For years we have had to put up with inappropriate use of fog-lights, front and rear. More recently we have the flashing blue HID phenomenom. Then there is the current fad of blue washer nozzle lights (??). However there is now a new menace on the roads, and it had to come from a German manufacturer, didn't it?
I am talking about the Audi S6 (or is it RS6) with the multiple LED sidelights. They look like multiple fog lights to me and are far brighter than they need to be. I don't know if they are day-running lights like the Volvos, but every Audi S6/RS6 I have seen so far has then on. But perhaps it is just the owners showing off in that usual German 'prestige' car way. They are a pain, and are bound to become more widespread.
You have been warned!
|
The point of this is to provide non-dazzling Daytime Running Lights that are soon to become compulsory throughout Europe by EC Directive. Audi should be applauded, not derided.
HJ
|
The point of this is to provide non-dazzling Daytime Running Lights that are soon to become compulsory throughout Europe by EC Directive. Audi should be applauded not derided. HJ
ONLY it they're not TOO bright.
vbr......MD
|
|
|
|
I'd agree if they were fitted to all A6's, but they've been fitted to some models just to make them stand out more.
|
They're beta testing DRLs that have a small carbon footprint.
Stop the world, I want to get off.
|
Oh no. Not the save the planet scenario.
The planet has experienced warm and cold changes for thousands, if not millions, of years. The current efforts will not make a blind bit of difference (it will raise a lot of money for governments though).
As I've said before, the warmest winter experienced in the UK occurred in, IIRC, 1869. Not many 4x4s, Boeing 747s or similar around at that time.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
The point of this is to provide non-dazzling Daytime Running Lights that are soon to become compulsory throughout Europe by EC Directive. Audi should be applauded not derided. HJ
I don't agree. (On HJ's site is this the same as going into your local bar and telling the publican his beer is flat and his barmaid is ugly? I hope not!)
Firstly, there's conflicting evidence that lights in the daytime actually help avoid accidents. They've been compulsary on motorbikes for years but the number of "sorry mate, I didn't see you" accidents hasn't dropped.
Secondly, there's the problem of the lights dazzling people. Especially when the back of a car is loaded or you go over bumps - is the driver flashing me to pull out?
Thirdly, it makes other road users more difficult to see by making the very complicated picture we see through our windscreens even more complicated and distracting. Personally I'd rather make vunerable road users like pedestrians on crossings and cyclists easier to see, not people in huge steel safety cells.
Fourthly, there's the element of 'risk compensation' If you think everyone can see you because you have your lights on (because we're all human!), it might make for some dangerous mistakes
I notice that buses now drive with their headlights on. If you can't see a bus that's 8 feet wide and 10 feet tall, what difference will a couple of lights make??
|
Firstly there's conflicting evidence that lights in the daytime actually help avoid accidents. They've been compulsary on motorbikes for years
Oh, have they really?
|
They've been compulsary on motorbikes for years >> Oh have they really?
I think so? Most bikes I've seen newer than 5 years old have dipped lights on whenever the ignition is on.
|
|
|
|
|
multiple LED sidelights. They look like multiple fog lights to me and are far brighter than they need to be.
The law on lighting (C&U) was that various bulbs/lamps should not exceed a maximim wattage. In view of scientific advances in lights and lighting, what is the situation now? I am tempted to think that (for instance) 60W of LED headlamp would be quite spectacular, compared to incandescent lamps. Mmm?
|
Certainly the opposite from tungsten bulbs to low energy types (in the home of course)...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
Great - what will I have to do now to make my motorbike once again visible as it blends into the background of cars with twin headlamps burning all the time...
|
>>The point of this is to provide non-dazzling Daytime Running Lights that are soon to become compulsory throughout Europe by EC Directive. Audi should be applauded, not derided.
HJ
>>
It is the EC Directive that should be derided!
Great - what will I have to do now to make my motorbike once again visible as it blends into the background of cars with twin headlamps burning all the time...
Spot on!
|
|
|
|
MSS, I think you'll be very visible still because your motorcycle will be moving and showing a very bright light - and therefore standing out from the stationery, dull scenery.
|
|
|
|
[LEDs] the opposite from tungsten bulbs to low energy types
Quite. However, is there any legislation that allows for bulbs other than incandescent, and their possible different output in terms of light?
|
Daytime running lights? What nonsense. Thought lights were only necessary when it got dark?
Cars with lights on everywhere will just make driving even more unpleasant.
|
|
Good for the bulb manufacturers though. And for the dealers who have to fit these bulbs on modern cars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't have a problem with the new Audi lights.
It's when they say bikes have to have say aircraft style anti-collision strobe beacons we will have an irritating problem.
|
anti-collision strobe beacons
Closest we have to that is old Lucas headlights with 3 settings: Off; Dim; Flicker
|
Day Time Running lights are one of the silliest ideas from the EU.
Are you ever a pedestrian?
Do you ride a horse?
Do you ride a bicycle?
All of these will come off worse in a collision with a car, and although the last one could have DRLs, a goodly proportion (which I'm not defending) don't even have lights at night.
If you take this thinking to extremis, should lamp posts and other street furniture have DRLs? After all motorists will be watching for lights - not objects. (I exagerate a bit but I think you'll get the point0.
I know the FHBVC and FIVA are trying to negotiate exeptions for historics, but this misguided legislation is the beginning of the end for anything other than a newish car/bus/lorry on the roads.
|
"Firstly, there's conflicting evidence that lights in the daytime actually help avoid accidents. They've been compulsary on motorbikes for years but the number of "sorry mate, I didn't see you" accidents hasn't dropped."
I have little objection to low intensity light, but I often find myself dazzled by motorbikes with lights on full beam. Quite often all I can see ahead is a blaze of light. I guess that there might be a motorbike there, but cannot tell, and cannot even focus on the road ahead, as the light is so bright. Surely this is counter productive, and reduces safety? (I do agree that non dazzling lights on bikes during daytime are a good idea.)
|
I often find myself dazzled by motorbikes with lights on full beam. Quite often all I can see ahead is a blaze of light. I guess that there might be a motorbike there but cannot tell and cannot even focus on the road ahead as the light is so bright. Surely this is counter productive and reduces safety?>>
Absolutely right, either because they ride with full beam on or because the bike is loaded differently and the dipped beam is pointing high.
The result of this is: vehicles in front are dazzled. I don't see that making everyone in front of you a bit angry is a good thing. Also it's difficult to judge how far behind the bike is, which must be a bad thing. And of course you (human nature) spend a while concentrating on what's behind you, rather than everywhere else. All in all, very silly motorcycle rider.
(I do agree that non dazzling lights on bikes during daytime are a good idea.) >>
Other than the unintended 'headlight flash' when going over a bumpy road, or a rider thinking that 'I have my lights on, he MUST have seen me' and it also confusing the view of other road users.
To anyone who thinks that lights always make things more visible, have a look here and follow the instructions: www.michaelbach.de/ot/mot_mib/index.html
The moving grid and flashing lights can be just the same for your brain to take in as the view up the road, lots of information, some things stationary and some moving. Some are potential hazards, don't forget to keep an eye on your speed too - there's a lot of information for your brain to take in. It's only natural that some things drop out of your brain's observation list.
|
|
|
I often find myself dazzled by motorbikes with lights on full beam.
What concerns me is that the riders might have the lights on main beam to illuminate the road in an attempt to compensate for poor eyesight. My only recourse is to put mine on main beam as well in the hope that they'll see me.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Listen, guys, I agree with you that Daytime Running Headlights should not be made compulsory. I have been fighting against this for years using the 'invisible motorcycle' argument. One ex cop 'road safety expert' now living in America tried to ruin my Christmas telling me I represented a danger to society by opposing this Euro stupidity, which, incidentally, will increase average vehicle CO2 emissions by a small percentage. It should be up to drivers to use their common sense. And this is what seems to be happening in Italy where DRLs are supposed to be compulsory but very few drivers drive on DRLs. My point about the Audi halo lights is that they are far less distracting than Bi-Xenons bouncing over speed humps, so Audi should be applauded for coming up with an acceptable compromise now that the imposition of DRLs throughout Europe seems to be inevitable.
HJ
|
My point about the Audi halo lights is that they are far less distracting than Bi-Xenons bouncing over speed humps so Audi should be applauded for coming up with an acceptable compromise now that the imposition of DRLs throughout Europe seems to be inevitable.
Agree with you 100% there HJ. How did those poxy things ever get approved?
Pain in the retina.
|
|
Total bonkerism - bikes stand out in the urban environment because they have lights (actual factory fit running lights in the case of mine). Motorcyclists will evolve and up the ante to remain visible. This stupid idea will increase the so called carbon footprint of motorists and cause needless light pollution as well as reduce the life of difficult to replace lightbulbs. Why not make it compulsory to have auto-lights ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
