I was told that the newer models of the ford minivan uses it's headlights
at all times, but to get the tail lights to come on you have to use a
different switch. So my question for all is was I given correct
information?
saberns wrote:
>
> I was told that the newer models of the ford minivan uses it's headlights
> at all times, but to get the tail lights to come on you have to use a
> different switch. So my question for all is was I given correct
> information?
A lot of vehicles do that; they use the headlamps operating at full or reduced
power as Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs), and yes the tail lights usually don't
come on with the DRLs.
> saberns wrote:
> >
> > I was told that the newer models of the ford minivan uses it's headlights
> > at all times, but to get the tail lights to come on you have to use a
> > different switch. So my question for all is was I given correct
> > information?
>
> A lot of vehicles do that; they use the headlamps operating at full or reduced
> power as Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs), and yes the tail lights usually don't
> come on with the DRLs.
And since DRL systems usually use the high beams at half-brightness, you're
semi-blinding people in front of you, yet totally black (invisible) from the rear.
Doesn't anyone read the owner's manual any more? I'm sure it says you still
have to turn on the headlight switch at night, but there's thousands of cars
driving around with only half their lights on. I want a sign for my back window
that lights up and says "Please turn on ALL your lights!".
Though many confuse 'autolamps' with DRLs, there is no connection. I agree
that one should spend ten seconds learning the difference before taking a
new vehicle on the road.
Alas, few of us read manuals. Perhaps the software industry, which shoves a
new version down our throats every couple months and does not even provide
printed manuals anymore, is to blame. Of course, there is not much damage
one can do by driving a home computer without reading the manual...
Many countries, including Canada, require DRLs. One would expect that these
laws were enacted after some thought and are not the result of ignorance.
I believe that DRL's don't operate tail lights to avoid confusing them with
brake lights. As for semi-blinding oncoming traffic, at least in Fords, the
intensity is much less than half brightness. In DRL mode the high beams are
operated at 25% power, which probably translates to around 10% brightness
(at low power the filament is much less efficient). I frequently drive in
tunnels and can't even see my DRLs reflecting in the car ahead of me. I
suspect that those drivers who are blinding you simply turn their high beams
on by mistake - it's often hard to see the high beam indicator in daylight.
And by the way, I don't wish this experience on anyone, but after an
encounter on a mountain road with a distracted driver who veered into the
opposite lane, I became a believer in DRLs.
"MasterBlaster" <Nobody's.Home@My.Place> wrote in message
news:fukef.144275$Io.69735@clgrps13...
>
> And since DRL systems usually use the high beams at half-brightness,
you're
> semi-blinding people in front of you, yet totally black (invisible) from
the rear.
>
> Doesn't anyone read the owner's manual any more? I'm sure it says you
still
> have to turn on the headlight switch at night, but there's thousands of
cars
> driving around with only half their lights on.
"Happy Traveler" <happy_traveler@abc.net> wrote in message
news:ZISdnSQ6zeqo2-fenZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Though many confuse 'autolamps' with DRLs, there is no connection. I agree
> that one should spend ten seconds learning the difference before taking a
> new vehicle on the road.
Recently rented a GM car. No manual in glovebox.
> Alas, few of us read manuals. Perhaps the software industry, which shoves
a
> new version down our throats every couple months and does not even provide
> printed manuals anymore, is to blame. Of course, there is not much damage
> one can do by driving a home computer without reading the manual...
>
> Many countries, including Canada, require DRLs. One would expect that
these
> laws were enacted after some thought and are not the result of ignorance.
> I believe that DRL's don't operate tail lights to avoid confusing them
with
> brake lights.
This is a problem. Start the car at night. Lights come on. You drive off. I
never imagined that my taillights might be turned off. Further confused by
autoshutoff for lights. You turn off the engine, turn off the lights, get
out of the car. lock the car walk away and the lights are still on.
Eventually they shut themselves off.
>As for semi-blinding oncoming traffic, at least in Fords, the
> intensity is much less than half brightness. In DRL mode the high beams
are
> operated at 25% power, which probably translates to around 10% brightness
> (at low power the filament is much less efficient). I frequently drive in
> tunnels and can't even see my DRLs reflecting in the car ahead of me. I
> suspect that those drivers who are blinding you simply turn their high
beams
> on by mistake - it's often hard to see the high beam indicator in
daylight.
>
> And by the way, I don't wish this experience on anyone, but after an
> encounter on a mountain road with a distracted driver who veered into the
> opposite lane, I became a believer in DRLs.
Personally I am a believer in light switches. If you want to turn your
lights on (DRL or otherwise) just do it.
Howard
>
> "MasterBlaster" <Nobody's.Home@My.Place> wrote in message
> news:fukef.144275$Io.69735@clgrps13...
> >
> > And since DRL systems usually use the high beams at half-brightness,
> you're
> > semi-blinding people in front of you, yet totally black (invisible) from
> the rear.
> >
> > Doesn't anyone read the owner's manual any more? I'm sure it says you
> still
> > have to turn on the headlight switch at night, but there's thousands of
> cars
> > driving around with only half their lights on.
>
>
It will be hard to drive off at night with DRLs, thinking that these are
your regular lights, because your dashboard will be dark.
Also, Ford's DRLs don't turn on until you release the parking brake. Don't
know if GM vehicles follow the same logic.
"Howard Nelson" <htnelsonvip@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:7csef.18353$tV6.17964@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> Recently rented a GM car. No manual in glovebox.
....
> This is a problem. Start the car at night. Lights come on. You drive off.
I
> never imagined that my taillights might be turned off.
<snip>
>
>Many countries, including Canada, require DRLs. One would expect that
>these laws were enacted after some thought and are not the result of
>ignorance.
Surely you know that there are many stupid laws on the books. The fact
that something was mandated by The Government doesn't necessarily mean
that it was intelligently considered -- or for that matter, done with the
average citizen's best interest in mind. Especially in Canada. ;-)
(Consider, for example, the mandatory center high-mounted brake light,
which history has now proven does *not* live up to its purpose of
reducing rear-end collisions.)
>I believe that DRL's don't operate tail lights to avoid confusing them
>with brake lights. As for semi-blinding oncoming traffic, at least in
>Fords, the intensity is much less than half brightness.
I, for one, find DRLs to be blinding on a sunny day, especially with a
fresh coat of snow on the ground. The amber ones I've seen on a few cars
aren't *too* bad, but there are times that I want to take a slingshot to
some of the clear/white ones.
<snip>
>
>And by the way, I don't wish this experience on anyone, but after an
>encounter on a mountain road with a distracted driver who veered into
>the opposite lane, I became a believer in DRLs.
I work for a 9-1-1 center, and I can assure you that people pull out in
front of cars with all their lights on at night (when cars with their
lights on are easiest to see) all the time. IMO, having DRLs on
motorcycles is not a bad idea, considering the bike's tiny silhouette,
but they are at best a nuisance on cars. --
Jim
Motorcycles currently use headlamps at all times. DRLs have been debated to
death in the NGs. There is no doubt DRLs can be an added safety item in
some conditions. As with the case with seat belts, there are situation were
they can do more harm than good. Test and practical experience has proven
that belt use prevents more injuries and death than they produce The
question is do the advantages of DRLs exceed the numerous problems THEY
present. I would suggest to anybody interested, on both sides of the
debate, that they do a search of the US Congressional Record for the reason
DRLs were NOT made mandatory in the US. Once you have the facts on both
sides of the argument you will be able to decide for yourself which opinion
is the most valid. Personally none of my vehicles are equipped with DRLs.
When I drive under conditions where I believe my vehicle needs to be more
visible, like driving with the sun to my back, I engage my headlamps for
maximum visibility.
mike hunt
"Jim J" <myself@nunyas.com> wrote in message
news:9715E24A6jazzmastajmindspring@207.69.189.191...
> happy_traveler@abc.net (Happy Traveler) wrote in <ZISdnSQ6zeqo2
> -fenZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@comcast.com>:
>
DRLs.
>
> I work for a 9-1-1 center, and I can assure you that people pull out in
> front of cars with all their lights on at night (when cars with their
> lights on are easiest to see) all the time. IMO, having DRLs on
> motorcycles is not a bad idea, considering the bike's tiny silhouette,
> but they are at best a nuisance on cars. --
> Jim
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
