Interesting about DRL's
06-25-2008, 08:58 AM
#1
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Retired but working
Posts: 18,401
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Cruise-In VI Veteran
Interesting about DRL's
Found this to be an interesting article about the use of DRL's. It appears that may do mor harm than good.
Sun's Up - Lights Off - Thank You!
One of the pervasive urban myths plaguing our highways and byways is the belief that daytime use of headlights reduces motor vehicle accidents. It all started with a Greyhound Bus Company public relations gimmick to promote its "safety image." There was an apparent reduction in bus accidents and the conclusion was made that the daytime headlight use must be the reason. There was a burst of publicity and daytime headlight use was christened as a great highway safety strategy. A subsequent study, slightly more thorough, determined that daytime headlight use on busses had no effect on accident frequency. That study never got much attention.
Think about this; if you can't see a bus during the daytime, because it doesn't have its headlights on, there is a greater problem at play here than "visibility."
Next, there were mandates of daytime headlight use in a few tundra laden Scandinavian countries. Subsequent government sponsored studies proved the government was inspired in its mandating of daytime headlight use. Again, subsequent review of these favorable DRL studies indicated the high probability that factors, other than daytime headlight use, were responsible for any reduction in accident frequency. The same scenario was subsequently repeated in Canada---the government mandates vehicles be equipped with automatic daytime running lights (DRLs) and low and behold government studies find that DRLs may be responsible for saving the human race from roadway annihilation.
Auto manufacturers, never loath to exploit a fad, climbed on the DRL bandwagon and hyped the safety benefits of irritating other drivers by shining headlights in their eyes, during daylight hours. General Motors was most aggressive on this front with their Saturn products winning the award for "most obnoxious cars to meet on the highway. " While seldom admitted, the primary motivation for putting DRLs on American market cars is that it saves money. Rather than building one lighting system for Canada, where DRLs are mandated, and a different system for the US market, GM decided to save a few bucks by just installing the DRL equipped system on both the US and Canadian models.
The first, last and only large scale U.S. study that has been completed and published on the effects of DRLs as safety devices, was conducted by the insurance industry Highway Loss Data Institute. The results; vehicles equipped with DRLs were involved in more accidents than similar vehicles without DRLs. The difference was minimal, but the meaning was straight forward, DRLs aggravate other motorists, obscure directional lights, waste fuel, "mask" other road users that don't have headlights on, or don't have headlights period (pedestrians and bicyclists) and their net effect on accident reduction is zero or worse.
Because DRLs negatively effect other motorists, versus the owner of a DRL equipped vehicle, they should be omitted from all new cars by government mandate. Furthermore, all states should explore legislation that limits daytime headlight use to low beam or parking lights. The government, in concert with various corporate interests has sold the driving public a bill of goods that doesn't live up to its advertised claims. It seems only fair that the government and the same corporate interests undo the damage they have done.
Sun's Up - Lights Off - Thank You!
One of the pervasive urban myths plaguing our highways and byways is the belief that daytime use of headlights reduces motor vehicle accidents. It all started with a Greyhound Bus Company public relations gimmick to promote its "safety image." There was an apparent reduction in bus accidents and the conclusion was made that the daytime headlight use must be the reason. There was a burst of publicity and daytime headlight use was christened as a great highway safety strategy. A subsequent study, slightly more thorough, determined that daytime headlight use on busses had no effect on accident frequency. That study never got much attention.
Think about this; if you can't see a bus during the daytime, because it doesn't have its headlights on, there is a greater problem at play here than "visibility."
Next, there were mandates of daytime headlight use in a few tundra laden Scandinavian countries. Subsequent government sponsored studies proved the government was inspired in its mandating of daytime headlight use. Again, subsequent review of these favorable DRL studies indicated the high probability that factors, other than daytime headlight use, were responsible for any reduction in accident frequency. The same scenario was subsequently repeated in Canada---the government mandates vehicles be equipped with automatic daytime running lights (DRLs) and low and behold government studies find that DRLs may be responsible for saving the human race from roadway annihilation.
Auto manufacturers, never loath to exploit a fad, climbed on the DRL bandwagon and hyped the safety benefits of irritating other drivers by shining headlights in their eyes, during daylight hours. General Motors was most aggressive on this front with their Saturn products winning the award for "most obnoxious cars to meet on the highway. " While seldom admitted, the primary motivation for putting DRLs on American market cars is that it saves money. Rather than building one lighting system for Canada, where DRLs are mandated, and a different system for the US market, GM decided to save a few bucks by just installing the DRL equipped system on both the US and Canadian models.
The first, last and only large scale U.S. study that has been completed and published on the effects of DRLs as safety devices, was conducted by the insurance industry Highway Loss Data Institute. The results; vehicles equipped with DRLs were involved in more accidents than similar vehicles without DRLs. The difference was minimal, but the meaning was straight forward, DRLs aggravate other motorists, obscure directional lights, waste fuel, "mask" other road users that don't have headlights on, or don't have headlights period (pedestrians and bicyclists) and their net effect on accident reduction is zero or worse.
Because DRLs negatively effect other motorists, versus the owner of a DRL equipped vehicle, they should be omitted from all new cars by government mandate. Furthermore, all states should explore legislation that limits daytime headlight use to low beam or parking lights. The government, in concert with various corporate interests has sold the driving public a bill of goods that doesn't live up to its advertised claims. It seems only fair that the government and the same corporate interests undo the damage they have done.
06-25-2008, 10:01 AM
#3
Administrator
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: In a parallel universe. Currently own 2014 Stingray Coupe.
Posts: 343,014
Received 19,305 Likes
on
13,977 Posts
C7 of the Year - Modified Finalist 2021
MO Events Coordinator
St. Jude Co-Organizer
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-
'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
NCM Sinkhole Donor
CI 5, 8 & 11 Veteran
Some people may not like them, but I'll keep my DRLs thank you. The way people drive around here, I'll take anything that makes the car more visible to them. 
06-25-2008, 10:12 AM
#4
Interesting that one of the first attempts at "stealth" was to try to
hide ships at sea from the enemy during the day was to line the sides
with banks of lights. It worked pretty well but was impractical.
hide ships at sea from the enemy during the day was to line the sides
with banks of lights. It worked pretty well but was impractical.
06-25-2008, 10:40 AM
#6
Night Owl for life
Member Since: Nov 2003
Location: Bugs Bunny should'a made a left turn here
Posts: 23,200
Received 3,247 Likes
on
1,668 Posts
lovin' the DRLs! 
06-25-2008, 07:01 PM
#8
06-25-2008, 08:18 PM
#9
Le Mans Master
Me too. With the low profile of the C5 it only makes common sense that the DRL's make it easier to spot from a head on position.
06-25-2008, 08:21 PM
#10
Supporting Tuner
Disabled mine the day I bought my car 
Stephen
06-26-2008, 01:30 AM
#13
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Dec 2003
Location: Horncastle Lincolnshire, England
Posts: 19,384
Likes: 0
Received 79 Likes
on
61 Posts
2023 C5 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
They're illegal here in England so I have no choice. I've done the relay mod
I have to say I agree with the author of the article. If you can't see a car DRLs won't help you except in marginal visibility when you should have headlights on anyway. The other observation is that why is it only GM who has them? If they were so good other manufacturers would have followed.
Over here, if you see an amber signal it means someone is turning; no confusion.
JMHO
I have to say I agree with the author of the article. If you can't see a car DRLs won't help you except in marginal visibility when you should have headlights on anyway. The other observation is that why is it only GM who has them? If they were so good other manufacturers would have followed.
Over here, if you see an amber signal it means someone is turning; no confusion.
JMHO
Last edited by DeeGee; 06-26-2008 at 01:34 AM.
