Advocacy & Safety - Daytime running lights on cars

This article (http://slate.msn.com/id/2090493/) appeared on Slate at MSN. It discusses a GM study that attempted to measure the effect of daytime running lights on accident rates for GM vehicles. It claims that DRLs prevented 37,000 accidents.

From a cyclist's standpoint, I think they should be required on all vehicles. I find that overtaking cars with DRLs are much easier to spot, especially when relying on a rear-view mirror. They are especially welcome in low-visibility conditions when not all drivers turn on their headlights. My 1996 Saturn has daytime running lights and for the first few years that I owned it, I could spot a Saturn quite easily at a distance because of this feature.

Interestingly, there is an organization opposing the adoption of these as mandatory equipment on new cars. Obviously, it is an evil plot to sell more light bulbs.

From a cyclist's standpoint, I think they should be required on all vehicles.

We've had them up here since around 1990 - They're not all positives. While they do make cars more visible, they also can de-sensitize drivers to overlook anything (like bicycles) that isn't glaring back at them. The "quick look" before a turn or lane change could come to depend on looking for daytime running lights, not a look to see what is actually there.
Also I've noticed too many people rely on the daytime running lights in darkness or in low visibility situations like heavy fog/snow. No Taillights, just daytime running lights. I think these are the same people who drove with no lights on in these situations before.

While they do make cars more visible, they also can de-sensitize drivers to overlook anything (like bicycles) that isn't glaring back at them.

Parts of NSW are trialing this right now. I drove through one of them recently, and while the merits of doing it are debateable, it's certainly not a huge burden, I'm not sure anyone's got so much to lose from being forced to run lights in daytime that they need to agrue it too strongly.

The solution to pinerider's problem above is simple. Run 'DRL's as well. My flashers are visible in daylight - I've conincidentally just started using them in daylight to see if it makes a difference. The results are inconclusive at present, simply due to the fact that the difference, if there is any, is too subtle to detect.

If everyone starts using them, and they are the norm, then I expect the difference would be more marked - if I don't run them I am not acting within the norm, and that always causes trouble.

I got to question their methodology. I am always suspect of any study funded by anyone seeking to validate a point, idea or inovation. No mention of any other type of traffic interaction other than cage vs. cage.

On the other hand, DRLs are required in Canada, and my own car has them, plus my employer requires them.

Pinerider makes a good point about desensitization.

Motorcyclists I have spoken to don't like it. Daytime lights on motorbikes get attention, they don't want to get lost in the noise.

I've been driving my car for a decade with my lights on since my return from Europe in the 1980's. It has manual DRL. People simply see you more frequently. That is good. I buy more bulbs, that is bad. It is a Volvo with a bad electrical system so I keep a bag of spare bulbs handy.

I've seen the odd car running lights during the day from time to time around here (probably people who simply forgot to turn them off from last time). I don't think it really makes a huge amount of difference to their visibility -- even blind Freddy can pick up most things in the Queensland sun.

Personally I think there are much more important aspects of safety to which police resources should be devoted (I notice around here that nobody seems to have got the messages about speeding, driving drunk etc etc). I don't think it's something that will make any real difference.

I think daytime running lights are a good idea, and though I'm not sure I'd simply accept that they have prevented 37,000 accidents, I bet they have prevented a good number. I rank them as effective as the center brake light cars in the US have had for the past, what, 20 years now.

I have 'em and use them on my tiny MR2 Spyder, I can disable them but I figured the car is small so I need all these house on wheels types to see me.

Jay

I'm afraid I find DRLs annoying and can see cars just fine without them on and I really by into the desensitize part. So I vote no. But then no one asked me to vote did they.

Joe

Its a requirement in Canada to have DRLs. I find cars with DRLs much more easy to spot in my bicycle rearview mirror (you can spot em a long way back).

This is the first I have heard about desensitization. Possible. But I have not experienced, or seen rather, any increase in bike/car collisions since they have been introduced.

Actuallly, here in NS the accident rate has declined since 1990 (149) to 88 in 2002. That is 88 vehicle accidents per year whether they hit a tree, pedestrian, another car, cyclist, rolled over, etc.

I like DRLs and find them a great advantage.

Digger

Since my 2001 VW Passat wagon came with DRLs, I was extremely surprised that my 2003 Dodge Stratus sedan did not. I share the mixed feelings which have been expressed in this thread, although I think DRLs are great on 2-lane undivided highways, many of which have long had signs alerting motorists to turn on their headlights, irrespective of time of day.

I vote NO. In heavy daylight traffic, a bike gets lost in the visual noise. On a quiet road, drivers will be looking for what they expect: a set of headlamps.
I dont have any problem seeing cars in normal daylight, but I find that motorcycle headlamps make fast moving 2-wheelers far more visible.

I used to ride in a town which had a brightly light seafront road that was wide and straight, but it was the most dangerous road I ave ever ridden on. I think its because there was just too much signage, road markings, lighting and shop-front detail. Drivers seemed incapable of seeing what was right in front of them.

I like the way Toyota has done it. They have a photosensitive diode that acts as a sensor to detect daylight conditions outside, and turns on all the lights if the light level falls below a specified limit.

Like pinerider said, I see a lot of people relying on DRLs at nighttime because they can see fine but forget to turn on their taillights. I haven't had any incidents with such cars yet (knock on wood) but I wouldn't doubt that rear-ending someone with no taillights is a likely possibility.