UKC

Can anyone explain to me a legitimate reason why new fangled car lights that switch on automatically only come on at the front?

For most of the driving I do being seen from behind is far more important: poor visibility, fog, spray on the motorway in such cases rear lights are really important. And yet I often see people with no lights on only to pass them and see they have front only on. How on earth is that a good idea? Why not automatically switch both on at the same time?

I'm baffled.

In reply to Escher:

Yes, I don't understand why DRLs don't also have reds at the rear.

In reply to Escher:

If it's drl only then strictly they don't have their front lights on. Headlights and rear light whether manual or automatic come one at the same time. These are the legally required lights not the drl.

In reply to Escher:

I have Daytime Running Lights on my VW Passat but there is an option to turn them off which I have done. I thought we were all supposed to be conserving energy?

Al

In reply to GridNorth:


If you are driving a car and concerned about conserving energy, your headlights are probably the least of your worries.

I don't get DRL either. Some cars have this weird thing where the headlight turns off when you start indicating.

In reply to Escher:

To my annoyance you can't turn off the DRLs on the latest VWs.

In reply to Escher:


I think the idea of DRL is to increase the visibility of oncoming vehicles and in some Scandinavian countries this is a legal requirement (hence the lights come on automatically). They are not the same as sidelights (which are both front and back). DRL are brighter than sidelights because they are designed to be used in normal daylight but I have to say that when I acquired a car that has them I wasn't immediately aware that they didn't also show at the rear.

In reply to Escher:

Annoying as hell - wish I could switch mine off. I could probably pull out the fuse but I bet it is conveniently located on the same circuit as the starter motor or something equally daft.

In reply to malky_c:

As I'm quite sensitive to flicker I dislike the fact that many of them are cheapo-crappo LEDs pulsed at 50Hz, but I don't have a particular issue with the concept (other than that they may cause cyclists to need to use lights at all times to ensure their safety). But I do think they should be rears as well - if nothing else it'd draw attention to a stationary vehicle about to move off even if they are too lazy to indicate.

In reply to Dave Garnett:


Its a legal requirement for Europe now although is only for new models and so will take time to appear on all new cars.

In reply to Rigid Raider:


Yes, but on the plus side when you tailgate people they'll think you are in an Audi.

In reply to ByEek:


I wasn't thinking of this at a personal level but it does seem a contradictory thing for the legislators to do.

Al

In reply to Escher:

I've got a Volvo so the Scandi thing means I don't think my DLRs can be turned off. To be honest I leave my lights on auto all the time - remembering to turn lights on and off is the sort of menial admin task that should indeed be relegated to the car's computer!

Joking aside, I'm in the Alps though, and quite a few tunnels near where I live and you need to turn your headlights on for them - so quite handy from that respect.

Also right now, in the height of a summer heatwave the amount of shimmer/heat haze on the roads means that having DLRs is a good thing - oncoming traffic (especially the suicidal French overtaking Dutch caravans) means that this helps you prepare to avoid potential head-on collisions.


To be honest it had never occurred to me that they didn't, but I guess its because during the day, red lights at the rear of a car usually indicate braking.

In reply to Rigid Raider:


Why on earth would you want to? Unplug them or pull the fuse if you're that bothered.
jk

In reply to Rigid Raider:


Mine is a MK7 Passat and you can. It's in the settings on the computer. I think we are onto MK 8 now though so not sure about that.

Al

In reply to jkarran:

But beware that if they're standard equipment your insurance company might use it as a get-out in case of an accident.

In reply to GridNorth:

LEDs use next to no power so it's barely noise level. They'd save more power by making you turn the stereo off.

In reply to Escher:

I get the impression some drivers aren't aware they don't have (at least) their side lights on in the evening, they just assume the DRL / dash lights are on, so their lights are on front and back. I've been behind lots of drivers now who don't have lights on at the back but once you've overtaken them, you can see the DRLs are on at the front. I'm assuming the dash lights are on too, but perhaps they're not and they're just eejits.

In reply to Neil Williams:

They don't look like LED's

In reply to Neil Williams:


This annoys me with DRLs but not half as much as it does with rear lights. I don't want to see the car in front of me generating bright red ghosts all over my vision every time it breaks. Typical cheapness by the auto manufacturers.

It seems legislation or common sense is not keeping up with car lights. We have some busses here with coaxial rear lights where the red/brake lights are an annulus around a circular indicator. (Or it might be the other way round...) This dramatically decreases the contrast change of the indicators coming on to the point where they're barely visible in some conditions.

Then last night we were behind an Audi with rear indicators that are animated as per this video youtube.com/watch?v=qVkRxPMnVzQ&

Whilst I'm on a rant, it makes no sense for the electrical power to remain the legal limiting factor for headlights when that power was specified for incandescent bulbs given the explosion of more efficient light sources.
MAKE IT STOP.

In reply to Fraser:


I've noticed this a lot lately as well.

In reply to GridNorth:

Unless you've got a very early model that just uses sidelights they almost certainly are.

In reply to wintertree:

Yes, this really hacks me off. I would like to see legislation requiring pulsing to be at least 100Hz, as I find it really distracting. I wonder if it will cause an accident?


Yes, I don't like those either, it makes the brake lights almost invisible. I think LEDs have invited too much styling - perhaps time for some more standardisation of the size and shape of such lighting?


I saw one of those last night. They seem very visible so I'm not sure I have an issue with them, but they are non-standard.


Indeed. It should be lumens.

In reply to wintertree:


Now I know you are making this up. Audi's don't have indicators!

In reply to Escher:




I'm baffled that you are so selfish you can't work this one out. You're driving a heavy metal box at speed, the lights are so that others can see you. They are as much to protect others from you as to protect you from others.

You'll tend to drive it forwards so the lights are on the front. If its so foggy that you can't be seen from behind you will probably have your normal sidelights on at the rear, you caould also run these all day if you wanted...

In reply to Neil Williams:
I agree , and I have still never got to the bottom of WHEN I can get prosecuted/Cautioned for not having a operating light (when using LEDs.)

If there is a cluster of 20 lights making up my rear light say, can I be prosecuted/Cautioned when ONE LED in the cluster is out, or only when they ALL go out, or is it a number in between based on the emitted lumens, and if it is lumens how many lumens is the minimum, and can the police efficiently measure this ?

(I have asked a couple of Police on this,(not Traffic though) and it ticked the too hard box for them , and they could not tell me)

In reply to petellis:


I think the point is, and it's one I completely agree with, that cars are driving around in dark and/or foggy conditions with no rear lights.

I certainly noticed this a lot in the mornings earlier this year. Maybe not an issue at night, but definately an issue at dusk or in fog.

In reply to Ridge:


Is it any different though to the cars without DRLs? Some drivers never think of putting lights on in poor visibility conditions. On Monday during the, day but on a dual carriageway, in heavy rain and spray, about 1 in 5 cars had no lights on at all.

In reply to NottsRich:


At least some manufacturers have sensors that dim the dashboard lights in reduced light conditions as a reminder that the car's lights are not actually on when the DRLs only are on. This does not happen if the setting is on auto since the car should put the lights on whenever conditions dictate. It should be easy enough for all manufacturers to have this.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:


I think it is. Although there's always a few numpties about, the increase seems to be due to drivers thinking their lights are on because the dashboard is illuminated. Seems like the more cars are loaded with tech like auto lights and traction control the more drivers are completely oblivious of light and weather conditions.

In reply to Ridge:
You may well be right. One of my neighbours was sort of boasting about his latest car that has automatic just about everything. Apparently things like sensors that warn of vehicles in blind spot, if he drifts lane, speed limit changes, as well as collision avoidance automatic braking, adaptive active cruise control, not just auto lights, but automatic headlights that go on and off full beam automatically, auto corner lights for turning corners, boot that opens itself when he walks behind, etc, etc.

Not sure what he needs to do to drive given the list just went on and on. I switched off for a bit in the conversation, and whether all that stops him driving like a numpty at times ....! .

In reply to Climbing Pieman:


I would find that dangerous. I don't want my view to be compromised when I'm not necessarily expecting it.

In reply to Neil Williams:
He says the full to dip beam and vice versa is a response to sensors reacting to light sources or absence of them. Anything from street lights, rear lights of cars, headlights of oncoming cars, etc. will cause the switch from full to dip, and the absence of the reverse to dip if dark.

He commented himself it was a something that took him by surprise a few times with them going "up and down" when driving in rural areas. I suppose it could be quite dangerous in certain situations eg if he was driving fast on a rural road and a single house light caused them to dip and leave him without adequate vision for the speed he was doing.

I have no idea if he can switch off or override manually.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

If it's the Volvo XC60 yes you can switch it off manually through the computer for city safety and a button for lane change. For the headlights you just turn it from auto to manual.
It is actually a very good system and does not distract you or other people. Watch a video on how it works.
I had the XC60 for a couple of months and can state it is a very smart piece of kit.
I think it's near enough the same on the V40 as well.

In reply to sleavesley:
It's a Ford Kuga he has bought.

In reply to Neil Williams:


I feel the same. It's not as if failure to dip is a major issue. The new billion lumen lights on modern cars blind oncoming traffic on dip beam anyway.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

The BMW adaptive lighting system, now being copied everywhere, but nowhere bettered, is the best advancement in car tech for some time.

There is no safety risk with street lights/houses/oncoming cars de-activating the BMW system. Instead it creates a dark channel which envelopes the incandescent object while illuminating the darkness all around with an enveloping main beam. As the object moves or the car's position relative to the object shifts, the lights (and dark channels) bend and transform. It's like driving a dancing light show and utterly brilliant. Night driving is transformed and once sampled, you'll never want to go back.

In reply to Escher:
Yes you can override the automatic full beam although it does work quite well and is a boon if you're driving unlit roads with only occastional traffic. One less thing to think on.

Re . Scandinavian thing, you need the rear lights on as well in Scandinavia.

In reply to BnB:
Interesting thanks. Never knew that type of thing exists.

In reply to BnB: Can the incandescent object be a car.? What happens if there are two and one falls in the dark envelope?

In reply to wbo:


Good point. In theory it sounds like the holy grail of headlights, would be interesting if it works in practice. Wonder what the threshold is, does it blind joggers and pedestrians who don't have sufficiently bright lights?

In reply to wbo:

The lights don't go out, they simply dip so as not to dazzle oncoming cars.

In reply to Ridge:

There is a threshold and sometimes you have to override (which you can at any time) but only for joggers on dark, unlit lanes.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

youtube.com/watch?v=-dvPZ3H1Vm4&

Amazing stuff. I have them on my lowly 2 series and I won't be going back!!

In reply to BnB:

Just watched a video on that and it indeed looks a very impressive system.

In reply to Neil Williams:
Yes, the link I posted is a bit long-winded but if you persevere it does give an excellent exposition.

In reply to BnB:


That's pretty impressive. I'm not a big fan of gadgets for the sake of having gadgets but that seems like a genuine improvement.

jk

In reply to Climbing Pieman:




I think I'll stick with my old mechanical cars...

http://phys.org/news/2015-07-experts-ability-remotely-jeep-cherokee.html

In reply to BnB:


Yes seems very good. Just wonder what the car in front thinks to have the area all around it lit up! Biggest hurdle for me to get that system if I wanted it would be that I generally don't like BMWs .

In reply to NottsRich:



Heard that on the radio today. Scary. Hard to keep away from technology though as even a lot of older cars have some form of computer control.

Technology should help, but you sometimes wonder. Error codes were to help the technicians to identify what was wrong and make repair simpler - I heard recently that VW garages now charge £70 just to read the computer error codes! Years ago I had a Golf and its error code prevented the car from starting - no one every got to the root of what was wrong though, and instead at a large cost just changed the whole of the instrument binnacle system to "cure" the unkown problem.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

The problem isn't with technology, it's about manufacturer protectionism. There is absolutely no technical reason why a detailed error message describing a fault in detail and even steps to rectify it should not be displayed on the touch screen of modern cars that all have such a thing.

Time for an EU law perhaps?

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:
Don't think EU law would work. I remember when extended warranties were linked to servicing at main dealers. EU step in rile illegal and the extended warranty just changed to part manufacturer's warranty and part dealer so they could still enforce main dealer servicing.

Probably need more competition.

In reply to BnB:



Looks cool - I've got a F31, but I think you need the 'Visibility' package for this?

In reply to Kipper:
You do, plus "high beam assist" for an extra £100 or so. But I would imagine it's being packaged differently by now and will soon be less pricey before eventually coming as standard in a decade or so.

Bottom of the range VW Golfs come with adaptive cruise control as standard already.