Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: Nickbat on 21 February 2011, 20:50:05
-
Daytime running lihts (DRLs) are compulsory for all new cars as of this month.
Three questions:
1. Do members feel they promote road safety?
2. Would they consider retrofitting DRLs?
3. Where would be the best position for fitting DRLs on an Omega?
Your thoughts, please. :y
-
1.No
2.No
3.No need, just manage to reach all that way to my headlight switch and turn them on !
-
I have seen an Omega with a row of LED's in a line just above the Fog lights and thought it looked great.....
Whether I would retro fit them myself is another question...... I doubt it
-
I'd not heard that one Nick.
Personally, I tend to have the lights on anyway if it's remotely overcast, particularly at this time of year. During the summer, not so much.
The biggest downside I can see to it is that it will reduce the (stand out) visibility of motorcyclists in the summer months somewhat as it is advised that the headlights are used all the time as an extra visibility aid :y
-
You could replace a set of led lights in place of the fog lights
-
I'd not heard that one Nick.
Personally, I tend to have the lights on anyway if it's remotely overcast, particularly at this time of year. During the summer, not so much.
The biggest downside I can see to it is that it will reduce the (stand out) visibility of motorcyclists in the summer months somewhat as it is advised that the headlights are used all the time as an extra visibility aid :y
Here's the blurb. Will affect lorries from next year.
http://www.visitcars.co.uk/car-news/car-articles/New+Daytime+Running+Lights+Law
-
I'd not heard that one Nick.
Personally, I tend to have the lights on anyway if it's remotely overcast, particularly at this time of year. During the summer, not so much.
The biggest downside I can see to it is that it will reduce the (stand out) visibility of motorcyclists in the summer months somewhat as it is advised that the headlights are used all the time as an extra visibility aid :y
Here's the blurb. Will affect lorries from next year.
http://www.visitcars.co.uk/car-news/car-articles/New+Daytime+Running+Lights+Law
Thanks Nick... It is ringing a bell in the deep depths of my mind now :-X ::)
-
The Omega had DRL's on the contient so adding the right bits would sort it.
Er Indoors Astra has them
-
The Omega had DRL's on the contient so adding the right bits would sort it.
Er Indoors Astra has them
Interesting. I wonder if there is any information on GM parts for DRLs. :-?
-
Lol, its even mentioned in the book of lies under the wiring diags
-
Lol, its even mentioned in the book of lies under the wiring diags
Knowing Vauxhall if you dig hard enough the wiring is probably already there hidden away.....
-
Actually, it's mentioned on page 118 of the Omega handbook. It's just dipped lights without instrument lighting. I was hoping for something more glamourous. ;) ;D ;D
Perhaps a wiring change guide for us numpties could be considered? :-?
-
The Omega had DRL's on the contient so adding the right bits would sort it.
Er Indoors Astra has them
Interesting. I wonder if there is any information on GM parts for DRLs. :-?
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1273698681/8
-
The Omega had DRL's on the contient so adding the right bits would sort it.
Er Indoors Astra has them
Interesting. I wonder if there is any information on GM parts for DRLs. :-?
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1273698681/8
Thanks for digging that out, Rob. I was probably babbling on too much about politics or global warming in the General Discussion area to notice that thread. ;) ;D ;D
-
Dont see how it promotes road safety tbh. Just pen pushers with nothing better to do, interfering in things they know little about.
-
Dont see how it promotes road safety tbh. Just pen pushers with nothing better to do, interfering in things they know little about.
I think it helps pedestrians at dusk and dawn, as well as in low light situations brought about by mist. They've had DRLs in Scandinavia for at least teh last twenty years, if not more. :y
-
So, having had a look at that thread, I presume one just needs a relay (13101741 - about £20) and a 10a fuse and the job's a good 'un... I think. :-?
-
Dont see how it promotes road safety tbh. Just pen pushers with nothing better to do, interfering in things they know little about.
Given how many idiots I see everyday with no lights during dawn and dusk conditions...........its got to be a good thing and only because it means the low IQ drivers dont have to apply any thought!
-
1. Don't think it promotes road safety, but I think it'll help some vehicles being seen to be honest.
2. Have had Daytime Running Lights enabled in every car I've had with them having the option in a menu somewhere, everything I own I always drive around with the lights on 99% of the time.
3. Hard to say on an Omega, unless they're intergrated somewhere, I think they could look kack, but I'm sure I read somewhere that they had them overseas so, must be able to sort them as if it was factory fit somehow?
Or get a set of these and run around with the side lights on?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VAUXHALL-OMEGA-BLACK-PROJECTOR-ANGEL-EYE-HEADLIGHTS-NEW-/160519384406?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item255fb36d56
-
Dont see how it promotes road safety tbh. Just pen pushers with nothing better to do, interfering in things they know little about.
Given how many idiots I see everyday with no lights during dawn and dusk conditions...........its got to be a good thing and only because it means the low IQ drivers dont have to apply any thought!
Road safety would be much better served if they didnt allow people that stupid to drive. ;) ::)
In daylight hours people will very soon get used to cars all ahving their lighs on, and continue to drive/wlk out in front of them.
-
I didn't know this before I started the thread. Apparently, new DRLs "have to be set at a light output of 1200 candela (cd, or candle power), 50% brighter than a dipped headlight.". There is a group (see link) who are set against this, claiming that there is opthalmic evidence that DRLs can cause temporary vision impairment.
Interesting. I think dipped headlights are fine during the day, but may have to reconsider my views on these new factory-fitted DRLs if they are that bright. :-/
http://www.lightmare.org/
-
I don't mind having daytime running lights as long as it's not the Audi R8-type super-bright LED ones. Don't like 'em :(
-
Dont see how it promotes road safety tbh. Just pen pushers with nothing better to do, interfering in things they know little about.
Given how many idiots I see everyday with no lights during dawn and dusk conditions...........its got to be a good thing and only because it means the low IQ drivers dont have to apply any thought!
Road safety would be much better served if they didnt allow people that stupid to drive. ;) ::)
In daylight hours people will very soon get used to cars all ahving their lighs on, and continue to drive/wlk out in front of them.
Albs, albs, albs.....that would be against thier human rights.
-
Dont get me started about yumin rather rites Mr DTM. This is car chat after all. :-X ::) ;D
-
I didn't know this before I started the thread. Apparently, new DRLs "have to be set at a light output of 1200 candela (cd, or candle power), 50% brighter than a dipped headlight.". There is a group (see link) who are set against this, claiming that there is opthalmic evidence that DRLs can cause temporary vision impairment.
Interesting. I think dipped headlights are fine during the day, but may have to reconsider my views on these new factory-fitted DRLs if they are that bright. :-/
http://www.lightmare.org/
Hmmm, I seem to recall 200-800 candelas which is about 10-20% of a dipped beam output
-
Here's a picture of an Omega with DRLs. Well, that's what the RACV Australia seems to think, anyway. ;) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
http://www.racv.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/Internet/Primary/my+car/car+safety/safety+equipment/lighting/daytime+lights
-
instead of making DRL compulsory I think they'd have been better making auto lights compulsory instead. That way cars would have lights on at BOTH ends, not just the front. ;)
-
I have no great issue with DRL's. More accidents happen with pedestrians/other vehicles from the front than the rear, during the day, IME.
I always turned them off on the (previous) company Volvo T5, however, as it was a give away whilst on a nedhunt in the back streets of chaveville..... ;D
-
...
I always turned them off on the (previous) company Volvo T5, however, as it was a give away whilst on a nedhunt in the back streets of chaveville..... ;D
Wasn't the blue light a clue? ::)
-
...
I always turned them off on the (previous) company Volvo T5, however, as it was a give away whilst on a nedhunt in the back streets of chaveville..... ;D
Wasn't the blue light a clue? ::)
Didn't use them when on the prowl.... ;)
-
Dont have a problem with them personally. But some Mercs have them brighter than omega hids afaict! Seems excessive.
They might sit well in the slots of an irmscher bumper though.... ::). ;)
-
Just below the fog lights in the slot undernieth. Not exactly high on the list though... :D
(http://i344.photobucket.com/albums/p326/chrisgixer/22d2f887.jpg)
-
I see this chap on the Vectra forum was stopped by the police last September for having retrofitted DRLs
http://www.vectra-c.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1321000
And yet, this DfT document says you can fit DRLs, provided they are made-for-piurpose and carry the necessary European certification stamp.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/vehicles/vssafety/info-runninglights.pdf
Once again a case of legislation which few have heard of and even the police are not sure of. ::) ::)
-
Most wagons coming from Scandinavian countries have had them for years, (all Scanias do) but just have a fuse pulled for UK use.
I wonder if Migs are the same ::)
-
I think they are terrible things, they waste electricity, make some cars look like nobs - Mercedes, and they dazzle like nobodies business.
I also hate the pulsing rear LED lights, they give me a headache, the cure is to follow on full beam so you over power them.
Some dog eating country ones are terrible as is a small open top Peugeot.
-
I don't understand why there should be a need for DRL's in this country. :-/ If the light isn't very good just switch your normal lights on. Stone me, if you can't see a car in normal daylight you shouldn't be driving! ::)
-
I don't understand why there should be a need for DRL's in this country. :-/ If the light isn't very good just switch your normal lights on. Stone me, if you can't see a car in normal daylight you shouldn't be driving! ::)
Nanny state Bob, so many dont turn them on and hence make the car do it automaticaly will make it safer.
Slightly suprised about the dazzling though which does suggest a legislation issue as the light output has to be quite low.
I guess its the LED's that cause the issue with the very narrow beam angle they emit light out at.
-
With the Goverments cut backs hopefullythey will GO ;D
-
I don't understand why there should be a need for DRL's in this country. :-/ If the light isn't very good just switch your normal lights on. Stone me, if you can't see a car in normal daylight you shouldn't be driving! ::)
I would like to nominate this for post of the year!
Nanny state Bob, so many dont turn them on and hence make the car do it automaticaly will make it safer.
Slightly suprised about the dazzling though which does suggest a legislation issue as the light output has to be quite low.
I guess its the LED's that cause the issue with the very narrow beam angle they emit light out at.
It may also be an epileptic thing, IIRC there was something about LED cat's eyes recently. If you drive past them too quick (legally too), because of the tight beam angle, they can appear to be strobing & cause issues that way
-
It may also be an epileptic thing, IIRC there was something about LED cat's eyes recently. If you drive past them too quick (legally too), because of the tight beam angle, they can appear to be strobing & cause issues that way
That's because they are strobing. They are pulse-width modulated to give constant output despite a variable battery voltage. ;)
Same with the LED tail lights on cars. They are dimmed from brake light intensity by PWM in'g them so if they move across your field of vision rapidly, you get a similar light trail. I think this is probably what Martin was objecting to. I must say, I find it irritating, too.
Kevin
-
It may also be an epileptic thing, IIRC there was something about LED cat's eyes recently. If you drive past them too quick (legally too), because of the tight beam angle, they can appear to be strobing & cause issues that way
That's because they are strobing. They are pulse-width modulated to give constant output despite a variable battery voltage. ;)
Same with the LED tail lights on cars. They are dimmed from brake light intensity by PWM in'g them so if they move across your field of vision rapidly, you get a similar light trail. I think this is probably what Martin was objecting to. I must say, I find it irritating, too.
Kevin
Very true, however the effect is much more noticeable when driving past them, than staring straight at them, think it's a combination of PWN & tight beam?
Can't think they'd be debating banning ONLY cat's eyes led's not rear lights if that was the case?
-
It may also be an epileptic thing, IIRC there was something about LED cat's eyes recently. If you drive past them too quick (legally too), because of the tight beam angle, they can appear to be strobing & cause issues that way
That's because they are strobing. They are pulse-width modulated to give constant output despite a variable battery voltage. ;)
Same with the LED tail lights on cars. They are dimmed from brake light intensity by PWM in'g them so if they move across your field of vision rapidly, you get a similar light trail. I think this is probably what Martin was objecting to. I must say, I find it irritating, too.
Kevin
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect. >:( >:(
-
Very true, however the effect is much more noticeable when driving past them, than staring straight at them, think it's a combination of PWN & tight beam?
I think it's because they are moving rapidly through your field of vision at that point, which "freezes" the flashing of the lights. Plus, your eyesight is more sensitive to changes/ movement at the extremes of your field of vision anyway.
I can see how they might be distracting
Can't think they'd be debating banning ONLY cat's eyes led's not rear lights if that was the case?
Agreed. Rear lights are only an issue as your vision scans past them, but I believe it's the same principle.
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect.
So now both you and the car in front are having difficulty seeing? ;)
Kevin
-
Likewise I cant for the life of me see the point,with the exception of the motor bike how can you not see all motors in daylight? and audis to me simply look dilly or some may say gay and often promote a chuckle in miggy's driving seat.For now I won't go on about BM's "Angel Eyes" now I ask you,for me more like "goofy eyes" Seriously I think on our heavy trafficked roads the motorcyclist will really lose out big time,just be another light lost among many
-
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect. >:( >:(
I'll wait for the thread about someone slamming on the brakes in front of you then ;) ;)
-
Likewise I cant for the life of me see the point,with the exception of the motor bike how can you not see all motors in daylight? and audis to me simply look dilly or some may say gay and often promote a chuckle in miggy's driving seat.For now I won't go on about BM's "Angel Eyes" now I ask you,for me more like "goofy eyes" Seriously I think on our heavy trafficked roads the motorcyclist will really lose out big time,just be another light lost among many
I agree. If I'm "pressing on" in the Westfield I often use dipped lights as it's a car with a small frontal area and dark colour.
What's more, I think lights on a vehicle that you'd otherwise be able to see perfectly well make it less easy to judge speed / size of the vehicle. Not sure I can explain why - maybe your attention is drawn by the pair of light lights and it's less easy to evaluate the size of the vehicle behind them and the rate at which it's getting bigger? I don't know. :-/
Kevin
-
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect. >:( >:(
I'll wait for the thread about someone slamming on the brakes in front of you then ;) ;)
They shouldn't be dazzling other drivers >:( >:(
-
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect. >:( >:(
I'll wait for the thread about someone slamming on the brakes in front of you then ;) ;)
They shouldn't be dazzling other drivers >:( >:(
Because they were lucky enough to buy a new car?
Give it a few years, then, and you'll have your main beam on all the time. Look forward to getting a tug from the police!
-
Interesting thread. If it saves just one life it surely has to be worth it. We live with congested roads and technology just hasn't kept up. DRLs are just a minor tweak. Not that I would like it but all motorway and main road travel should be computer controlled with only the local loop being "freestyle". ;D
Is it law yet in the UK to have dipped lights on if it is raining? It is in Spain. Good law too. :y
-
Must admit I don't have a problem with DRLs - they're bright but.. that's the idea, surely.
If everyone had half a brain then I'm sure we wouldn't need them; then again, bikers wouldn't need their lights on either if everyone was capable of using their eyes.
What does drive me up the wall, though, are the fog lights on new Mercedes - on the 4x4s, anyway.. you know, the ones that 'wink' at you as they're going round corners/roundabouts/etc. What's that all about? Bright as hell and when they're following you, they're basically flashing one fog lamp at a time at you - highly distracting.
-
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect. >:( >:(
I'll wait for the thread about someone slamming on the brakes in front of you then ;) ;)
They shouldn't be dazzling other drivers >:( >:(
The same could be said of your reaction though ;) ;)
Except theirs is as fitted, you are deliberately trying to dazzle them ::) ::)
-
Likewise I cant for the life of me see the point,with the exception of the motor bike how can you not see all motors in daylight? and audis to me simply look dilly or some may say gay and often promote a chuckle in miggy's driving seat.For now I won't go on about BM's "Angel Eyes" now I ask you,for me more like "goofy eyes" Seriously I think on our heavy trafficked roads the motorcyclist will really lose out big time,just be another light lost among many
Not that I'm a fan of anything with 2 wheels (segways excluded, the're on the pavement), but I agree completely
-
I drive her Smart Roadster with lights on all the time. People just don't see it! Especially 4x4 owners :-? :-? :-?
-
1. Do members feel they promote road safety?
Yes - makes the cars more visible especially this time of year with the poor conditions...
2. Would they consider retrofitting DRLs?
I personally would consider having the lights come on with the ignition
3. Where would be the best position for fitting DRLs on an Omega?
Normal dipped or side lights are fine
I know the argument will come with motorcyclists saying that they are losing an element of there higher visibilty, but, they can still wear flourescent hi-vis clothing.
Sadly, there are many motorists who drive around in the poor light conditions without lights, who get hidden by spray, mist and such...
-
....
Sadly, there are many motorists who drive around in the poor light conditions without lights, who get hidden by spray, mist and such...
This is something that always amazes me :-? I get to work now just after it's got light, but see loads of people who obviously believe that cos they can see where they're going, they don't need their lights on. All around have lights on, including street lights, but they don't think they need theirs. Hence AUTO lights would have been a better fitment.
-
It is and I go full beam & fog lights and that minimises the effect. >:( >:(
I'll wait for the thread about someone slamming on the brakes in front of you then ;) ;)
They shouldn't be dazzling other drivers >:( >:(
The same could be said of your reaction though ;) ;)
Except theirs is as fitted, you are deliberately trying to dazzle them ::) ::)
Problem was unless I was on full beam I couldn't actually see where I was going the pulsing LED rear lamps were buggering up my vision.
Basically some Peugeot convertable crap and a dog eater mobile both have this effect with me.
If I crash due to it - what happens?
BTW who flashed the Mercs with DRL fog lights until they realised what they were.
-
Problem was unless I was on full beam I couldn't actually see where I was going the pulsing LED rear lamps were buggering up my vision......
In that case you are a danger to yourself and other road users and thus, should not be driving.
If you were to be involved in a collision and the above statement came to light then you would be up whatsit creek without a paddle, legal wise....
-
Problem was unless I was on full beam I couldn't actually see where I was going the pulsing LED rear lamps were buggering up my vision......
In that case you are a danger to yourself and other road users and thus, should not be driving.
If you were to be involved in a collision and the above statement came to light then you would be up whatsit creek without a paddle, legal wise....
But how did these lights pass testing as it seems I am not rare in this?
Yes I am considering stopping night driving if they get too common.
I find I am OK on motorways and the like
Examples from a quick search.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=116387
http://thedrivingblog.com/2010/10/led-tail-lights-are-too-bright-need-auto-dim/
http://www.fun-led-light.com/tail-light-led.html
Currrently I know of two car models which cause this and if I get vision issues I WILL use main beam if I have to.
I am looking at taking this further as I believe that some LED rear lights are actually dangerous.
I will be asking my MP to investigate he is new and willing to please.
-
just like with a low sun, don't look at the light, look at the road.
-
Problem was unless I was on full beam I couldn't actually see where I was going the pulsing LED rear lamps were buggering up my vision......
In that case you are a danger to yourself and other road users and thus, should not be driving.
If you were to be involved in a collision and the above statement came to light then you would be up whatsit creek without a paddle, legal wise....
But how did these lights pass testing as it seems I am not rare in this?
Yes I am considering stopping night driving if they get too common.
I find I am OK on motorways and the like
Examples from a quick search.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=116387
http://thedrivingblog.com/2010/10/led-tail-lights-are-too-bright-need-auto-dim/
http://www.fun-led-light.com/tail-light-led.html
Currrently I know of two car models which cause this and if I get vision issues I WILL use main beam if I have to.
I am looking at taking this further as I believe that some LED rear lights are actually dangerous.
I will be asking my MP to investigate he is new and willing to please.
And until (if) you manage to get the law of the land changed, guessing you will continue to drive with uncorrected defective vision?
Whether you are in a team of one or several thousand, PLEASE get specialist help to rectify your vision issues and, until rectified, simply do not drive in the dark.
Ultimately, its your conscience if someone is injured due to you being present on the road and driving using your main beam control in the manner that you describe. Its worse than simple stupidity, to be honest. It involves malicious intent, to my mind, with total disregard for possible consequences.
Would be bad enough if it was one of your family that was injured/killed by your actions but possibly worse if it was that of someone else.....
-
Or drop well back from the offending vehicle. If someone overtakes you let em drop in the space.
Top tip served me very well over the years, you still get to your destination. :y
-
Or drop well back from the offending vehicle. If someone overtakes you let em drop in the space.
Top tip served me very well over the years, you still get to your destination. :y
I have let people out to fill in as well
-
just like with a low sun, don't look at the light, look at the road.
[/highlight]
Indeed..... :y That said I believe there are night vision glasses available to help with glare...... :-/ :-/ :-/
-
Problem was unless I was on full beam I couldn't actually see where I was going the pulsing LED rear lamps were buggering up my vision......
In that case you are a danger to yourself and other road users and thus, should not be driving.
If you were to be involved in a collision and the above statement came to light then you would be up whatsit creek without a paddle, legal wise....
But how did these lights pass testing as it seems I am not rare in this?
Yes I am considering stopping night driving if they get too common.
I find I am OK on motorways and the like
Examples from a quick search.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=116387
http://thedrivingblog.com/2010/10/led-tail-lights-are-too-bright-need-auto-dim/
http://www.fun-led-light.com/tail-light-led.html
Currrently I know of two car models which cause this and if I get vision issues I WILL use main beam if I have to.
I am looking at taking this further as I believe that some LED rear lights are actually dangerous.
I will be asking my MP to investigate he is new and willing to please.
And until (if) you manage to get the law of the land changed, guessing you will continue to drive with uncorrected defective vision?
Whether you are in a team of one or several thousand, PLEASE get specialist help to rectify your vision issues and, until rectified, simply do not drive in the dark.
Ultimately, its your conscience if someone is injured due to you being present on the road and driving using your main beam control in the manner that you describe. Its worse than simple stupidity, to be honest. It involves malicious intent, to my mind, with total disregard for possible consequences.
Would be bad enough if it was one of your family that was injured/killed by your actions but possibly worse if it was that of someone else.....
I don't have vision issues, don't have the need for glaases and eye tests confirm that I don't...
LED lights play havoc with my eyes, they appear to dance about all over the road, leaving me at times with almost a migraine...
-
Likewise I cant for the life of me see the point,with the exception of the motor bike how can you not see all motors in daylight? and audis to me simply look dilly or some may say gay and often promote a chuckle in miggy's driving seat.For now I won't go on about BM's "Angel Eyes" now I ask you,for me more like "goofy eyes" Seriously I think on our heavy trafficked roads the motorcyclist will really lose out big time,just be another light lost among many
I agree. If I'm "pressing on" in the Westfield I often use dipped lights as it's a car with a small frontal area and dark colour.
What's more, I think lights on a vehicle that you'd otherwise be able to see perfectly well make it less easy to judge speed / size of the vehicle. Not sure I can explain why - maybe your attention is drawn by the pair of light lights and it's less easy to evaluate the size of the vehicle behind them and the rate at which it's getting bigger? I don't know. :-/
Kevin
Agreed, lights on in daylight make a vehicle seem closer and faster than its really is, good for bikes as it gives the rider a safety margin as other drivers dont pull out in front as close (bikes are often nearer and faster than they seem). If all cars etc have lights on all the time it takes away from the safety of bikes (and small cars Kevin) where it is needed. Riders and drivers put there lights on because they know they are in a position to not be seen as easily by other road users, not because other road users are blind and cant see every day things put in front of them.
In short, its another rule to replace ability and common sense.
Al
-
Likewise I cant for the life of me see the point,with the exception of the motor bike how can you not see all motors in daylight? and audis to me simply look dilly or some may say gay and often promote a chuckle in miggy's driving seat.For now I won't go on about BM's "Angel Eyes" now I ask you,for me more like "goofy eyes" Seriously I think on our heavy trafficked roads the motorcyclist will really lose out big time,just be another light lost among many
I agree. If I'm "pressing on" in the Westfield I often use dipped lights as it's a car with a small frontal area and dark colour.
What's more, I think lights on a vehicle that you'd otherwise be able to see perfectly well make it less easy to judge speed / size of the vehicle. Not sure I can explain why - maybe your attention is drawn by the pair of light lights and it's less easy to evaluate the size of the vehicle behind them and the rate at which it's getting bigger? I don't know. :-/
Kevin
Agreed, lights on in daylight make a vehicle seem closer and faster than its really is, good for bikes as it gives the rider a safety margin as other drivers dont pull out in front as close (bikes are often nearer and faster than they seem). If all cars etc have lights on all the time it takes away from the safety of bikes (and small cars Kevin) where it is needed. Riders and drivers put there lights on because they know they are in a position to not be seen as easily by other road users, not because other road users are blind and cant see every day things put in front of them.
In short, its another rule to replace ability and common sense.
Al
In 1973 I got my first of the 16er moped, a Honda SS50....It developed a charging fault which was overcome by putting on the lights. Lots of cars used to flash as I rode with my dipped beam, now the norm for bikes and imho a very positive safety feature, as a driver you notice lights. I fear bikes are going to blend in to the mirage of lights on the road, making them more vulnerable than before they started using lights as an 'I am here' message. What next? bikes with flashing headlights? that has to be the next step and then we will have problems with the emergency services, sadly it will be interesting to look at future statistics involving bike accidents... :(
-
Firstly, I don't recall the democratically elected UK parliament voting for DRL's..... >:(
Secondly, most of the LED designs that I have seen so far are just plain naff, especially the Audis, Discos and Range Rovers..... :o
Thirdly, most of the DRL's that I've seen are just too damn bright, especially the newer Volvos. Surely, sidelight brightness is enough?? :-?
Fourthly, I agree with Varche. That the law should be that if it's raining or bad viz then we have to drive on dipped beams! and the local constabulary should be the judge of that! Oops they've all been replaced by cameras, never mind we'll just dictate that all new cars should be fitted with superbright automatic running lights.... :D
Think that just about covers my thoughts on the subject :y :y :y
-
Firstly, I don't recall the democratically elected UK parliament voting for DRL's..... >:(
Secondly, most of the LED designs that I have seen so far are just plain naff, especially the Audis, Discos and Range Rovers..... :o
Thirdly, most of the DRL's that I've seen are just too damn bright, especially the newer Volvos. Surely, sidelight brightness is enough?? :-?
Fourthly, I agree with Varche. That the law should be that if it's raining or bad viz then we have to drive on dipped beams! and the local constabulary should be the judge of that! Oops they've all been replaced by cameras, never mind we'll just dictate that all new cars should be fitted with superbright automatic running lights.... :D
Think that just about covers my thoughts on the subject :y :y :y
I thought that was law anyway....
-
Maybe, not sure come to think of it! Definatly the case in France and Spain. The motorway speed limit goes down in wet weather in France as well, I think from 120 kmh to 110 kmh....
Anyway if it is the case, shouldn't that be sufficient? Mind you we've all seen numptys driving down the motorway at 90mph in the pouring rain with no lights, so maybe we do need our unelected masters in Brussels dictating to us... >:(
-
Firstly, I don't recall the democratically elected UK parliament voting for DRL's..... >:(
Secondly, most of the LED designs that I have seen so far are just plain naff, especially the Audis, Discos and Range Rovers..... :o
Thirdly, most of the DRL's that I've seen are just too damn bright, especially the newer Volvos. Surely, sidelight brightness is enough?? :-?
Fourthly, I agree with Varche. That the law should be that if it's raining or bad viz then we have to drive on dipped beams! and the local constabulary should be the judge of that! Oops they've all been replaced by cameras, never mind we'll just dictate that all new cars should be fitted with superbright automatic running lights.... :D
Think that just about covers my thoughts on the subject :y :y :y
I thought that was law anyway....
It's not law, but common sense should make you turn them on. Mine go on when raining during the day. :y
-
Might be out of date to current regs but these are what I am familiar(ish) with....
Rear lights, wattage and intensity...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/10/made
Rear foglamps
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/11/made
Front foglamps
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/6/made
Use of lights and front fogs
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/regulation/25/made
Or if you really want to play with lighting regs...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/contents/made
Fill your boots.... ;)
-
Firstly, I don't recall the democratically elected UK parliament voting for DRL's..... >:(
Secondly, most of the LED designs that I have seen so far are just plain naff, especially the Audis, Discos and Range Rovers..... :o
Thirdly, most of the DRL's that I've seen are just too damn bright, especially the newer Volvos. Surely, sidelight brightness is enough?? :-?
Fourthly, I agree with Varche. That the law should be that if it's raining or bad viz then we have to drive on dipped beams! and the local constabulary should be the judge of that! Oops they've all been replaced by cameras, never mind we'll just dictate that all new cars should be fitted with superbright automatic running lights.... :D
Think that just about covers my thoughts on the subject :y :y :y
I thought that was law anyway....
Really is very simple ... Highway Code section 226-237
"Driving in adverse weather conditions"
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069859
Some folks might wish to read 114 and 115 as well .. :(
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070302
-
Not as straightforward as you may thing Nige. The Highway 'Code' is not 'Legislation'.
That said, there is something rustling in then pickled recesses of my memory that to disregard the highway code is, in essence, Sect 3 RTA - without due care/attention or regard to other road users etc but the onus of proof is the stumbling block...
-
Not as straightforward as you may thing Nige. The Highway 'Code' is not 'Legislation'.
That said, there is something rustling in then pickled recesses of my memory that to disregard the highway code is, in essence, Sect 3 RTA - without due care/attention or regard to other road users etc but the onus of proof is the stumbling block...
I would not have the temerity to argue with someone with your background, or your knowledge of the RTA ... but when I did my LGV/PCV training one of the "training documents" we had to read said this:
"The Highway Code is not law, but it does include many points of law (denoted by the word must in bold type).
Failing to observe the code, while not in itself an offence, may be taken as evidence of 'driving without due care'.
In law, of course, ignorance is no defence, so even if you haven't read the Highway Code for 20 years you can still be prosecuted for new offences."
which, in part, agrees with what you say.... :)
-
Not as straightforward as you may thing Nige. The Highway 'Code' is not 'Legislation'.
That said, there is something rustling in then pickled recesses of my memory that to disregard the highway code is, in essence, Sect 3 RTA - without due care/attention or regard to other road users etc but the onus of proof is the stumbling block...
I would not have the temerity to argue with someone with your background, or your knowledge of the RTA ... but when I did my LGV/PCV training one of the "training documents" we had to read said this:
"The Highway Code is not law, but it does include many points of law (denoted by the word must in bold type). [/highlight]
Failing to observe the code, while not in itself an offence, may be taken as evidence of 'driving without due care'.
In law, of course, ignorance is no defence, so even if you haven't read the Highway Code for 20 years you can still be prosecuted for new offences."
which, in part, agrees with what you say.... :)
That is the point I was trying to convey. ;)
When reading the HC you will see a specific reference to relevant legislation beneath each listed para. Where there is no reference, it becomes 'code' not 'legislation', if you follow.
:y
-
The quote/highlight parts as shown above of the forum software have become skewed and, frankly, its too late after a long day for me to reassemble it.
You get the gist though, I think.... ;)
night night... :y
-
Iirc..... Looong pause. ::). ...... Think it was an Army experiment in camoflage. They placed a tank on a horizon or ridge and covered it in bright lights. The tank disapeared almost entirely in broad daylight. The light level emited matched that of the sky behind to a degree that wasnttoo acurate and the effect was enough for the tank to be invisible unless you knew where it was before lights on.
So, point is, the more of the vehichle covered in light the harder it is to see and judge distance and speed. There is a balance to be had, i'm sure you've all seen bikes with lights on low beam in day time, and some of those are dumb enough to use high beam in day time. With an urban background the bike will stand out where as the tank on a horizon will not, however it is almost impossible to judge the bike speed and distance as all you see is light, theres nothing to focus on.
So as Kev says, excessive light doesnt help. Therefor too bright a light.... You get the gist, to pinch an H'ism. :)
-
Iirc..... Looong pause. ::). ...... Think it was an Army experiment in camoflage. They placed a tank on a horizon or ridge and covered it in bright lights. The tank disapeared almost entirely in broad daylight. The light level emited matched that of the sky behind to a degree that wasnttoo acurate and the effect was enough for the tank to be invisible unless you knew where it was before lights on.
So, point is, the more of the vehichle covered in light the harder it is to see and judge distance and speed. There is a balance to be had, i'm sure you've all seen bikes with lights on low beam in day time, and some of those are dumb enough to use high beam in day time. With an urban background the bike will stand out where as the tank on a horizon will not, however it is almost impossible to judge the bike speed and distance as all you see is light, theres nothing to focus on.
So as Kev says, excessive light doesnt help. Therefor too bright a light.... You get the gist, to pinch an H'ism. :)
At least some have a coloured filter for drl use, they stand out a little more than most imo
-
Iirc..... Looong pause. ::). ...... Think it was an Army experiment in camoflage. They placed a tank on a horizon or ridge and covered it in bright lights. The tank disapeared almost entirely in broad daylight. The light level emited matched that of the sky behind to a degree that wasnttoo acurate and the effect was enough for the tank to be invisible unless you knew where it was before lights on.
So, point is, the more of the vehichle covered in light the harder it is to see and judge distance and speed. There is a balance to be had, i'm sure you've all seen bikes with lights on low beam in day time, and some of those are dumb enough to use high beam in day time. With an urban background the bike will stand out where as the tank on a horizon will not, however it is almost impossible to judge the bike speed and distance as all you see is light, theres nothing to focus on.
So as Kev says, excessive light doesnt help. Therefor too bright a light.... You get the gist, to pinch an H'ism. :)
At least some have a coloured filter for drl use, they stand out a little more than most imo
I cirtainly feel that, given that we dont use yellow lights like they do in Europe,that that colour should be reserved for bikers. Or at least have some sort of colour code to mark the single headlight out from the sea of same colour pairs.
-
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
Amen to that. (From the Highway Code)
Anyway back to DRLs ;D
-
Coloured lights for bikers isn't a bad idea, as we'll just blend in with all the background light once DRL's are common :-/
Incidently, I lived in Vietnam for a while recently and when I got my first bike there (Honda Wave 90cc stepthrough :y) I rode around with my headlight on dipped beam, thinking I'd stand out in a sea of erratic Honda Waves. :-/
However all the locals kept pointing at my light and kept telling me to turn it off! Ride around at night with no lights on however.... No Problem!! :o ;D :D