ADUK Archive

I use (flashing) lights when cycling in daylight - didn't used to and it should not be necessary. Would not, if all drivers took personal responsibility for the danger their ton or so of moving metal brings to the roads. Unfortunately, my (reluctant) decision to use DRLs on the push-bike puts other road users (such as the mother from a mile up the road, who rides with a tagalong taking her 4 - 5 y/o son to school, or the girl who cycles to keep fit for horse trials, or the sheep or the escaped horses, or the escaped child from the familly camping in that field...) at a relative disadvantage, they not frequenting AD and cycling forums are not aware of the growing pressure towards DRLs - and would probably be as shocked by the price of decent lights as my wife is.

Running DRLs as Gareth says, do not help you see that the road is clear. As with a blind bend, when vision is limited the only responsible response is to slow down sufficiently to be able to stop in the distance which can be seen to be clear. That there is any suggestion on a AD forum, that making yourself more visible helps ensure the road is clear ahead of you, is frankly shocking.

Ancient wrote:I use (flashing) lights when cycling in daylight - didn't used to and it should not be necessary. Would not, if all drivers took personal responsibility for the danger their ton or so of moving metal brings to the roads. Unfortunately, my (reluctant) decision to use DRLs on the push-bike puts other road users (such as the mother from a mile up the road, who rides with a tagalong taking her 4 - 5 y/o son to school, or the girl who cycles to keep fit for horse trials, or the sheep or the escaped horses, or the escaped child from the familly camping in that field...) at a relative disadvantage, they not frequenting AD and cycling forums are not aware of the growing pressure towards DRLs - and would probably be as shocked by the price of decent lights as my wife is.

mine are both constant and flashing - the flash is a background pulse to the constant beam.

Take the point that it puts others at a relative disadvantage, also on the cost

Ancient wrote: That there is any suggestion on a AD forum, that making yourself more visible helps ensure the road is clear ahead of you, is frankly shocking.

I began to wonder if the 'more lights' was a wind up!
However maybe the klaxon thread is related.... Be really loud and they'll know you're coming!

Ian

I don't think anybody said DRLs would help you see the road ahead. I believe the implication was that if people used them, they would be easier to see. Of course as Ancient already pointed out, that doesn't help with other road users who don't carry lights.

There was some ambiguity as this indicates.."Running DRLs as Gareth says, do not help you see that the road is clear. "

Wasn't there some research that cast doubts on flashing bike lights usefulness? I can't recall where I might have seen it.

Ian

DRLs are not used for vision, but rather for conspicuousness. Other road users could be just as affected by bright sunlight and deep shadows, so it makes sense to use DRLs or indeed low beams.

By the way, Israel is the southernmost state to obligate road users to use their low beams as DRLs. Local advanced driving coaches recommend using it (or dedicated DRLs) all the time and in all vehicles.

Is it just me that finds it really irritating that DRLs are only on the front of cars?

It annoys my OCD tendencies somewhat, knowing that I have a set of bright DRLs on the front of the car, but in order to have any illumination on the rear, I have to have sidelights or dipped beams on, which completely negates the point of the DRLs?

But than again, research has shown that daytime use of tail lights reduces (however slightly) the conspiciousness of the brake lights as they go on.

It's also part of how the dedicated DRLs produce their economical results: using only a LED on the front rather than lighting up the enite car.

I am still keen on using dipped beams as daytime lights in a car without dedicated DRLs.

Astraist wrote:But than again, research has shown that daytime use of tail lights reduces (however slightly) the conspiciousness of the brake lights as they go on.

It's also part of how the dedicated DRLs produce their economical results: using only a LED on the front rather than lighting up the enite car.

I am still keen on using dipped beams as daytime lights in a car without dedicated DRLs.

So, surely, would it not make sense to put the brakelights where it is obvious when they've come on? For instance, the Yeti has the traditional Skoda C-rear lights, but the brake lights are in a separate bit above the C-light which means it's quite obvious when they've come on?

TheInsanity1234 wrote:

Astraist wrote:But than again, research has shown that daytime use of tail lights reduces (however slightly) the conspiciousness of the brake lights as they go on.

It's also part of how the dedicated DRLs produce their economical results: using only a LED on the front rather than lighting up the enite car.

I am still keen on using dipped beams as daytime lights in a car without dedicated DRLs.

So, surely, would it not make sense to put the brakelights where it is obvious when they've come on? For instance, the Yeti has the traditional Skoda C-rear lights, but the brake lights are in a separate bit above the C-light which means it's quite obvious when they've come on?

not sure that logic and car design always go hand in hand!
car designers spend their time fighting regulations, not looking for ways to make things easier

Alasdair

akirk wrote:not sure that logic and car design always go hand in hand!

Witness the stupid VW rear indicators with the orange bit inside a red circle - virtually invisible in daylight.

akirk wrote:car designers spend their time fighting regulations, not looking for ways to make things easier

No, they spend their time designing things they think the public will find attractive, then re-designing it to please the accountants ...

Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:

akirk wrote:not sure that logic and car design always go hand in hand!

Witness the stupid VW rear indicators with the orange bit inside a red circle - virtually invisible in daylight.

akirk wrote:car designers spend their time fighting regulations, not looking for ways to make things easier

No, they spend their time designing things they think the public will find attractive, then re-designing it to please the accountants ...

...and after a further period they modify things back to nearer how they used to be, i.e. practical and reliable.

Some of this 'progress' and 'improvement' is not all it's cracked up to be: it's actually a waste of time, effort and money.

TripleS wrote:

Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:

akirk wrote:not sure that logic and car design always go hand in hand!

Witness the stupid VW rear indicators with the orange bit inside a red circle - virtually invisible in daylight.

akirk wrote:car designers spend their time fighting regulations, not looking for ways to make things easier

No, they spend their time designing things they think the public will find attractive, then re-designing it to please the accountants ...

...and after a further period they modify things back to nearer how they used to be, i.e. practical and reliable.

Some of this 'progress' and 'improvement' is not all it's cracked up to be: it's actually a waste of time, effort and money.

+1

TripleS wrote:Some of this 'progress' and 'improvement' is not all it's cracked up to be: it's actually a waste of time, effort and money.

How did you read my mind like that?

So ++1... Or is that +2?

StressedDave wrote:Depends on which language you're writing the code in. Personally, I'd go for agreeing++ then there's no issue with having to work out prefix or postfix notation (which I can never remember because I always programmed in Pascal with very strict typing and no such nasty macros as I++ and ++I. You also don't have to be able to count

Ho Ho...

In another life time, long past, ALGOL....but typed in over a telex link and the results in the post the next day.... Surprisingly good at producing address labels as well as costing a new telephone network...

Ian