HEADLIGHTS ON when its nasty out...

[MHarryE]

Rear fogs like that are common on European cars. Really useful in low viz conditions - blizzard or fog, day or night. That setup presumes the driver is capable of turning a switch On/Off at the relevant time... so domestic manufacturers don't bother installing them here. About 15 years back, there was a really bad pileup in daytime fog, on the 401 in Western Ontario. I remember reading a really haunting account of the aftermath, told by a guy who managed to get his truck clear by driving well off the shoulder. I wish rear fog lights were common here, they would have helped quite a bit in that situation. Rgds, D.

Rear fogs are REQUIRED on European cars, not just common. When I checked into bringing my European car into the U.S., one thing I would have needed to do was to disable the rear fogs. There were so many things I traded for an American spec car before returning but I could only use it for 30 days in Europe due to it not meeting European safety standards. I having driven in so much fog in Europe and loved the visibility of the rear fogs, I can't understand why America thinks it's a bad thing. Just like not having the rears lit when a car is equipped with daytime running lights. I need to keep reminding my wife about that because she thinks all the lights are on all the time.

 

[aczlan]

Rear fogs are REQUIRED on European cars, not just common. When I checked into bringing my European car into the U.S., one thing I would have needed to do was to disable the rear fogs.

I wonder why they wanted them disabled? US market Volvos have had them since at least 1984 (the oldest Volvo I have owned) and they still have them on present day cars (see page 96 of the 2015 XC70 owners manual PDF: http://www.volvocars.com/~/media/files/owner manuals/2014/11/11/12/46/20155 xc70 owners manual.pdf ). The cars I have had had a single taillight on the drivers side (although, I rewired one to use dual filament bulbs to have 4 running lights and 2 fog taillights in the back).

Aaron Z

 

[jlgurr]

I wonder why they wanted them disabled? US market Volvos have had them since at least 1984 (the oldest Volvo I have owned) and they still have them on present day cars (see page 96 of the 2015 XC70 owners manual PDF: http://www.volvocars.com/~/media/files/owner%20manuals/2014/11/11/12/46/20155%20xc70%20owners%20manual.pdf ). The cars I have had had a single taillight on the drivers side (although, I rewired one to use dual filament bulbs to have 4 running lights and 2 fog taillights in the back). Aaron Z

They should be disabled in the US because our drivers are not trained in their use and leave them on, probably unaware they even exist. But, then again, I have issue with improper light bulbs being installed and those silly clear lens taillights. My OCD wins some days.

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

 

[Looking4new]

3930dave:
I understand where you are coming from. Idiots that will pull out in front of a motorcycle are the very same idiots that will pull out in front of a truck, the only good thing about the whole situation is that the truck will flatten them. The old excuse of 'I looked and didn't see it'. They didn't look, they only glanced. The split second that it took to glance instead of actually look is the difference between life and death for someone.

 

[DHD]

I agree with much that has been said about using headlights in nasty weather for better visibility.
The key point is, when it is more difficult to see because of darkness or storm conditions or dusty conditions, then yes headlights should be used.

I do not agree with the idea of using headlights every time you drive your vehicle.
Lights should only be used when conditions require better visibility.

I actually use to think day light running lights were a good idea.
After all, if everybody's headlights came on automatically every time they used their car,
then being seen and seeing the another person's vehicle would no longer be an issue.
Why would anyone be against that .....

Here are a couple of links for anyone interested in
another view of Day Light Running Lights

DADRL - The Story of Daytime Running Lights

Pros and Cons of Daytime Running Lights

 

[3930dave]

I wonder why they wanted them disabled? US market Volvos have had them since at least 1984 (the oldest Volvo I have owned) and they still have them on present day cars (see page 96 of the 2015 XC70 owners manual PDF: http://www.volvocars.com/~/media/files/owner manuals/2014/11/11/12/46/20155 xc70 owners manual.pdf ). The cars I have had had a single taillight on the drivers side (although, I rewired one to use dual filament bulbs to have 4 running lights and 2 fog taillights in the back).

Aaron Z

All that was done on my old V here to "disable" was the factory left the r. fog bulbs out, as well as the dedicated fuse. Adequate measures, for the avg. driver today.

Rgds, D.

 

[3930dave]

Rear fogs are REQUIRED on European cars, not just common. When I checked into bringing my European car into the U.S., one thing I would have needed to do was to disable the rear fogs. There were so many things I traded for an American spec car before returning but I could only use it for 30 days in Europe due to it not meeting European safety standards. I having driven in so much fog in Europe and loved the visibility of the rear fogs, I can't understand why America thinks it's a bad thing. Just like not having the rears lit when a car is equipped with daytime running lights. I need to keep reminding my wife about that because she thinks all the lights are on all the time.

Euro regs are definitely better in certain areas. I can have a headlight bulb out of my old Volvo about 30 seconds after I get the hood up. As I understand it, that came from a requirement to be able to change a bulb at the side of the road, with zero tools. It's a good design on my V.

OTOH, some light N. American trucks today...... you are taking all sorts of major parts off the truck, in a shop, using tools, just to change one headlight bulb. Paying for 1hr+ of shop time is enough to encourage some people to keep driving with a burned out light.

The baseline expectation for the driver here is pretty low. The general assumption is that the driver regards a vehicle just as a necessary appliance, wants auto-everything, and ideally zero involvement in the process of driving. IMO, driverless cars here would probably catch on fairly quickly with a sizeable % of the population. I'm not lumping enthusiasts, DIY'ers, TBN'ers..... into this group.

Rgds, D.

 

[aczlan]

I would in favor of a system where the running lights (front and rear) come on when the key is on and it only turns the headlights on when it gets dark, we have Yukon that has DRLs that come on in the daytime, but that doesn't turn on the taillights.
As for their worries about cars without running lights being more likely to get hit or pulled out in front of, that's the problem of the driver of the car. It is (in my mind) a proven fact that when you have at least your running lights on, you are more visible. If I can make myself more visible to other cars lessening my risk for an accident, why not?
My insurance company feels that having DRLs makes a car safer, they have shown that in that they offer a discount for cars which have them. That discount is enough to (IMO) offset the miniscule extra gas used to generate the electricity needed to power my lights in the daytime.

Aaron Z

 

[aczlan]

All that was done on my old V here to "disable" was the factory left the r. fog bulbs out, as well as the dedicated fuse. Adequate measures, for the avg. driver today.

My Volvo has a fog taillight bulb in the LR light fixture, the RR one is wired for it, but it doesn't have a hole for the bulb to fit in.

Euro regs are definitely better in certain areas. I can have a headlight bulb out of my old Volvo about 30 seconds after I get the hood up. As I understand it, that came from a requirement to be able to change a bulb at the side of the road, with zero tools. It's a good design on my V.
OTOH, some light N. American trucks today...... you are taking all sorts of major parts off the truck, in a shop, using tools, just to change one headlight bulb. Paying for 1hr+ of shop time is enough to encourage some people to keep driving with a burned out light.

It is actually easier to change the bulb in my wife's Yukon than in my Volvo V90. On the Yukon you pull 2 metal rods out and the whole headlight assembly drops out where it is easy to work on whereas in the Volvo you have to work around the battery and the airbox.

Aaron Z

 

[3930dave]

3930dave:
I understand where you are coming from. Idiots that will pull out in front of a motorcycle are the very same idiots that will pull out in front of a truck, the only good thing about the whole situation is that the truck will flatten them. The old excuse of 'I looked and didn't see it'. They didn't look, they only glanced. The split second that it took to glance instead of actually look is the difference between life and death for someone.

The last one here was a dump truck. I was in my car at the time. Even if I had been driving my 1 ton, that's still major pucker factor.

That car runs factory DRL, high beam, but at reduced voltage.

Rgds, D.

 

[Pete6114]

When they introduced day time running lights, it was for a **** good reason, and now all of a sudden they aren't required anymore. Cant imagine why, since they DO work, even on a sunny day, never mind a snowy day....and i suspect that people that dont use their head lights, are the same one that dont use signal lights either, which is plain ignorant and careless.

 

[GManBart]

Drove home from work today and it was pretty nasty, 4-5F and gusts of wind. When the gusts died down, you could see for most of a mile. When they kicked up (which they would do suddenly) you had a hard time seeing the car in front of you.
Probably 1/3 of the cars I saw had no headlights on. It was hard enough to see the car in front of you when the wind kicked up if they had their headlights on. Without them, it was virtually impossible.

PLEASE, turn your headlights on when its nasty out. Its not just so you can see, but so that you can be seen by others.

Aaron Z

Amen! Even people with daytime running lights need to put their lights on because that is the only way to get the taillights on. I've seen folks in white cars/trucks, driving in near whiteout conditions without their headlights on....just DRLs and you could barely see them when approaching from behind. Of course, they usually tend to be the idiots driving too fast, or too slow in the same situation.

 

[k0ua]

I would in favor of a system where the running lights (front and rear) come on when the key is on and it only turns the headlights on when it gets dark, we have Yukon that has DRLs that come on in the daytime, but that doesn't turn on the taillights.
As for their worries about cars without running lights being more likely to get hit or pulled out in front of, that's the problem of the driver of the car. It is (in my mind) a proven fact that when you have at least your running lights on, you are more visible. If I can make myself more visible to other cars lessening my risk for an accident, why not?
My insurance company feels that having DRLs makes a car safer, they have shown that in that they offer a discount for cars which have them. That discount is enough to (IMO) offset the miniscule extra gas used to generate the electricity needed to power my lights in the daytime.

Aaron Z

+1.. This sums it up nicely.

 

[pat32rf]

Here in Ontario DRLs have been law since 1989, but my first set went onto my grill in 1964. Needless to say I'm sold on them and had quite a chuckle reading those links posted by the group against them. I still don't understand why we don't have constant tail lights.
What many people here in Canada don' realize is that when you use your parking brake, the runners shut off...
Even though we have had mandatory DRLs since 1989, it is normal for 5-10% of oncoming vehicles to be dark...and these are vehicles that must have a safety check each time they get sold.

 

[Looking4new]

The DRL controller in my Jeep is toast and will remain that way until I sell it. I don't have a problem turning on the headlights and shutting them off when I shut the engine off.

 

[Agvg]

The reason behind having only one rear fog light is simple, to make it easyer to see the braking lights.

 

[Looking4new]

The reason behind having only one rear fog light is simple, to make it easyer to see the braking lights.

That makes sense.

 

[cqaigy2]

3930dave:
I understand where you are coming from. Idiots that will pull out in front of a motorcycle are the very same idiots that will pull out in front of a truck, the only good thing about the whole situation is that the truck will flatten them. The old excuse of 'I looked and didn't see it'. They didn't look, they only glanced. The split second that it took to glance instead of actually look is the difference between life and death for someone.

What? Your not to pull out in front of a motorcycle? They have those nice cushy front tires on them that act like a bumpers so they just bounce off and leave smug on the door. Easy to buff out.

 

[Looking4new]

What? Your not to pull out in front of a motorcycle? They have those nice cushy front tires on them that act like a bumpers so they just bounce off and leave smug on the door. Easy to buff out.

I trust you are joking?

 

[timswi]

This is something I noticed (me bad) a year or so ago..DRL's used to be everywhere and I never minded them..Now It's rare to see them. When you have a light colored car approaching in the sun without DRL's, they disappear, with them they don't..Just sayin.

I really don't see the harm of having the lights on all the time..Who exactly is hurt by that is my question and there hasn't been a good answer from others queries.