US DOT rejects Daytime Running Lights

My 2007 Lexus ES350 and 2009 Subaru Forester has them...don't quite understand why people are against something that could potentially help someone see you coming. There were those against seat belts too!!!! Duh...

I don't think anyone here wants to ban DRLs. I just don't want them to become mandatory.

Did you feel the same way about seat belts???

We as a population must stop DEVO!

Stop saving us from ourselves.

I'm not that old. Seat belts were standard equipment by the time I was born.

Nonetheless, did you mean seat belts as mandatory equipment, or mandatory use of seat belts?

I'm am definitely in favor of the former -- seat belts are proven to save lives, and definitely should be provided. But if this is your comparison, it's invalid -- vehicles are already required to include sufficient lights. It's just up to the driver to use them.

If your argument is the latter, the correct comparison would be mandatory use of headlights at all times. The equipment is already installed on all road-legal cars; DRLs are redundant. As for my opinion, I have mixed feelings. I am an enthusiastic user of seat belts, but I do not believe it is the government's job to force people to use them. As a parent, I am deeply concerned about children whose parents don't care enough to secure them properly, however, I still see that even with some of the nation's strictest child seat laws. I'm not convinced the laws are as effective as the graphic Barbara Mandrell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Mandrell#1984:_Motor_ve...) PSAs from the 80s.

I apologize if I've misunderstood your argument.

While driving down a two lane highway doing 60mph (legal speed limit) when a car pulls out in front of you. The driver didn't see you because your car blended into the background and you did not have DRL's. We now have multiple law enforcement vehicles racing to the accident with two ambulances, fire rescue vehicles, one medivac airlift chopper. Two tow/recovery vehicles, not to mention the hundreds of cars and trucks that had to detour several miles around the accident scene. Lets not for get about the fuel that will be used by legal console, jury and judge. If your so worried about the minuscule amount of energy used by DRLs then turn off your A/C or heater fan.

Not sure if you read this but GM did a study on how much fuel the DRL alone consumes thru electric generation and it came out to 1.5 gallons a year.

I don't like the DRL's unless it was on the '98-'02 Camaro or the C5 Corvette as it looks fit.

As for my BMW, I turned the option off in the menu settings. Less bulb wear and heat during the daytime.

Other than that, you often see Suburban's and Tahoe's with one DRL out.

From talking with officers in traffic dept, they hate the DRL's for some reason.

Pennsylvania has this as well. I was pulled over a few weeks ago for it. Long story short I did not get a ticket because I explained to the officer my wipers were not on.

What a dumb law; requiring headlights on if wipers are on. Why not just say if it is raining put headlights on.

I admit that 8 years to make a decision on the DRL lights in cars is ridiculous. I have a beef with the approval of the new blue lights.
I think those lights are not a good feature in cars, because the wavelength is affecting people driving at night. Some drivers are affected by the intensity of those lights, and to make the case much worse some times drivers have the lights on the max.

???????

I don't know much about them, but I hate them too. They are very bright. I would compare them to a LED flash light and a regular bulb flashlight. The LED light shines almost twice as far and will almost blind you if you look at the beam.

Curt

What do you mean motorcyclists are the worst culprits? My Harley on low beams, as required by law, can also operate my pair of driving lights, my personal option to try to get cagers to see me and not make left turns right in front of me. These lights are all properly aimed with and without luggage packed to make sure they don't blind oncoming traffic. If I were to turn on my high beams, the driving lamps extinguish to not overtax the electrical system. Get this 3-lights legal, one high beam illegal. Cagers that turn in front of a cyclist, probably too busy to be bothered by another person's life.

I love my OEM HID lamps. The color of the light and the precise beam pattern are fantastic! As for the blue lamps that is generally people installing aftermarket over wattage bulbs into housings not intended for them, or non-dot approved aftermarket HID kits.

I also take my driving responcabilites seriously and makesure my lamps are aimed properly. HID lamp cars come either equiped with a lamp level control switch or the high end cars come with and auto level systems. It is funny seeing the Saab/Benz headlight wag up and down.

The problem with most HIDs are the people who install the aftermarket ones and don't bother adjusting their lights or worse, aim them higher so they can see 'better'. Either don't care about everyone else or are too ignorant.

My favorite are the ones with HID headlights AND foglights, and there's no fog or rain or anything. Makes me wonder just how much horsepower is added by HID lights?

Anyways, has anyone looked up what the research numbers say for DRLs? Let the numbers do the talking...

My 2009 Toyota has DRLs that can be turned on or off. Guess they want to please everyone, huh?

I do all the time.

My Honda has DTR that I can't disable. I hate that. There are times when you need to be able to drive with the lights off.

If you want to defeat the automatic DRL, just leave your parking brake engaged 1 click. It's not enough to engage the brakes, but it does fool the DRL routine.

People were against seat belts and air bags at one time. People seem to fight against anything that may possibly be benefit to protect life and avoid possible accidents. What the hell is wrong with daytime running lights? Seems we are always the last to incorporate a good idea because of the bureaucracy in our country.

This may repeat something already said.

Motorcycles were (apparently) hard to see so we were given "always on" headlights, and not much choice in the matter, but that seemed to help especially with regard to people making left turns in front of us.

So up comes the bright idea, let's give everyone daylight running lights.

Now motorcycle riders are once again mostly invisible because we're not noticed amongst all the lit up cars.

Motorcycle riders, in the states that allow them, are beginning to install modulators which make the headlights flash hi-lo so they'll stand out again.

And, quite frankly, it's the rare car color that can't be seen in the distance without running lights.

Lights are "point sources" and as such, unless you get a parallax view on them, you can't tell how far away they are.

You may have noted that at night, you have to be more cautious when passing as you really can't tell how far that oncoming vehicle is from you.

Have you noticed that certain jeeps (like the CJ) can fool you and are closer than they appeared because you were judging distance between you and it by the spread of the headlights?

In fact, certain motorcycles with dual headlights were getting creamed because of this and they now only run with a single headlamp with the second dedicated to highbeam use.

So look down the road one sunny day and see if it's easier to see how far away those oncoming cars are if they have brightly lit headlamps vs. just paint.

lol funny

Just beginning to install modulators? They came out in the early 80's - like 82 or 83. I know, I almost put one in my '80 CX500 but it didn't like the Windjammer fairing headlight module.

After reading this thread, I'm going shopping for a Modulating Headlight circuit for my Harley so I can be noticed among all the cagers with DRLs.

Before you complain, the Federal law that applies in all 50 states can be found here: http://users.snip.net/~WCLAMB/mod-law.htm

Canada has a similar law.

There is a good site for common courtesy that motorcycle riders should follow here: http://users.snip.net/~WCLAMB/MODULATOR.HTM

So the bureaucrats mandate DRL's, drivers become more inattentive than they are already & depend on looking for cars coming with DRL's, and then some poor sucker in a car without them comes down the road, the inattentive driver pulls out in front of the poor sucker because he's inattentive and not looking for cars but DRL's. [faceious) Great safety feature (/faceious)

I definitely want motorcycle riders to be protected, but headlight modulators seem a little distracting to me. (Clearly, I don't ride a motorcycle myself!) Personally, I hope this is a stopgap measure until some kind of personal radar/something similar (networked presence of other vehicles?) is available. Say in 20 years? Hey, it can happen!

They are SUPPOSED to be distracting. That's why you notice the motorcycle. Given that over 75% of car/motorcycle crashes occur in FRONT of the motorcycle, anything that can grab the attention of another vehicle operator is GOOD.

From the Motorcycle Safety Foundation, 10 things every car/truck driver should know about motorcycles:

1. There are a lot more cars and trucks than motorcycles on the road, and some drivers don't "recognize" a motorcycle; they ignore it (usually unintentionally). Look for motorcycles, especially when checking traffic at an intersection.

2. Because of its small size, a motorcycle may look farther away than it is. It may also be difficult to judge a motorcycle’s speed. When checking traffic to turn at an intersection or into (or out of) a driveway, predict a motorcycle is closer than it looks.

3. Because of its small size, a motorcycle can be easily hidden in a car’s blind spots (door/roof pillars) or masked by objects or backgrounds outside a car (bushes, fences, bridges, etc). Take an extra moment to thoroughly check traffic, whether you're changing lanes or turning at intersections.

4. Because of its small size a motorcycle may seem to be moving faster than it really is. Don't assume all motorcyclists are speed demons.

5. Motorcyclists often slow by downshifting or merely rolling off the throttle, thus not activating the brake light. Allow more following distance, say 3 or 4 seconds. At intersections, predict a motorcyclist may slow down without visual warning.

6. Turn signals on a motorcycle usually are not self-canceling, thus some riders, (especially beginners) sometimes forget to turn them off after a turn or lane change. Make sure a motorcycle's signal is for real.

7. Motorcyclists often adjust position within a lane to be seen more easily and to minimize the effects of road debris, passing vehicles, and wind. Understand that motorcyclists adjust lane position for a purpose, not to be reckless or show off or to allow you to share the lane with them.

8. Maneuverability is one of a motorcycle's better characteristics, especially at slower speeds and with good road conditions, but don't expect a motorcyclist to always be able to dodge out of the way.

9. Stopping distance for motorcycles is nearly the same as for cars, but slippery pavement makes stopping quickly difficult. Allow more following distance behind a motorcycle because it can't always stop "on a dime."

10. When a motorcycle is in motion, don't think of it as motorcycle; think of it as a person.

I just saw this thread and haven’t been able to read through it entirely so I apologize if this has already been said, but Canada mandates day-time running lights and because of that, all modern cars have the capability built in regardless of local laws. I live in Michigan and had them turned on by the dealership for both my 2008 and 2010 Fords as I think we should use any extra help being seen on the road that we can. I prefer the day-time lights as opposed to simply turning on your headlights because the dashboard lights work differently (easier to see during daylight use) and the headlamps run at a lower wattage [hopefully] making them last longer than at full brightness. Plus, I don’t have to do anything for them to be on.

The only thing stopping the manufacturers from turning them on regardless of a law requiring them (like GM does) is that some people don’t like them, but I have no idea why. As long as I can at least have the dealer turn them on for me, I’m OK with it.

Edit: OK… sorry. I should have read more of the comments before posting. My initial remarks seem to be a rehash of what’s been said before. I am surprised about how passionate some are regarding the non-use of the DRLs, so I can’t leave well enough alone and have to throw in my opinions. The necessity of turning on your headlights in inclement weather (so your tail lights are also on) is there whether you use DRL or not, so why not use them? You are simply easier to see the rest of the time. Is there really an argument that because some people fail to verify that one or both of the DRLs are not burned out justifies not using them? Those same people won’t check for stop lights, either, so why bother requiring them? Every component on the car wears out with use. You can’t not use them (double negative intentional) simply to make them last longer; don’t drive the car at all if you’re that worried about wear & tear.

You’ll never stop inconsiderate/neglectful/air-headed people from being inconsiderate/neglectful/air-headed, but that doesn’t mean the overall driving environment won’t be safer by using them.

Just my 2 cents.

I just love the mileage this topic brought. Lots of opinions expressed.

I do think it is interesting that none of the states require DRL's, and since the DOT is not making them mandatory on american cars, but my thought goes to the "lights on with wipers" law in place by many states, perhaps the DOT should require the headlights to go on automatically with the wipers? I have only had one car in the past that did this, and dont even remember which one it was.

Or, why dont they require automatic headlights, i still see many people riding around too late without theirs on.

It would be difficult for a single state to require an automobile feature not required in the other states. As it is now, you have CARB compliant vehicles and the rest of the United States. About the only way you could get DRL's required on at least some cars would be for California to mandate them. However, I believe California's ability to specify automobile features applies only to emissions. Here in New York, we follow CARB rules so our cars meet California emissions requirements.

I have family in Canada and travel there quite frequently. DRL's are useful BUT when everyone has them, they tend to get less notice. Much like the third break light was quite visible when it first appeared in 1985. My own vehicle has a Canadian version but unfortunately Honda did not put in the DRL controller connector in my car. A lot of the pieces are in place for DRL's on my vehicle but without that one harness connector, I am out of luck.

The decision should have no effect at all. Mandatory headlight zones simply mean the driver has to turn on the light switch. No 'mandatory drl' needed.

It seems most, if not all automakers are installing drl's on their vehicles whether it's mandated or not. The driver has the option (at least on my Toyota) whether to use them (along with the auto headlight feature) or not.

BTW, many states have a law (though it shouldn't have been needed) requiring motorists to turn headlights on when windshield wipers are operating. DRL's don't meet that requirement since tail lights aren't illuminated. One of the first things I ever learned about driving (and it was a lot of decades ago) was to turn headlights on in the rain. Besides being a safety issue for you, it's also a courtesy to other drivers whose view is hampered by wet windows.

Cheers

I don't know if you noticed, but most modern cars are set up so that anytime you use your wipers, your headlights (and taillights) turn on. At least every car I've onwed over the last 15+ years do.

I have absolutely no statistics on any reduction in accidents, based on the Canadian experience. However, we've had this feature for many years.

Does it reduce accidents? Who knows, but it does no harm and the odds are, that it does make you at least a bit easier to see.

Does it burn out the headlights? As stated by another contributor, the lights are on reduced power and I put over 120,000 kM (75,000 miles) on numerous vehicles and never had to replace a headlight bulb.

Does it lower gas mileage? Probably does due to the tiny load on the alternator, but it's likely a fraction of a fraction of a percent. Don't worry about it.

Fog and Rain? You do have to remember to turn your headlights to full power on cars without a photo sensor, but even reduced power is better than no power. How many times do you forget to use headlights.

I don't understand why GM just doesn't add it anyway. The rules don't say you can't. It would make the vehicle more standard for both countries, which should slightly reduce their production cost.

Last summer on a narrow 2 lane blacktop, I pulled out to pass a slow moving truck. Just ahead were large trees that were shading the highway. Just as I pulled even with the trucks rear bumper, I saw an older gray colored SUV approaching. I dynamited the brakes and pulled back in. If the SUV had DRLs, I would have spotted him quicker.

Just out of curiosity what planet do you buy your cars from. I have never heard of such a thing. I have owned 6 new cars in the last 15 years. Can you give me some examples of what cars do this. I have a 2009 Subaru Forester and a 2009 Lexus ES350 and neither do this.

Thanks

And this is the only problem I see with headlights used as DRL, people often forget to turn their lights on and just drive at night with the DRL which means no tail lights.

I think all cars today should come with DRL and a photo sensor, period. I do agree that a manual off switch for all lights would be nice but only one you have to activate each time your car is turned on.

Steve

DRL. I have no problem with that at all. It also has an automatic switch that will turn the headlights on when it gets to certain level of darkness.

Sales Are Up!!

I live in Canada too. Years ago before we had mandatory DRL I had a sales job and did a lot of highway driving. It's a small sample based on my own experience and those of my co-workers at the time. I always felt that drivers pulled out in front of me on the highway less often when I had my headlights on during the day. Does the impact of DRL go unnoticed among all the other cars on the road? Not driving on a remote highway with no other cars around.

My car is 16 years old with well over 200,000 km and I recently replaced one headlight bulb for the first time.

Canadian DRL can take several forms including high beams on low intensity or parking lights on high intensity. Well designed lights that don't run at full intensity and dont turn on the instrument panel lights lessen the probability that drivers will forget to turn on headlights at night.

I am glad that DRL are mandatory in Canada and consider any effect on component longevity or gas mileage to be minimal and well worth any cost.

They used to sell vehicles with DRL"s. My sister's 1999 Saturn has DRL's and many GM vehicles in the 1990's had them. GM even touted it in their advertisements. I guess when Y2K rolled along they decide to drop it.

I ride and I drive.

Motorcycle headlamp modulators are all designed to meet the Federal standard. The Federal law specifically prevents states from making them illegal. The light cycles between 40% and 100% at a rate that is designed to be noticed... aka annoying. If it causes you to notice the rider, it has done its job.

DRL's can create a sea of lights which can visually clutter the view of on-coming traffic... but that can help you been seen in other situations. That being said, lights are only one factor in being noticed. I use the word noticed as it is different than being seen. Many times a driver will see an on-coming car/truck/motorcycle/bicyclist/pedestrian/ fire-truck-with-lights-on-and-horn-blaring and make a bad or incorrect decision for the given situation and it will lead to an accident or near accident. This is because the driver may have seen the on-coming item but not noticed that they are a threat to their own personal safety. If they don't perceive the on-coming driver as a threat, they will not take the needed action (stay stopped, move to the right, accelerate out of the way, etc...) and may end up causing an incident or accident.

I've done my own study. It's about as scientific as some of these "facts" thrown around.

First, if you're bothered by DRL's glare, you shouldn't be driving because you have an issue with you're eyes. DRL's are reduced intensity from normal low beams. It's my understanding that DRL's use you're normal headlights. That way you will know when they burn out.

Second, I have a car that the headlights turn on and off with the car. I run with my headlights on always, day and night. When I turn them off for some reason and drive, I have people who don't see me and pull out on me. When they're on it doesn't happen. If I'm out and somebody pulls out on my the first thing I check is, are my headlights on because they probably aren't.

Why is the government ALWAYS bad. There are good government regulations that attempt to protect us from stupid people. (i.e. don't drink and drive.) Not every government regulation is good, but, then not every one is bad either. I guess it's the in thing to hate government.

I'm keeping my headlights on until there is a definitive study that says it's not safe.

Beas

I've noticed that the bright yellow cars that are in vogue right now are MUCH easier to see than even red cars which used to be the easiest color to see.

All we need is some bureaucrat to get a law passed what color cars should be.

It seems to me that each manufacturer can determine if the DRL are ran at 100% or less. My wife's '01 is rarely driven at night, has programmable DRL feature that can be defeated by following instructions within the driver's manual, and burns out halogen bulbs with regularity every 20k miles, about 2 years. The high beam bulbs are still original.

I enjoy the years when some American pickups DRLs were the high beams ran at a reduced power. Unfortunately these seem to have been built without the feature that automatically turns on the lights after dark. Thus they run around at night with 80% high beams.

There's a difference between hate and distrust.

There's probably a lot more to distrust than the government. Usually it's the big corporate interests looking to pad their bonuses that will do whatever they can get away with. If there were no government things would run rampant.

Individuals have the power to change government more than they do corporate entities. They at least have a vote in government.

Beas

Just out of curiosity what planet do you buy your cars from. I have never heard of such a thing. I have owned 6 new cars in the last 15 years. Can you give me some examples of what cars do this. I have a 2009 Subaru Forester and a 2009 Lexus ES350 and neither do this.

Thanks

2004 Chrysler Pacifica, 2008 Ford Excape, 2010 Ford Fusion, and I can't swear to it but I'm pretty sure my 2002 Ford Explorer did as well. Just to make sure I wasn't in a complete fog, I just went to my Fusion, started it, turned the wipers on, and checked front and back lights - all were on. I'm sure the people in the window offices think I'm nuts running my wipers in the parking lot on the hotest, brightest day we've had so far this year in metro-Detroit, but I had to check.

But I did preface my statement by saying most "modern" cars... Kidding! Just kidding!