I never turned off the daytime running lights. I figured why not be that much safer. However, it just dawned on me that I don't see too many on any more, even though I thought many manufacturers still use them. What's the deal? Do I look like a idiot with mine on?

I haven't followed all the links to other sites so this might have been covered allready. The only reason I've heard arguing against DRLs is it makes it more difficult to determine the oncoming vehicle's distance and speed. They appear closer with lights on.

I turned mine off when summer began but will likely turn them back on as the days become more grey. Around here I've noticed about 2/3 of the cars don't run them.
--
Erwin in Memphis, '95 855t

Mine are on, on my Beetle too. USAA gives me a $2.12 discount on each car, every 6 months. IMHO, I don't think they could use $2.12 worth of gas (or diesel).

Chuck, 95 850 GLT Wagon, 69k. clean oil, new thermostat, new coolant. Doing tranny and p/s next weekend.

i leave mine on all the time too-- rock on!

Most of the time DRL's are useless and wasteful. There are however many situations where their use is helpful, and adds a measure of safety. The trouble is that the vast majority of drivers out there are too ignorant, distracted, incompetant, inconsiderate, etc. to know when to turn their lights on, and when to turn them off. Government enters in, and as is usual in these cases, the competant few are punished by the sins of the masses. I keep mine on all the time because I come under the category of "forgetful".

Koz.

See following Web site for "rest of the story."

http://www.lightsout.org/

I went to the link mentioned in your post and I found it very amusing.

let's see, what other safety features can I think of that are only in existence to increase automoblie profits. 1. anti lock brakes 2. air bags
3. traction control systems 4. seat belts 5.the padded dash. 6. collapsable steering columns 7.radial tires 8. windshield wipers 9.laminated glass
10. bumpers 11. dual circuit master brake cylinders 12.disc brakes 13.headrests 14. transmission shift lock mechanisms . ETC. ETC.

IT'S ALL A CONSPIRACY TO INCREASE PROFITS I TELL YOU ! (EVIL AUTO COMPANIES) (LOL)
--
You will never leave where you are until you decide where you would rather be - 2002 V70 stk, /w /tinted windows

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/31402_nh_worstseat.html

#2 was required because people refused to use their 3-point belts. It, too can cause injuries. http://www.womanmotorist.com/sfty/arbg01.shtml

etc.

No Phil items #1 (antilock brakes) and #2 (traction control), they aren't required by the federal government, nor are Drl's for that matter. nonetheless this doesn't mean that they are not useful safety features that, if you choose to add these features to your car, can proivide a greater degree of safety and protection. this is especially true of antilock brakes when the car is driven in winter climates. as for traction control, to me, it is waste of money.

now regarding LAP seat belts, yes indeed they can do more harm than good and I personally would not purchase an automoblie that doesn't provide 3 point seat belts for ALL of the vehicle passengers.

and finally, regarding air bags: yes, airbags were mandated by NHSTA to protect un-belted drivers/passengers. the airbag standard, as set by NHSTA, was set to protect a un-belted 160 lb male ! we all know what the negative results of airbag deployment on children, small women and men can be, and that is why we now have SECOND GENERATION airbags that do not deploy with the same force as the previous generation airbags did. the previous generation airbags deployed at speeds 200+ MPH and the new 2nd generation deploys at speeds 0f 150 -180 MPH.

also, there is a federal mandate to equip passenger cars with "smart airbags" that will deploy at various different speeds depending on inputs from sensors located in the seats and seat belt latches. these sensors will provide input to the air bag module which will calculate the speed of the airbag deployement based on input from the sensors that will : 1. measure the weight of the passenger/driver, 2. measure the seat position, (distance from away from the airbag ) and 3. whether or not the seat belt is buckled or unbuckled. if I remember correctly, 20% of all 2004 passenger vehicles must be equipped with this smart airbag system during the first part of the phase in period.
--
You will never leave where you are until you decide where you would rather be - 2002 V70 stk, /w /tinted windows

The number one beneficiary of DRLs, according a Mass. State Police trooper I know, are pedestrians.....and construction workers! He's cited a US study that shows dramatic reduction in daytime accidents and fatalities where DRLs are used - even in the sunshine belt.

Now it so happens the Volvo implementation sucks. You shouldn't have to run headlights along with your tail lights and instrument panel lamps; instead our cars should have a special DRL circuit a la GM, MB, Lexus, BMW and others. I wired my foglights for this use - I'm highly visible, but less annoying. The fact is, you are a safer (less dangerous) driver with lights on rather than off.

A recent European study:
If all motor vehicles would drive with lights on during the day
The number of accident fatalities European-wide would be reduced by 24.6 % corresponding to 5,500 people (based on the relevant multiple accidents during the day).
20.0 % fewer injuries - 155,000 people
740,000 less reported accidents
12.4 % less economic damage
Source: http://www.restena.lu/pri/12_98/deutsch/07.htm

--
David \\ (98 S70 T5SE Black, misc mods (mostly lighting), red calipers) (92 940GLE)

My intuitive thought was that they're probably reasonable in countries like Norway, Russia and Canada, and reasonable to use on motorcycles and probably small sports cars too (the Excursions just don't see you) but you'd have to be completely blind not to see an Excursion in the noontime sun.

My state and many if not most require lights on with wipers, might make more sense to wire the lights that way.

I gather from Paul's post that he turns 'em on and off with the seasons, if you usually leave home and return in the winter twilight that seems a reasonable choice, too.

-Punxsutawney Phil

'98 V70T5 5-speed, 103k mi., sport suspension, Mobil-1, iPd stabilizer bars, Volvo strut tower brace and skidplate, Dunlop SP 5000s, Valentine-1

Some info on DRLs from the Insurance Institute
http://www.trinbagoauto.com/iihs_daytime_index.asp

This from Jeffrey Lange of the NHSTA, excerpted from freep.com
"Referring to federal studies, Lange said DRL's have resulted in a 5-percent reduction in daytime collisions, and a 28-percent reduction in daytime fatal single-vehicle pedestrian crashes."

ABSTRACTS from NORTH AMERICAN studies
Cantilli, E. J.: Accident experience with parking lights as running lights. Highway Research Record Report No. 32. National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1970.
In the United States, a small-scale fleet study conducted in the 1960s found an 18-percent lower daytime, multiple-vehicle crash rate for DRL-equipped vehicles.

Stein, H. S.: Fleet experience with daytime running lights in the United States. Technical Paper 851239. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA. 1985.
In a much larger fleet study conducted in the 1980s, more than 2,000 passenger vehicles in three fleets were equipped with DRLs.

One fleet operated in Connecticut, another in several States in the Southwest, and the third operated throughout the United States. A 7-percent reduction was found in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes in the DRL-equipped vehicles compared with control vehicles.

Aurora, H., et al.: Effectiveness of daytime running lights in Canada. TP 12298 (E). Transport Canada, Ottawa, 1994.
In a study in Canada comparing 1990 model year vehicles (required to have DRLs) with 1989 vehicles, a statistically significant 11-percent reduction in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes other than rear-end impacts was estimated. This estimate was adjusted to take into account the fact that about 29 percent of 1989 vehicles were fitted with DRLs. Collisions involving pedestrians, pedalcyclists, motorcyclists, and heavy trucks and buses were not included in this study.

Sparks, G. A., et al.: The effects of daytime running lights on crashes between two vehicles in Saskatchewan: a study of a government fleet. Accid Anal. Prev 25: 619-625 (1991).
In another Canadian study, crashes of vehicles with and without DRLs in a government fleet in Saskatchewan were compared with a random sample of crashes involving vehciles without DRLs. The estimated reduction in daytime two-vehicle crashes was 15 percent. When the analysis was limited to two-vehicle collisions most likely to be affected by DRLs--involving vehicles approaching from the front or side--the estimated reduction was 28 percent.

Society of Automotive Engineers Inc., Automotive Engineering Vol. 102 ; No. 8 ; Pg. 35; ISSN: 0098-2571 (August, 1994).
In 1994 Avis, Inc. announced the results of a traveler-safety study analyzing the incidence and degree of damage to cars equipped with daytime running lights; the study showed a significantly greater degree of damage to those without daytime running lights (DRLs). Those equipped with DRLs have their headlights on at all times and are more visible to other drivers. During the day, they are on at an 80% power level; in the dark they operate at 100%.

Damage severity in the non-DRL group (measured in terms of cost) was 69% greater than that of the DRL-equipped fleet. Only the non-DRL vehicles experienced damage in excess of $15,000. The Avis study involved 1500 cars with DRLs, and 1500 without, representing approximately 29,000 rentals in eight cities in Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Washington.

Summary of the Studies

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Reports , Vol. 110 ; No. 3 ; Pg. 233; ISSN: 0033-3549 (May, 1995).
In summary, although the studies of DRLs have differed in design, analysis techniques, and outcome measures, the later studies are largely in accordance with the earlier ones, indicating that the overall effect of DRLs on motor vehicle crashes is positive.
--
David \\ (98 S70 T5SE Black, misc mods (mostly lighting), red calipers) (92 940GLE)

No, leave 'em on! There's tons of empirical data showing daytime running lights to be advantageous, especially w/regard to pedestrian collisions. One of the great things about my 740 cars: leave the light switch in the on position and you never have to worry about it since the lights go on and off with the engine. That and the impossible-to-lock-yourself-out feature are perfect for absent minded people like me :)

You got a reference for that data? My company's research, admittedly far from complete, has so far found no difference in accident rates that could be attributed to the use of DRL's.

Yeah, plenty here:

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/DRLs/studies.htm

....particularly by the gendarmes. At least consciously. If you drive fast, drive a lot or drive fast a lot, you may want to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of using or not using the lights.

There remains some debate as to how effective DRLs are, except in the case of motorcyclists and in countries that are partially above the arctic circle.

http://www.motorists.com/stealthis/lightsoff.html

-Punxsutawney Phil

'98 V70T5 5-speed, 103,000 mi., sport suspension, Mobil-1, Rain-X, iPd stabilizer bars, Volvo strut tower brace and skidplate, NEW Dunlop SP 5000s, Valentine-1 with main unit discreetly tucked into visor organizer pocket.

http://penguinppc.org/~hollis/personal/bergeron.shtml

Thanks for the link. I always like to read "devil's advocate" opinions. If DRLs are being vilified as annoying, let me ring in with how much I can't stand the "super-bright" blue headlights. I'm blinded whenever I come across a car equipped with those. Ugh, rant over.

Since they reduce daytime accidents (and fatalities) by an awesome amount, I leave them on. I rigged my foglights so they run independently of the headlights - that way I'm only consuming $5 H1's, instead of $20 Euro H7's, running lights, tail lights, and instrument panel lamps.

The best at DRL's? Believe it or not, GM with 60% pulsed high beams.

I have seen photographs where running lights were proven to help other drivers see you better especially in high glare situations like near sunset or sunrise and you happen to be in the dark of their sight. The lights stick out.

I won't turn mine off. They are there for a reason. I see many people here in Colorado using them even on other vehicles.

Rick in Denver 97 850-R, 66000 miles from new, all OEM

You mean you can turn them off? :)

YOUR OWNERS MANUAL TELLS HOW TO TURN THEM OFF, I BELIEVE IT IS A THREE POSITION SWITCH-LOOKS LIKE A SCREW

Yes, at least on the 97 models. There is a small black switch that looks like the head of a flat head screw. It is on the same panel as your headlight switch. If this is flipped to the other position your headlight switch works the old fashioned way ie on or off. I still leave mine in the on position except on rare occasions when I want to turn my headlights off.

Thanks for reminding me, time to turn mine back on.....
--
www.fidalgo.net/~brook4

Nope your not the only one I still use them and believe in them.

Lee

Both of my cars have them.....can't hurt, right?

All the time.

'97 850 N/A

Fogs as DRLs look much more slick :)

Dang ... now I want front fogs as DRL's !!
--
98 V70 AWD, IPD ECU, 'R' Emblem, K&N, Volvo Strut Bar, Dunlop SP5000, IPD Sport Spring

I find that bright parking lights are much nicer to look at oncoming, and do a much better job of making a car stand out. You can't really notice the parking lights as much when your lights are on, so you can only really see how well they work with normal lights off

Yeah, those 4 watt bulbs outshine the 50 watt lowbeams. Inexplicable, but there you have it.