US DOT rejects Daytime Running Lights

This ruling shouldn't have any effect on mandatory use of headlights in safety zones. Only the mandatory installation of "always on" daytime running lights into every vehicle. Someone would have to challenge the necessity of headlights in the safety zones they have in question.

Why does it take 8 years to follow up on a petition?

Probably didn't make GM to happy as they are forced to make vehicles for sale in Canada with Daytime Running Lights as it has been the law here for many years.

In their current state it probably costs GM a fair amount to build the same car differently in the same production facility. It maybe better for them to just install the same lights in all their vehicles anyway.

The length of one Administration???

Fred

This is more evidence that safety is not a priority for the government in USA. In Europe they are going ahead with that safety feature (Daytime Running Light - DRL). The USA is one more time retrograde.

Wait a minute... what??? They took 8 years to make this decision?? "Yeah, GM, we'll get back to you on this sometime before you go out of business." WT????

I don't think it matters, because denying GM's petition doesn't change rules states have enacted on their own. Now if they'd approved GM's petition, that would have been imposed on every state.

As I recall, driving lights were first introduced into Canada by Greyhound bus line. They had experienced a rash of headon accidents and needed to do "something/anything" for public relations. They came up with the idea of daylight drive lights and started a PR campain on it. Governments jumped on board without documentation.

My memory isn't the best so anyone add your corrections.

This ruling means nothing to anybody.
"and therefore has decided that leaving them as a
manufacturer option is the best course of action."

GM can put them on or not as they see fit.....as can all the other manufacturers.

Situations that require lights will still require lights and the driver is responsible for turning them ON when necessary. In some of the smoke/fog situations, the tail lights are more important than the headlights and they aren't on with the DRLs anyway.

I suspect GM was throwing a "rock" at companies that made cheap(er) cars without them. Since the initial filing, I think almost every one has done it anyway so in the end it is a "don't care".

during daylight hours, regardless of light, you can be seen 11% more easily by oncoming traffin on two lane highways. I'll travel with teh lights on regardless of whether mandated just as long as I'm not FORCED to shut 'em off!

But I will say a little more. About 15 years ago I researched this subject for my employer. As I recall there was a lot of favorable data from the Highway Safety people. I have done this with my non-GM vehicles since. Better to be seen by more folks than not.

I don't understand the time frame either.

As I prefer less rather than more gov't interference (ala speed cams & RLC's), see

http://www.lightsout.org/

Here in the southern sunshine state, there is a requirement to have your headlights on during inclement weather (rain, fog, etc...) which I never thought about it until I got older and realized that it is a good idea... but required always on lights to me would actually be harmful for the environment.

1) the lights use power which means the engine has to work a little bit harder (use more gas) to charge the battery more

2) always on lights burn out faster so the increased landfill from the extra bulbs, glass, filaments...

Don't know where you got those facts from?

When the car is running, the alternator powers the car's electrical system not the battery.

DRLs do not burn on full power. If you ever had a light bulb connected to dimmer switch and use less than 100% brightness. The bulb will last almost forever.

Around me, particularly in the summer, I am driving in and out of shade during the day. I have noticed that it is much easier to see traffic coming out of the shade when you are in the sun. Particularly when wearing sunglasses. I can't understand resistance to something that makes it easier to see the other cars.

The bulb will last forever? Not. There are plenty of information in various forums about one or both of the DRL lights not working on GM vehicles. Everyday, I am tempted to jump out of my truck, run back to the vehicle behind me and tell them that one or both DRL lights are not working. The same with tail lights (although you don't see as many of them as you used to). Who checks them anyway. Just get in and drive it 'til it drops is the standard motto for people today.

Curt

Ohio as of 7/1/09 Drivers must turn on headlights when you turn on your windshield wipers in the rain.
Warnings will be issued this year for those who don’t comply with the wiper law, but tickets could be issued in years to come.

Your two points above don't seem to be very accurate, can you back them up with any facts?

Edit

I see Ein hit the nail right on the head with his reply.

I've heard it both ways, that DRLs waste fuel, and DRLs don't use fuel to run because the alternator powers the battery and the battery powers the DRLs.

Run the question through ask.com, and you'll find the two highest ranked webpages discussing the question disagree, slightly, with both sides. They say that because alternators are not 100% efficient, a very small amount of fuel *is* used to power DRLs or other accessories such as GPS or radios in running cars. But the amount of fuel used to power this kind of stuff is so small that it's arguably of almost no effect. This guy ran the numbers in such detail as to make my eyes glaze over, but his conclusion was that you'd save more fuel reducing your average highway speed by 1mph than you would by turning off DRLs:
http://blog.dotphys.net/2008/10/turn-off-daytime-running-lig...

Here are the similar numbers for other accessories such as GPS:
http://blog.dotphys.net/2009/04/gas-mileage-and-car-accessor...

I drive with the hi beams on all the time. If a little DRL is good my brighter high beams must be better.

[Soapbox/Rant]
Do you have any idea how bright they are, how annoying they are, how blinding even in the daytime they are, and how illegal it is to use high beams within 500 feet when approaching another vehicle it is, and how dumb you look driving around in the daytime with you high beams on.

If you don't think it's illegal, check your state code. It probably doesn't differentiate between day and night.

Further, why do you think the Fed regs on the USE and Implementation of DRL restricts the voltage applies to the highbeam bulb when used as a DRL to 10 volts?
[/Soapbox/Rant]

Back to the regularly scheduled discussion.

thanks for the info

In conditions of reduced visibility, it is just as important to have the TAIL LIGHTS on as it is to have the headlights on. I would hope that the actual law is worded that way.

And, no Ein missed the ball completely.

In a closed system like a car, engegy consumed must come from somewhere. If you are not in a hybrid 100% of it comes from the fuel. Insignificantly small maybe, but there is fuel consumed to power those lights.

As for the lights, their life is rated in hours of use and additional use,even at 1/2 power WILL result in shorter life. Again insignificant maybe but not non-existant.

I was kidding.

Here is a good read.
http://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/tech.html
http://www.danielsternlighting.com/nhtsa/NHTSA.html

Well, thank you for that. Unfortunately, even if you aren't, there are plenty out there that do. Including the worse culprits, motorcycles.

how bout making head lights that adjust to the brightness of the sun instead of always being on. if it's cloudy it's on, if it clear and sunny then it's off.

That kind of defeats the purpose of DRLs. In bright sunlight, certain colour cars can be nearly invisible. Especially on some of the open highways in the midwest and west. Particularly at certain sun angles.

Take that small amount of fuel used to power the increased load on the alternator for any electrical device and multiply that by several million vehicles.It now becomes a consideral amount.

i'm all for DRL...my insurance co. actually gives me a discount for having them on my car.

YOu know, you can always manually turn your lights on all the time...

Yeah, they're getting better. Used to take at least 10 years...

I can't beieve they didn't make it mandatory... Or actually I can, as with everything else, their decision surey couldn't have been based on research or logic, but on lobbyists...

Anyways, makes sense to have them, 'see & be seen'. Like people who don't use headlights at dawn/dusk hours. They say they can see just fine, but will others see them?

Also, while I also hate drivers who run around with high-beams for no reason, I can't blame the motorcyclists. It's the only armor they have, and the loud exhausts.

There's a simple solutuion to that. DOn't build cars for Canada till they decide to be reasonable

Any vehicle I have that didn't already have DRL's, I add a relay to turn on the headlights when the vehicle is on. I think they are a good idea regardless of what the gov idiots think.

They are a bad idea for the motorcyclist as this just means the masses will learn to ignore the lights comming at them.

Don't see such the big deal for automakers to include DRLs on all vehicles if they are having to put them on vehicles sold in Canada. Gotta think in the long run it would be cheaper to put them on all cars rather then keeping track of which vehicle is being shipped to Canada.

I'm all for DRLs I want to be seen when on the road, as a matter of fact if the weather is iffy and the automatic headlights don't come on I'll at least turn on my parking lights and fog lights. My thought is that if someone can see me a split second earlier that might prevent them from pulling out in front of me.

I have an 01 Sierra and have seen many full sized GM trucks with one DRL burnt out, perhaps two, perhaps they've disabled the DRLs but my truck is 8 years old and both DRLs are still burning. Even if they went out replacing a $3 bulb vs a potental $500 insurance deductible.... easy choice

Why does it have to be a law? If you think it's a good idea, great, turn them on! Makeing it a law, is just another excuse to give tickets/fines!

Been reading the comments and I'm in favour of DRL for a number of reasons.....safety (11% faster visiblity to on-coming traffic on sunny two lane highway - according to DOT survey in the late 70's), no tail lights, so my brakes show up in teh sunny days (versus keeping on the headlights which also turns on the tail lights), actually helps me see if a bulb is burned out when entering or leaving garage as they come on when ignition comes on, actually burn at 50% of normal so not a factor re "blinding on-coming traffic", and last but not least it is really cheap - com'on the total world addtitional energy consumption can't be any greater than 2 dozen SUVs versus a mini!
Key to me is safety - why do buses have to use them if they do not do anything? Hmmmmm....good enough for my kids, good enough fo me!

In Tennessee it is the law to have headlights on when running your wipers.

That doesn't make much sense. Ford sells vehicles in Canada too and doesn't have Daytime running lights on most of the US vehicles. So it apparently isn't causing them issues.

On most Ford's you can change this. Personally, I drive with my headlights on everytime I drive day or night. There is zero issue about the tail lights, When I use turn signals or brake, you know it from behind.

... to turn on headlights when wipers are in used but I have never seen it enforced.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc24400.htm

I have a 2000 Sunfire, a 1995 Suburban and a 2005 SRT/4. The bulbs have never been replaced. I'm on the road about 20 hours a week. Either I've been extremely lucky with all of my car's light bulbs or you're telling a tall tale.

the headlight manufacturing companys want this. I am guessing the latter has a lot more to do with than the prior.

Same is the case in SC, Was in a "Gully Washer" this afteroon, so bad that some semis pulled off to the side of the road and yet about half of the cars didn't have any lights on... including the idiot that turned right in front of me.

Always thought it would be funny to be a police officer, pull over some one in that instance and get on the PA and ask them to walk back to the car and stand outside while I wrote them up. "What, can't possibly be raining, your lights weren't on!"

Think it was mentioned earlier that it's common sense and "I know when I need to turn my lights on". Problem is that COMMON sense isn't and those that know when to turn their lights on aren't the trouble. Just my .02

One of my pet peeves is driving at night, coming upon a car with no taillights, only to realize that they probably forgot to turn on their headlights when I see the anemic DRLs lighting up one car-length of road in front of them. This has been brought up as an argument against DRLs. For those of you with DRLs, does your instrument cluster light up when they're on, or only when you turn on the headlights? Either way, I still wonder how people can drive miles on the freeway, at night, without real headlights.

Now for some trivia.

I found it interesting to read up on Oregon's driving laws, especially with respect to lights. First, at no time is it legal to drive with tail/parking lights without headlights on. I see this quite often around dusk. The primary issue is that the dim, amber lights have a different effect on depth perception, causing other drivers to think you're farther away and approaching more slowly. The law essentially states that if it's dark enough to necessitate any lights, headlights are mandatory.

High beams, fog lights, and accessory lights are another interesting category. In many states (yes, I'm generalizing), you may only operate two high beams OR two forward-facing accessory lights (including fog lights) at any time. Further, accessory and fog lights are subject to the same following and head-on distance restrictions as high beams (gotta shut them off so you don't blind other drivers), AND they do not qualify as headlights when they are required.

Some people around here drive with only their fog lights on at dusk, and even at night. A lot of people have their fog lights on whenever their headlights are on (even on dry, clear evenings), and do not dim them for oncoming or approached traffic.

For my part, I've developed the habit of turning on the headlights whenever I drive.

I don't write them, just report them. Just do a search on "BURNED OUT DAYLIGHT RUNNING LIGHTS" on Google and read the hits. There are only 63,200 of them. You should be able to read them in one night. BTW, I didn' lie when I said that I could see vehicles in my rearview mirror with a DRL out. Happens all the time. Consider it good fortune that yours have never gone out. I have owned GMC and Chevy Trucks since 1985 (seven of them) and have owned three Buicks, a Pontiac GrandAm, and a Pontiac Torrent. None of them have ever had a burned out DRL and I attribute it to the fact that I have never had high mileage on any of them. I check them and everything else weekly.

Here are a couple of them just to get you started.

http://outdoorsbest.zeroforum.com/zerothread?cmd=print&id=78...

The next one is a .PDF file from a study done by the Dutch that includes all of the arguments above. Again, I don't write 'em.

http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_DRL.pdf

HTH's Curt

I can't speak for all vehicles with DRLs. I have a 01 Sierra and an 02 TrailBlazer that both have DRLs and automatic headlights. The dash does not light up for DRLs. I know what you mean about people not having lights on, Can't figure out how they see how fast they are going when it's getting dark. I very seldom have to touch the light switch for either vehicle, it seems that they are preset to come on when it's just starting to get dark. Only time I turn them on myself is when you get one of those mid-afternoon showers where the sun is playing games with the sensor and it keeps turning the headlights on and off. I usually turn the parking lights and fog lights on. And yes I have heard somewhere before too that you can't drive with parking lights on. I figure that it's lighting up the back end of the truck to help keep people from running over me from behind.

On a side note kind of a lively and interesting discussion we're having on a subject that's pretty far off of the topic of this forum... I like it!

...on my Toyota Camry for DRLs, either.

DRLs do not cause either taillights or dashboard lights to come on. This is across most, if not all, vehicles sold in Canada.

For other comments out there, fog lights do NOT replace headlights in law, high beams must be dimmed for oncoming traffic, taillights/headlights must be turned on at leat 30 minutes after seunset and continue uintil 30 minutes before subrise - or so say most provinces. Back-up lights must be attached to the transmission and if there are additional white lights pointing backward that can be turned on independently, they must be on a spring switch to prohibit them from being inadvertently left on - trucks for instance.

There are also min/max laws regarding the candle power of lights, but not necessarily quantity, in most provinces.

For those that want to make the observation, rally car lights can only be used on the public roads when the roads have been closed to general traffic (I.e. special stages)

Also, BTW, fog lights work best if they are low to the ground and have a spread out pattern (makes no difference if yellow or clear). High beams are a no-no in fog and heavy snow as they reflect the light back to the driver reducing visability.

I suspect DOT will revisit the issue of DRLs once companies such as Ford start importing the European models of their cars for sale in the US.

No laws against having DRLs. Just no laws forcing them down peoples throats either.

Lights are on 30 minutes before sunset and 30 minutes after sunrise.

subject says it all....seniors moment!