I’m interested in disabling my daytime running lights on my 2002
Corolla. On alt.autos.toyota.trucks (and other places in usenet and
on the web) I found the following bulletin:
http://www.tacomaterritory.com/~faqsection/content/dsabldrl.htm
I’ve found the DRL control unit behind my glove box and the relay
under the hood near the front right corner of the car. I’m trying to
match the directions given in the Technical Service Bulletin to what
I’m actually seeing on the relay and the ECU.
The first point of confusion is deciphering the chart given in the
first page of the bulletin. According to the chart (and assuming the
process is the same for ’02 corollas as it was for ’00 corollas), I
should be looking at the "DRL main relay", which I believe is the one
I mentioned above. I’m not sure what a D3 connector is and there
certainly aren’t 23 pins on the relay–there’re only about 6 or 7, as
I’d expect from a relay. I’m also not sure what the EWD PG# column is
for.. I’m assuming it is a reference to another manual.
I tried to remove the relay from the plastic molding it is attached to
but couldn’t get it out. I also tried to pull the wires out of the
relay, but they must somehow be either locked in or soldered to the
relay because they wouldn’t budge.
The second point I’m having problems with is the instructions versus
picture. I’m assuming that the picture really has nothing to do with
the relay and is instead supposed to represent the ECU. From the
picture, I originally assumed that there were two connectors into the
ECU, one of which I’d simply have to pull out and insulate. That was
obviously wrong after I got a look at the ECU, so I’m not really sure
what to do at this point.
If any of you out there have done this or can provide any insight, I’d
appreciate the advice.
Thanks much,
Josh Bertram.
joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com
Well Josh,
I think you must have found the wrong relay. The below are the instructions
for a ’98 Corolla which I ASSume are the same as the 2002. It is my
understanding that the "IG" connection is the only one that has to be
removed. However, there is also a connector called -CHG that could play a
roll, but I haven’t seen that one disconnected on other instructions.
PJ wrote:
"Dave M." wrote:
> Read this…
Would love to! Where is it?
If you are referring to the DRL relay, it is mounted above and somewhat to
the left of the center of the glove compartment. Remove the glove
compartment (you have to remove the passenger side door step and kick panel
first) then looking up and toward the passenger seat, you will see a relay
that is being held in place by a metal tang. Pull the
relay down. The harness breakout is very short and it will be tricky. So, be
careful. Using a jewelers screwdriver or other
suitable tool, from the side of the connector, release the pin corresponding
to the red wire with a blue stripe (pin 23). if you use
a flashlight, you can see pin numbers 16 and 21 in relief on the connector.
This should disconnect the ignition input of the DRL relay and should
disable the lights except when deliberately turned on by
the driver.
Disclaimer;
I hold no responsibility for any results of the actions stated and/or
described above.
Good luck on your mission!
- Dave M.
"Josh Bertram" <joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b1e7c5a6.0110231114.5203ffb1@posting.google.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> I’m interested in disabling my daytime running lights on my 2002
> Corolla. On alt.autos.toyota.trucks (and other places in usenet and
> on the web) I found the following bulletin:
> http://www.tacomaterritory.com/~faqsection/content/dsabldrl.htm
> I’ve found the DRL control unit behind my glove box and the relay
> under the hood near the front right corner of the car. I’m trying to
> match the directions given in the Technical Service Bulletin to what
> I’m actually seeing on the relay and the ECU.
> The first point of confusion is deciphering the chart given in the
> first page of the bulletin. According to the chart (and assuming the
> process is the same for ’02 corollas as it was for ’00 corollas), I
> should be looking at the "DRL main relay", which I believe is the one
> I mentioned above. I’m not sure what a D3 connector is and there
> certainly aren’t 23 pins on the relay–there’re only about 6 or 7, as
> I’d expect from a relay. I’m also not sure what the EWD PG# column is
> for.. I’m assuming it is a reference to another manual.
> I tried to remove the relay from the plastic molding it is attached to
> but couldn’t get it out. I also tried to pull the wires out of the
> relay, but they must somehow be either locked in or soldered to the
> relay because they wouldn’t budge.
> The second point I’m having problems with is the instructions versus
> picture. I’m assuming that the picture really has nothing to do with
> the relay and is instead supposed to represent the ECU. From the
> picture, I originally assumed that there were two connectors into the
> ECU, one of which I’d simply have to pull out and insulate. That was
> obviously wrong after I got a look at the ECU, so I’m not really sure
> what to do at this point.
> If any of you out there have done this or can provide any insight, I’d
> appreciate the advice.
> Thanks much,
> Josh Bertram.
> joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com
In article <9r6n75$cb…@malakbel.unb.ca>, gu…@umoncton.ca says…
>What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics show
>that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
>it.
They are annoying and they have no proven safety purpose.
—————–
Alex __O
_-\<,_
(_)/ (_)
You should check with your insurance carrier concerning your coverage if you
willfully bypass safety features installed by the manufacturer.
"Michel Guay" <gu…@umoncton.ca> wrote in message
news:9r6n75$cb5$1@malakbel.unb.ca…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics
show
> that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
> it.
> Josh Bertram <joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message :
> b1e7c5a6.0110231114.5203f…@posting.google.com…
> > I’m interested in disabling my daytime running lights on my 2002
> > Corolla. On alt.autos.toyota.trucks (and other places in usenet and
> > on the web) I found the following bulletin:
> > http://www.tacomaterritory.com/~faqsection/content/dsabldrl.htm
> > I’ve found the DRL control unit behind my glove box and the relay
> > under the hood near the front right corner of the car. I’m trying to
> > match the directions given in the Technical Service Bulletin to what
> > I’m actually seeing on the relay and the ECU.
> > The first point of confusion is deciphering the chart given in the
> > first page of the bulletin. According to the chart (and assuming the
> > process is the same for ’02 corollas as it was for ’00 corollas), I
> > should be looking at the "DRL main relay", which I believe is the one
> > I mentioned above. I’m not sure what a D3 connector is and there
> > certainly aren’t 23 pins on the relay–there’re only about 6 or 7, as
> > I’d expect from a relay. I’m also not sure what the EWD PG# column is
> > for.. I’m assuming it is a reference to another manual.
> > I tried to remove the relay from the plastic molding it is attached to
> > but couldn’t get it out. I also tried to pull the wires out of the
> > relay, but they must somehow be either locked in or soldered to the
> > relay because they wouldn’t budge.
> > The second point I’m having problems with is the instructions versus
> > picture. I’m assuming that the picture really has nothing to do with
> > the relay and is instead supposed to represent the ECU. From the
> > picture, I originally assumed that there were two connectors into the
> > ECU, one of which I’d simply have to pull out and insulate. That was
> > obviously wrong after I got a look at the ECU, so I’m not really sure
> > what to do at this point.
> > If any of you out there have done this or can provide any insight, I’d
> > appreciate the advice.
> > Thanks much,
> > Josh Bertram.
> > joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com
In article <9r6n75$cb…@malakbel.unb.ca>, Michel Guay says…
>What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics show
>that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
>it.
There are no statistics that show this. If you have some, then please
share them with us and with the NHTSA.
Read the NHTSA report entitled: _A Preliminary Assessment of the Crash-
Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs)_
at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/DRL7_RPT.pdf.
Look at the conclusions on page 24 where it states: “Using the FARS
data the combined odds ratio technique shows an increase of in fatal
crashes of 8 percent for vehicles equipped with DRLs, the combined
simple odds results show a decrease in fatal crashes of 2 percent.
Neither result is statistically significant.”
The points in disabling DRLs can be found at:
http://www.geocities.com/scharf_steven/drl.htm
Steve
It does not do you much good to advance a source that you have not completely
checked yourself.
Read the executive summary!!!
No reduction in non-fatal crashes (read if you are going fast enough to kill
yourself, DRLs wont help)
Statistically significant reduction in non-fatal two-vehicle crashes (7%
reduction)
Statistically significant reduction in fatal pedestrian-vehicle crashes (28%
reduction)
Pretty significant if you are walking across the street, don’t you think.
Now, if you are only concerned about yourself as a potentially dead driver of a
car in a head-on collision, you are correct. If you are a responsible citizen
and concerned with others on the road, either on foot or in a car, then DRLs are
significant, aren’t they????!!!!
Dan Gates
ps I’ll read the rest of the report and retract if I need to — so don’t flame
me yet.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
sch…@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <9r6n75$cb…@malakbel.unb.ca>, Michel Guay says…
> >What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics show
> >that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
> >it.
> There are no statistics that show this. If you have some, then please
> share them with us and with the NHTSA.
> Read the NHTSA report entitled: _A Preliminary Assessment of the Crash-
> Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs)_
> at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/DRL7_RPT.pdf.
> Look at the conclusions on page 24 where it states: “Using the FARS
> data the combined odds ratio technique shows an increase of in fatal
> crashes of 8 percent for vehicles equipped with DRLs, the combined
> simple odds results show a decrease in fatal crashes of 2 percent.
> Neither result is statistically significant.”
> The points in disabling DRLs can be found at:
> http://www.geocities.com/scharf_steven/drl.htm
> Steve
Having read the entire report, my earlier comments stand. Statistically significant
reductions were found in 2-vehicle non-fatal crashes and in car v. pedestrian (dead
ped) crashes. Seems important to me. But again if you feel that anything you walk
away from as a driver is insignificant, then it you are correct. DRLs wont help
you, statistically.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
"Daniel R. Gates" wrote:
> It does not do you much good to advance a source that you have not completely
> checked yourself.
> Read the executive summary!!!
> No reduction in non-fatal crashes (read if you are going fast enough to kill
> yourself, DRLs wont help)
> Statistically significant reduction in non-fatal two-vehicle crashes (7%
> reduction)
> Statistically significant reduction in fatal pedestrian-vehicle crashes (28%
> reduction)
> Pretty significant if you are walking across the street, don’t you think.
> Now, if you are only concerned about yourself as a potentially dead driver of a
> car in a head-on collision, you are correct. If you are a responsible citizen
> and concerned with others on the road, either on foot or in a car, then DRLs are
> significant, aren’t they????!!!!
> Dan Gates
> ps I’ll read the rest of the report and retract if I need to — so don’t flame
> me yet.
> sch…@hotmail.com wrote:
> > In article <9r6n75$cb…@malakbel.unb.ca>, Michel Guay says…
> > >What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics show
> > >that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
> > >it.
> > There are no statistics that show this. If you have some, then please
> > share them with us and with the NHTSA.
> > Read the NHTSA report entitled: _A Preliminary Assessment of the Crash-
> > Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs)_
> > at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/DRL7_RPT.pdf.
> > Look at the conclusions on page 24 where it states: “Using the FARS
> > data the combined odds ratio technique shows an increase of in fatal
> > crashes of 8 percent for vehicles equipped with DRLs, the combined
> > simple odds results show a decrease in fatal crashes of 2 percent.
> > Neither result is statistically significant.”
> > The points in disabling DRLs can be found at:
> > http://www.geocities.com/scharf_steven/drl.htm
> > Steve
"subc" <subc-no-s…@cotse.com> wrote in message
news:c3ViYw==.cf74760684e8b00b073b3a2de0656d78@1003958646.cotse.net…
> Alex Rodriguez wrote:
> > They are annoying and they have no proven safety purpose.
> Are you trying to say that YOUR DRL annoy you? If you mean the people
> you are meeting,
Every few months this discussion begins again…many people have valid
reasons for the need to disable their DRLs. You can look at it as ENABLING
your headlight switch!
Chris
—
http://www.mcmartinville.com
Last Update 28 April 2001
"Daniel R. Gates" <dga…@kellerengineering.com> wrote in message
news:3BD5BCB0.F80802D2@kellerengineering.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> It does not do you much good to advance a source that you have not
completely
> checked yourself.
> Read the executive summary!!!
> No reduction in non-fatal crashes (read if you are going fast enough to
kill
> yourself, DRLs wont help)
> Statistically significant reduction in non-fatal two-vehicle crashes (7%
> reduction)
> Statistically significant reduction in fatal pedestrian-vehicle crashes
(28%
> reduction)
> Pretty significant if you are walking across the street, don’t you think.
> Now, if you are only concerned about yourself as a potentially dead driver
of a
> car in a head-on collision, you are correct. If you are a responsible
citizen
> and concerned with others on the road, either on foot or in a car, then
DRLs are
> significant, aren’t they????!!!!
> Dan Gates
> ps I’ll read the rest of the report and retract if I need to — so don’t
flame
> me yet.
> sch…@hotmail.com wrote:
> > In article <9r6n75$cb…@malakbel.unb.ca>, Michel Guay says…
> > >What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics
show
> > >that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think
about
> > >it.
> > There are no statistics that show this. If you have some, then please
> > share them with us and with the NHTSA.
> > Read the NHTSA report entitled: _A Preliminary Assessment of the Crash-
> > Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs)_
> > at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/DRL7_RPT.pdf.
> > Look at the conclusions on page 24 where it states: "Using the FARS
> > data the combined odds ratio technique shows an increase of in fatal
> > crashes of 8 percent for vehicles equipped with DRLs, the combined
> > simple odds results show a decrease in fatal crashes of 2 percent.
> > Neither result is statistically significant."
> > The points in disabling DRLs can be found at:
> > http://www.geocities.com/scharf_steven/drl.htm
> > Steve
We use them here in Norway, as mandated by law. I don’t think many, if any,
of us would want
to drive without them. They definitely raise awareness of near traffic
under conditions of decreased visibility.
As implemented here, they do not cause any significant glare problems.
I am totally positive on them.
If one was to run with his lights on all day as many do here, DRL’s will
be of no use.
MDT Tech®
Toyota Master Diagnostic Technician and
a conservative flag waving patriotic American, long
before it became fashionable on 9/11
===================================================
This morning freedom was attacked by a faceless coward,
and freedom will be defended–President GWB
We will bring those responsible to justice, or justice to those
responsible, but justice will be served–President GWB
We will not tire, we will not falter, we will not fail–President GWB
We hear you, America hears you and those who knocked down these
buildings will hear us all–President GWB
Larry Smith wrote:
> We use them here in Norway, as mandated by law. I don’t think many, if any,
> of us would want
> to drive without them. They definitely raise awareness of near traffic
> under conditions of decreased visibility.
> As implemented here, they do not cause any significant glare problems.
> I am totally positive on them.
DRLs are mandated by law in Canada as well. I’ve never heard of anyone
having to shut them off to enter a military base (one of the reasons
previously cited) or for any other reason except on emergency vehicles
such as police cars. They certainly make vehicles more visible on long
stretches of highway, although if I’m planning to be on the highway for
a long time, I turn my headlights on rather than relying on my DRLs
alone.
Glare from DRLs during the day doesn’t seem to be a problem here,
either.
Before DRLs, I drove with my headlights on almost all the time.
Susan
’00 Tacoma Xtra cab
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:17:01 -0400 (EDT), "subc"
<subc-no-s…@cotse.com> wrote:
>Chris McMartin wrote:
>> Every few months this discussion begins again…many people have valid
>> reasons for the need to disable their DRLs. You can look at it as
>> ENABLING your headlight switch!
>OK, I agree that people should be able to ‘tweak’, to a degree, their
>vehicles. I am curious though, what would be considered a VALID reason
>to disable the DRL. I have DRL and they don’t bother me a bit. Some of
>the lights on other cars I meet do, but I can’t really tell if my lights
>are on or off except by the indicator light.
>subc
It was a stupid design to put DRL’s on cars without any easy way to
override them, either momentarily (with a ‘blink’ switch), temporarily
or permanently.
If I have a dodgy – or totally dead – alternator, I want the option
to turn off all un-necessary loads – including the headlights – so I
can *drive* to a repair shop on what’s left in the battery and not get
towed in. And if I’m off-roading by myself when the "power crisis"
hits (admittedly not the best idea in the first place), you do NOT
want to know what they charge for off-road wrecker recoveries…
–<< Bruce >>–
—
Bruce L. Bergman blCHURRObergman@ NOearthSPAMlink.netEVER Remove the caps.
Troubleshooter – Electrician, Phones, HVAC, Plumbing,…
‘Current’ly with Westend Electric (#726700) Agoura, CA 818/889-9545
WARNING: No Unsolicited Commercial E-mail is EVER accepted.
subc wrote in message …
>Chris McMartin wrote:
>> Every few months this discussion begins again…many people have valid
>> reasons for the need to disable their DRLs. You can look at it as
>> ENABLING your headlight switch!
>OK, I agree that people should be able to ‘tweak’, to a degree, their
>vehicles. I am curious though, what would be considered a VALID reason
>to disable the DRL. I have DRL and they don’t bother me a bit. Some of
>the lights on other cars I meet do, but I can’t really tell if my lights
>are on or off except by the indicator light.
>subc
Well one reason is or was military bases. I have a large Air Force base near
me. When DRLs first came out we had a lot of people wanting to disable them
as it was required to turn off your headlights when going through the
security checkpoints going onto the base. We don’t have very many people
asking about DRLs anymore so that may have changed. I remember one time when
I was small my father who worked on base had a guard point his gun at him
one time. Apparently my dad wasn’t thinking and left the headlights on. The
guard had yelled at my dad from a distance to turn them off but my dads
hearing never has been that good, so he didn’t understand what the guard
said. So the guard (whom I think was new) pulled his gun out.
Chris
The best way to disable the damn things is to turn on the HEADLAMPS and
REALLY be seen, front and back.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Michel Guay wrote:
> What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics show
> that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
> it.
I don’t understand, if DRL’s are so much of a benefit, why are these
people still HAVING accident? LOL
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
"Daniel R. Gates" wrote:
> Having read the entire report, my earlier comments stand.
> Statistically significant reductions were found in 2-vehicle non-fatal
> crashes and in car v. pedestrian (dead ped) crashes. Seems important
> to me. But again if you feel that anything you walk away from as a
> driver is insignificant, then it you are correct. DRLs wont help you,
> statistically.
> "Daniel R. Gates" wrote:
> > It does not do you much good to advance a source that you have not
> > completely
> > checked yourself.
> > Read the executive summary!!!
> > No reduction in non-fatal crashes (read if you are going fast enough
> > to kill
> > yourself, DRLs wont help)
> > Statistically significant reduction in non-fatal two-vehicle crashes
> > (7%
> > reduction)
> > Statistically significant reduction in fatal pedestrian-vehicle
> > crashes (28%
> > reduction)
> > Pretty significant if you are walking across the street, don’t you
> > think.
> > Now, if you are only concerned about yourself as a potentially dead
> > driver of a
> > car in a head-on collision, you are correct. If you are a
> > responsible citizen
> > and concerned with others on the road, either on foot or in a car,
> > then DRLs are
> > significant, aren’t they????!!!!
> > Dan Gates
> > ps I’ll read the rest of the report and retract if I need to — so
> > don’t flame
> > me yet.
> > sch…@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > In article <9r6n75$cb…@malakbel.unb.ca>, Michel Guay says…
> > > >What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights?
> > Statistics show
> > > >that these lights can save your life and the life of others.
> > Think about
> > > >it.
> > > There are no statistics that show this. If you have some, then
> > please
> > > share them with us and with the NHTSA.
> > > Read the NHTSA report entitled: _A Preliminary Assessment of the
> > Crash-
> > > Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps
> > (DRLs)_
> > > at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/DRL7_RPT.pdf.
> > > Look at the conclusions on page 24 where it states: “Using the
> > FARS
> > > data the combined odds ratio technique shows an increase of in
> > fatal
> > > crashes of 8 percent for vehicles equipped with DRLs, the combined
> > > simple odds results show a decrease in fatal crashes of 2 percent.
> > > Neither result is statistically significant.”
> > > The points in disabling DRLs can be found at:
> > > http://www.geocities.com/scharf_steven/drl.htm
> > > Steve
People have their own reason. Besides, you should be able to disable them
since it’s not a law in the U.S to have them. Or better yet, you should be
able to get your car without them. GM lets you do that on their cars and
trucks. Toyota should too.
–
A.J
"Michel Guay" <gu…@umoncton.ca> wrote in message
news:9r6n75$cb5$1@malakbel.unb.ca…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> What is the point of disabling the daytime running lights? Statistics
show
> that these lights can save your life and the life of others. Think about
> it.
> Josh Bertram <joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message :
> b1e7c5a6.0110231114.5203f…@posting.google.com…
> > I’m interested in disabling my daytime running lights on my 2002
> > Corolla. On alt.autos.toyota.trucks (and other places in usenet and
> > on the web) I found the following bulletin:
> > http://www.tacomaterritory.com/~faqsection/content/dsabldrl.htm
> > I’ve found the DRL control unit behind my glove box and the relay
> > under the hood near the front right corner of the car. I’m trying to
> > match the directions given in the Technical Service Bulletin to what
> > I’m actually seeing on the relay and the ECU.
> > The first point of confusion is deciphering the chart given in the
> > first page of the bulletin. According to the chart (and assuming the
> > process is the same for ’02 corollas as it was for ’00 corollas), I
> > should be looking at the "DRL main relay", which I believe is the one
> > I mentioned above. I’m not sure what a D3 connector is and there
> > certainly aren’t 23 pins on the relay–there’re only about 6 or 7, as
> > I’d expect from a relay. I’m also not sure what the EWD PG# column is
> > for.. I’m assuming it is a reference to another manual.
> > I tried to remove the relay from the plastic molding it is attached to
> > but couldn’t get it out. I also tried to pull the wires out of the
> > relay, but they must somehow be either locked in or soldered to the
> > relay because they wouldn’t budge.
> > The second point I’m having problems with is the instructions versus
> > picture. I’m assuming that the picture really has nothing to do with
> > the relay and is instead supposed to represent the ECU. From the
> > picture, I originally assumed that there were two connectors into the
> > ECU, one of which I’d simply have to pull out and insulate. That was
> > obviously wrong after I got a look at the ECU, so I’m not really sure
> > what to do at this point.
> > If any of you out there have done this or can provide any insight, I’d
> > appreciate the advice.
> > Thanks much,
> > Josh Bertram.
> > joshua_r_bert…@yahoo.com
But you shouldn’t have to special-order the car just to get rid of the Damn
Running Lights. GM makes you order option T62 to delete the DRLs. Why
can’t they just put a switch in like Volvo does so that the driver can
defeat/activate the DRLs at will? I have never seen anyone complain about
Volvo’s DRLs, and I suspect this is partly why.
"A.J" <snowman1…@home.com> wrote in message
news:OmMB7.93248$My2.50652193@news1.mntp1.il.home.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> People have their own reason. Besides, you should be able to disable them
> since it’s not a law in the U.S to have them. Or better yet, you should be
> able to get your car without them. GM lets you do that on their cars and
> trucks. Toyota should too.
"Daniel R. Gates" <dga…@kellerengineering.com> wrote in message <news:3BD5BCB0.F80802D2@kellerengineering.com>…
> No reduction in non-fatal crashes (read if you are going fast enough to kill
> yourself, DRLs wont help)
Uninformed people keep claiming that DRLs reduce deaths from crashes.
As you see, this study shows that this is untrue.
> Statistically significant reduction in non-fatal two-vehicle crashes (7%
> reduction)
Six out of 16 of the results showed a statistically significant reduction,
the other ten did show a statistically significant reduction.
> Statistically significant reduction in fatal pedestrian-vehicle crashes (28%
> reduction)
> Pretty significant if you are walking across the street, don’t you think.
Very significant. DRLs reduce pedestrian fatalities. They don’t reduce
fatalities of drivers involved in multiple vehicle accidents. This
result startled even the people doing the survey.
> Now, if you are only concerned about yourself as a potentially dead driver of a
> car in a head-on collision, you are correct. If you are a responsible citizen
> and concerned with others on the road, either on foot or in a car,
The pedestrian issue is a side-issue. If you really want to reduce
pedestrian fatalities it would be quite simple. First, enforce the
laws on crosswalks, both for vehicles and pedestrians. I.e., my
daughter is terrified to walk to school because we have to cross a
minor arterial road where crosswalk enforcement is non-existent.
Second, stop the insane practice of putting crosswalks at
intersections (unless you have traffic lights that are red in all
directions with no right on red when there is a walk signal).
I’d like to know how many of the pedestrian fatalities were
the result of a pedestrian walking against the traffic signal,
as this is the most common cause of pedestrian deaths in urban
areas. But I can definitely see how a speeding car with DRLs would
be more likely to be seen by a pedestrian than a car without
DRLs.
Third, Stop teaching kids (and adults) that the safest place to
cross a street is at an intersection, it’s usually the least
safest place as you have traffic coming from four directions
instead of two.
The issue I have with DRLs is that they are poorly implemented on
Toyotas and GM vehicles, as well as on most other vehicles sold in
the U.S. with DRLs. This isn’t even debatable, the NHTSA has said
as much.
DRLs need to be temporarily disableable, they need to be reduced in
brightness, and a system needs to be implemented to prevent the all
too common problem of people failing to turn on their headlights
because they think they are already on. All of these things are
not hard to do, but there is no incentive for automakers to do
them. If these things were done you’d only see the really far-right
people being opposed to them.
"Chris" <ku…@erinet.com> wrote in message
news:3bd77efc$0$35613$4c5ecdc7@news.erinet.com…
> Well one reason is or was military bases. I have a large Air Force base
near
> me.
Yes. You are still required to turn off your headlights when entering a
military installation. If the gate guard is blinding because of your bright
lights, he can’t see who’s in the vehicle, or any weapons they might be
carrying.
I’ve also heard astronomy clubs need to have their lights off (parking
lights only) when approaching a group of fellow observers so as not to ruin
their night vision.
My seatbelt allows me to unbuckle it when I need to–why can’t I turn off my
lights when I need to? (Actually, I can–I put in a disable function).
Chris
—
http://www.mcmartinville.com
Last Update 28 April 2001
"Bob M." <n…@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:EUMB7.2360$Xy2.129842@nntp1.onemain.com…
> But you shouldn’t have to special-order the car just to get rid of the
Damn
> Running Lights. GM makes you order option T62 to delete the DRLs. Why
> can’t they just put a switch in like Volvo does so that the driver can
> defeat/activate the DRLs at will? I have never seen anyone complain about
> Volvo’s DRLs, and I suspect this is partly why.
or simply remove a fuse, like in Saabs. Now, a more pressing concern is the
dang "upshift" lights. They suck.
In alt.autos.toyota.trucks Bob <withh…@nospam.com> wrote:
: "Bob M." <n…@nospam.com> wrote in message
: news:EUMB7.2360$Xy2.129842@nntp1.onemain.com…
:> But you shouldn’t have to special-order the car just to get rid of the
: Damn
:> Running Lights. GM makes you order option T62 to delete the DRLs. Why
:> can’t they just put a switch in like Volvo does so that the driver can
:> defeat/activate the DRLs at will? I have never seen anyone complain about
:> Volvo’s DRLs, and I suspect this is partly why.
I have the DRL’s on my 2000 4Runner SR5. At first it was a little
different, but I quickly became used to them. My personal issue
with them is they don’t shut off when you put the vehicle in Park.
I find myself picking up my daughter’s at various event’s and feel
bad for the person parked in front of me. In the summer I can just
shut off the vehicle, in the winter it’s just plain sorry.
On another note, considering all the idiots that feel it’s cool
to _not_ turn on any lights until it’s dark. I think they should
be mandated. Let’s keep in mind that such law’s end up on the
books because of the few, not the many. For instance, Speed
Limits, which target the few who can’t go faster safely, not the
many who can…
I briefly drove Class 1 vehicles when I was younger (Tractor-
Trailer). I’ll never forget the day I took the written exam.
There were nine people in the room. I was the only person taking
the class 1 exam, the other 8 people were taking the learners
permit exam. 6 out of the 8 failed the super simple 10 question
multiple choice exam. And to top it all off, an old man 70+ years
old who just renewed his license backed into my car in the DMV
parking lot because he can’t turn his head to look behind his car.
In Massachusetts they only check eyesight, which would be fine if
cars only went forward.
In the last few years, we have had several instances where elderly
drivers accidently hit the gas rather than the brakes and twice
drove into stores and once into a crowd of people waiting for a
bus. These are considered accidents??? If they were younger they
would have been charged and checked for alcohol or drug use.
So, all in all, I think that DRL’s couldn’t possibly be bad.
My 2 cents….
–
Joel R Wright
j…@world.std.com
Douglas, Massachusetts
Gee Mike, if you can come up with a device that will stop all accidents,
please, put it forward.
As an engineer, I would suggest that the reason that there is a reduction in
pedestrian/car and non-fatal, non-head on car accidents are reduced and
head-on fatal are not significantly reduced is closing speed. Two cars in
opposite directions at 60 mph are closing at 120 mph. A pedestrian walking
towards a car at say 3 mph and a car at 60 mph are closing at 63 mph.
Similarly a car waiting to pull out from a corner is only closing on the
moving car at 60 mph. The two cars approaching each other have only 1/2 of
the time to make a decision as the other two cases. Therefore, the
increased visibility of DRL’s is not likely significant in this type of
case.
With regard to motorcyclist, I don’t ride any more, but when I did, I wanted
other drivers to see me as a car. Therefore, they wouldn’t pull out in
front of me, or sideswipe me. DRLs may make bikes blend in with the cars,
but I don’t see that as a problem. I want the other drivers to recognize
that a vehicle is approaching, to me it doesn’t matter that it is a bike, a
car, or a Freightliner. (actually, if I could make them think it was a
Freightliner, I would be much happier ;<)> then for sure they wouldn’t pull
out!)
I understand someone’s need to temporarily disable DRLs, and maybe there
should be a push button that disables them until the next engine start.
Toyota doesn’t seem to have a good handle on this anyway. Most that I know
of do not function until parking/emergency brake is released, then shut off
when it is re-engaged. Toyota’s turn on when the parking brake is released
but do not turn off until the engine is turned off. This would solve the
Military Base problem people have been mentioning. You do apply the parking
brake whenever you stop to talk to someone, don’t you???
Horse is dead, I’ll stop beating.
Dan Gates
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
MikeHu…@mailcity.com wrote:
> I don’t understand, if DRL’s are so much of a benefit, why are these
> people still HAVING accident? LOL
> "Daniel R. Gates" wrote:
> > Having read the entire report, my earlier comments stand.
> > Statistically significant reductions were found in 2-vehicle non-fatal
> > crashes and in car v. pedestrian (dead ped) crashes. Seems important
> > to me. But again if you feel that anything you walk away from as a
> > driver is insignificant, then it you are correct. DRLs wont help you,
> > statistically.
> > "Daniel R. Gates" wrote:
In article <4f153f94.0110242107.21231…@posting.google.com>,
Steven Scharf <sch…@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Third, Stop teaching kids (and adults) that the safest place to
>cross a street is at an intersection, it’s usually the least
>safest place as you have traffic coming from four directions
>instead of two.
In theory, an intersection is the safest place to cross the street, as
drivers are either stopped, or moving slowly while checking for pedestrians.
Of course, this assumes that you are crossing with the lights. Away from
intersections, drivers are not expecting to stop, nor are they expecting
pedestrians to walk out in front of them. There are exceptions, but drivers
are given warnings like "School zone" and "Watch for children", and the
posted speed limit is lower. It is a Good Thing (Tm) for pedestrians to
cross where drivers expect they might have to stop, anyways. It is clearly
unsafe for a pedestrian to attemp to cross the street at a location where
drivers will be surprised.
It also requires work from both sides. I was taught that it is safest to
cross the streets at intersections, as a child, and I was also taught as
a driver to be on the lookout for pedestrians at intersections (failure to
yield to a pedestrian intending to cross was grounds for a summary
failure on the roadtest [but not as bad as passing a flashing schoolbus]).
In article <0lGB7.1003$Xc.102…@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
newsgro…@mountainboomer.com says…
>Every few months this discussion begins again…many people have valid
>reasons for the need to disable their DRLs. You can look at it as ENABLING
>your headlight switch!
Good way to see it. I want to be the one to decide when lights are necessary
and be able to turn them off when I see the need. DRL’s are a pretty stupid
idea that is being foisted upon us. I know I refuse to buy any car that comes
with DRL.
—————–
Alex __O
_-\<,_
(_)/ (_)
Alex
You can decide when it is hard for me to see your car? Interesting!
Dan Gates
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Alex Rodriguez wrote:
> In article <0lGB7.1003$Xc.102…@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> newsgro…@mountainboomer.com says…
> >Every few months this discussion begins again…many people have valid
> >reasons for the need to disable their DRLs. You can look at it as ENABLING
> >your headlight switch!
> Good way to see it. I want to be the one to decide when lights are necessary
> and be able to turn them off when I see the need. DRL’s are a pretty stupid
> idea that is being foisted upon us. I know I refuse to buy any car that comes
> with DRL.
> —————–
> Alex __O
> _-\<,_
> (_)/ (_)