DRL switch

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 26 Feb 2013, 06:03 am   #1 (permalink)
badgolferman
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default DRL switch

Around ten years ago I started a post complaining about the Daytime
Running Lights (DRL) on my 2000 Sienna. There was no way to deactivate
the lights when approaching gate guards or just because I didn't want
them on. That thread generated 300-400 messages both pro and con for
DRLs being forced upon us. There are a few people still here that may
remember the big brouhaha that time -- Hachi, dbu, Jeff, Sharx.

Over the past year I have replaced my 97 Camry (no DRL) and 2000 Sienna
(DRL) with a 2004 Camry and a 2004 Avalon. I'm happy to report both
vehicles have an extra position on the light switch allowing the DRLs
to be shut off by the driver for whatever reason they deem necessary.
It's nice to see Toyota providing that option eventually.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 07:15 am   #2 (permalink)
Sharx35
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

I'm more concerned about those blinding white or bluish white
headlights. Even if they are probably properly aimed, most people I
know find them blinding. There OUGHT to be a law!

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0ierxi91beao000@reader.albasani.net...
> Around ten years ago I started a post complaining about the
> Daytime
> Running Lights (DRL) on my 2000 Sienna. There was no way to
> deactivate
> the lights when approaching gate guards or just because I didn't
> want
> them on. That thread generated 300-400 messages both pro and con
> for
> DRLs being forced upon us. There are a few people still here
> that may
> remember the big brouhaha that time -- Hachi, dbu, Jeff, Sharx.
>
> Over the past year I have replaced my 97 Camry (no DRL) and 2000
> Sienna
> (DRL) with a 2004 Camry and a 2004 Avalon. I'm happy to report
> both
> vehicles have an extra position on the light switch allowing the
> DRLs
> to be shut off by the driver for whatever reason they deem
> necessary.
> It's nice to see Toyota providing that option eventually.


  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 10:19 am   #3 (permalink)
homepc
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

On 26/02/2013 6:03 AM, badgolferman wrote:
> Around ten years ago I started a post complaining about the Daytime
> Running Lights (DRL) on my 2000 Sienna. There was no way to deactivate
> the lights when approaching gate guards or just because I didn't want
> them on. That thread generated 300-400 messages both pro and con for
> DRLs being forced upon us. There are a few people still here that may
> remember the big brouhaha that time -- Hachi, dbu, Jeff, Sharx.
>
> Over the past year I have replaced my 97 Camry (no DRL) and 2000 Sienna
> (DRL) with a 2004 Camry and a 2004 Avalon. I'm happy to report both
> vehicles have an extra position on the light switch allowing the DRLs
> to be shut off by the driver for whatever reason they deem necessary.
> It's nice to see Toyota providing that option eventually.
>


I've checked my manual for 2012 RAV4 and it says only US models have a
customized setting to turn off daytime running lights by a Toyota
dealer. So if you are posting from the US, perhaps many other newer
Toyota models also offer the same setting option.

However in Canada it is not an option. In fact in my province you can
get a $171.30 fine if you get caught driving without your lights on
during the day. For cops trying to meet their target quota, it's like
shooting fish in a barrel. Funny though, I see drivers at night with no
lights on at all occasionally, and there isn't a cop in sight!
  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 04:05 pm   #4 (permalink)
Clive
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

In message <kgin8b$14l$1@dont-email.me>, homepc <wiebe008@gmail.com>
writes
>I've checked my manual for 2012 RAV4 and it says only US models have a
>customized setting to turn off daytime running lights by a Toyota
>dealer. So if you are posting from the US, perhaps many other newer
>Toyota models also offer the same setting option.
>
>However in Canada it is not an option. In fact in my province you can
>get a $171.30 fine if you get caught driving without your lights on
>during the day. For cops trying to meet their target quota, it's like
>shooting fish in a barrel. Funny though, I see drivers at night with
>no lights on at all occasionally, and there isn't a cop in sight!

As I understand it, all vehicles type approved after Nov 2011 had to
have day running lights and in Europe their use, where fitted, is
mandatory, with the only exception being here in the UK where the same
rules about fitment apply but can be switched of by the user if s/he
wanted.
--
Clive
  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 04:16 pm   #5 (permalink)
dbu`
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

In article <kgicen$vb2$1@dont-email.me>,
"Sharx35" <sharx35@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm more concerned about those blinding white or bluish white
> headlights. Even if they are probably properly aimed, most people I
> know find them blinding. There OUGHT to be a law!


Cataracts can cause problems with bright lights and night vision. Have
you had your eyes checked lately?

I do agree with your point, some of those lights are very intense.
--



  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 07:31 pm   #6 (permalink)
Sharx35
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch



"dbu`" <nospam@nobama.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:KuaXs.85557$_U.45774@newsfe20.iad...
> In article <kgicen$vb2$1@dont-email.me>,
> "Sharx35" <sharx35@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm more concerned about those blinding white or bluish white
>> headlights. Even if they are probably properly aimed, most
>> people I
>> know find them blinding. There OUGHT to be a law!

>
> Cataracts can cause problems with bright lights and night vision.
> Have
> you had your eyes checked lately?


Yup. Once a year and by a specialist, a opthamologist BTW.


>
> I do agree with your point, some of those lights are very
> intense.
> --
>
>
>

  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 08:03 pm   #7 (permalink)
SMS
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

On 2/26/2013 4:03 AM, badgolferman wrote:
> Around ten years ago I started a post complaining about the Daytime
> Running Lights (DRL) on my 2000 Sienna. There was no way to deactivate
> the lights when approaching gate guards or just because I didn't want
> them on. That thread generated 300-400 messages both pro and con for
> DRLs being forced upon us. There are a few people still here that may
> remember the big brouhaha that time -- Hachi, dbu, Jeff, Sharx.
>
> Over the past year I have replaced my 97 Camry (no DRL) and 2000 Sienna
> (DRL) with a 2004 Camry and a 2004 Avalon. I'm happy to report both
> vehicles have an extra position on the light switch allowing the DRLs
> to be shut off by the driver for whatever reason they deem necessary.
> It's nice to see Toyota providing that option eventually.


Yes, it was nice to see on our 2007 Camry that they included the option
to shut off the DRLs. On my 2001 4Runner I had to make a modification to
get rid of them.

Over the years it's become very clear just how dangerous DRLs actually
are. Not because the concept of DRLs is necessarily bad but because you
_constantly_ see drivers that don't realize that they don't have their
headlights on, just their DRLs, and hence no tail lights.

The NHTSA study from 1995-1997 showed the effectiveness of DRLs in fatal
crashes from, between -28% and +5%. So effectively they have a
_negative_ impact, though the NHTSA said that the findings were not
statistically significant.

  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 08:06 pm   #8 (permalink)
Sharx35
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch



"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:512d6987$0$80108$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> On 2/26/2013 4:03 AM, badgolferman wrote:
>> Around ten years ago I started a post complaining about the
>> Daytime
>> Running Lights (DRL) on my 2000 Sienna. There was no way to
>> deactivate
>> the lights when approaching gate guards or just because I didn't
>> want
>> them on. That thread generated 300-400 messages both pro and
>> con for
>> DRLs being forced upon us. There are a few people still here
>> that may
>> remember the big brouhaha that time -- Hachi, dbu, Jeff, Sharx.
>>
>> Over the past year I have replaced my 97 Camry (no DRL) and 2000
>> Sienna
>> (DRL) with a 2004 Camry and a 2004 Avalon. I'm happy to report
>> both
>> vehicles have an extra position on the light switch allowing the
>> DRLs
>> to be shut off by the driver for whatever reason they deem
>> necessary.
>> It's nice to see Toyota providing that option eventually.

>
> Yes, it was nice to see on our 2007 Camry that they included the
> option to shut off the DRLs. On my 2001 4Runner I had to make a
> modification to get rid of them.
>
> Over the years it's become very clear just how dangerous DRLs
> actually are. Not because the concept of DRLs is necessarily bad
> but because you _constantly_ see drivers that don't realize that
> they don't have their headlights on, just their DRLs, and hence
> no tail lights.
>
> The NHTSA study from 1995-1997 showed the effectiveness of DRLs
> in fatal crashes from, between -28% and +5%. So effectively they
> have a _negative_ impact, though the NHTSA said that the findings
> were not statistically significant.
>


A PROPER DRL system *SHOULD* have the tail lights on. Sadly, many
don't. Up here, hardly anyone has functioning license plate lights
making it very hard to report bad drivers. Hell, even IF the light
was functioning, chances are the plate would be covered by mud--all
to thwart photo radar, no doubt.



  Reply With Quote
Old 26 Feb 2013, 11:05 pm   #9 (permalink)
homepc
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

On 26/02/2013 8:03 PM, SMS wrote:
> On 2/26/2013 4:03 AM, badgolferman wrote:


> Over the years it's become very clear just how dangerous DRLs actually
> are. Not because the concept of DRLs is necessarily bad but because you
> _constantly_ see drivers that don't realize that they don't have their
> headlights on, just their DRLs, and hence no tail lights.
>


I caught myself driving in the evening once with the marker lights and
only the day running lights on when I first got my RAV4 because of the
misleading instrument panel display. I thought I had the headlights on,
but they weren't.

RTFM

  Reply With Quote
Old 27 Feb 2013, 11:44 am   #10 (permalink)
SMS
Guest
  • Posts: n/a
  • User Status:


Default Re: DRL switch

On 2/26/2013 6:06 PM, Sharx35 wrote:
>
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:512d6987$0$80108$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> On 2/26/2013 4:03 AM, badgolferman wrote:
>>> Around ten years ago I started a post complaining about the Daytime
>>> Running Lights (DRL) on my 2000 Sienna. There was no way to deactivate
>>> the lights when approaching gate guards or just because I didn't want
>>> them on. That thread generated 300-400 messages both pro and con for
>>> DRLs being forced upon us. There are a few people still here that may
>>> remember the big brouhaha that time -- Hachi, dbu, Jeff, Sharx.
>>>
>>> Over the past year I have replaced my 97 Camry (no DRL) and 2000 Sienna
>>> (DRL) with a 2004 Camry and a 2004 Avalon. I'm happy to report both
>>> vehicles have an extra position on the light switch allowing the DRLs
>>> to be shut off by the driver for whatever reason they deem necessary.
>>> It's nice to see Toyota providing that option eventually.

>>
>> Yes, it was nice to see on our 2007 Camry that they included the
>> option to shut off the DRLs. On my 2001 4Runner I had to make a
>> modification to get rid of them.
>>
>> Over the years it's become very clear just how dangerous DRLs actually
>> are. Not because the concept of DRLs is necessarily bad but because
>> you _constantly_ see drivers that don't realize that they don't have
>> their headlights on, just their DRLs, and hence no tail lights.
>>
>> The NHTSA study from 1995-1997 showed the effectiveness of DRLs in
>> fatal crashes from, between -28% and +5%. So effectively they have a
>> _negative_ impact, though the NHTSA said that the findings were not
>> statistically significant.
>>

>
> A PROPER DRL system *SHOULD* have the tail lights on. Sadly, many don't.
> Up here, hardly anyone has functioning license plate lights making it
> very hard to report bad drivers. Hell, even IF the light was
> functioning, chances are the plate would be covered by mud--all to
> thwart photo radar, no doubt.


My idea for solving California's budget problems was to hire 100,000
deputies at a burdened cost of about $200,000 each, and have them do
nothing but write tickets for the following infractions:

1. Driving without lights on at night: $500
2. Driving without lights on in the rain: $500
3. No front license plate: $500

With cameras and a good ticket writing system they could probably do
about 40 tickets in an eight hour shift, for gross revenue of $20,000
per shift, and assuming 200 shifts per officer per year they could bring
in $4 million per officer per year, minus the cost per officer of about
$200,000 per year.


  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42 am.

Attribution:
Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers



ToyotaLexusForum.com is an unofficial community for car enthusiasts. ToyotaLexusForum.com is not affiliated with Toyota Motor Corporation in any way.
Toyota Motor Corporation does not sponsor, support, or endorse ToyotaLexusForum.com in any way.
Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.