Are some motorists disconnecting their daytime running lights? If so, why so?
By David Menzies for MSN Autos
Pop quiz: why are there so many late-model cars in Canada without functioning daytime running lights (DRL)?
Oh, and I don’t know the answer, by the way.
Still, the lack of daytime illumination has become conspicuous enough so as to be noticeable. GM, Lexus, Mercedes, Infiniti – you name it – just driving along with no daytime runners.
My first assumption is that the car is visiting from south of the border. r. But no; in every case, the cars have provincial licence plates.
And if the car had been purchased in or imported from the U.S., the vehicle must be equipped with daytime runners – a rule that has been in place for more than two decades.
So what’s the deal? Why are so many vehicles on the road not illuminated as per the law of the land?
Are some motorists actually disconnecting their DRL system? If so, why so? And yes, this is indeed a fineable offense at the discretion of law enforcement.
But still, why would one want to disconnect the DRL system... unless one was a member of the U.S.-based National Motorists Association (NMA)?
- DRLs increase visual glare.
- DRLs obscure the directional signal lights.
- DRLs increase visual clutter.
- DRLs mask other roadway users.
- DRLs reduce the conspicuity of motorcycles.
- DRLs distort distance perception
- DRLs reduce emergency vehicle conspicuity.
- DRLs can discourage motorists from using standard lights.
With all due respect to the creative writer who compiled this list, I’m afraid none of these reasons pass the sniff test. (In other words, come on NMA: just state that you don’t like daytime running lights... but don’t come up with a bunch of cockamamie reasons justifying what is surely an emotional as opposed to scientific stance regarding your opposition.)
But my original dilemma remains: what are so many Canadian cars not illuminated as required? If you do know why, please feel free to – ahem – shed some light on the situation, won’t you?
Justin Couture
Mark Atkinson
John LeBlanc
Posted by: JD | 2013-02-14 12:06:02 AM
DRLs have half the lumen power of regular lights, therefore there is no increased glare.
Most vehicle's turn signals are quite separate from headlights, and again, will flash brighter than half lumen DRLs.
DRLs clutter less than LED or "angel eyes" lights on some vehicles.
DRLs do not mask other road users, otherwise why do people still cut off motorcyclists by turning left in front of them. DRLs for motorcycles in the States are mandatory, they don't seem to have an issue with that.
Accident rates in Canada and the US are comparable per capita, therefore, not much support for DRLs masking motorcyclists. Actually accident rates for motorcyclists slightly less per 100000 than the States. Evidence shows conspicuity isn't affected in Canada with DRLs.
DRLs are supposed to distort distance perception, by appearing closer than an oncoming vehicle really is.
Seriously? Half lumen steady lights are going to reduce flashing high beams and flashing colored lights on an emergency vehicle? Not realistic.
There's a slight chance that if DRLs are mandatory in the US, at first drivers will not use standard headlights at dusk, much like Canada had when they were first introduced. However, it doesn't take long before a driver catches on to the DRLs aren't as bright as headlights concept.
Driving in Montana, for example, in the resort areas where there are tons of Canadians, I'm finding more and more residents of Montana running their headlights during the day, and not just when it's cloudy. They seem to be liking the idea.
As to why a Canadian driver may disconnect DRLs, or just have malfunctioning ones, my guess is the vehicle IS a US import, and the mechanics installed a DRL system that runs all the lights of the vehicle, all the time. Some people are under the misunderstanding that that might be draining the battery, and disconnect them after inspection.
Posted by: Plano | 2013-02-14 10:53:11 AM
I would guess most of the cars without running lights were used cars built outside of Canada as only Canada has all cars built for Canadian buyers after 1990 built with running lights this could be cars comming from flood, tornado government drug auctions or just Dealers in Canada buying $3000.00 cheaper selling to unknowing people here on dealer trade.
Posted by: Rob | 2013-02-14 12:32:12 PM
The biggest issue is not so much that people are disconnecting them (I haven't seen much of that) but rather that a lot of the new vehicles have lit up dashboards so people are driving at night with their lights OFF! I honestly believe that most of these people don't realize that their lights are off because they can't tell from the drivers seat!
Posted by: Troy Jollimore | 2013-02-15 9:06:17 AM
Back in my 'fast car' days, I'd frequently hear complaints from the 'young ones' about how they thought DRLs were 'stupid', 'geeky', 'dorky'...or the odd, more intelligent, 'unnecessary'. Most were from the US, and I always tried to be the voice that moderated them. Out of the cities on rural two-lane roads and highways, they were nothing but a boon. I was puzzled by Car and Driver's Csaba Csere even harping on the glare they produced. I'd never experienced that, even from jacked up trucks where the DRLs ended up shining right in your eyes...
However, on our honeymoon in Florida in 2000, I was driving my wife and I toward the Space Coast on a two-lane highway when a Saturn approached from the other direction. It was a very sunny day, yet all of a sudden, the glare from its DRLs was blinded me! It wasn't 'bright' like a high beam at night, but a brilliant 'dazzle' effect. I was intrigued, and found the same thing happened with several other cars (mostly GM) we encountered on the trip. I can't explain it, but it HAD to be something atmospheric. I'd assume the cars are almost identically made to those up here, and it's never happened to me in Canada, or elsewhere I've been in the US (not many places). I've never been able to debate that point with anyone after experiencing it.
Nova Scotia has gone a step farther and made it law that your headlights must be on at ALL times. It's hardly ever enforced, though.
Posted by: Buzzard | 2013-02-17 2:42:16 PM
Have to agree with Rob re: drivers running at night with no lights on. This is becoming more and more of a problem. New vehicles have the dash lights on at all times, so when they are driving at night, they don't realize that their headlights (and tail lights) are NOT on. I see this more and more all the time. If I see them, I flash my lights at them as much as I can, but they just don't get it. Very frustrating driving behind someone with no lights. It's even worse in bad weather. They might as well be invisible. This actually brings me to my next point: DRL's are not meant to illuminate the road, or help you see better. It's all about BEING SEEN. Most people against DRL's just don't understand this. I've driven in the U.S. in dark rainy weather, and most drivers did not have their lights on. They were impossible to see, and I have come close to getting into an accident on many occasions as a result. I would love to see DRL's mandatory in the U.S., as well as mandatory auto headlights.
Posted by: Alphamouse | 2013-02-19 7:35:53 AM
I think mandatory DRL should include the tail lights. Under some rain or snow conditions it can be very difficult to see a vehicle from behind. When I'm driving in these conditions I try to remember to turn my headlights on, so cars coming up behind me can see me as well as the ones I meet. When I'm on the road I want everyone to know I'm there !
Posted by: Gary Kelly | 2013-02-20 9:20:08 PM
I do not know why people are not being stopped and warned and given time to get the DRL working. It is the law to have them in use. If found that they disconnected them ,them charge them right there and then.
I find it unsafe as I find a lot of drivers don't even turn their headlights on at dusk and in bad weather they would rather be not seen,but give more chance to be involved in a mishap.
Why are the police not seeing this and take action. Timmies and donuts, or just to preoccupied?
Courious, Gary Kelly, Nova Scotia.