80 in a 70 is speeding, it needs to stop.

AWSX1686 said:

Duke said:

AWSX1686 said:

Grtechguy said:

 

More so?   People need to turn on headlights when it's snowing/raining.   That is more of safety factor the speeding.

Please just everyone turn on your headlights ANY time you drive!! The visibility is worth WAY more than a headlight bulb!

THEY MASK PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS, AND MOTORCYCLES. 

Motorcycles have their own lights that are always on.... Granted, older motorcycle lighting pretty much sucks, but still, they are always on. 

WHICH IS WHY THEY STOOD OUT... at least a little.

z31maniac said:

Duke said:

AWSX1686 said:

Grtechguy said:

 

More so?   People need to turn on headlights when it's snowing/raining.   That is more of safety factor the speeding.

Please just everyone turn on your headlights ANY time you drive!! The visibility is worth WAY more than a headlight bulb!

NO!  Bad AWSX! <smack>

Daytime headlights in clear conditions are THE SUCK.  You're already driving a car.  People can see you without DRLs.

I think it's funny you think just because it's daylight people "see" you. 

Thanks for the laugh, it was a long day at work.

If people don't see you as a moving car, a moving car with DRLs is not going to fix the problem.

Grtechguy said:

Daytime = seen?

 

You obviously don't live in the snowbelt.     White/gray cars around here all but completely disappear on most roads between December and March.

I believe in DRLs

I don't actually like DRLs. 

Pause, suspense. 

Actually I do, because in most cases they look cool, but I don't actually like their function. Most of the time, if DRLs are on, tail lights are not. More so, at night, DRLs are getting good enough that people don't realize their headlights aren't actually on. 

Duke said:

z31maniac said:

Duke said:

AWSX1686 said:

Grtechguy said:

 

More so?   People need to turn on headlights when it's snowing/raining.   That is more of safety factor the speeding.

Please just everyone turn on your headlights ANY time you drive!! The visibility is worth WAY more than a headlight bulb!

NO!  Bad AWSX! <smack>

Daytime headlights in clear conditions are THE SUCK.  You're already driving a car.  People can see you without DRLs.

I think it's funny you think just because it's daylight people "see" you. 

Thanks for the laugh, it was a long day at work.

If people don't see you as a moving car, a moving car with DRLs is not going to fix the problem.

Honestly, as I see you drive a miata, I am thoroughly surprised at your standpoint on this. 

Agree to disagree I suppose.

I ride a motorcycle. The statement is true. They don't see you and they don't care about seeing you. Lights, bright clothing, doesn't matter, because there is a certain person out there, and their purpose in life is to kill you.

DRL's work.  However, just like the frog dna in Jurassic Park, they bring unintended consequences.  One, if you drive a car without DRL, people will pull out in front of you all day long, because they no longer look for a car, they look for lights.  Two, sometimes auto designers are stupid, and they design dash clusters that are backlit all the time.  Those clusters make people forget that they haven't turned their lights on.

My BRZ has DRLs, I turn on the normal HIDs anyway. Everytime I get in the car. 

Crxpilot said:

If police would consistently enforce the actual speed limit, the national conscious would know, "hey, that's the fastest I should go on this road."  They don't so we drive 7 over.  Within the context of driving, the US govt is seen as a hindrance more than a help and almost every American driver is thinking of ways to grab back as much freedom behind the wheel as we can get.  Driving 10 over is our silent, peaceful protest.

Buy this book. https://www.amazon.com/Cannonball-Americas-Greatest-Outlaw-Road/dp/0760310904/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1516200431&sr=8-3&keywords=cannonball

Weaving does need to stop.  We could really use a refresh of our drivers' ed system and adopt a more German view of highway lane discipline.

It’s the local or state’s duties to enforce driving laws. Not the federal governments.  The state’s also set the limits. So if it’s too fast or too slow take it up with the state or local authority.  

DRL's are not always visible in poor conditions, fog,snow when headlites are need.   They are better than nothing, though.

Seems, with all the magic we have today that a system could be devised that would turn on the Lights when  ambient lighting is below a certain point.

I drive everywere at the speedlimit, but have my marker lights turned on in the winter. I have a bad habit of buying white/tan vehicles and i tend to dodge alot of people pulling out in front of me if i run no lights even in daytime hours. They raised the speed limit on us30 to 70mph and we have alot more accidents. This being farm country its not unusual for tractors and combines to be crossing the highway. 

On the speed thing. I remember writing on here a long time ago about my experience with 10 over.

Way back in the late '90's/2000's I did quite a bit of traveling and I found that 9/10 over was a safe speed, it still is.

I remember way back when the Thruway I-90 was 55 mph.  I heard a trucker ask a trooper how much over was allowed.  The trooper replied , we will give you five and you can steal five.

In some cases I think 15 might be allowed if traffic is light and flowing well.   

  Why is it that large pickups and SUVs do that more than mere mortals cruising along at 10 over ?

Duke said:

z31maniac said:

Duke said:

AWSX1686 said:

Grtechguy said:

 

More so?   People need to turn on headlights when it's snowing/raining.   That is more of safety factor the speeding.

Please just everyone turn on your headlights ANY time you drive!! The visibility is worth WAY more than a headlight bulb!

NO!  Bad AWSX! <smack>

Daytime headlights in clear conditions are THE SUCK.  You're already driving a car.  People can see you without DRLs.

I think it's funny you think just because it's daylight people "see" you. 

Thanks for the laugh, it was a long day at work.

If people don't see you as a moving car, a moving car with DRLs is not going to fix the problem.

So if something doesn't solve something 100%, it's worth 0%.

Got it. 

That means we need to ban cars and live in planned communities.............no more car accidents.

iceracer said:

Seems, with all the magic we have today that a system could be devised that would turn on the Lights when  ambient lighting is below a certain point.

They are called automatic headlights and I can't think of a car I've driven built in the last 10 years that doesn't have them. 

iceracer said:

DRL's are not always visible in poor conditions, fog,snow when headlites are need.   They are better than nothing, though.

Seems, with all the magic we have today that a system could be devised that would turn on the Lights when  ambient lighting is below a certain point.

My '97 Grand Cherokee does an amazingly good job at this with the auto-on headlight setting. It also turns the headlights on if it's in auto and you turn the wipers on. Our '14 Mazda s with auto everything does a worse job on light levels and DOESN'T turn the lights on with the wipers. Makes no sense to me.

DRLs are fine, but I do believe that the more cars have them, the less effective they become. As a cyclist I agree that there are some people that will never see you no matter what you do. 

z31maniac said:

If people don't see you as a moving car, a moving car with DRLs is not going to fix the problem.

So if something doesn't solve something 100%, it's worth 0%.

Did I say that?  No.  What I said was that the "solution" creates a worse problem without actually fixing the original issue.

ultraclyde said:

DRLs are fine, but I do believe that the more cars have them, the less effective they become.

Exactly.  The same thing is true with CHMSLs.  Does anybody even notice CHMSLs any more?  They were effective when some cars had them but most didn't.  Now that all cars have had them for a couple decades, they're just more visual background noise.

Adrian_Thompson said:

iceracer said:

Seems, with all the magic we have today that a system could be devised that would turn on the Lights when  ambient lighting is below a certain point.

They are called automatic headlights and I can't think of a car I've driven built in the last 10 years that doesn't have them. 

Except, it's amazing how dark it has to be for those to work.    I frequently travel during dusk/daybreak hours.   Very few cars with automatic lights (ie looking at Lexus/Caddy/BMW drivers) have them on as the sunlight is just enough.

Duke said:

ultraclyde said:

DRLs are fine, but I do believe that the more cars have them, the less effective they become.

Exactly.  The same thing is true with CHMSLs.  Does anybody even notice CHMSLs any more?  They were effective when some cars had them but most didn't.  Now that all cars have had them for a couple decades, they're just more visual background noise.

I beg to differ, on the CHMSLs too. They are effective. Pickups with a cap on, or semi trucks that just have the corner lights are not as easy to see braking. With CHMSLs, it makes a dedicated light for braking. Corner lights can be stop or turn (though we should have amber turn signals universally!) the center brake light makes it stand out. 

AWSX1686 said:

Duke said:

ultraclyde said:

DRLs are fine, but I do believe that the more cars have them, the less effective they become.

Exactly.  The same thing is true with CHMSLs.  Does anybody even notice CHMSLs any more?  They were effective when some cars had them but most didn't.  Now that all cars have had them for a couple decades, they're just more visual background noise.

I beg to differ, on the CHMSLs too. They are effective. Pickups with a cap on, or semi trucks that just have the corner lights are not as easy to see braking. With CHMSLs, it makes a dedicated light for braking. Corner lights can be stop or turn (though we should have amber turn signals universally!) the center brake light makes it stand out. 

High mount brake lights have no downside.

Duke said:

ultraclyde said:

DRLs are fine, but I do believe that the more cars have them, the less effective they become.

Exactly.  The same thing is true with CHMSLs.  Does anybody even notice CHMSLs any more?  They were effective when some cars had them but most didn't.  Now that all cars have had them for a couple decades, they're just more visual background noise.

try driving a car WITHOUT a CHMSL. Last time I drove my fiat, I used to fear every time I hit the brakes

as was said before....driving too slow or holding up traffic is much more dangerous than driving a bit over the speed limit.

not sure what the self righteous point of the OP was.   Doesn't seem like a person anyone would want to be around.

Duke said:

Did I say that?  No.  What I said was that the "solution" creates a worse problem without actually fixing the original issue.

It does not create a worse problem and it mitigates the issue it addresses

z31maniac said:

So if something doesn't solve something 100%, it's worth 0%.

Got it.

It took a lot longer than it normally does on this forum for a response like that.

Toebra said:

Duke said:

Did I say that?  No.  What I said was that the "solution" creates a worse problem without actually fixing the original issue.

It does not create a worse problem and it mitigates the issue it addresses

What he meant was that motorcycles wre required to run headlights all the time so that they stood out from cars. Making cars have the headlights on all the time means that motorcycles no longer stand out and are back to being in as much danger as when they didn't need to run headlights. DRLs attempt to solve a "problem" and make another worse. Also, if DRLs work so well, why do people still pull out in front of you at night when you have your lights on anyhow?

Toebra said:

Duke said:

Did I say that?  No.  What I said was that the "solution" creates a worse problem without actually fixing the original issue.

It does not create a worse problem and it mitigates the issue it addresses

I comprehensively disagree with both halves of your statement.  But I've said my piece, and I won't belabor it further.