I just got my TL last Thursday. 2002 TL-S w/ Navigation system. It's pretty badass.

Anyway, I was surprised to learn that this car doesn't come with Daytime running lights. My last car (Toyota Camry) wasn't half the car this is, but I got spoiled with the headlights that it had. I could always leave them in the "off" position. When I got in the car at night, they would automatically come on for me and shut themselves off when I got out of the car. I noticed that the TL will automatically kill the headlights a minute or so after you turn off the power.

Here's my question: Is it bad to just always leave the lights on? That way, you have them on in the day, which is safer (right?), and you don't have to mess with them at night. I know I'm just being lazy here, but I've not had to turn my lights on or off for the last 3 years. Even my other car (94 Jeep) also has automatic lights.

Any thoughts here?

 

I have had my 2000 TL since 12/28/99. I also wanted DRLs but HONDA is butt backwarks on this. I also along with someone else on this forum inquired about it at the dealership. I was wondering if the CAN model part could be put in the US model to make it work. I don't think so & I am not going to CAN for the work. I have driven with my lights on since day one of having this car. The first tail lamp just went out last month almost 2yrs. I replaced all brake & tail lights & tag. The HID bulb should last a very long time. I don't leave mine on most of the time I just turn them on & off. I don't think it should be a problem because they make them that way. I just turn mine off to reduce any drain on the battery at start-up. I see alot of TL/CL with lights on during daytime on the road.

 

You cannot add DRLs to a US-spec TL. The wiring schematics for the lights are very different and there are several components that needed to be added, as well as new wiring harnesses. It'd be like trying to retrofit navi into a non-navi car.

 

I for one do not appreciate DRL's. It's just plain silly! I like having manual control of the lights. Hey, if it gets dark, it's just a flick of the wrist to turn the lights on. What's the big deal?

 

I like not having DTRL, too. It annoys me soooo much when I am sitting at a restaurant (or anywhere with a parking lot nearby) and some fool pulls in with his lights blinding everyone in the establishment. Most can be turned off when the parking brake is engaged, but they never turn them off. And, I would hate to be one of those people that blind everyone. Just like automatic door locks, I am glad we don't have them so I have control.
I leave my lights on all the time, even when I park it for the night (although, with winter coming, I have been turning off the headlights and leaving the driving lights on-worried about the battery). I drive with them on during the day, even in summer. But, I like having the ability to turn them off... like when pulling in a girls house, so you don't wake parents.

 

Car & Driver is a big basher of DRL's. Apparently they were created so battery companies would get better turn around. They get pretty in deatail as to why DRL’s are worthless.

 

i like the d r l they look really neat on the road. The MB and gs x00 also have them and when their HID's are on, there is still an amber color in the middle.

the tl's high beam are attatched to its low beam. Drl conversiion is ver difficult. especially for do it yourselfer's whenthe high beam is tapped into, the low beam will turn on or flicker any help/??

kevin

 

There are so many things wrong with DRLs being required as standard equipment that it's not funny. But that's a subject for another topic... maybe in the OT forum.

 

Back to my original question:

Is it a bad thing to leave the lights on 24/7, keeping in mind that they will be shut off automatically when the key is out of the ignition? It sounds like the only problems are an increased load on the battery when starting and possibly having to change the HID's more often. Is this right? Is there something else?

 

I wouldn't worry about having to change the HID's more often. One of the benefits of HID's is that they have a bulb life 10x longer than halogens (no filament to break).

 

With you being in Ga, I doubt you have anything to worry about. The battery should be fine. I left mine on alllll the way up until like a week or so ago. It gets a little colder up here, and I'm not sure if the headlights will load mine down too much. I would say do it. If you have a warranty, would the battery be covered?
Oh, yeah, I do turn my stereo and AC off, but leave the butt warmers on.

 

Just get an auto-light control from www.jcwhitney.com

 

I wouldnt mind having the city lights like the BMW's have. City lights are when the high beam lights up about 30% while the parking lights or head lights are on. It looks great when its getting a lil dark out and you put the city lights on with the fogs. They are aslo driver controlled they dont have to be on at all.

 

I HATE DRL's I think it is THE single most asinine thing a car can have. If I want my F*#*&@'n headlights on, I will turn them on. when I was looking at getting a SoLara -- the FIRST thing I did was find out how to disable the stupid things.

Now -- like bigman said -- if I had those "eye" parking lights like on the newer Bimmers -- that'd be tha sh!t!!

I phuckin love those things ---- they're so aawesome

 

I couldnt have said it better. They say its a safety feature. If you knew how to safely operate a motor vehicle you wouldnt need it. It makes it look like we are idiot proofing our cars.
Im waiting for the day when someone driving at night gets into an accident b/c they dont have their lights on and they the cop its the cars fault b/c on their last car the lights came on automatically and this new one they dont. :p

 

DRL r old farts who can't see in the day

city

 

It is my understanding that DRL is a safety feature. Canadian studies have been done that shows that cars with DRL are involved in approx. 30% (?) less accidents than cars without DRL. That's why all new cars in Canada are required to have DRL. Older models are exempt because DRL rules were not legislated at the time they were sold.

NBP TL et al: It is not a question of whether the person driving knows how to drive safely, but it is a question of being more visible. A car that is more visible is less likely to be involved in an accident. You may be the best and safest driver in the world, but the idiot that might hit you is not. If he sees you coming with your DRL, the probability of him hitting you is lower. Example of when DRL becomes useful: You are driving westbound, and the sun is behind you, glaring like crazy. The car opposite of you is driving eastbound and wants to make a left hand turn. This guy has the sun in his eyes and can't see because of the glare. If you have DRL, it makes you more visible to him, because he can see you (he might not see your car). Without DRL, he just might turn right in front of you and cause an accident. The fact that you and others don't like DRL - that's fine, I got no problems with that. It's basically a personal preference. But DRL is a useful feature if you consider the safety advantages.

 

i've been thinkin about this too, i think it would be phat to have my high beams on real dim with the corners and fogs, and even with the HID too, i will look into this and let you guys know if i come up with anything

 

bah -- bright sun is 100902198318X's brighter than even HID's so if its that bright ur phucked anyhow :p

and if u cant see a car in broad daylight, you shouldnt be driving

 

Ya forgot to mention that your ability to see in the sun, lightning reflexes, and awesome driving skills make up for the difference that the rest of the 99.99% of us don't have.

 

I have been over this topic many times before & so has CAR & DRIVER. My point is that you can see the car with the lights on better than the one that has them off. If two cars are side by side I am sure that you will see the one with lights on better.
Even Busses & Tractor Trailer Trucks have them on more now in daylight hours. Now who can't see one of them in the day?
When a car that has its lights off is closer to you than a car with them on you will see the car with them on better. I am sure this is why motor cycles have them on to be seen sooner.I don't think no place has bright sun 100% of the time. The cars will be in or comming out of a shadow at some point duruning the day.

 

Agreed. I was using the bright sun as an example. But at least we both agree about the usefulness of DRL.

 

Why not just turn your lights on whenever you go somewhere, day or night?? That way, you can turn them off when, say, you go through the Starbucks drive-thru and you want to be considerate and not blind the person in front of you??

 

Yep yep --- you control the lights -- not the car -- if you want to be seen better during the day and reduce your chance of an accident 30% us hould be able to make that decision.

They should put a little "hanger" (like the cardboard things u can put on door knobs) on the light switch on new cars with that fact printed on it

I mean --------------- installing GPS sensors that monitor speed and instantly send you a ticket in the mail for going 5MPH over would greatly reduce accidents too -- but do we want big brother looking over our shoulders all the time...

 

The DRL are not bright and should not blind unless you swap them out for brighter bulbs.

 

Agreed, drivers should be able to make that decision. Up here in Canada, the government decides that it would be in the best interest of all drivers that DRL is standard. But what it all boils down to is this: what is the benefit of having it and what is the cost if you don't. The rules for wearing seatbelts can be used as an example. If you don't want to wear it, you don't have to. And no one can force you. But if you ever get into an accident, you sure wish you did. Same idea with DRL, except DRL is not req'd in the US.

 

Blah, blah, blah, and on goes the rethoric about DRLs. They're about as useful as those ultrasonic deer whistles you paste on your bumpers.

DRLs make your car more noticeable only because other cars don't have DRLs. What happens when everyone has them (in Canada, for example)? Then one car is just as noticeable as the another, so your supposed safety advantage becomes irrelevant.

The argument that a car is "more" visible with DRLs in the daytime sun than without is also bogus. I can put flashing christmas lights on my car and it'll become even more visible than DRLs. But that's not the point; the question for regulation should be: what is considered the minimum visibility of a car in daylight? And I contend that regular cars (that aren't camouflage-painted) are plenty visible enough.

Additionally, DRLs actually make motorcycles less visible by comparison.

However, I can find several undisputable truths about DRLs: A DRL mandate allows manufacturers to sell more "required features" on their cars and obsolete their older models more quickly; it allows insurance companies to say "if only you had DRLs, you wouldn't be in this accident"; and it also shortens bulb life so you buy more headlight bulbs (not an issue with HIDs).

The argument that people with DRLs are less likely to be involved in an accident could be entirely attributed to the fact that they own newer and relatively more well-maintained cars during the study (who funded that study, by the way?), or that they were simply better drivers.

Daytime Christmas Lights on cars, now that's an idea!

 

And just ask any motorcyclist about what happens when you're invisible. Most states require use of a headlight on a motorcycle to increase the bike's visibility. Like Daverman pointed out, the reason a headlight in the daytime is effective on a bike is not because the light is so bright you see it, but because it is *different* from everything else around it. Although I'm not a biker myself, I've heard plenty of complaints from those who are that say DRLs are making it more dangerous for them because less people "notice" their bike. A friend of mine rode to Canada a few summers ago and said it was terrible because everyone has DRLs.

This is just like running headlights on the highway in the daytime here in the US. If you look in your rearview mirror you will spot a car with lights on faster than one without. I've noticed that if I travel in the left lane, slower cars are more likely to get out of my way (and move to the right like they should) if I have my lowbeams on. It's not because I'm flashing them, it's because they'll be more apt to notice me approaching in the rear view mirror and pull over.

Also, for those of you who want to be stealth-like in your quest for speed on the highway: Lights in the day time only attract attention to your car. From both the general public and the police.

Now I *do* think it is a good idea that lights should be required in limited visibility situations (rain, snow, fog, etc). I know NY has a law that requires headlights to be on whenever your wipers are.

 

Because the DRL's are using high beam, even with reduced power, it can be very irritating to the driver in front during early evening situations. My wife keeps complaining that my DRL's are in her eyes whenever I follow her car during early evenings that are not dark enough to turn on headlights. I thought it must be the days in the month she complained about anything and everything, until the day we swapped car to drive. The DRL's are REALLY
irritating, even though not blinding.

However, if the DRL's are using low beam, there would not be any problem with blinding and irritating other drivers.

 

DRL is low beam (at least up here in Canada). I didn't realize that some DRL in the US are high beam.

 

The DRL on my ex- 90 Canadian Integra is using low beam. In fact, this is the first year Honda/Acura introduced DRL to their new cars.
The DRL on my mom's 91 Canadian Accord is using reduced power high beam.
The DRL on my sister's 94 Canadian Accord is using reduced power high beam.
The DRL on my other sister's 96 Canadian 2.5 TL is using reduced power high beam.
My 2002 Canadian TL-S is using reduced power high beam, the low beam is the HID.

The reason why the purple high-beam-on indicator light on the dash is very, very dimly lighted up whenever the DRL is activated, is that there is electrical current going to the high beam circuit.

 

For starters, the post started out not about DRL, but about the "Auto" feature that senses darkness and automatically turns on your headlights. I'd find it pretty hard to believe that anyone here would be b@tching about having them factory-installed, probably only wondering how to make the light "brighter", but since you don't have it you ridicule it as if it's a niche technology (a whole friggin' country adopted it, and it's becoming standard in the U.S.) If you knew anything about DRLs, you'd realize that the bulbs last a very long time, in most cases longer than a regular halogen or HID. And that crap about insurance companies ??!! WTF ?? My sister works for one, and she was cracking up over that one, there's no credit for having DRLs. There's people that feel the same about ABS, pros and cons, but I wouldn't say it's stupid just because my car doesn't have it. That's almost as good as the guy on here who was glad the wood in the TL/TLs was fake, so if he got in an accident he wouldn't have to worry about getting splinters from it. What's next, complaining about injuries you could sustain from having too many airbags ?

 

Your reasoning is somewhat faulty, IMHO--if we were to follow your line of reasoning, then can one say that turn signals are unnecessary also? I would venture to say that roughly half of all drivers out there don't use them anyway; plus if people knew how to safely operate a vehicle as you said, then it wouldn't be all too difficult to make out if someone was attempting a turn.

Also, your comment about someone getting into an accident at night won't really fly either--anyone with half a brain would know that just because the DRLs are on doesn't mean that the parking/tail lights are also on; you would still need to turn the switch to turn on the parking/tail lights. But then again, I would have to admit that there are some drivers out there with less than half a brain.

Nothing personal...

Tony

 

Perhaps not--I don't know the complexity of the TL electrical wiring, let alone whether or not it would be feasible to implement a DRL setup on a HID system to comment otherwise. However--notwithstanding the HID issue, I don't know whether it wouldn't be entirely impossible to add DRL to the TL; US-spec 3rd-gen Integras didn't come with DRLs but yet Acura offered a DRL-retrofit option for US-spec Integras. I know because I used to own a 3rd-gen Integra and I got a mailer from my local Acura dealer offering DRL installs.

Tony

 

Keep in mind that DRLs main--if not sole--purpose is to make a car more visible during the day. It wasn't meant to be a crutch for remembering to turn on your headlights and parking/taillights. Many US-spec (if not all) vehicles with factory DRLs installed are set up so that when in DRL "mode" only the headlights are on (at a tad bit less than full output); the taillights remain off. You still need to turn the switch to turn on the taillights.

Now, if you prefer to manually turn on your headlights so as to make your vehicle more visible to oncoming traffic (assuming you desire to do so in such circumstances)--hey, it's a free world.

Tony

 

man, this thread is starting to become a free for all rumble! let's roll! j/k

 

Well, isn't the purported selling point of DRLs supposed to be that they make a car more visible to oncoming traffic? If every vehicle had them--then yes, I suppose that there wouldn't be an advantage; however, at least now a driver wouldn't be able to claim that he didn't see an DRL-equipped oncoming vehicle without admitting that his attention had wandered elsewhere because now that since every car had DRLs, how could you have not notice them?

Tony

 

Granted that everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion about how they feel about DRLs, I will say this about DRLs (and having headlights on during the day, in general)--I'm sure you guys have seen stretches of road where there are signs posted telling you to turn on your headlights during the daytime. These signs are there for one simple reason--safety. I guess that those of you who claim (implicitly or otherwise) that DRLs don't add anything as far as driver safety is concerned probably feel that you know more about highway safety than the engineers and police departments who surveyed and put out those signs on those stretches of highway.

I know--it's a free country, and people can do whatever they want to do, whenever they want. Hey--I'm not against that; just as long as you accept responsibility for whatever arises from what you do, whether it be positive or negative.

Tony

P.S.: DRLs may save your a** from a ticket; why? Going back to my comment regarding the signs stating that you need to turn on your headlights on certain stretches of highway, ever notice that some--if not many--of them are posted in black letters against a white background, like your typical speed limit sign? Remember, signs with the black letters/numbers against a white background indicate that they are regulatory signs--meaning that you are mandated to obey what is posted on them or else be subject to citation. Ever see such a traffic sign (at least here in the US) that didn't offer dire consequences (i.e., a ticket) if disobeyed? For those of you who don't have DRLs and believe in turning on your headlights only when it's dark, you may want to keep that in mind next time you drive on a stretch of road and there's such a sign out there telling you that you need to turn on your headlights.

 

Damn, How many consecutive posts are people going to make?
All this talk about how safe DRL are... well, If you're on a country road during the day, and come around a corner with trees shading the sun, and some car is going real slow in front of you, even if they have DRL you may not see them because their tailights wouldn't be on. Crash. So, why can't lazy ****ers just turn them on their damnselves?
As for "auto-on", when they sense it is getting dark... sure, if the tailights came on, too.

 

I told a brief look at the DRL schematics inside the factory service manual (2002 TL supplemental manual) in an Acura service department a while back. My intention was to change the DRL from using high beam lights to fog lights. I decided not to do so after seeing the complexity of the DRL circuit.

The Canadian low beam (HID) headlight system is identical to the US one.
The US high beam headlight system is a conventional on/off switch controlled high current relay layout, similar to all non-DRL equipped cars. However, the Canadian high beam system has an extra DRL controller. This controller doesn't just tap into the high beam circuit. It is the center of the high beam circuit, with multiple sensor inputs and shares wirings with the driver multiplexing controller. The ground wires of the two high beam bulbs go directly into the DRL controller. So the headlight switch on the steering column stick is completely isolated from the high beam circuit with the help of the DRL controller.

I believe this is required for the high beam bulb burnout detection to work. If such happens, the DRL dash light will light up and warn the driver.