Daytime Running Lights

[berserker_sid]

JFC. Some of you guys really need to take your Premarin.

FWIW, I have my headlights on whenever I'm driving. Rain or shine. I want other drivers to see me and avoid hitting me. If the DRLs help with that I'm all for it. Besides, they look pretty cool.

yup... thats what there is a very thin line between ... an excellent driver and a resposible one too,,,

Its not always abt me, my car , my speed should not be caught and blah blah... but sometimes it is others, there safety, and stuff

Sponsored

 

[Blk2015GT]

High performance cars and pretending to know better than everyone else on a public road leads to incidents like this. Just saw this on Yahoo news ironically.

It's not only can you hit someone, but also the reaction you cause others to have when going at a unnecessary high rate of speed.

I'm sorry but I take big issue with some attitudes of people here who think they can drive however they want, however fast they want on public roads, and "F the police" childish attitude, because they THINK they know what they're doing.

Sorry, but you're not Dale Ernhart Jr (or whoever is good in racing I have no clue honestly as that is the only name I could think of); you are nowhere near the skill of those guys no matter what you say or think, so keep it off the public roads (just as they do). Go rent track time and wreck your car into a wall instead of one of us on the public roads.

[ame="[MEDIA=youtube]DCYkhXuRsWU[/MEDIA]"]

 

[berserker_sid]

High performance cars and pretending to know better than everyone else on a public road leads to incidents like this. Just saw this on Yahoo news ironically.

It's not only can you hit someone, but also the reaction you cause others to have when going at a unnecessary high rate of speed.

I'm sorry but I take big issue with some attitudes of people here who think they can drive however they want, however fast they want on public roads, and "F the police" childish attitude, because they THINK they know what they're doing.

Sorry, but you're not Dale Ernhart Jr (or whoever is good in racing I have no clue honestly as that is the only name I could think of); you are nowhere near the skill of those guys no matter what you say or think, so keep it off the public roads (just as they do). Go rent track time and wreck your car into a wall instead of one of us on the public roads.

Correct bro.. and this what i have been debating all the way here... that others safety is more important than our childish desires

 

[Norm Peterson]

but givin an excuse the DLRs should be turned off so that speed on highways shows how irresposible ur driving is on streets.

I wasn't the guy who said he wanted to be able to turn them off so that he could speed with less risk of getting caught, so I'd appreciate not being accused of suggesting such a poor reason.

I had to move my daughter's car a couple of days ago, and I could see that her car's DRLs lit up even before I could turn the key. My first thought was irritation at why the headlights were left on - not a good frame of mind to start your drive with.

Remember that I'm from a time when if you left the lights on, the car probably wasn't going to start the next time, and you'd be cussing yourself out for being so damn stupid. You can't mandate memories like that to suddenly vanish, nor that the associated annoyance suddenly be converted to some warm fuzzy feeling of goodness about your car's electrical behavior.

You do realize that with a little over 50 years as a licensed driver under my belt, essentially none of that has been in vehicles with DRLs? Somehow, the people around me managed just fine even when nobody had them. Obviously, I did.


Blk2015GT - I agree. No telling what some random street driver is going to do when surprised.

In the majority of track day driver groups, you are not permitted to pass another car until he points you by, typically with his left hand indicating which side you are to pass him on. In return, the driver you're about to pass is expected to use his mirrors from time to time so that he knows you're there (and that you are apparently faster overall because you caught him). In these respects at least, driving hot laps around a track constitutes more civilized driving than what you get thrown at you on the street. Mechanical failure excepted, your relaxed-pace drive to the track can be riskier than your hard driving on the track.


Norm

 

[berserker_sid]

I wasn't the guy who said he wanted to be able to turn them off so that he could speed with less risk of getting caught, so I'd appreciate not being accused of suggesting such a poor reason.

I had to move my daughter's car a couple of days ago, and I could see that her car's DRLs lit up even before I could turn the key. My first thought was irritation at why the headlights were left on - not a good frame of mind to start your drive with.

Remember that I'm from a time when if you left the lights on, the car probably wasn't going to start the next time, and you'd be cussing yourself out for being so damn stupid. You can't mandate memories like that to suddenly vanish, nor that the associated annoyance suddenly be converted to some warm fuzzy feeling of goodness about your car's electrical behavior.

You do realize that with a little over 50 years as a licensed driver under my belt, essentially none of that has been in vehicles with DRLs? Somehow, the people around me managed just fine even when nobody had them. Obviously, I did.


Blk2015GT - I agree. No telling what some random street driver is going to do when surprised.

In the majority of track day driver groups, you are not permitted to pass another car until he points you by, typically with his left hand indicating which side you are to pass him on. In return, the driver you're about to pass is expected to use his mirrors from time to time so that he knows you're there (and that you are apparently faster overall because you caught him). In these respects at least, driving hot laps around a track constitutes more civilized driving than what you get thrown at you on the street. Mechanical failure excepted, your relaxed-pace drive to the track can be riskier than your hard driving on the track.


Norm

Apart from you there is one more... Who is finding excuse to shut down DRls in car and that person gave point that he wants to speed up 90-100 and Cops should not see him.

And i have seen those cars which when light up heheh might not let you start the car at all.

and with all Due respect sir, You need to get used to all this. DRLs are indicators or lets say at least they contribute a bit more towards safety of other passengers.

Its for others and Yours too. SO no matter what excuse can be put, you cannot say DRLs are not required or wanna turn them off,

The video GT posted, clearly shows, how stupid some WANNABE drivers are today. After Getting an sports car some feel that street belongs to my DAD sorts.
Which is not the case and DRLs contribute if not much then a little.


Also ,

You also mentioned DRLS are more required in Northern states than south, that also is little invalid. In matter which state you are in north, south anywhere, you cannot risk ANYONES life for your own mindset. If it bothers you , get used to, Welcome to new world sir.

How many of us will actually bother , to switch on headlight during dusk time, Very few, Even if it is not important to us, But for some on coming traffic it is.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Apart from you there is one more... Who is finding excuse to shut down DRls in car and that person gave point that he wants to speed up 90-100 and Cops should not see him.

And i have seen those cars which when light up heheh might not let you start the car at all.

OK, we agree on the first and you understand the second. Close enough.

and with all Due respect sir, You need to get used to all this. DRLs are indicators or lets say at least they contribute a bit more towards safety of other passengers.

Its for others and Yours too. SO no matter what excuse can be put, you cannot say DRLs are not required or wanna turn them off,

Like I said, in a whole lifetime of driving there hasn't been any incident involving me that DRLs would have made better. I know that people fixated on things like DRLs have difficulty acknowledging past performance as a pretty good indicator of future experience, but it is a valid approach. And the longer I drive, the more experience I accumulate and the better I get at anticipating situations.

The video GT posted, clearly shows, how stupid some WANNABE drivers are today. After Getting an sports car some feel that street belongs to my DAD sorts.
Which is not the case and DRLs contribute if not much then a little.

I absolutely agree on peoples' stupidity/aggression/whatever, there simply isn't any excuse for what that Ferrari driver caused. At a track day, he'd have been booted off, perhaps permanently.

Also ,

You also mentioned DRLS are more required in Northern states than south, that also is little invalid.

I said 'northern countries'. Alaska is the USA's only outlier, and it wouldn't surprise me if AK's motor vehicle code has had something to say about this due to their unique (for the USA) situation.

In matter which state you are in north, south anywhere, you cannot risk ANYONES life for your own mindset. If it bothers you , get used to, Welcome to new world sir.

By my driving record, nobody has been placed at risk by me not having DRLs.

How many of us will actually bother , to switch on headlight during dusk time, Very few, Even if it is not important to us, But for some on coming traffic it is.

And the morons who think that their DRLs ar the end-all, be-all solution already fail to realize that their taillights are NOT lit. This happens all the time, so your precious DRL solution really isn't as sound as you'd like to think.


Sometimes I think that people have become too afraid to express opinions that are inconsistent with whatever the "politically correct" stance happens to be.


Norm

 

[berserker_sid]

OK, we agree on the first and you understand the second. Close enough.


Like I said, in a whole lifetime of driving there hasn't been any incident involving me that DRLs would have made better. I know that people fixated on things like DRLs have difficulty acknowledging past performance as a pretty good indicator of future experience, but it is a valid approach. And the longer I drive, the more experience I accumulate and the better I get at anticipating situations.



I absolutely agree on peoples' stupidity/aggression/whatever, there simply isn't any excuse for what that Ferrari driver caused. At a track day, he'd have been booted off, perhaps permanently.


I said 'northern countries'. Alaska is the USA's only outlier, and it wouldn't surprise me if AK's motor vehicle code has had something to say about this due to their unique (for the USA) situation.


By my driving record, nobody has been placed at risk by me not having DRLs.


And the morons who think that their DRLs ar the end-all, be-all solution already fail to realize that their taillights are NOT lit. This happens all the time, so your precious DRL solution really isn't as sound as you'd like to think.


Sometimes I think that people have become too afraid to express opinions that are inconsistent with whatever the "politically correct" stance happens to be.


Norm

Sir,

YOu are one experience driver.. Here we have majority of drivers ... which lets say in 20s. and few even in Teens...

Now in that age people you know tend to get carried away ...As we saw .. that in last few months new mustangs being crashed , s550s.

Thats why i said.. "IF NOT MUCH DRLS contribute a LITTLE to road safety".

You have experience and i know a few trust me... i have never seen faster and safer drivers than them.

I am in mid 20s and even i sometimes tend to go over the board...there is where all these small bits just help.

and Sometimes being "POLITICALLY CORRECT" doesn't make you "ETHICALLY CORRECT"

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

Like I said, in a whole lifetime of driving there hasn't been any incident involving me that DRLs would have made better. I know that people fixated on things like DRLs have difficulty acknowledging past performance as a pretty good indicator of future experience, but it is a valid approach. And the longer I drive, the more experience I accumulate and the better I get at anticipating situations.
...
By my driving record, nobody has been placed at risk by me not having DRLs.

This isn't really a valid line of reasoning for anything, though. "I've never had a problem with it" has nothing to do with answering any question -- I personally have never had colon cancer, but that doesn't mean that I don't recognize that it's a problem and that we need as a society to take steps to treat and prevent it. The fact that you personally have never been in an accident or "put somebody at risk" or whatever has nothing to do with whether or not preventative measures should be taken.

That's, of course, the whole point of insurance -- risk is shifted around, and people who don't have problems pay more into the system than they take out. If people who didn't use insurance never paid for it, then the entire purpose of having insurance in the first place would be defeated.

 

[Norm Peterson]

and Sometimes being "POLITICALLY CORRECT" doesn't make you "ETHICALLY CORRECT"

I'm not sure that came out the way you intended it . . . it's close enough to my position of not being a slave to PC-ness to permit "ethically correct" to be interpreted somewhat differently.

I was in my twenties, once upon a time. 40 years from now, I wonder how many of today's 20-somethings will be flat-out afraid to get in and drive, say, a 1967 Mustang specifically because it lacks most of today's nannies.

This isn't really a valid line of reasoning for anything, though. "I've never had a problem with it" has nothing to do with answering any question

It's a good enough basis for insurance companies to offer better rates to those who haven't had problems than they will to those who have had their difficulties, no? If they can accept existing history as a legitimate predictor of future risk, why can't you?

The fact that you personally have never been in an accident or "put somebody at risk" or whatever has nothing to do with whether or not preventative measures should be taken.

Agreed, generally. But not to the extent that the value of [safe] driving experience is sacrificed at the altar of "we'll do your safety for you".


Norm

 

[berserker_sid]

I'm not sure that came out the way you intended it . . . it's close enough to my position of not being a slave to PC-ness to permit "ethically correct" to be interpreted somewhat differently.

I was in my twenties, once upon a time. 40 years from now, I wonder how many of today's 20-somethings will be flat-out afraid to get in and drive, say, a 1967 Mustang specifically because it lacks most of today's nannies.




It's a good enough basis for insurance companies to offer better rates to those who haven't had problems than they will to those who have had their difficulties, no? If they can accept existing history as a legitimate predictor of future risk, why can't you?


Agreed, generally. But not to the extent that the value of [safe] driving experience is sacrificed at the altar of "we'll do your safety for you".


Norm

Sir.. its not about being afraid... its about being responsible... You with your experience... have learnt things in life... but M talking about young blood...

They tend to get careless and including me...I also get sometimes i don deny that.. and in those situations right all this helps...

And i reiterate... i am not saying it makes some night and day difference but yes it plays a part...

 

[Norm Peterson]

Sir.. its not about being afraid... its about being responsible... You with your experience... have learnt things in life... but M talking about young blood...

They tend to get careless and including me...I also get sometimes i don deny that.. and in those situations right all this helps...

And i reiterate... i am not saying it makes some night and day difference but yes it plays a part...

Fair enough.

Though I do have to wonder how today's new drivers would cope with driving cars from the semi-distant past after a lifetime of driving cars equipped with all the nannies. If fear isn't quite the right word, how does 'hesitant' or 'reluctant' sound?


Norm

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

Fair enough.

Though I do have to wonder how today's new drivers would cope with driving cars from the semi-distant past after a lifetime of driving cars equipped with all the nannies. If fear isn't quite the right word, how does 'hesitant' or 'reluctant' sound?

I grew up driving very basic cars with no power anything -- no power steering, no power windows, no power locks, no ABS, no any of that stuff -- just about the only "manual" things I've never driven are a car with a manual choke or a car with a manual transmission.

But I've got to say... I don't miss the feeling of having to moderate the brake pedal to keep it from locking while still being able to decelerate during a panic stop. And I don't miss driving cars without power steering that made you feel like you were doing pullups when you parallel parked.

I do sort of miss manual windows, though. Especially since I do the "window-rolling-down" hand motion to young people some time and they have no idea what that means.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Jimmy - have you ever driven a car that was not equipped with at least 2-point lap belts and a collapsible steering column? If you had to drive such a car for a while starting tomorrow - what do you think your initial gut-reaction might be?

I know I'd be a lot uneasy just about the missing seat belts, so my curiosity here is to wonder if 20 or 30 years from now, today's new drivers would be equally or even more uneasy about driving cars equipped well below what they're accustomed to having in terms of nannies. Or for that matter, if their DRLs or any of their car's other nannies suddenly became inop with no immediate means of recovering them back to full function.


Norm

 

[Blk2015GT]

I think while reasonable minds can disagree on what tech we really need (or should need) in cars these days that intentionally disabling a safety feature is a bad idea.

Yes, people got by in old days with no antilock brakes and less restrictive belts and safety features, but cars also did not go as fast as today and the average person couldn't go out and get a near 450hp car for the price of a loaded average sedan. People also try to do more in the car these days with cell phones and technology which is distracting.

I totally agree I cant stand these backup and anti crash sensors. If you actually pay attention to driving, odds are you wont be any more at risk of getting in an accident without these systems. The anti-collision systems arent going to stop you on a dime if some kid runs out in front of your car; there are limits to the current technology. The camera helps on this car with the design of it, but I find it just as easy to use the mirrors on the car to maneuver like my S197 that had 0 tech on it.

 

[JTR]

Fair enough.

Though I do have to wonder how today's new drivers would cope with driving cars from the semi-distant past after a lifetime of driving cars equipped with all the nannies. If fear isn't quite the right word, how does 'hesitant' or 'reluctant' sound?


Norm

My roommate and I are 21 year old college kids that have a passion for baseball and cars. I have the s550, and he drives a '59 Chevy Apache...we like to have fun in both. You can't count all of us out!

Sponsored