A presumed safety item that isn't safe - daytime running lights

[freeportd]

I'm not a fan of mandated standards with respect to layout, etc. In fact, the mandate of DRLs is what prompted me to initiate this thread. As I stated in the subject line, this mandate under the guise of safety has created an unsafe condition. Don't get me wrong, I think DRLs do increase visibility during the day - and thus increase my safety. But, when it causes the public to not activate full lighting after sunset, it decreases safety.

Sounds like Canada has learned a bunch regarding DRLs and from unintended consequences and will now require DRL rear lighting. Of course, that could cause confusion with brake lights - and that could cause further safety issues.

Personally, I'd like something a bit more obvious to let me know that DRLs are active. Maybe something that says DRL ON instead of an icon. I've driven some cars where the icon is on for DRLs - to remind folks that only DRLs only are on. In our CX-5, the light is on when the headlights are on. Changing color of the light doesn't do it - as you need a legend to determine what color means what.

I too drove cars with headlight dimmers on the floor - so let's just say I've been driving a while. I've learned to adapt to wiper switches that pull toward me for "mist" in some cars - and upwards for our Mazdas. So, I'll adapt to this lighting thing as well. The scary part for me is the number of folks that do NOT adapt. As a previous poster stated - we are less and less aware of the operation of our vehicles - and that is NOT a good thing.

 

[CX5Nut]

We just leave it on auto and no issues. Really love the auto high beam feature too!

 

[Avoidin Deer]

I'd certainly enjoy reading it. I prefer to read 'opinions' that are well documented.

I prefer to lay out all my reasoning so as to get valuable inputs (confirming as well as contending). I care less about getting agreement that about being mutually informative.

Some find it tiring...all that thinking & such. (No one here, just thinking about work environments).

 

[Avoidin Deer]

We just leave it on auto and no issues. Really love the auto high beam feature too!

I live in the country where houses are space way far apart. I remember the first night I drove my CX-5. I came around a corner and there was a house up ahead well off the road with its porch light on. The high beams went off because of the ambient light it sensed. I have yet to have them blast in someone's eyes...they always dim in time.

I also find the auto-headlights to be interesting around here. There are lots of open areas and lots of areas where trees overhang. At dusk, it's dark enough under the trees to kick the headlights on, and still light enough in the open areas to turn them back off.

As an aside, this is hardly new technology. Years ago a friend and I purchased a pair of '63 Continentals at an estate sale. He found the deal so he got first choice. His car had auto headlight dimmers...the light sensor looked like a little rocket sitting up on the dash. I have no idea when this technology was first introduced.

 

[pcardoza]

Maybe the answer is as simple as making headlights 100% automatic with:
DRL during daylight hours (car engine running).
When darkness approaches or when the wipers are on, all lights come on (engine running).

 

[Ronzuki]

Maybe the answer is as simple as making headlights 100% automatic with:
DRL during daylight hours (car engine running).
When darkness approaches or when the wipers are on, all lights come on (engine running).

Ahh yes, the beauty of everything tied to a central automation controller, in this case a car's BCM. The infamous black box. Lots of goes-intas and goes-outtas with all the magic happening inside. One can skin the 'how to control it' cat 50 different ways then. Great right? Well, not so fast. This is precisely why there are no standards with anything any longer... "I can do whatever I want" because hey, if I screw it up, we're not on the hook to rewire the entire production run of machines (in this case cars) to fix my ill-thought of way of doing things. Or my favorite of fixing a mechanical issue with software...we'll just send down a patch. I give you Mazda's CD issue and rocker arms falling off. We all know this is happening already in the newest models, correct? Want them or not, you're getting them shoved down in to the car's controls. Randomly, by whom? And for what reasons? How would you know and why would you care? It's just YOUR car, that you own and are riding around in. You have no right to know. There's your notorious 'firmware updates'. The vast majority of these so-called updates are not improvements or upgrades at all...they're repairs to the original screwed up controls, period. Once again, I give you 737Max. When something is designed/engineered for hard-wired implementation, trust me when I tell you, a lot more thought is put in to the what-if scenarios of operation and you are continuously asking yourself the question day and night "are we really sure this is the best path to follow". You're asking it in your sleep. If you're not, and your designing hard-wired, chances are extremely good that you won't be employed very long. Boeing has bigger problems with the Max besides some lousy firmware.

Ever ponder the difference in meanings behind the terms 'firmware' and 'software'? Make no mistake, they are very different (well at least they used to be) and should never be used interchangeably. However, unfortunately, all too often in today's world, they are. And here we are, 2020, welcome and enjoy the headaches.

 

[Ronzuki]

Some find it tiring...all that thinking & such. (No one here, just thinking about work environments).

Yeah tiring of thinking....clearly explains why all I get paid to do anymore, primarily, is clean up messes and fight fires. Now we have our cars employing all the same nonsense that requires us all to get on here and guess about how the voodoo works, doesn't, or should.

Still an avid fan of head lights on all the time. If the engine is running, turn em on. What's the harm? You know, from the "it's all about safety" perspective...

 

[GoFrogs]

without reading the article, I can attest to them not as "safe" as they are made out to me. other than people not turning on their headlights during low light situations, especially with backlit gauges, DRLs don't save you from people not paying attention.

in 2004, just bought my new GTI with low beam DRLs. it was 3 days old and a guy pulled out in front of me (crossing 3 lanes of traffic) and forced me off the road. Even with the DRLs, he did not see me clearly enough to wait, or he thought he could beat me (misjudged my speed ~40mph). My car sustained $2k in suspension damage as was out for 30 days.

from that point forward, I deemed DRLs ineffective and proceeded to disable them at the switch with electrical tape (easily reversible).

my current WRX has the high beam and I am highly contemplating in disabling them too as I pull up to manned security gates during hours of darkness and I hate blinking the guards with either the low beams or the high beam DRLs. Easy enough, but frustrating.

again, I agree that DRLs are not has "safe" as believed, although insurance give discounts for your car having them....

 

[sm1ke]

without reading the article, I can attest to them not as "safe" as they are made out to me. other than people not turning on their headlights during low light situations, especially with backlit gauges, DRLs don't save you from people not paying attention.

in 2004, just bought my new GTI with low beam DRLs. it was 3 days old and a guy pulled out in front of me (crossing 3 lanes of traffic) and forced me off the road. Even with the DRLs, he did not see me clearly enough to wait, or he thought he could beat me (misjudged my speed ~40mph). My car sustained $2k in suspension damage as was out for 30 days.

from that point forward, I deemed DRLs ineffective and proceeded to disable them at the switch with electrical tape (easily reversible).

my current WRX has the high beam and I am highly contemplating in disabling them too as I pull up to manned security gates during hours of darkness and I hate blinking the guards with either the low beams or the high beam DRLs. Easy enough, but frustrating.

again, I agree that DRLs are not has "safe" as believed, although insurance give discounts for your car having them....

Personally, I wouldn't come to such a conclusion after one instance of a driver "not seeing you". That driver could have been an asshole who knew exactly what they were doing, or they may have been oblivious enough to not realize you were there even if you had your low beams on and you were laying on the horn.

Having DRLs on when driving is always slightly better than not having any lights at all. A car with lights on will always be more visible (however slight) than a car without.

 

[Mazdiod2]

I think DRL operation should also include side marker and taillights (rear DRL).

 

[yrwei52]

⋯ Having DRLs on when driving is always slightly better than not having any lights at all. A car with lights on will always be more visible (however slight) than a car without.

Agreed. But I also agree with GoFrogs’ point that DRLs are not as "safe" as people believed. That’s why DOT doesn’t mandate DRLs in US market after so many lobby tries by GM, because it’s not an effective safety device after many researches for US driving environment.

Like GoFrogs, I also disabled the DRLs on my previous VW Passat with a Euro headlight switch. I’m particularly against those DRLs using headlights, which would cause many side-effects such as forgetting turn on the lights in the night, and reducing the effect of recognizing motorcycles and school buses where they have headlights on all the time.

Personally I don’t mind to have DEDICATED LED DRLs like my current 2016 CX-5. Unfortunately they failed too early which is not supposed to as LED should last a lot longer. LED is perfect to be the lighting source for DRLs.

 

[GTA-CX9]

That’s why DOT doesn’t mandate DRLs in US market after so many lobby tries by GM,

I'd be careful when assuming a gov or agency of gov (USA, Canada where I am, or any) is making decision based on proper evidence, or any at all. Many factors.

Whether DOT does or doesn't mandate something, I don't take that as anything more than a decision someone somewhere made, informed or not.

 

[Mazdiod2]

I am thinking of converting some OEM halogen foglights to LED with aftermarket LEDs and wiring them as DRLs. Also adding rear red LEDs to the bumper reflectors which would ideally come on at the same time.

 

[Avoidin Deer]

I have always driven with my headlights on...at least since the early 90s.

I appreciate it when others do because different color cars have a way of blending into different backgrounds under different lighting conditions.

That's why I've always preferred driving at night. As long as everyone has their headlights on, we're unlikely to not see each other.

 

[GTA-CX9]

Deaths per mile or km traveled have constantly gone down. For decades. Many factors obviously, such as driver skill, road design/construction, impaired driving rates, etc.

But I'd like to believe car technology has played part. Any new tech can be questioned. I have relatives who still swear at seat belts. It was new "tech" at one point.

This is a simplification i know, but at end of day, whatever we've done to cars in last ten years, the rate of dying while hurtling down road in a metal box is still going down.

So I'm open to vehicles offering new safety, including these systems that watch/monitor/warn us. The systems can sometimes work against us, and be annoying, but I'd think I'm still net positive overall.

I could copy paste this to the Radar Cruise thread, and like 5 others, since it's an opinion I have that applies to all these vehicle enhancements.

It's interesting to hear opinions of those for and against. It's good we question and ask why. It's the only way to get a full understanding of what the systems do and what the pitfalls are.

 

[Avoidin Deer]

Deaths per mile or km traveled have constantly gone down. For decades. Many factors obviously, such as driver skill, road design/construction, impaired driving rates, etc.

This is because of air bags.

They have also caused insurance premiums to rise.

What used to result in a relatively inexpensive funeral now ends up being tens of thousands of dollars (or more) in hospital bills because your extremities get mangled but your vital organs are protected. And Deaths per mi/km decline.

 

[murky]

Personally, I wouldn't come to such a conclusion after one instance of a driver "not seeing you". That driver could have been an asshole who knew exactly what they were doing, or they may have been oblivious enough to not realize you were there even if you had your low beams on and you were laying on the horn.

Having DRLs on when driving is always slightly better than not having any lights at all. A car with lights on will always be more visible (however slight) than a car without.

You stated it much more diplomatically than I was inclined to. Yesterday I was going to make a left turn from a parking lot onto a divided road with a 45mph speed limit. It was near dusk and I would have to cross a lane of traffic coming from the west with the sun as the backdrop. I could clearly see cars that had headlights/running lights on and could not see other cars. I wound up turning right instead and taking the long way.

It wasn't worth the risk of getting killed by a car I couldn't see with no lights on. I'm sure all of the geniuses driving those cars with no lights had no idea that I'd contemplated turning in front of them.

P.S. Why is it that it seems the people with asphalt gray cars are the ones that like to use their lights the least.

 

[LAMike240]

this also can be solved if dashboard lights remain off at night when the headlights are not on, this was how they did it back in the days before autohead lights and DRL's.

Exactly! Luckily in LA traffic, I can roll down my window and yell at them to turn on thier lights. At somepoint, NHTSA will get involved and demand changes due to too many accidents.

 

[GTA-CX9]

Exactly! Luckily in LA traffic, I can roll down my window and yell at them to turn on thier lights. At somepoint, NHTSA will get involved and demand changes due to too many accidents.

Roll down window? Don't you all have convertibles???

And BTW I said roll down window to a younger cousin recently. Blank stare. No idea what i meant.

Last roll down i had was mid 90s Cavalier! 2 door. Manual, had no guts but I loved that car.

 

[sm1ke]

Agreed. But I also agree with GoFrogs’ point that DRLs are not as "safe" as people believed. That’s why DOT doesn’t mandate DRLs in US market after so many lobby tries by GM, because it’s not an effective safety device after many researches for US driving environment.

While reading into this topic a bit more, it seems that there are quite a few opinions from many different sources arguing the pros and cons of DRLs. Here's one example. In short, according to that article, DRLs aren't required because people confused them for headlights or turn signals. It also states that inattentive or impaired drivers confused them with their low beam headlights. GM actually tried to petition the govt to make DRLs mandatory so they could minimize the differences between the CAN and US spec vehicles (to save money), but wasn't successful. The NHTSA published a report that stated that with regard to DRL-equipped vehicles, there was a 5.7% decrease in two-vehicle collisions excluding rear-end collisions, while all other test results were deemed to be statistically insignificant. Further, some of those against DRLs complained of glare from the DRLs (usually in vehicles that used the high beam bulb at 50% power as the DRL). All good points, and totally valid in supporting the fact that DRLs do not provide a statistically significant reduction in crashes. With that said, it's easy to understand why DRLs haven't been mandated. However, more and more manufacturers are now implementing DRLs in ways that cannot be easily confused (like LED eyebrows as DRLs, or turning off the DRL when the turn signal is activated to ensure that the signal is visible). That, to me, says that the DRLs help much more than they hurt.

IMO, the cons against DRLs can be drilled down to the people, not the tech. If they aren't as safe as you think they are, that may be problem with your own expectations (such as expecting DRLs to prevent one driver from cutting another off). People mistake DRLs for headlights because they are inattentive or impaired.

A flashlight in a dark forest is better than no light at all.