Bring back the basic & simple cars

[Drago]

DRL's are a good addition to cars. Volvo have shown this over the years.

You might want to read post #30. Volvo pioneered dim-dip systems for several decades, which were proven to work. DRL is a different thing entirely.

Thery'e controversially brighter, which serves to obscure indicators and break up the visual outline of oncoming vehicles thus making it harder for an observer to judge their speed, and as a consequence have not been associated with any drop in the accident rate in our climate.

 

[Jody]

DRL's are just a permanent sidelight running when the car is operating in the same way as dim-dip is a permanent lighting system. I agree some are poorly desigend and interfere with indicator function but so do quite a lot of headlights. That is just plain bad design. But a lot are not even integrated in the headlight. They will use very little in terms of extra fuel as they are only low wattage. Don't agree with it being harder to judge speed. They are no brighter than headlights and you wouldn't say you can't determine someones speed due to them having their headlights on.

 

[Drago]

Dim dip was diffuse, and optically completely different in the manner in which the eye and brain registered and responded to it.

Suzuki have conducted testing that demonstrates the speed judgement issues with both DRLs mounted in the headlamp position, and standard headlamps on low beam used during the day. The mechanism is startlingly simple - the brain calculates speed by the rate at which the eye perceives the silhouette of an oncoming vehicle gets larger in relation to its background. DRLs and dipped headlamps (not daytime specific dim dipped headlamps) can be sufficiently bright that they break up the visible silhouette, depriving the brain of the datum required to make the speed calculation.

Honda, who have access to some of the worlds foremost expert on optics (they own the worlds largest search light manufacturer) conducted similar research as long ago as the 1980s, and similar conclusions were drawn.

This is why there has been no reduction in any form of collision in the UK that can be attributed to DRLs, and it is suspected why there has been an upturn in the T bone type of accidents.

Despite their being no evidence that they make any improvement anywhere other than a high latitude climate, the EU enforced their fitment any way.

Whether you believe it is neither here nor there, but you can read about Suzuki's findings in the relevant issue of Bike magazine.

 

[Jody]

Dim dip was diffuse, and optically completely different in the manner in which the eye and brain registered and responded to it..

DRL's are not just exclusively LED's so you must advocate the banning of side lights. If you can't tell what speed a big metal box is travelling then there is something wrong. Is Suzuki's study relating to DRL's used on a motorbike?

 

[Drago]

I'm not advocating anything.

I'm pointing out that DRLs have brought no reduction in any category of road accident in the UK.
That is a bottom line fact. I have also described Suzuki's explanation as to why they believe that is.

Suzuki manufacture both cars and motorbikes, and the research was conducted on both.

Using emotional language such as "what speed a big metal box is travelling" is needlessly glib, and utterly ignores the point that Suzuki have positively identified a mechanism whereby the human brains ability to do just that can be compromised. I have explained the mechanism to you, quite succinctly in fact, and you are quite right - there is indeed something wrong. DRLs.

If, as you seem to think, they are the ibuprofen of road safety, then perhaps you could identify for us the accident reduction attributed to them? Perhaps you could explain why recorded T bone type accidents have also increased since 2010 if they are an aid to safety?

This is the same EU that tried to force motorcycles to be fitted with mandatory leg protectors. Yes, they were reducing injury in minor spills, but in higher energy accidents they were proven to tear riders in half at the hip. The EU plougned on and for almost six years did their damdgest to make them compulsory despite the evidence showing how dangerous they were. The plans were only dropped when it was discovered that the EU officer in charge of the project had come home one day to find his wife in bed being seen to by a bloke who was a keen motorcyclist, and the leg protector issue became a private vendetta. I'm not suggesting that is the motivation behind DRLs (caught his missus in head with a headlight salesman?) but it does illustrate how the legislators within the EU are willing to ignore science and proven statistics in favour of the word of their own officers. Peter Bottom [sic] MP, DoT minister from 1986-89, had been a vocal supporter of the project and suddenly looked a bit silly, having devoted much public time and money to a safety device that so obviously killed people.

 

[cyberknight]

Agree.
The answer is Dacia . Simples*
But there are plenty of basic cars around, our Citroen C1 as as basic as it gets.

*The Dacia is having a tow-bar fitted and 2 new tyres today @Hill Wimp reckons it will double its value......

Great car for the money, glad i bought one as i think cars nowadays have to many bells and whistles i will never need or use , it could be i am turning into a grumpy old man though ....

 

[Jody]

I have explained the mechanism to you, quite succinctly in fact,

Appologies as the mechanism you explained was done so in an edit after I had clicked reply so had not seen it.

Human brains are compromised in a lot of areas. I still believe if you can't judge the speed of something then don't pull out. If it were a cyclist that was sent over the bonnet of a car for using a light on the handlebars you wouldn't be pointing blame at the cyclist.

But this is going far off topic so we might need to leave it there or start another thread on the joy of DRL's

 

[cyberknight]

You're not allowed to use a phone at the wheel but manufacturers think its OK to put in touch screen operated everything. Its just so dangerous and not needed.

And bluetooth connectivity for your phone , not like anyone's going to phone me anyway .

 

[Drago]

I think peoples brains tell them faulty info under the described circumstances, so they genuinely believe they have made an accurate calculation.

But it's not off topic. Its another example of how they add needless complexity to a car. I was pleasantly surprised to see the DRLs on Mrs D's new Sportage (old now, its a 66) are separated from the headlamps , a little inboard from the edge.

And then there are all sorts of needless menus on then touch screen to switch them on, off, shake it all about. Why?

Indeed, as Biggs points out, why a touch screen at all? Well, I know why - a touch screen manufactured in Singapore and bought by the hundreds of thousands is massively cheaper than separate, more effective controls. The manufacturers then sell it to us that its all high tec and cutting edge, when in terms of controlling vehicle functions while on the move they're inferior. Saving pennies, but palming it off as a premium product. Very clever.

 

[raleighnut]

I think all cars should go back to basics, it might even stop speeding if everyone drove cars that were basically at the level of the Moggy Thou, 2CV, Viva etc, you know cars that if you got up to 60mph terrified the bejesus out of you. None of these airbags either, crash it and there's a good chance you'll have serious injuries not just 'be a bit sore'. It might help drivers to concentrate on driving instead of being sat in an air-conditioned armchairs with actually driving being probably 3rd on their list of priorities.

I think the 'rot' set in with synchromesh gearboxes.

 

[Vapin' Joe]

So you have one of these?

Good idea but I already have enough junk plugged into various bits of the car what with the satnav and the dashcam plus the occasional need to give the phone a boost. Now if you can find one that can take a memory stick I'll be interested. I might even blow you a kiss.

 

[mjr]

DRLs are another piece of useless shizzle foisted on us by Europe. [...] Nice work Herr Juncker.

I'm pretty sure they were foisted on us by a change to the UN ECE vehicle regulations - which is basically nothing to do with Juncker. ECE not EEC!

 

[mjr]

Don't confuse the old chap....

Aw, I deliberately didn't point out that it should be Här Juncker, as he's Luxembourgish not German...

 

[Biff600]

You're not allowed to use a phone at the wheel but manufacturers think its OK to put in touch screen oprated everything. Its just so dangerous and not needed.

I think you'll find that operating a sat-nav in your car while it is in motion is against the law.

I have an E-Class and that has a command dial that is situated next to the gear lever, that alters everything on the screen, so negates the use of a touch screen.

 

[Jody]

I think you'll find that operating a sat-nav in your car while it is in motion is against the law.

I have an E-Class and that has a command dial that is situated next to the gear lever, that alters everything on the screen, so negates the use of a touch screen.

You still have to stare at a screen while navigating through menus. Same thing in my eyes