A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The dangers of DRLs



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old July 9th 05, 07:25 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 22:55:55 -0700, N8N wrote:

> if your suggestions were as easy to implement as you seem to imply,
> don't you think I would have done so already?


No, I don't.

Chris
Ads
  #202  
Old July 9th 05, 01:27 PM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

C.H. wrote:

> Then get off the freeway and wait until conditions improve. Driving faster
> than visibility allows is stupid. Usually changing lanes to the right
> is sufficient to get rid of the retard, though. Could it be that you are a
> LLB?


No LLB. But the freeway is congested.

>>Imagine coming upon a slow granny running only DRLs, no taillights.
>>You may end up hitting her.

>
>
> To fast for conditions. That's what you are and that's what the police
> report will say. You simply drive beyond your own capabilities.


What capabilities are you talking about, X-Ray vision? Why cant you understand
that DRL cars encourage people to not think about lights, and especially
about taillights?

  #203  
Old July 9th 05, 01:28 PM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

C.H. wrote:

> The average driver forgets to turn on his head- and taillights in non-DRL
> equipped cars in low visibility conditions during the day.


Nope. My observations disagree with your statement. And I'm
pretty sure you know you're grossly exagerating, but you are trolling
for the sake of trolling.
  #204  
Old July 9th 05, 01:31 PM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

N8N wrote:
>
>
> Same way that Civics are riced - ugly rims, fartpipe exhausts, and
> tacky body mods. Don't see as many 350Z's done up like that but there
> are a good number floating around here. Need has nothing to do with it
> and bad taste apparently knows no boundaries.
>


I thought the idea of 'ricing' was to make a slow car look 'fast'.
The 350Z is pretty fast, and looks fast already.
  #205  
Old July 9th 05, 02:06 PM
Nate Nagel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

223rem wrote:
> N8N wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Same way that Civics are riced - ugly rims, fartpipe exhausts, and
>> tacky body mods. Don't see as many 350Z's done up like that but there
>> are a good number floating around here. Need has nothing to do with it
>> and bad taste apparently knows no boundaries.
>>

>
> I thought the idea of 'ricing' was to make a slow car look 'fast'.
> The 350Z is pretty fast, and looks fast already.


The best of the "tuner" guys actually do make the cars faster, they just
have questionable (IMHO) taste.

I do recall when the 350Z first came out I picked up one of the better
ricer magazines to flip through it, and they had an aftermarket exhaust
manufacturer try to make a better exhaust for the car, they gained like
1 HP or something silly like that by the time they were all done. So a
350Z really does take effort to actually make better, but that doesnt'
stop people from trying.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
  #206  
Old July 9th 05, 02:21 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



C.H. wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 15:34:35 -0700, N8N wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > C.H. wrote:
> >> On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 15:23:07 -0700, N8N wrote:
> >>
> >> > But the driver without DRLs is actually more likely to realize his
> >> > error, as he won't be able to see.
> >>
> >> We are talking about rain and fog, where the light does not serve vision
> >> but visibility. And as long as they see they won't worry about switching
> >> on their lights.

> >
> > Which is true for all drivers, whether they have DRLs or not.

>
> Thanks for making my point, Nate.


Um, you don't HAVE a point.

> The difference is that in DRL equipped
> cars you at least see the headlights (i.e. oncoming traffic) early,
> whereas you are responsible to adjust your speed to seeing the traffic
> going your way in time anyway. If you guys really have to rely on the
> car's taillights to tell whether there is an obstacle or not, you are much
> too fast for conditions.


I don't "rely" on taillights, but surely even you have to admit that
they're nice to have?

>
> >> No, it's self evident that the DRLs don't influence their behavior, but
> >> make their cars at least visible from the more dangerous side and thus
> >> have a beneficial effect on safety.
> >>

> > How do you figure that any side is "more dangerous" than any other? I
> > don't particularly want to run into any of them.

>
> 1) Closing speed is much higher in oncoming traffic (v_x + v_y instead of
> v_x - v_y).


Yeah, and you're also much less likely to be in the path of oncoming
traffic. So what?

>
> 2) You have no influence on the speed of the oncoming car, whereas you
> have total control on adjusting your speed to conditions in the proper way
> (i.e. being able to stop if an unlighted obstacle is in your path), be it
> a branch, a person or a car without taillights on.
>


yeah, whatever. If that were the solution to all problems there
wouldn't be an issue driving around with no lights on at all.

nate

  #207  
Old July 9th 05, 04:57 PM
Daniel J. Stern
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 8 Jul 2005, N8N wrote:

> C.H. wrote:


<another bunch of trollola>

> You're just being delibnerately argumentative.


....and you're continuing to engage him.
  #208  
Old July 9th 05, 08:55 PM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 12:28:53 +0000, 223rem wrote:

> C.H. wrote:
>
>> The average driver forgets to turn on his head- and taillights in
>> non-DRL equipped cars in low visibility conditions during the day.

>
> Nope. My observations disagree with your statement.


And my observations disagree with yours. Now what?

> And I'm pretty sure you know you're grossly exagerating,


I know that you are grossly exaggerating.

> but you are trolling for the sake of trolling.


No.

Chris
  #209  
Old July 9th 05, 09:02 PM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 06:21:01 -0700, N8N wrote:

> C.H. wrote:


>> The difference is that in DRL equipped cars you at least see the
>> headlights (i.e. oncoming traffic) early, whereas you are responsible to
>> adjust your speed to seeing the traffic going your way in time anyway.
>> If you guys really have to rely on the car's taillights to tell whether
>> there is an obstacle or not, you are much too fast for conditions.

>
> I don't "rely" on taillights, but surely even you have to admit that
> they're nice to have?


I surely admit that they are nice to have, but I much prefer DRLs to no
light at all. And there is no evidence either in the meager sources posted
nor in real life that people without DRLs are more diligent in terms of
switching on their lights in bad weather.

>> > How do you figure that any side is "more dangerous" than any other? I
>> > don't particularly want to run into any of them.

>>
>> 1) Closing speed is much higher in oncoming traffic (v_x + v_y instead
>> of v_x - v_y).

>
> Yeah, and you're also much less likely to be in the path of oncoming
> traffic. So what?


On the contrary. Fatal accidents where one car hits another one from
behind on a two-lane highway, are rare. Fatal head-on collisions are much
more common.

>> 2) You have no influence on the speed of the oncoming car, whereas you
>> have total control on adjusting your speed to conditions in the proper
>> way (i.e. being able to stop if an unlighted obstacle is in your path),
>> be it a branch, a person or a car without taillights on.
>>

> yeah, whatever. If that were the solution to all problems there
> wouldn't be an issue driving around with no lights on at all.


Adjusting speed and distance to conditions _is_ the solution and from you
I definitely expected that you are capable of driving within your envelope.

Taillights are a safety feature, which is why I like auto headlights,
that make sure that even the bozos switch on their headlights at the
proper time, but he who relies on them is going to get hurt or worse.

And the rare situation, where auto-headlights don't switch where they
should are much outweighed by the frequent situation where they switch on
the lights where the bozo wouldn't.

Chris
  #210  
Old July 9th 05, 09:04 PM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 12:31:48 +0000, 223rem wrote:

> N8N wrote:
>>
>>
>> Same way that Civics are riced - ugly rims, fartpipe exhausts, and tacky
>> body mods. Don't see as many 350Z's done up like that but there are a
>> good number floating around here. Need has nothing to do with it and
>> bad taste apparently knows no boundaries.
>>

> I thought the idea of 'ricing' was to make a slow car look 'fast'. The
> 350Z is pretty fast, and looks fast already.


There are still a lot of ricers, who want to make this moderately fast and
moderately fast looking car look faster. Parkbench spoilers are common and
just about every 350Z I see has at least two huge fart cannons under its
rear bumper, some even have four. The corresponding farting sound makes
them all the more ridiculous.

Chris
 




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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Enable Caravan Daytime Running Lights (DRL's) Option ls_dot1 Chrysler 11 May 26th 05 01:49 AM
Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10 Pete Technology 41 May 24th 05 04:19 AM
Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10 Daniel J. Stern Driving 3 May 24th 05 04:19 AM
Why no rear lights with DRLs? Don Stauffer Technology 26 April 26th 05 04:16 AM
Chevy Tahoe DRls? BE Driving 0 March 28th 05 03:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.