know that when the parking brake is engaged, the DRL turn off

i dont believe how personally some people here take DRL. about 10 years ago i remember watching some videos during drivers ed. about the topic.

obviously you need to see the cars on the road. but in the distance, even on a sunny day, DRL help you to more quickly notice a vehicle than you would without them

in the vw's i've had, i know that when the parking brake is engaged, the DRL turn off

dude, ITS A CAR! its not as though its a packet of peanuts. i can see a car heading for me MILES away.

They don't bother me when I'm driving, but say I'm in a parking spot the car running (while waiting on someone, which I often find myself doing), then my headlights are shining right in the face of someone sitting in a car in front of me. Really annoying. Plus I don't like the look of the lights on during the daytime.

If you put your parking brake on, the lights turn off.

one of the most annoying things with car lights is those idiots with powerfull white Halogen lights....when you see them coming at you they make your eyes hurt.

everyone who have seen them say the same thing...it hurts the eyes. they should be banned...they can cause an accident by blinding the other drivers...dumb @sses.

I think some manufacturers used to put them in cars as optional but I think they stopped.... I feel like running the idiots off the ROAD when I see one. :angry:

We're talking about daytime running lights, which are limited, not full-on headlights. They barely make a dent, and help you to be more visible.

I can't understand the vehemence some people are showing regarding these lights. How can something designed to make you more visible on the road possibly be a bad thing? :blink: You may think they don't make a difference, but it's been proven they do.

dude, ITS A CAR! its not as though its a packet of peanuts. i can see a car heading for me MILES away.

Now imagine you saw it even sooner.

but its not the safety aspect of the DRL's that bugs me, its not being able to have my lights off if i need it. i have been in a couple situations where i need to go down a driveway late at night to drop a chic off and i dont want to attract attention/wake up sleeping people. or if im waiting outside a friends house to pick them up, and i dont want to shine lights in there house nor turn off my car. im intelligent enough to make the decision when my lights need to be on.

Being sneaky over being safe? Hmm, let me think. :rolleyes:

Now imagine you saw it even sooner.

i can already see it miles out, whats the point in seeing it sooner? perhaps if we where traveling at a few hundred miles an hour, then a greater distance would in some way be relivent. but it isnt.

Being sneaky over being safe? Hmm, let me think. :rolleyes:

again. i have yet to see any reasonable argument for it being safer. if the conditions warrant head lights, then turn them on.

false statement:

car - headlights = invisible

i can already see it miles out, whats the point in seeing it sooner? perhaps if we where traveling at a few hundred miles an hour, then a greater distance would in some way be relivent. but it isnt.

A person can see not more than 2 miles on level ground, due to the curvature of the earth.

again. i have yet to see any reasonable argument for it being safer. if the conditions warrant head lights, then turn them on.

false statement:

car - headlights = invisible

You have also yet to present any reasonable argument that would prove it's NOT safer. Many different countries have investigated this, and the usual argument is not that it's NOT safer, it's that they're worried about gasoline consumption.

False statement: car + DRL = not more visible.

No one ever said a car with no DRL is invisible, just easier to see. And they are. Once every car has them, it IS actually easier to see if a car is on the move or not, by whther or not their DRLs are on. I'm on the road for 9 hours a day, and it helps.

I'm glad my car doesn't have DRL enabled. There are times when I have to sneak into places at night.

I always drive with the Xenons on. I do believe it is safer to drive with the lights on, but I like having the option to drive with all the lights off if I need to. It's not that hard to flip a switch.

again. i have yet to see any reasonable argument for it being safer. if the conditions warrant head lights, then turn them on.

"A study examining the effect of Norway's DRL law from 1980 to 1990 found a 10 percent decline in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes."

http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/drl.html

The effectiveness of the safety improvements may have to do with ambient lighting conditions. If you live in a southern state that gets purer light then it may not make much of a difference.

how can you base that soley on DRL's? how many tire, brake, and overall vehicle safety advancements have also been made in those 10 years? how about advances in ABS, traction controll and stability control? can you be SURE that because you reduced the "multiple day time vehicle collisions" from 100 to 90, DRLs are the only plausible explanation?

A person can see not more than 2 miles on level ground, due to the curvature of the earth.

You have also yet to present any reasonable argument that would prove it's NOT safer. Many different countries have investigated this, and the usual argument is not that it's NOT safer, it's that they're worried about gasoline consumption.

False statement: car + DRL = not more visible.

No one ever said a car with no DRL is invisible, just easier to see. And they are. Once every car has them, it IS actually easier to see if a car is on the move or not, by whther or not their DRLs are on. I'm on the road for 9 hours a day, and it helps.

well im fairly certain (dont quote me on this) that 2 would warrant the word mile to become plural, and thus miles i still a true statement. corect me if im wrong.

i never said DRL's ARENT safer. i just think your all crazy for thinking me not wanting DRL's is obsurd.

how do DRL's increase gas consumption. they are electrical and run off the alternator.

so what hapens when people start blaming the lack of DRL's for accident. "i didnt think the car was in motion because i didn't see any DRL's"

how can you base that soley on DRL's? how many tire, brake, and overall vehicle safety advancements have also been made in those 10 years? how about advances in ABS, traction controll and stability control? can you be SURE that because you reduced the "multiple day time vehicle collisions" from 100 to 90, DRLs are the only plausible explanation?

Other studies have shown a 7% reduction in collisions of fleet vehicles when models with DRL were compared to similar models without DRL.

It depends on the time of day for me. Early morning (6-10 am), I tend to notice cars who have DRL first before other cars. Midday (11-3pm), the sunlight overpowers the DRL and it does nothing for me. Afternoon (4-7pm), it's the same as early morning.

As for the question of whether it should be mandatory or not, I vote yes. There are numerous times when people forget to turn on the headlights and with a mandatory DRL, there is at least some visibility. Making yourself more visible to other drivers is never a bad thing.

Out of curiosity, could someone explain then how it increases petrol usage, I just would have assumed it runs off the battery?

I don't know much about the inner working of cars lol.

http://www.nationsautoelectric.com/function.html

I'm not an expert, but know the basics... when your car is on... the lights run off your alternator... in the end your alternator is ran with the engine which of course consumes gas.

Out of curiosity, could someone explain then how it increases petrol usage, I just would have assumed it runs off the battery?

I don't know much about the inner working of cars lol.

the battery does NOT run the electrical components of the car. the alternator does. the alternator converts the mechanical power the engine creates from fuel into electrical energy. it keeps the battery charged (so you can re-start your car) as well as power headlights, radios, etc. now, the alternator is powerd by a belt running off the engine. so, energy required by the alternator essentially creates a load on that belt, more energy is required to spin the belt and power the alternator and subsequently the lights. however, you can get about 10.5 kilowatt-hours of electrical energy out of a gallon of gas. while the average headlights (not DRL which are lower consumption) consumes about 50-60 watts.

http://www.nationsautoelectric.com/function.html

I'm not an expert, but know the basics... when your car is on... the lights run off your alternator... in the end your alternator is ran with the engine which of course consumes gas.

lol. you have some nerve talking about credibility.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'd say the first one failed to be as popular as Apple anticipated, but the easy adjustment here is to make fewer of them next time around. It would only be a "flop" if it isn't possible for Apple to recover the design and factory tooling costs given the number of units sold, which I doubt would be the case. It isn't like no one bought them; it just failed to become the new hot phone of the year.
    • You're right that it does not follow the plain meaning of the word, but in this context, it is a legal term defined in 49 U.S.C. Kind of how "wire fraud" laws apply even if a physical wire was not used. Given that it is codified in law, and it isn't just automotive journalists that don't understand evolving technology, I highly doubt congress would change a well understood term just because technology makes the term slightly less actuate.
    • This is exactly why I keep saying we are not ready for human free self-driving. These little "bugs" are may seem like random one-offs. There was also the Waymo that drove between police with drawn weapons and the suspect they were pointing them at. From a software perspective it is easy to understand how those extremely rare situations may not have been programed for, but that is the point. If AI needs to be told to watch out for every possible contingency, then it can never be successful. There will always be the possibility of a first encounter that the AI needs to understand to avoid.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Final by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 | 14.6MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • First Post
      BizSAR earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      586
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      187
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      74
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      72
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!