[eye30]

Daytime running lights | AA

Thanks but......

I've seen cars with drl's on with side lights on which according to the above should not occur as drl's become the sidelights......so have car manufacturers found a way around the eu regs....

[FatBoy]

I don't understand Rusty's reasoning.

I believe that I might have some understanding, and he will correct me if I am wrong.

Headlights and tail-lights are OK in inclement weather, obviously because they increase visibility of the car but somehow DRLs are a disservice. Do they not increase visibility just like headlights?

Yes perhaps their benefit is less on a bright summer's day but that's not every day conditions. Heck it's been cloudy for the whole week in Sydney.

Even in sunny conditions, Rusty, haven't you driven at dusk or dawn directly into the direction of the sun and tried to make out oncoming cars against the glare, or had to look in your rear view mirror with the sun behind you as you tried to see if it was safe to change lanes. Take a moment to see whether DRLs make a difference then. I'm sure the 90% of us here who support DRLs don't all need our eyes checked.

Even today, pouring rain in Sydney. Yes 60% of people put their headlights on but 40% do not. DRL's make a big difference particularly as that 40% of drivers are just not accustomed to putting on their lights rather than forgetting.

He is not saying that lights on in these instances don't help.  However, having these on during the bright daylight hours (yes it has been raining in Sydney for the week, but it doesn't always rain in Sydney) may be next to useless.  Heck, even when it is raining here in Australia, even in Southern Tasmania, I have to wear sunglasses!!  BTW, Southern Tasmania is the same distance from the equator as the French Riviera is.  Surely educating the 40% of drivers to use their lights correctly (including indicators, or will we get automatic indicators too) would be a solution as well? 

Now, while trolling the internet for information, I have found a report from ANCAP about the effectiveness of DRLs.

DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
Fitted to all GM cars in the USA since the mid 1990s
Under European regulation dedicated bright white DRLs mandatory for cars from 2011
In a 2003 GM study dedicated DRLs were found to be much more effective than headlights

DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
GM findings are supported by photometric theory
At best, headlights are marginally effective on bright, cloudy days
GM study was one of the few to look at different effectiveness
Most DRL accident studies have been based on use of headlights or older style DRLs
Not surprising that they found a “latitude effect”

DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
Euro NCAP not interested in DRLs since they are required by regulation in Europe
Any cars intended to be sold in Europe will have dedicated DRLs
Many models now sold in Australia have DRLs
Fitted to some performance vehicles in Australia
Looking at ways to encourage early uptake

https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/shado/Divisions/Sydney%20Division/Southern%20Highlands%20and%20Tablelands%20Regional%20Group/INNOVATIONS/ancap-paine-25jul2013.pdf

Notice how it does mention the "latitude effect", which is basically what I have been saying.  Conditions in Australia are different to those in Europe.  We get more sunlight and it is more intense.  We are at the same latitude south as the Sahara is north.  You are comparing apples to oranges. 

While it is good that ANCAP are using a GM study to back up their claim that DRLs do help in visibility and the reduction of accidents, they also should also conduct a study in Australia to see if they get the same results as from the USA and Europe.  From their webpage, they expect to get different results with the "latitude effect".

Remember, I like DRLs, and I think that they work well, but that is anecdotal evidence, not backed up by any peer reviewed paper.  Also remember that the plural of anecdote isn't data, but anecdotes!!

[Surferdude]

^^^^
That's all very well, Jamie. Yes, anecdotal  I agre.
However, there are a number of experienced and careful Australian members who have made observations on hre which indicate they can see the benefits.
Technically that's anecdotal but I would suggest that their observations are valid.
As you know I have a history in motor sport. A number of my friends are now involved in drivr training and I'm unaware of any of them who dispute the benefits of DRLs.
Also, most of the reports I've read highlight that the most benefit is gained around dawn and dusk. With significant improvements in single vehicle/ pedestrian accidents and car/ motorcycle accidents.

These are north American surveys. I have an interest in Canada obviously, but most reports include the USA.

[FatBoy]

^^^^
That's all very well, Jamie. Yes, anecdotal  I agre.
However, there are a number of experienced and careful Australian members who have made observations on hre which indicate they can see the benefits.
Technically that's anecdotal but I would suggest that their observations are valid.
As you know I have a history in motor sport. A number of my friends are now involved in drivr training and I'm unaware of any of them who dispute the benefits of DRLs.
Also, most of the reports I've read highlight that the most benefit is gained around dawn and dusk. With significant improvements in single vehicle/ pedestrian accidents and car/ motorcycle accidents.

These are north American surveys. I have an interest in Canada obviously, but most reports include the USA.

I agree, Trev.  I like DRLs, and I think that they do make a difference.  Even the theory behind the type of light that they emit suggests that they are better seen than normal lights, particularly during bright, overcast days.  However, I still stand by my comment that the views and opinions by everybody on here constitute anecdotal evidence, not data.  I also stand by the evidence that Australia is at a different latitude to that of Europe and North America, therefore the results on the effectiveness of the DRLs in each of the places would be different.  I'm not saying that they would be detrimental to safety in Australia, just that the results would be different.

[Dazzler]

Something else to throw into the mix is the brightness and orientation of the DRLs.

Some are certainly brighter and more noticeable than others. I am quite happy with the brightness and orientation of the DRLs on our two cars.





There are some cars about that due to their location and size the DRLs aren't as noticeable. The RAV4 springs to mind.. 3 fairly small LEDs next to the grill on each side. Some other cars have small vertical strips mounted low down...

[Surferdude]

I agree it's mostly anecdotal.

But I guess my point is that I put more faith in anecdotal evidence than some do. And I think we tend to over analyse things scientifically sometimes.

Often the simple solution or initial observation is t he best.
 The further you delve into something the more opportunities for twisting the facts arise.

[Doggie 1]

Do you have scientific proof of that? 

[Surferdude]

Do you have scientific proof of that? 

Of course.   

[Johnno]

Daytime running lights | AA

Thanks but......

I've seen cars with drl's on with side lights on which according to the above should not occur as drl's become the sidelights......so have car manufacturers found a way around the eu regs....

mine stay on when I put the side lights on, but go off when I try any of the other lights. Don't forget that the Drl's are brighter than the sidelights  so it wouldn't make any difference

side lights are really marker lights, one on each corner or as near as possible.
In the UK, it was or maybe still is illegal to park a vehicle on a road that as a 40mph speed limit at night with out lights, hence the sidelights / marker lights.

Each country as different rules on Drl's before these new style led one's came out, e.g Italy when driving through tunnels you must use dipped headlight's or on urban country roads or when it's raining.  All this comes under Drl's.

If you look at the European directive and what is stated that Drl's are not for the driver to see better but to aid other road user's to see his vehicle

[Doggie 1]

I'll have to do a bit of reading up on the regs.
I'm getting a bit Rusty. 

[Johnno]

I'll have to do a bit of reading up on the regs.
I'm getting a bit Rusty. 

Me too, and I use to be a I.A.M observer/instructor

[Dazzler]

I'll have to do a bit of reading up on the regs.
I'm getting a bit Rusty. 

Don't you swear at me.. 

[Lakes]

I don't have DRL 's , but I think they are a good thing.
Some people have poor eyesight judging by the things I've seen happen so DRL has to  be safer especially on a black car

[Wingerdave]

Knee airbag on the Dodge Caliber model year 2007 (as an option)

[Wingerdave]

Oh, BTW, i was driving home this evening and a car doomed up in my rear view mirror with headlights on AND DRL's (not dimmed at all). Guess what..... A Volvo V40.

[Dazzler]

Oh, BTW, i was driving home this evening and a car doomed up in my rear view mirror with headlights on AND DRL's (not dimmed at all). Guess what..... A Volvo V40.

Seems a bit odd?  Maybe someone has altered the wiring?

[Wingerdave]

Difference in regulations between NL and AUS ?

[Dazzler]

Difference in regulations between NL and AUS ?

Possibly, but can't see the point of having them all on (I would have thought DRL's might create too much glare at night time?)

[Wingerdave]

Oh, you're right, absolutely no reason at all, but apparently it can. Whether it's standard or not i'll have to find out. If all V40's have it ( alone with Audi, BMW and Mercedes etc) then it's a standard thing.

[rustynutz]

^^^^
That's all very well, Jamie. Yes, anecdotal  I agre.
However, there are a number of experienced and careful Australian members who have made observations on hre which indicate they can see the benefits.
Technically that's anecdotal but I would suggest that their observations are valid.

This is the problem, there is much anecdotal "evidence" out there as to drl's effectiveness but, surely, if drl's really are so effective, then it shouldn't be too hard to find hard "evidence". Most "evidence" though would appear to be either theoretical studies or "evidence" using flawed methodology to produce favourable results.... 

[rustynutz]

I don't understand Rusty's reasoning.

Headlights and tail-lights are OK in inclement weather, obviously because they increase visibility of the car but somehow DRLs are a disservice. Do they not increase visibility just like headlights?

The difference though is that if you are using daylight running lights in inclement weather, you are driving without taillights on at a time when they would be very beneficial... 

[rustynutz]

Surely if they save even one person being involved in a fatal/serious incident then that is a good thing?

This comment seems to pop up quite regularly to try to justify so called safety features.... 

Okay, so how about we fit flashing lights on all cars and also require cars to be painted in fluoro green paint??
Surely if it saves just one person it has to be a good thing....   

[Surferdude]

There is plenty of evidence of the effectiveness of DRLs. There's little proof it is flawed. Except in the arguments put forward by opponents.

As for whether or not having parking lights (including tail lights) on instead of DRLs that's probably valid. But whilst I suspect nose to tail accidents feature prominently in the list of causes,  most serious accidents  are front on (head on) or pedestrians or cyclists  (both pedal and motor) who either don't see or aren't seen by oncoming vehicles, then DRLs would seem to be a worthwhile consideration.

[CraigB]

I don't understand Rusty's reasoning.

Headlights and tail-lights are OK in inclement weather, obviously because they increase visibility of the car but somehow DRLs are a disservice. Do they not increase visibility just like headlights?

The difference though is that if you are using daylight running lights in inclement weather, you are driving without taillights on at a time when they would be very beneficial... 

You only have to turn on the park lights to get the benefit of rear lights as well which means that full driving lights don't need to be on.

Surely if they save even one person being involved in a fatal/serious incident then that is a good thing?

This comment seems to pop up quite regularly to try to justify so called safety features.... 

Okay, so how about we fit flashing lights on all cars and also require cars to be painted in fluoro green paint??
Surely if it saves just one person it has to be a good thing....   

Your not being very realistic are you

[Wingerdave]

Surely if they save even one person being involved in a fatal/serious incident then that is a good thing?

This comment seems to pop up quite regularly to try to justify so called safety features.... 

Okay, so how about we fit flashing lights on all cars 

Getting there.......... if you brake hard, then on some modern cars (i30 included) the brake lights flash first to maximise attention.

This is getting boring but......... on my 1989 Honda Goldwing I have Modulating Brake lights (along with cornering lights and DRL's), they flash first then stay on.

In fact, in some US States modulating headlights are on the table for acceptance (they don't flash on and off, they dim slightly)

[bumpkin]

Surely if they save even one person being involved in a fatal/serious incident then that is a good thing?

This comment seems to pop up quite regularly to try to justify so called safety features.... 

Okay, so how about we fit flashing lights on all cars 

Getting there.......... if you brake hard, then on some modern cars (i30 included) the brake lights flash first to maximise attention.

This is getting boring but......... on my 1989 Honda Goldwing I have Modulating Brake lights (along with cornering lights and DRL's), they flash first then stay on.

In fact, in some US States modulating headlights are on the table for acceptance (they don't flash on and off, they dim slightly)

Yep, my Cee'd is the first one I have had that has ESS, same as this

Kia Pro cee'd GT Emergency Stop Signal - YouTube

[Phil №❶]

The difference though is that if you are using daylight running lights in inclement weather, you are driving without taillights on at a time when they would be very beneficial... 

No, the tail lights are only 5 watts @ standard bulb consumption. Their brightness compared to 5 watt LED's is considerably less, almost useless actually.

A rear fog light is 21 watts IIRC.

[Dazzler]

The difference though is that if you are using daylight running lights in inclement weather, you are driving without taillights on at a time when they would be very beneficial... 

No, the tail lights are only 5 watts @ standard bulb consumption. Their brightness compared to 5 watt LED's is considerably less, almost useless actually.

A rear fog light is 21 watts IIRC.

But to be fair DRL's only in bleak weather probably isn't enough. Tail Lights might only be 5 watts but there needs to be some rear lighting in these conditions. 

[Phil №❶]

Disagree, a 5 w tail light in daylight is next to useless. that's why fog light are 21 w to cater for diminished visibility.

[rustynutz]

There is plenty of evidence of the effectiveness of DRLs. There's little proof it is flawed. Except in the arguments put forward by opponents.

Where is this "evidence", Trev?
There is much talk about this supposed evidence but there's very little of it forthcoming... 

And who do you suppose is gonna point out the flaws in the evidence other than these "opponents"... I'm sure the ones pushing for drl's aren't gonna shoot holes in their own "evidence"... lol

As for whether or not having parking lights (including tail lights) on instead of DRLs that's probably valid. But whilst I suspect nose to tail accidents feature prominently in the list of causes,  most serious accidents  are front on (head on) or pedestrians or cyclists  (both pedal and motor) who either don't see or aren't seen by oncoming vehicles, then DRLs would seem to be a worthwhile consideration.

Rear end shunts hold the number one position, Trev....

Number 1 cause of Car Crashes in Australia for 2011-2012

You only have to turn on the park lights to get the benefit of rear lights as well which means that full driving lights don't need to be on.

And what is the advantage of drl's then, Craig? You may as well just turn your headlights on and be done with it... 

Your not being very realistic are you

You don't recognise sarcasm??? 

The difference though is that if you are using daylight running lights in inclement weather, you are driving without taillights on at a time when they would be very beneficial... 

No, the tail lights are only 5 watts @ standard bulb consumption. Their brightness compared to 5 watt LED's is considerably less, almost useless actually.

A rear fog light is 21 watts IIRC.

How is this related to drl's, Phil?