One reason DRLs shouldn't be opposed...

I doubt it. The vast majority of buyers are fucking clueless. A lot of idiots
who own vehicles with fog lights run them not only on clear nights, but during the
day too. And you expect them to dislike DRLs? I bet they love them!

 

Of course fuel is required to power all electrical devices on cars. I don't
believe it is significant. Believe what you want, believe that stupid
formula on how it works if you want to. Who wrote it anyway? A scientist?
An engineer? Who the hell knows, yet you accept it as gospel.

 

And somewhere around the time of 07/28/2004 17:53, the world stopped and
listened as James C. Reeves contributed the following to humanity:

Reminds me of a few lawyer jokes:

What do you have if there is only one lawyer in town?
Not enough work.

What do you have if there is two lawyers in town?
Too much work.

I think that says it all. Oh, and as a parting gift:

You have 3 lawyers neck deep in cement. What you you need?
More cement!



Enjoy!

 

040730 1838 - doc posted:

Yes, bricking the camel...

 

Yes, but if you have DRLs you don't have to turn on the headlights as
often. My DRLs consume 54W (2x27W) while the head, parking, tail, side
marker, and interior lights together consume over 150W. This means that
if I drive a lot in rain, dusk, dawn, and other situations where DRLs
are enough I might even save gas.


BTW, have you seen this:

http://www.lumileds.com/newsandevents/releases/Jan_14_2004_Lumileds_Audi_Final.pdf

"Because the new Audi’s daytime running lamp is powered by LEDs, it is
the first car in which the use of daytime driving lights has virtually
no effect on fuel consumption, thanks to the low voltage demands and
exceptional energy efficiency of LED technology."

Ulf

 

DRLs are not an acceptible substiture for headlights, and
the requirement as to when headlights should be turned on
is mandated by law, so essentially any time you have DRLs
on when it would be acceptible for a non-DRL equipped car
to have their lights off you are consuming more fuel than
when you have them off. Electricity doesn't come from the
air, you know.

It's also a question of the small things adding up over
time. If everyone in America sent me a penny, just one
slim (not even copper) penny, I'd receive two million and
eight hundred thousand dollars. Each penny is almost
insignificant, but two point eight million dollars is not.

JazzMan
--
**********************************************************
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
**********************************************************
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
**********************************************************

 

No, not at all. I just have to wonder how many people who make the DRL
power consumption a big issue leave their computers on all day and never
give it a second thought (or drive a car that gets lousy gas mileage, or
owns and uses a dishwasher, or three color tv's, or, like Barbara
Streisand with all of her liberal causes, goes shopping in, not just an
SUV, but a motor home, or whatever it is that people want to micromanage
in other people's lives but ignore in their own. I really don't care
one way or another. It just seems to be habit with people who complain
and point fingers about certain almost insignificant things to ignore
something in their own lives that may have an order of magitude greater
impact on the very end result that they are otherwise so focused on.
Leaving a 150 to 300 watt computer on all day and all night is just one
example that I pulled out of the air as an example that many here might
be able to relate to.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

Well, other than lightning.

Ahh - but look at how much the postage cost to get those pennies to you.
Same with SPAM - money-making response rates in the fractions of a
percent that make it pay, yet the cost to businesses of fighting it and
wading thru it is several orders of magnitude over that. Some would
argue that *all* the costs of having DRL's far outweight what benefit
could be argued that they provide even if true.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

But... When you are driving in any of those conditions you should
have your headlights on for safety. Not only is it important that you
be able to see other drivers need to be able to see you. Taillights,
side markers and headlights enable them to do that.

Steve B.

 

Only if the law (under which those regulations were written)
explicitly overrides state law. Federal law allows
windshield tinting. State law does not.

 

(Sorry, that should have been California law does not.)

 

Not quite. My car has(had) parking light DRL's. It uses the turn
signal filament - when I turn the park lights on now, they're dim
compared to what the DRL's were. (01 Trans Am)

Ray

 

Aha! So you're one of the fuckwits driving around in the rain with no
lights on! Turn the fucking lights ON before I rear end you!!!!!!
ARGH!!!!

 

I haven't seen any car's tail lights that can be seen worth a damn in
the rain!

 

"> No, not at all. I just have to wonder how many people who make the DRL

Exactly. I guess I just couldn't articulate it as well as you.

 

And this is undistputed fact? Geez, get a grip man.

 

Yeah, there are several idiots around here who think it's cool to drive
with their parking lamps, DRLs and foglamps lit at the same time during
the day as well. Everytime I see one, I give them a brief flash of my
highbeams.

 

Are you following the thread?

nate

 

No, *you* need to get a grip. Although I doubt that we're currently
using 400MGallons per year for DRLs, the figure is certainly close
to that. Try researching: here are two urls to gander at.
http://www.netl.doe.gov/ssl/PDFs/Niche Final Report.pdf
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question424.htm
The first is a DOE report on converting to LED lights; DRLs are
included. They estimate that if all *exterior* lights were converted
to LEDs, it would save about 1,397,000,000 gallons per year. If
you believe them, DRLs alone would account for 35,000,000 gallons
per year.
If you go for a more back-of-the-envelope calculation, the howstuffworks
calculation comes up with 406,000,000 gallons.

Floyd

 

Not exactly. Federal safety standards apply to the manufacture and preempt
state safety standards. The tint applied at the factory preempts any state
restrictions. The mini-van, being classified as a truck can have darker rear
and side glass then a vehicle classified by the feds as a passenger car.
States can and do have their own restrictions on aftermarket tints applied
to the front and front side glass; this action is not preempted.

Richard.