Subject: DRLs: reduced-brightness low beams

From: [email-masked] (Isaac Wong)
Date: 6 Sep 1995 16:14:52 GMT

For those of you who have not seen DRLs before, and would like to contribute
to the long threads about DRLs, here is the difference between DRL and 
regular low beams.

DRLS ARE REDUCED-BRIGHTNESS LOW BEAMS.

Simply turning on your regular low beams during daytime is not considered
DRL. Full intensity low beams are too bright under normal daylight. DRL
should be dimmer and should not cause unnecessary distraction.

OTOH, DRL is no substitute for regular headlight at night. If only DRL is
on, interior instrumentation illumination is not on. Also the tail lights
are not on.

Before you contribute to the DRL threads, please be better informed.

-- 
Isaac Wong                | Protel Compiler Group
[email-masked]    | Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
[email-masked] | Dept. of Systems and Computer Engineering
TEL: (613) 763-6127       | Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada

---

From: [email-masked] (Isaac Wong)
Date: 6 Sep 1995 18:53:05 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (John P. Curcio) writes:
|> In article <[email-masked]>, Isaac Wong <[email-masked]> wrote:
|> 
|> >For those of you who have not seen DRLs before, and would like to contribute
|> >to the long threads about DRLs, here is the difference between DRL and 
|> >regular low beams.
|> >
|> >DRLS ARE REDUCED-BRIGHTNESS LOW BEAMS.
|> 
|> Wait a sec, bozo..... wasn't it you that said that different auto
|> manufacturers use different methods of implementation of DRLs?  I
|> thought so.  Even so, this STATEMENT THAT YOU HAVE MADE IS UNTRUE.
|> It doesn't matter how loud you say it-- it still ain't true!!!

Whoever said it, the difference of implementation of different manufacturers
is minor. Some manufacturers are clueless enough to use high beams as
DRLs, that's their fault. However, up here in Canada, we see thousands of
cars use low beams as DRLs. Some are connected to the parking brake, some
are not, that's not the major point.

In fact, I can hardly find vehicles with high beams as DRLs here.

Furthermore, there is a difference between "DRLs are supposed to be reduced-
brightness low beams" and "Some manufacturers incorrectly used high beams".

|> >Simply turning on your regular low beams during daytime is not considered
|> >DRL. Full intensity low beams are too bright under normal daylight. DRL
|> >should be dimmer and should not cause unnecessary distraction.
|> 
|> DRLs are too bright under normal daylight...

Why most Canadians don't think so?

|> >Before you contribute to the DRL threads, please be better informed.
|> 
|> Before you annoy the living hell out of the rest of us, please keep you
|> love of government mandates to yourself.

What's wrong with getting better informed before contributing to a thread?
If you feel the information I provide annoying, don't follow it up and 
simply skip it. You don't have to tell everyone that you're annoyed and
want to flame someone. Keep all your personal insults to yourself.

---

From: [email-masked] (Gumby)
Date: 6 Sep 1995 12:02 CDT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Isaac Wong) writes...

>DRLS ARE REDUCED-BRIGHTNESS LOW BEAMS.

They can also be reduced brightness high beams.  I don't know if GM is still
doing it (since you are so sure of yourself) but they started as high beams.

Marc

P.S.  I couldn't care less either way.  I look for other cars and am not
hyponitized by lights.  I'd rather bee seen than not, though.

---

From: [email-masked] (Gumby)
Date: 6 Sep 1995 13:56 CDT

[email-masked] (Isaac Wong) writes...
>[email-masked] (Gumby) writes:
>|>[email-masked] (Isaac Wong) writes...

>|> They can also be reduced brightness high beams.  I don't know if GM is still
>|> doing it (since you are so sure of yourself) but they started as high beams.

>Interesting. We see thousands of vehicles equipped with DRLs everyday here
>in Canada, but I can hardly find them using high beams. 

Well, I'm in the U.S. and the first American maker to put DRL on their cars
used brights.  I read articles on it.  I see them.  The inside lights of the
separate high/low are highs.  These are the DRLs.

>The vehicles you mentioned might have their
>headlights improperly adjusted, or just because GM did it wrong. Remember,
>even a low beam incorrectly adjusted can be dangerous. Load bias towards
>the rear of the vehicle will also affect the aim of headlights.

The idea behind using high beams is to make sure that other vehicles can see
the car.  Low beams are designed not to be seen by other drivers.  The high
beams at 60 or 80 percent brightness are much more viasble.

GM isn't wrong because they didn't do it the way you expected; they are just
different.

Marc

---

From: [email-masked] (jjbl)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 09:18:34 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Isaac Wong) wrote:

: Let's not go into a discussion of whether high is right or low is right.
:  : My
: original intention is that 99% of the vehicles equipped with DRLs here in
: Canada use the low beam implementation. I don't know about GM in US, but I
: think the low beam is used in Canada. I also find that low beams do not
: cause unnecessary distractions as compared to high beams. Maybe high beams
: work better, I don't know. Anyway, some DRLs surely work better than none
: at all.

Are you saying that Ford vehicles account for less than one percent of the
DRL equipped vehicles in Canada?  Your figures are truly insightful.

Ford and GM build many cars destined for both Canada and the USA in the
same plants.  GM's Camaros, Firebirds, etc are built in Canada.  Ford
builds all of its Mustangs in Dearborn.  Most of Ford's trucks are built
in New Jersey.    All Corvettes are built in Kentucky.  DRL's are then
mounted on cars alotted for export to Canada.  It's not like you need a
separate assembly line for Canadian and US vehicles.

GM DRL propoganda advertised using lowered-output hi-beams, I'd imagine
that's what they're currently using.  Ford definitely uses hi-beams.

General Motors and Ford combined have more than 1% of the DRL equipped
cars on the road in Canada.  I'd go as far to say that the majority of DRL
equipped cars in Canada are GM or Ford, though I don't have amazing
statistics like yours to back me up, just an educated guess based on the
sheer size of both of these companies, in terms of both manufacturing
capacity and vehicles sold.

: -- 
: Isaac Wong                | Protel Compiler Group
: [email-masked]    | Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
: [email-masked] | Dept. of Systems and Computer Engineering
: TEL: (613) 763-6127       | Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada

-- 
-----
You have just been verbally molested by: [email-masked]
Was it good for you?
Try the full flavor of my low-tar and nicotine chat server:
telnet://mustang.bridge.net
-----

---

From: Craig Baltzer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 95 13:04:18 PDT

> DRL equipped vehicles in Canada?  Your figures are truly insightful.

A couple of additional data points on some Toyota vehicles. '94 Supra uses 
reduced intensity high beams (and they are actually lowered about 50% from my 
"shine them on the wall" testing). The MR2 uses the driving lights (a.k.a. fog 
lights) which are mounted down low under the bumper.