For You DRL Non Believers
#41
Obnoxious Philadelphian
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Jersey
Age: 47
Posts: 5,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by moda_way
DRLs only differentiate the car if no other car around them have DRLs. Once every car has DRLs, then you have the same problem all over again.
#43
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm... though I know the safety issues, I personally don't like them on my car. My wife's Jetta has them.
Just think, people in the U.S. want to mod their cars with DRLs. Soon we'll be modding them to disable the DRLs.
Just think, people in the U.S. want to mod their cars with DRLs. Soon we'll be modding them to disable the DRLs.
#44
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by moda_way
DRLs only differentiate the car if no other car around them have DRLs. Once every car has DRLs, then you have the same problem all over again.
#46
Obnoxious Philadelphian
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Jersey
Age: 47
Posts: 5,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
If there's room, do you make everyone ride in the back seat?
#47
Originally Posted by sauceman
All of you who try and find excuses for not believing in DRLs are
I do enough driving, and see enough of a difference when I cross a pre 1990 car not equipped with DRLs to know the DRLs are a very safe enhancement.
I just cannot believe any of you would fight against something that has nothing but benefits, especially about safety! and
I do enough driving, and see enough of a difference when I cross a pre 1990 car not equipped with DRLs to know the DRLs are a very safe enhancement.
I just cannot believe any of you would fight against something that has nothing but benefits, especially about safety! and
#48
Moderator Alumnus
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Windsor-Quebec corridor
Age: 47
Posts: 7,709
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
Anything that causes people NOT to turn their lights on 1) at night, or 2) in the rain is NOT a great safety enhancement.
#49
They helped a lot back when I had a Jetta. I almost never got cut off. In my tSX, I'm cut off all the time. Plus, it doesn't help that my car is the same color as the road.
#50
Originally Posted by slo007
They helped a lot back when I had a Jetta. I almost never got cut off. In my tSX, I'm cut off all the time. Plus, it doesn't help that my car is the same color as the road.
#51
Originally Posted by sauceman
I but these people don't turn them on anyways even if they don't have DRLs, they are just too unconsciencious. But I trust that you are a passionnate enough driver you'd do just like me and ALWAYS drive with your headlights on.
#52
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
NO! They don't turn them on because they think the DRLs are "lights"! People don't understand what DRLs are, that's the problem. They look in front of the car and see something (DRLs), they don't do a damned thing. If they looked in front and saw nothing (no DRLs), they'd get the picture after a while and turn the lights on. I've had people follow me for MILES in the dead of night w/ nothing but DRLs on. Drives me nuts.
Don't forget that your interior lights won't come on with DRL's. So I'm not sure how these people drove around at night with no interior lights?
#53
Originally Posted by SacQuacker
Interesting observation. So it's your conclusion that the people cutting you off are generally doing it by accident?
On the other hand, there are more SUVS on the road today than 1-2 years ago. And SUV drivers think they rule the road, often merging without looking.
#54
Boy Genius
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Secret Laboratory
Age: 49
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
NO! They don't turn them on because they think the DRLs are "lights"! People don't understand what DRLs are, that's the problem. They look in front of the car and see something (DRLs), they don't do a damned thing. If they looked in front and saw nothing (no DRLs), they'd get the picture after a while and turn the lights on. I've had people follow me for MILES in the dead of night w/ nothing but DRLs on. Drives me nuts.
#55
Originally Posted by domn
Don't forget that your interior lights won't come on with DRL's. So I'm not sure how these people drove around at night with no interior lights?
STOOPID!!
That's the point I'm trying to make. People can't handle this technology yet.
#56
Originally Posted by lokman
This sounds like an education issue then. Here in Canada that was the case for a little while, but everybody got it pretty quick. It's very rare now that I see a car at night running only DRLs (and when I do, it's usually someone that drive 20km under the speed limit and who shouldn't be on the road to begin with).
#57
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
That's the point I'm trying to make. People can't handle this technology yet.
We seem to handle it just fine in Canada and we're no smarter than you yanks so your point isn't a good one.
#58
Originally Posted by domn
We seem to handle it just fine in Canada and we're no smarter than you yanks so your point isn't a good one.
#59
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
I see it all the time. Mostly old people, but some young'uns are technology n00bs, too. And NOBODY with DRLs turns their lights on in the rain.
But isn't an entire country proof that it works?
I was in Montana in October and nobody period turned their lights on in the rain, with or without DRL's. So DRL's are better than nothing at all.
#62
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Age: 49
Posts: 7,594
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
DRLs don't solve the stupidity of drivers. I've personally never been hit by or hit a car that I mistakenly didn't see. In every accident I've been in (2 in 13 years of driving), each time it was another person's fault (woman turning in front of me because she decided not to stop and look and someone slammed their brakes on in front of me and I was hit from behind b/c the idiot behind me didn't give enough room).
As for people being able to handle the technology.... Lexus employs a simple method to handle idiots who drive with DRLs on at night. They have a light switch with an auto setting and a sensor turns the main lights on during the night and the DRLs the rest of the time.
As for people being able to handle the technology.... Lexus employs a simple method to handle idiots who drive with DRLs on at night. They have a light switch with an auto setting and a sensor turns the main lights on during the night and the DRLs the rest of the time.
#63
Moderator Alumnus
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Windsor-Quebec corridor
Age: 47
Posts: 7,709
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
Originally Posted by moda_way
DRLs don't solve the stupidity of drivers. I've personally never been hit by or hit a car that I mistakenly didn't see. In every accident I've been in (2 in 13 years of driving), each time it was another person's fault (woman turning in front of me because she decided not to stop and look and someone slammed their brakes on in front of me and I was hit from behind b/c the idiot behind me didn't give enough room).
As for people being able to handle the technology.... Lexus employs a simple method to handle idiots who drive with DRLs on at night. They have a light switch with an auto setting and a sensor turns the main lights on during the night and the DRLs the rest of the time.
As for people being able to handle the technology.... Lexus employs a simple method to handle idiots who drive with DRLs on at night. They have a light switch with an auto setting and a sensor turns the main lights on during the night and the DRLs the rest of the time.
But remember, it's not because it didn't happen to you that it doesn't happen.
I could go on and on telling you about my own experiences and how I feel very lucky to be here today to tell it to you.
#64
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by moda_way
DRLs don't solve the stupidity of drivers. I've personally never been hit by or hit a car that I mistakenly didn't see. In every accident I've been in (2 in 13 years of driving), each time it was another person's fault (woman turning in front of me because she decided not to stop and look and someone slammed their brakes on in front of me and I was hit from behind b/c the idiot behind me didn't give enough room).
As for people being able to handle the technology.... Lexus employs a simple method to handle idiots who drive with DRLs on at night. They have a light switch with an auto setting and a sensor turns the main lights on during the night and the DRLs the rest of the time.
As for people being able to handle the technology.... Lexus employs a simple method to handle idiots who drive with DRLs on at night. They have a light switch with an auto setting and a sensor turns the main lights on during the night and the DRLs the rest of the time.
#65
such a dirty birdy
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 1,868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by domn
Don't forget that your interior lights won't come on with DRL's. So I'm not sure how these people drove around at night with no interior lights?
Similar to how the "Baby on Board" signs are useful to warn of severely distracted drivers.
#66
Race Director
My only gripe with any of this stuff is that once mandated I no longer have a choice. Originally it was brought on because people are too stupid to realize reasons behind some of this stuff. Why do we have to put on the brake when shifting an AT out of D, because some stupid people in the 80 couldn't drive their Audis correctly.
No, I want choice - I want to decide when to do something. I don't want AT, rain sensing wipers, DRLs, automatic headlights, adaptive steering, automatic climate system, etc.
No, I want choice - I want to decide when to do something. I don't want AT, rain sensing wipers, DRLs, automatic headlights, adaptive steering, automatic climate system, etc.
#67
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
Why do we have to put on the brake when shifting an AT out of D, because some stupid people in the 80 couldn't drive their Audis correctly.
I thought I could move it into neutral and other gears while still driving. To move into park, yeah, you gotta step on the brake. I think that's a good thing. I've had a passenger bump it before and shift it into neutral. Wouldn't want to accidentally shift it into reverse or park. Yikes!
#68
Obnoxious Philadelphian
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Jersey
Age: 47
Posts: 5,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
No, I want choice - I want to decide when to do something. I don't want AT, rain sensing wipers, DRLs, automatic headlights, adaptive steering, automatic climate system, etc.
#69
[QUOTE=biker
No, I want choice - I want to decide when to do something. I don't want AT, rain sensing wipers, DRLs, automatic headlights, adaptive steering, automatic climate system, etc.[/QUOTE]
.....and those damn automatic seatbelts from the 80's......What's neat about the TSX is the VSA and A/C systems can be shut off or manually controlled by the driver. I'm not sure if the passenger side front airbag can be disabled though.
No, I want choice - I want to decide when to do something. I don't want AT, rain sensing wipers, DRLs, automatic headlights, adaptive steering, automatic climate system, etc.[/QUOTE]
.....and those damn automatic seatbelts from the 80's......What's neat about the TSX is the VSA and A/C systems can be shut off or manually controlled by the driver. I'm not sure if the passenger side front airbag can be disabled though.
#70
such a dirty birdy
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 1,868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
Why do we have to put on the brake when shifting an AT out of D, because some stupid people in the 80 couldn't drive their Audis correctly.
#71
Originally Posted by jcg878
I do this most AMs. Every morning I drive WNW on my way to work, with terrible sun glare behind me. The cars behind me with DRLs or their lights on, I can see. The other ones are difficult to see. I'd prefer to be one of the "seen" cars. If DRLs were required, I'd be able to see all of them.
#72
Originally Posted by biker
No, I want choice - I want to decide when to do something. I don't want AT, rain sensing wipers, DRLs, automatic headlights, adaptive steering, automatic climate system, etc.
#73
Obnoxious Philadelphian
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Jersey
Age: 47
Posts: 5,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SacQuacker
Wouldn't investing in some window tint and/or sunglasses help with that glare problem? If so, why wish for a mandate that everyone else has to have or do something when you can solve the problem for yourself?
Excellent - an excuse to buy something nice
#74
Race Director
Originally Posted by majormojo
Are you sure you don't mean shifting out of Park? I've never seen an AT that couldn't be shifted from D to N with just a nudge, no brake necessary. I think the "brake on to shift from Park" feature was in response to some lawsuits against Ford because of some cars (Aerostar vans?) that supposedly popped out of Park to R all by themselves. Defective cars or not, it's probably not a bad idea, even if it's only to prevent an accidental bump of the lever out of P.
I'm pretty sure this feature was directly linked to the 80s Audi unintended accelaration cases.
#75
Race Director
Originally Posted by slo007
Get a $5,000 car then. I want all those features standard!
#76
Moderator Alumnus
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Windsor-Quebec corridor
Age: 47
Posts: 7,709
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
4 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
I wouldn't necessarily mind if they are standard (except the AT) - but at least let me turn them off. On BMWs for example, you can program off the DRLs.
#77
No real American will EVER agree to having DRL's.
We are against anything on our vehicles that makes them go slower or look stupid.
We don't like trigger locks on our guns , warning labels on our beer
and the V-chip.
God Bless the USA! Live free or DIE!
We are against anything on our vehicles that makes them go slower or look stupid.
We don't like trigger locks on our guns , warning labels on our beer
and the V-chip.
God Bless the USA! Live free or DIE!
#78
Originally Posted by SacQuacker
No real American will EVER agree to having DRL's.
We are against anything on our vehicles that makes them go slower or look stupid.
We don't like trigger locks on our guns , warning labels on our beer
and the V-chip.
God Bless the USA! Live free or DIE!
We are against anything on our vehicles that makes them go slower or look stupid.
We don't like trigger locks on our guns , warning labels on our beer
and the V-chip.
God Bless the USA! Live free or DIE!
yea i think drl look kinda dumb, and i never really thought they save lives, but i'm always open to mandating things to ensure safety.
they should implement LED DRL. that would be sweet!
#79
Obnoxious Philadelphian
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Jersey
Age: 47
Posts: 5,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dzuy
they should implement LED DRL. that would be sweet!
Title 2, Section 4. Daytime Running Lights ("DRLs")
Subtitle B - They must look cool
Sec 101 - The requirement of DRLs is to no way render the vehicles "uncool".
Sec 102 - LEDs are ill, and are required."
Write your Congressman now!
#80
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by SacQuacker
No real American will EVER agree to having DRL's.
We are against anything on our vehicles that makes them go slower or look stupid.
We don't like trigger locks on our guns , warning labels on our beer
and the V-chip.
God Bless the USA! Live free or DIE!
We are against anything on our vehicles that makes them go slower or look stupid.
We don't like trigger locks on our guns , warning labels on our beer
and the V-chip.
God Bless the USA! Live free or DIE!