PDA

View Full Version : Daytime Running Lights



Hacienda
04-06-2009, 12:02 AM
My Mk 6 has obviously come with the daytime running lights, i have the lights set to auto also.

Has anyone managed to turn off the daytime lights on thiir own or is ia dealer fix? I have tried to follow the instructions in the manual but they are still on.

Ideally i want to keep the lights set to auto but not have them on in the daytime. People keep telling me i have left them on and i am concerned that im going to get through bulbs at a much higher rate than normal.

Thanks

machine
04-06-2009, 12:59 AM
I think having them is a legal requirement on all new cars now.

Having faulty lights could cause you grief should you ever have an accident or cross the police in some way.

nwhiteley
04-06-2009, 01:15 AM
I think having them is a legal requirement on all new cars now.

Having faulty lights could cause you grief should you ever have an accident or cross the police in some way.


I dont think that it is a legal requirement to have DRL's in this country just yet, but it does seem that the MK6 Golf has them as standard.

I'm 99% sure that you can turn them off with VAGCOM or similar, but some people that have done it have reported that it has also affected other systens aswell, so be careful what you change.

Neil.

WeegieBob
04-06-2009, 06:15 AM
If you read the owners manual (and if memory serves me correctly an earlier thread in this forum on the same subject) there is a section that tells you how to turn them off.

As far as burning out bulbs - speaking from an emergency service background - which do you prefer ..... not replacing a bulb now and again to save a few pounds by switching the facility off or the increased likelyhood of being involved in a daylight accident? For me its a no-brainer.

WeegieBob. ;)

VictorPapa
04-06-2009, 07:31 AM
As far as burning out bulbs - speaking from an emergency service background - which do you prefer ..... not replacing a bulb now and again to save a few pounds by switching the facility off or the increased likelyhood of being involved in a daylight accident? For me its a no-brainer.

WeegieBob. ;)

Quite right mate. Anything (within reason) that makes me more visible on todays roads, where the general standard of driving and awareness has deteriorated, has got to be a good thing.

I've been looking for a whiter bulb to replace the yellowy ones that came as standard but the accessory shops only seem to do ones with main beam or sidelight wattages.

james_tiger_woo
04-06-2009, 07:49 AM
I think we did this here - http://www.vwaudiforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=68265


To disable, DRLs ensure the keys are in the ignition but switched off. Then push the indicator stick as far down and as far towards you as you can, hold this position, then switch on engine for 3 seconds and then switch off.
That's it no more annoying lights on during the day.
You can reactivate them if required via the same method but with the indicator stick up instead of down.

maisbitt
04-06-2009, 08:31 AM
James Tiger woo:-

I think that method of turning them off only works if you have Xenons. With Xenons come separate DRLs (like the higher up Audis), that can be turned off with the method stated in the manual.

For those without Xenons, their "DRLs" are just the dipped beam permanently on (unless you switch your lights over to sidelights only, from auto), and you need Vagcom to switch off the DRL function in that case.

The Scirocco manual is the same as the Golf in this case. The manual says you cant switch them off yourself, then talks about Xenons and gives the method for switching off.

I don't have Xenons, and the indicator stalk method definitely does not work for me.

I only tried to switch off to see if it could be done.

james_tiger_woo
04-06-2009, 08:35 AM
Ah - I stand corrected - I've not tried it myself to be honest

Apologies - JTW

JoseSpring
04-06-2009, 08:37 AM
I think that method of turning them off only works if you have Xenons. With Xenons come separate DRLs (like the higher up Audis), that can be turned off with the method stated in the manual.


Happy to be proven wrong, but that previous post that James pointed to was from before Xenons were available on the Mk6, and therefore refers to "normal" lights.

But, back to why you'd really want to turn off a safety feature...

maisbitt
04-06-2009, 08:43 AM
The way the manual is written does not always make certain things clear. At times the manual appears to conradict itself within a few paragraphs, until you realise that the contradiction applies only to some rare piece of optional equipment. There are a few cases like this in the manual.

maisbitt
04-06-2009, 08:46 AM
Some people have got their DRLs switched off because they've been cut up by someone who thought they'd been flashed in.

DRLs must surely lose some of their safety impact when everyone has them in 2011?

dowgi
05-08-2009, 09:08 PM
To turn off daylight running lights, the lights switch position must be set to off, then follow instructions in manual.

BTW, my auto headlights come on in sunlight on main beam (intermittently) - not sure if since i de-activated auto running lights or not; dealer states equipment not faulty.

Can anyone else shed any light on main beam coming on when auto lights switched on in sunlight/daylight?

mad evo
11-08-2009, 12:32 AM
not sure but mine do this too, on auto they just stay on main beam even in direct sunlight, deffies the purpose of auto lights, theres deff something wrong as iv had auto lights before and they never stayed on all the time like these day

any advice?

Nightowl4933
11-08-2009, 01:12 PM
Hmm. I noticed my headlights came on this morning and didn't switch to DRL's in bright sunshine. This hadn't happened before today and I definitely haven't been fiddling with the MFD settings.

Before I make an *** of myself and moan to the dealer, is there a sensitivity setting somewhere?

Funnily enough, I saw an 09 Golf without its DRL's on this morning.

Pete

Nightowl4933
11-08-2009, 01:13 PM
Ooh! It didn't like the word ***, as in donkey!

dowgi
11-08-2009, 04:24 PM
According to the manual, the dipped headlights should come on at motorway speeds, however mine have also come on full beam from start up - no sign of any sensitivity setting, will be speaking to the dealer tomorrow.

keithwigley
11-08-2009, 04:31 PM
Not sure that you can get the DRLs to non-Nordic setting other than by dealer re-set?

SC03OTT
11-08-2009, 04:58 PM
According to the manual, the dipped headlights should come on at motorway speeds, however mine have also come on full beam from start up - no sign of any sensitivity setting, will be speaking to the dealer tomorrow.

Just FYI, I have a Jetta and the past few mornings my lights have been coming on as well (about 6.30), so I don't think it's a problem.

dowgi
11-08-2009, 10:31 PM
For some reason, the manual states that :
1. You can adjust the drl by yourself - and this works if you follow advice and the switch is set to 0
2. Go to dealer for switch off.
I have de-activated my lights successfully, today i drove over the kph limit mentioned in the manual and the main beam activated - not the dipped lights as mentioned in the manual, and they dis-engaged a few minutes later as per the manual. It will be difficult to prove to the dealer that the main beam comes on upon start up, although this is sometimes the case.

Can anyone define a certain set of circumstances when the Auto lights fire up un-necessarily?

vwcabriolet1971
03-01-2010, 12:45 AM
Have turned mine off - I will decide if I need lights on not VW !
and will keep it this way until someone comes up with with a 8 year life bulb. I'm often amazed that motorists accept new car designs that require bumpers to be removed or 2 inch span hands to remove a tungsten element bulb with its limited life span. There must be lots of unused bulbs in the mandatory foreign travel lamp kits safely tucked away in many glove boxes ! ( European common market ruling !!!!!???)
Instructions in 1.6TDI manual perfectly O.K.
If you do keep DRLs on only use 'LL' coded /marked bulbs ( Long Life-- how Long ?).

percymon
04-01-2010, 12:49 AM
Drls increase your visibility to other road users and pedestrians. I can't believe you are worried about the cost of a bulb versus the safety benefits. Volvo ans Saab used then for 20 years before others caught on, and people always spotted those!

manager
04-01-2010, 12:50 AM
Originally Posted by smithysmudger
To disable, DRLs ensure the keys are in the ignition but switched off. Then push the indicator stick as far down and as far towards you as you can, hold this position, then switch on engine for 3 seconds and then switch off.
That's it no more annoying lights on during the day.
You can reactivate them if required via the same method but with the indicator stick up instead of down.


This is what i've actually done and it works every time!! Great info!! Thanks. :D

All i want to actually add to the instructions above is that when you turn the engine on, you actually get a beep to confirm if it has either switched on or off.

vwcabriolet1971
04-01-2010, 07:29 PM
Ever since driving in the winter in Sweden in the early 70s I have been convinced about the benefits of DRLs . The swedes first introduced DRLs to reduce deaths & accidents due to poor vehicle visibilty in early morning & late afternoon in bright low level sunlight ( they are further north so the get much long periods of bright low level sunlight) . The introduction of DRLs did show significant reduction in road deaths and accident levels. In those days it was quite easy to change a headlight bulb . However since then most car manufactures have so far been unable/unwilling to make the ease of bulb replacement a high priority so that many Golf owners now have to remove batteries , diesel fuel filters etc just to replace a simple bulb. Indeed many owners take their car to the dealer for this operation ( £50 !! ?? ). I had to make a special bulb holding tool to replace a front side light bulb in my wife's 04 Polo. This was after taking the battery and various bits of trim out ! Even worse is replacing Polo high level rear brake lights - all the tailgate trim has to come out with its many clips ( about 30 and lining them up with their slots on re-assembly is nigh on impossible ! ).
It's unfortunate that may car drivers don't seem to know when to put on their lights ( not just when its dark ) and thus the EEC have decided to introduce DRLs.

percymon
04-01-2010, 11:19 PM
Ever since driving in the winter in Sweden in the early 70s I have been convinced about the benefits of DRLs . The swedes first introduced DRLs to reduce deaths & accidents due to poor vehicle visibilty in early morning & late afternoon in bright low level sunlight ( they are further north so the get much long periods of bright low level sunlight) . The introduction of DRLs did show significant reduction in road deaths and accident levels. In those days it was quite easy to change a headlight bulb . However since then most car manufactures have so far been unable/unwilling to make the ease of bulb replacement a high priority so that many Golf owners now have to remove batteries , diesel fuel filters etc just to replace a simple bulb. Indeed many owners take their car to the dealer for this operation ( £50 !! ?? ). I had to make a special bulb holding tool to replace a front side light bulb in my wife's 04 Polo. This was after taking the battery and various bits of trim out ! Even worse is replacing Polo high level rear brake lights - all the tailgate trim has to come out with its many clips ( about 30 and lining them up with their slots on re-assembly is nigh on impossible ! ).
It's unfortunate that may car drivers don't seem to know when to put on their lights ( not just when its dark ) and thus the EEC have decided to introduce DRLs.

your experienceus different to mine then! The only bulbs ivefitted to any of my cars in 25 years drivinghave been updated headlight bulbs to threecars which were all easy enough and two hid kits to a couple of cars which were also easy access. Oh I forgot the one number plate light that was out on my mkiii when I bought it. I reckon most of the bulbs in that were original when I scrapped it !

DaveB666
05-01-2010, 10:15 AM
Have turned mine off - I will decide if I need lights on not VW !
and will keep it this way until someone comes up with with a 8 year life bulb. I'm often amazed that motorists accept new car designs that require bumpers to be removed or 2 inch span hands to remove a tungsten element bulb with its limited life span. There must be lots of unused bulbs in the mandatory foreign travel lamp kits safely tucked away in many glove boxes ! ( European common market ruling !!!!!???)
Instructions in 1.6TDI manual perfectly O.K.
If you do keep DRLs on only use 'LL' coded /marked bulbs ( Long Life-- how Long ?).

normal replacement bulbs are already available, and are £13.50.

http://www.leadinglamps.co.uk/h15-12v-55-15w-replacement-bulb-pr-16229.html

Hardly going to break the bank.

HHGTTG
05-01-2010, 05:20 PM
normal replacement bulbs are already available, and are £13.50.

http://www.leadinglamps.co.uk/h15-12v-55-15w-replacement-bulb-pr-16229.html

Hardly going to break the bank.
No it is not going to break the bank but that's not the point; it is the inconvenience and hand damage that is far more a consideration, isn't it.

DaveB666
06-01-2010, 10:18 AM
No it is not going to break the bank but that's not the point; it is the inconvenience and hand damage that is far more a consideration, isn't it.

Take it to Halfords then and get them to fit it for £5.99 if you don't want to get your hands dirty.

Besides, although it's now European legislation that all cars built from now must have DRLs; it's not British Law. So if a bulb goes; just turn them off using the stalk method.

SebbyMK6
06-01-2010, 06:24 PM
I wouldn't trust Halfords to do anything quite frankly!

HHGTTG
07-01-2010, 04:14 PM
I wouldn't trust Halfords to do anything quite frankly!
I know that, when I used to change bulbs, especially the halogen type, I was very careful, as instructed on the package, not to to touch the glass envelope with the fingers, otherwise you'd leave finger 'grease' behind and thus cause eventual darkening of the bulb and a shorter working life etc.
I wonder how careful the grease monkeys are when they fit bulbs for customers?

p3asa
07-01-2010, 06:44 PM
I know folk have complained about changing the golf bulbs but I have found it one of the easiest cars to do.

The fact you can put the bulb into its holder well away from the car is a genius idea. Eliminates the chance of touching the bulb. Putting the holder in and twisting was also extremely easy.

The trickiest part for me was putting those big rubber covers back on, especially the drivers side. However once I had mastered it, I then had to change my bulbs back to the originals and was able to do the 2 sides in less than a minute.

What's the problem? ;) :D

WeegieBob
31-01-2010, 09:28 AM
This is not directed at any single indivdual here, but more to the thread with a view on DRL's -

I have read how some people don't want the additional cost of replacing a bulb, how some people don't want to hurt themselves changing the bulb(s), how some people find them annoying and how some people want to decide themselves whether they have DRL's switched on, not VW - to these folks may I say - weigh up all of the above, or any selection of them that matches your preference and compare it to the pain and grief encountered when, for the want of a higher visual presence on the road you have someone else drive out in front of you and an accident happens?

Which is worse - some inconvenience and perhaps a few £'s having them on or many of the following due to a vehicle accident, i.e. damage to your car, perhaps an uninsured driver, injury to you and/or your passengers, loss of use of your vehicle, police involvement, recovery costs, lawyers costs, the car never being the same again, etc?

I'm not lecturing you guys, you're all adults, but it begs the question is saving a few £'s and perhaps skinned knuckles really more important than the well-being and safety of your loved ones?

HHGTTG
31-01-2010, 10:04 AM
This is not directed at any single indivdual here, but more to the thread with a view on DRL's -

I have read how some people don't want the additional cost of replacing a bulb, how some people don't want to hurt themselves changing the bulb(s), how some people find them annoying and how some people want to decide themselves whether they have DRL's switched on, not VW - to these folks may I say - weigh up all of the above, or any selection of them that matches your preference and compare it to the pain and grief encountered when, for the want of a higher visual presence on the road you have someone else drive out in front of you and an accident happens?

Which is worse - some inconvenience and perhaps a few £'s having them on or many of the following due to a vehicle accident, i.e. damage to your car, perhaps an uninsured driver, injury to you and/or your passengers, loss of use of your vehicle, police involvement, recovery costs, lawyers costs, the car never being the same again, etc?

I'm not lecturing you guys, you're all adults, but it begs the question is saving a few £'s and perhaps skinned knuckles really more important than the well-being and safety of your loved ones?
You're not seriously saying that because we suddenly find ourselves with DRLs on our cars and some of us don't want them on, that we are exposing ourselves and others, to all sorts of danger on our roads, should we turn them off?

zollaf
31-01-2010, 10:16 AM
i wonder if the same comments were made by drivers when headlights first started to appear on cars, fuelled by acetylene ?:D.

WeegieBob
31-01-2010, 11:31 AM
You're not seriously saying that because we suddenly find ourselves with DRLs on our cars and some of us don't want them on, that we are exposing ourselves and others, to all sorts of danger on our roads, should we turn them off?

Yes, I'm seriously saying if you turn off your DRLs you run a greater risk of not being seen, which in turn increases the risk of a collision.

Not wishing to sound patronising as my comments are well intentioned, not to score points off you, however I've lost count over the years where a new idea is introduced into motoring and because we never had it before it becomes a subject for debate as to "should I or shouldn't I". How often did we hear that when the seat-belt regulations came in "they can't make me wear them and they don't work anyway, I know of cases where they actually caused injury because we have to wear them" - total urban myth. To reinforce the point, as a fire brigade officer of 25 years with a specialised remit for RTA's I saw first hand the dozens of life's seat belts saved, people who would have been far more seriously injured or even killed if they hadn't. Perhaps DRLs now fall into that debate?

You are prefectly at liberty to switch your DRL's off, I'm quite sure you have your reasons for that opinion, but perhaps for some others it might not be as clear cut for them as it is you. ;)

HHGTTG
31-01-2010, 12:06 PM
Yes, I'm seriously saying if you turn off your DRLs you run a greater risk of not being seen, which in turn increases the risk of a collision.

Not wishing to sound patronising as my comments are well intentioned, not to score points off you, however I've lost count over the years where a new idea is introduced into motoring and because we never had it before it becomes a subject for debate as to "should I or shouldn't I". How often did we hear that when the seat-belt regulations came in "they can't make me wear them and they don't work anyway, I know of cases where they actually caused injury because we have to wear them" - total urban myth. To reinforce the point, as a fire brigade officer of 25 years with a specialised remit for RTA's I saw first hand the dozens of life's seat belts saved, people who would have been far more seriously injured or even killed if they hadn't. Perhaps DRLs now fall into that debate?

You are prefectly at liberty to switch your DRL's off, I'm quite sure you have your reasons for that opinion, but perhaps for some others it might not be as clear cut for them as it is you. ;)
Well, ironically, I actually like mine on, as I believe someone said that if you turn them off you also lose the illuminated instrument lighting during daytime, of course.

As regards seatbelts, well, I was around when they were introduced and available as an option and I could not wait to have them installed in my cars which, in the early sixties, were supplied without them.

Keithuk
02-02-2010, 05:43 PM
Ok this is something that annoyed me about my GTD the DRLs. I went back to the dealer last Friday to discuss the mark on the rear panel. While I was there I asked can these driving lamps be disabled? They said yes. I took it back today to have the mark removed and I said can you disable the driving lamps at the same time. I've searched the handbook and the highline but I can't see any option. The handbook says the driving lamps can't be disconnected.

After 20 minutes he came back to me and said that have done the mark and are just disabling the driving lamps for me. Now he didn't explain it in great detail but its a combination of lights on and indicator on, lights to another position and indicators to the other side and lights to another position and indicators switched back. It just a matter of using the right combination on both these switches.

He said driving lamps are going to be law in the UK later this year. OK when it becomes law I will have then switched back on, in there dreams. I have lamps on when I want them on which is normally as its going dark, rain or falling snow. Drivers don't reallise its been law for driving in the rain for a number of years.

If I had wanted a car with perminate driving lamps I would have bought a Volvo as that was one of the first manufactures to do this. I'm sure a lot of manufactures have this option now.

It reminds me of that sketch that Jasper Carrot did many years ago. He wanted another car and the Volvo was a good deal. He complained about the lights being on all the time. He would drive home at night and put the car in the garage. The next morning he woke up and opened the garage door the bl**dy lights were still on. This went on for a long time. When he decided he didn't want to car anymore He drove it to the scrapyard where they put it through the crusher. As it came out the other side the bl**dy were still on. ;)

HHGTTG
02-02-2010, 06:00 PM
Ok this is something that annoyed me about my GTD the DRLs. I went back to the dealer last Friday to discuss the mark on the rear panel. While I was there I asked can these driving lamps be disabled? They said yes. I took it back today to have the mark removed and I said can you disable the driving lamps at the same time. I've searched the handbook and the highline but I can't see any option. The handbook says the driving lamps can't be disconnected.

After 20 minutes he came back to me and said that have done the mark and are just disabling the driving lamps for me. Now he didn't explain it in great detail but its a combination of lights on and indicator on, lights to another position and indicators to the other side and lights to another position and indicators switched back. It just a matter of using the right combination on both these switches.

He said driving lamps are going to be law in the UK later this year. OK when it becomes law I will have then switched back on, in there dreams. I have lamps on when I want them on which is normally as its going dark, rain or falling snow. Drivers don't reallise its been law for driving in the rain for a number of years.

If I had wanted a car with perminate driving lamps I would have bought a Volvo as that was one of the first manufactures to do this. I'm sure a lot of manufactures have this option now.

It reminds me of that sketch that Jasper Carrot did many years ago. He wanted another car and the Volvo was a good deal. He complained about the lights being on all the time. He would drive home at night and put the car in the garage. The next morning he woke up and opened the garage door the bl**dy lights were still on. This went on for a long time. When he decided he didn't want to car anymore He drove it to the scrapyard where they put it through the crusher. As it came out the other side the bl**dy were still on. ;)
I think that you've been told or had the procedure explained to you, so why not try it yourself?
Turn you lights switch from 'Auto' to 'Off' and then pull the left hand indicator stalk fully towards you and fully downwards. Holding the stalk in this position, turn on the ignition to position '1' and leave on for about 3 seconds and then turn off. This is then supposed to have turned off the DRLs.
N.B.
I haven't personally tried this!!

DaveB666
02-02-2010, 08:27 PM
He said driving lamps are going to be law in the UK later this year.

There's no way it will be made law that driving lamps have to be on during the day; it would never work.

However, it is now new EU legislation that all NEW cars from 2010 onwards have to have DRLs FITTED when built.

Keithuk
02-02-2010, 10:22 PM
I think that you've been told or had the procedure explained to you, so why not try it yourself?

No as I said it wasn't explained that clearly he just said its a combination of lights on and indicator on, lights to another position and indicators to the other side and lights to another position and indicators switched back.

If you haven't tried how do you know this procedure?



There's no way it will be made law that driving lamps have to be on during the day; it would never work.
Well thats the EU for you Dave.

Oh while I was there I asked if VW do workshop manuals for the Golf. They said no, new VW's are very complex and they don't want anyone playing about with them on their own. I said I shall have to get the old Golf manual from Halfords. I called in there on my way back home but the newest model they do is only up to 05.

I downloaded Elsawin 3.6 a long time ago but I can't get it to show anything without the sales model, gearbox number, and final drive number. ;)

p3asa
02-02-2010, 10:46 PM
............. I've searched the handbook and the highline but I can't see any option. The handbook says the driving lamps can't be disconnected.


It tells you in the handbook how to disconnect the lights but I think it also tells you, you then can't re enable them but on the next line it tells you how to switch them back on!!

Keithuk
02-02-2010, 10:56 PM
It tells you in the handbook how to disconnect the lights
Well over the weekend I had a read of the handbook and I didn't catch how to do it only it says it can't be disabled. ;)

p3asa
03-02-2010, 08:08 AM
I was looking for something else (condensation on the inside of the headlights) which happened to be on the same page.
Page 65 how to deactivate / activate the Daytime Running Lights.

HHGTTG
03-02-2010, 10:08 AM
Well over the weekend I had a read of the handbook and I didn't catch how to do it only it says it can't be disabled. ;)
Well it sort of tells you it can't and then describes how it is done. It's well documented here and on http://www.uk-mivs.net, anyway

p3asa
03-02-2010, 05:32 PM
Yeah its weird the way the handbook describes it. On one hand it says it can't be done then describes how to do it then says you have to have the dealership reactivate them but then goes on to tell you how to reactivate them!!

Bizarre.

Keithuk
04-02-2010, 02:49 AM
Page 65 how to deactivate / activate the Daytime Running Lights.
Well I don't know what handbook you are reading but my page 65 is talking about the seat mounting and seat belts?

Mine it the Golf GTi and GTD handbook only.

I noticed there is something in there that talks about a compass. If you don't have a particular radio you have to set your location from the map shown, UK - 10. I've never seen that.

You could print the useful things in that handbook on a 10 page booklet. ;)

andyCYM
05-02-2010, 03:32 PM
I think the reference to a compass only applies if you have fitted sat nav, but the handbook it doesn't make that clear.

Got my GTD last week - your first impressions?

Keithuk
05-02-2010, 05:43 PM
I think the reference to a compass only applies if you have fitted sat nav, but the handbook it doesn't make that clear.

Got my GTD last week - your first impressions?

Yes the handbook is a bit sketchy. It says something about the radio with sat nav finds it automatically you just have to set your location in the map of the world UK = 10.

First impressions!

Well the only thing thats comes to mind is the heater controls. You turn the fan on and a few seconds later it comes on. You change the position of the air flow and a few seconds later it changes. There are too many electronic controls on these modern systems that are unecessary. Thats not progress thats just being idol.

There is no vent on top of the door panel so if you want your side windows demisting you have to divert the flow from the dash vents.

Everytime you switch the air recirculation button on it put the air con on, which I switch off. Actually I've never need air con, you don't in the UK, it only uses more fuel to run. Thats another part that as to be checked out and topped up, lucky we have the machine at work.

If you hold your foot on the clutch pedal it pulsates but it appears slightly less than engine speed, I'm presuming this is the dual mass flywheel. I hope its that and not a faulty pressure plate.

Apart from that it appears to be ok at the moment. I've only had it 9 days so time will tell. ;)

HHGTTG
05-02-2010, 10:31 PM
Yes the handbook is a bit sketchy. It says something about the radio with sat nav finds it automatically you just have to set your location in the map of the world UK = 10.

First impressions!

Well the only thing thats comes to mind is the heater controls. You turn the fan on and a few seconds later it comes on. You change the position of the air flow and a few seconds later it changes. There are too many electronic controls on these modern systems that are unecessary. Thats not progress thats just being idol.

There is no vent on top of the door panel so if you want your side windows demisting you have to divert the flow from the dash vents.

Everytime you switch the air recirculation button on it put the air con on, which I switch off. Actually I've never need air con, you don't in the UK, it only uses more fuel to run. Thats another part that as to be checked out and topped up, lucky we have the machine at work.

If you hold your foot on the clutch pedal it pulsates but it appears slightly less than engine speed, I'm presuming this is the dual mass flywheel. I hope its that and not a faulty pressure plate.

Apart from that it appears to be ok at the moment. I've only had it 9 days so time will tell. ;)
Well in some ways I agree what you have to say about those 'electronic' heater controls although it's more to do with their feel and design generally. On my car (once or twice) my problem is whether the aircon is going to actually come on when I press the appropriate button!
Your claim that you, personally, dont' need aircon in this country is a bit nonsensical, as you full well know, we can and do have very unncomfortable humid weather in the summer and if you used it more often, say in the winter months then you would not suffer so much from misted windows on the interior.
Personally, I find driving around in UK's summers much more enjoyable with aircon in use and in fact would not consider driving nowadays without it, notwithstanding as slight penalty in fuel consumption.
If you can remain cool, calm and collected you're a better safer driver IMHO.
I would have thought that having a diesel, with already superior fuel consumption compared with my petrol TSI, then you would not begrudge a slightly higher fuel consumption from the use of your Aircon.

Keithuk
10-05-2010, 07:34 PM
I think the reference to a compass only applies if you have fitted sat nav, but the handbook it doesn't make that clear.

I was talking about this compass on another forum and they say its fitted to the standard RCD 210. ;)

markus_bms
10-05-2010, 08:05 PM
Hi Keith,
Can you post the link on the other forum with respect to the RCD210..:)

Keithuk
11-05-2010, 12:24 AM
Hi Keith,
Can you post the link on the other forum with respect to the RCD210..:)
Yes Changing 24 hour clock (http://www.golfmk6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5733). I know they are American but its still a Golf 2.5L. Perhaps you can help on changing the clock? ;)

markus_bms
11-05-2010, 10:14 AM
Just had a look at that site..the RCD210 on the U.S version looks different. My RCD210 manual does not talk about the compass so I presume this is only for the U.S version?
You wouldn't happen to know the commands to bring it on screen would you :)

Keithuk
11-05-2010, 01:12 PM
No not really I can't see anything in my MFD menus. ;)

percymon
11-05-2010, 02:14 PM
Just had a look at that site..the RCD210 on the U.S version looks different. My RCD210 manual does not talk about the compass so I presume this is only for the U.S version?
You wouldn't happen to know the commands to bring it on screen would you :)

Off topic : - the VW US website makes no mention of a model number for the standard radio system, and the upgrade isn't a model designation we'd recognise here either. The basic US radio has 8 speakers and is double din sized, so even if it is described elsewhere as an RCD210, its not the same as the UK

Keithuk
11-05-2010, 03:23 PM
Just going off topic a bit (no off topic smilie, do they want one?).

This is the only forum out of the 50 or so that I use that you have to join before you can read anything. :zx11:

@percymon - I've just seen you've joined that US GTI forum but you are showing a MkIII TDi. When did you change it?

Bob_S
22-02-2011, 03:10 PM
Yes, I'm seriously saying if you turn off your DRLs you run a greater risk of not being seen, which in turn increases the risk of a collision.

If you need cars to drive around in daylight hours with headlamps on in order to be able to see them then perhaps it is time you went to Specsavers!

WeegieBob
22-02-2011, 03:58 PM
Lets just save time here - my background is a fire & rescue officer for 25 years in the City of Glasgow, with my last 3 years in Tactical & Heavy Rescue.

I have heard all the urban myths, all the granny facts, all the home-spun experts on why DRL's shouldn't be used - so tell me Bob, what is your expertise in the field of rescue and accident investigation when recommending I go to Specsavers?

I look forward to your informed response. ;)

Bob_S
22-02-2011, 04:42 PM
A fire and rescue officer? Or to put it another way a firefighter? I can imagine you have had loads of training in accident investigation then:rolleyes:

WeegieBob
22-02-2011, 04:56 PM
Oh, I see you're an expert on fire brigade as well - good to have you here then, I'm sure you'll keep me right on that subject as well. LOL! ;)

Bob_S
22-02-2011, 05:37 PM
I'm not an expert on the fire service but I do know they don't deal with road traffic accident investigations, that being the role of the police. ;)

So, tell me how 25 years service as a firefighter makes you an expert on DRL's?

WeegieBob
22-02-2011, 10:04 PM
I bow to your greater knowledge. ;)

SC03OTT
22-02-2011, 10:40 PM
DRLs help identify vehicles (especially darker/grey coloured cars) that are in the distance or on the horizon. Fact.

Bob_S
23-02-2011, 01:39 AM
DRL's cause a reduction in conspicuity for more vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists. That's a fact too.

roddy22
28-02-2011, 11:16 AM
28 years ago, when seatbelt wearing was to be made compulsory, every manufacturer from Austin to Volkswagen knew the reasons, every research organisation agreed the anticipated saving in lives, every thinking person was prepared to accept this imposition and yet…. there were many individuals who held loud campaigns against them, based on their arrogantly held assumptions that they had seen the secret and devastating reasons to reject them. “I would get trapped if my car turned over and went on fire”, “I’d drown if my car fell into a river and I couldn’t escape”, etc. Today, very few people seriously hold such views because seatbelt use has so remarkably changed accident death statistics.

It was true with the anti-airbag brigade: “I don’t want wrap round glasses…. to be deafened…. to have my cigarette forced down my throat….” And it was true with the Motorcycle helmet refusers. Despite these safety measures being introduced to help the individual occupants of a vehicle, there is always someone who will fight against them.

But one thing is very different with DRLs. They aim to help OTHER road users see YOU. Other road users may have poor eyesight (and should not be driving….) or be distracted.

I am prepared to put in that tiny bit of effort to accommodate other drivers’ weaknesses and give me a little more safety in everyday driving – to switch on the lights. I don’t need to even think about them now because they are automatic and I’m delighted that I no longer even have to think about them.

I am lucky to have driven since 1971 without an accident. At one time I was averaging 20,000 miles per year on the M6, M1 and country roads in England and Scotland in various cars, small and large, but seldom slow. Since Polo 1 in 1977, I have had “DRLs” - headlights actually - and I have used them all the time, summer and winter. It seems so obvious to me. Any observant driver must, at some time, have been surprised by a dark coloured vehicle appearing on a sunny day out of the shade of trees. That’s what DRLs are for – to let others see your car.

Yes, the cost of replacement bulbs is horrendous. In the 12 years I drove Polo1, it consumed at least 8 new bulbs. Golf 3 gobbled up 6 bulbs over 14 years. I didn’t pay for the bulbs in the more interesting company cars I drove over the years. But you know what – I think that’s a price worth paying. And the increased fuel consumption? Ah, yes, Golf 3 Tdi managed only 53mpg cruising at 100mph with air conditioning and headlights on in Germany. (That’s a lot better than Golf 6, by the way…………..)

Bob_S
28-02-2011, 11:49 AM
When the wearing of seatbelts was made compulsory it was based on solid research that showed they did save lives. The research to show that DRL's will make a contribution to road safety is not conclusive, with some of the results of some studies being flawed. This is not a basis to introduce legislation forcing the use of DRL's when the evidence of their effectiveness is in dispute.

WeegieBob
28-02-2011, 06:28 PM
Excellent post Roddy - thanks for taking the time to detail your views.

WeegieBob. ;)

welshpedro
28-02-2011, 08:53 PM
Excellent post Roddy - thanks for taking the time to detail your views.

WeegieBob. ;)

x 2 from me too Roddy.....

Some things are just common sense... (not that its that common it seems)

Bob_S
28-02-2011, 09:05 PM
Some things are just common sense... (not that its that common it seems)

But not DRL's. If people need a large one ton plus lump of metal to be illuminated by DRL's in daylight hours to be able to see them then you have to worry about whether or not they have the ability or aptitude to drive safely in the first place.

welshpedro
28-02-2011, 09:52 PM
But not DRL's. If people need a large one ton plus lump of metal to be illuminated by DRL's in daylight hours to be able to see them then you have to worry about whether or not they have the ability or aptitude to drive safely in the first place.


DRLs are not just for other drivers , but for all road users and pedestrians too.

I currently have 2 Volvo's (until the Golf replaces one tomorrow) and both cannot be driven without lights on.. something I am quite happy about. I want other road users to be able to see me in all weather conditions.

Keithuk
28-02-2011, 11:34 PM
But not DRL's. If people need a large one ton plus lump of metal to be illuminated by DRL's in daylight hours to be able to see them then you have to worry about whether or not they have the ability or aptitude to drive safely in the first place.
Correct Bob I couldn't agree more.


DRLs are not just for other drivers , but for all road users and pedestrians too.
Thats just todays society, don't look, don't think, don't give a dam about anything just sue the driver that knocks them down. It must be all this junk food they eat.



I currently have 2 Volvo's (until the Golf replaces one tomorrow) and both cannot be driven without lights on..
That reminds me of that Jasper Carrot joke.

It reminds me of that sketch that Jasper Carrot did many years ago. He wanted another car and the Volvo was a good deal. He complained about the lights being on all the time. He would drive home at night and put the car in the garage. The next morning he woke up and opened the garage door the bl**dy lights were still on. This went on for a long time. When he decided he didn't want to car anymore He drove it to the scrapyard where they put it through the crusher. As it came out the other side and the bl**dy lights were still on. ;)

I'm still not turning my DRLs back on.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 02:30 AM
DRLs are not just for other drivers , but for all road users and pedestrians too.

Perhaps you might want to talk to motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians about how DRL's are going to cause them more problems. As drivers attention is drawn more to cars with DRL's on they will focus less on pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists. The benefits of motorcyclists using their headlamps during the daytime will be diminished considerably as more cars with DRL's come on to the roads.

As drivers drive with DRL's they will become more confident that others will see them just because their DRL's are on, and they will drive less defensively. This behaviour has already been seen in motorcyclists who have their headlamps on during the day and think they will be seen by everyone, so their guard slips and they drive less defensively.

By all means introduce DRL's if there is real evidence that shows they will be effective in reducing accidents, but don't bring them in just because some EU politicians have accepted flawed research and think they are a good idea.

Berisford
01-03-2011, 10:24 AM
You're on the money there Bob_S, as a motorcyclist for over 40 years I agree 100% with what you say.

I'll add that DRL's fitted to things such as Audi Q7's, BMW X6's and the like can only make the roads a more dangerous place to place to be.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 10:28 AM
Berisford,

I am just a novice motorcyclist with a mere 32 years experience;) but I know that DRL's will make the roads a more dangerous place for those on two wheels and pedestrians too.

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 11:30 AM
I dont understand the complaint really, DRL's are a good idea. They make everyone more visible.

What I dont like, is cyclists and pedestrians who insist on wearing black, having no reflectors, and ploughing through junctions,lights and roundabouts without obeying the road rules that drivers and motorcyclists have to follow.


To be honest, when I see a stupid 4x4 bullying people out the way, id rather see the DRLs in my mirror - and to be honest if you are a good driver, you only need to glance at them to give you a reference as to where they are, not sit transfixed on them until you drive up the pavement. That shows an inability to drive.

I dont agree making them mandatory, but they arent a bad idea to improve safety. I for one welcome them.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 11:43 AM
I dont agree making them mandatory, but they arent a bad idea to improve safety. I for one welcome them.

But do they improve safety? When they were introduced in Austria in 2006/7 there was an increase in accidents. The Austrians banned them from 1st January 2008 and as a result there were 5% less fatalities and 25% less accidents involving motorcycles.

There is not enough evidence that shows they do improve safety, which is a stark contrast to the evidence that was available when it was made compulsory to wear seatbelts back in 1983. Go back to 1973 when it was made compulsory for motorcyclists to wear helmets. The evidence was plain to see that they made a big difference to motorcyclists safety. But this same level of evidence is just not there to support the use of DRL's.

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 11:44 AM
Well I look at it objectively, I can see cars better, so im going to say yes for me.

Also its very easy to distinguish between DRL's and motorbike lights. They are completely different.

Even so the point is, if you see a DRL and you think its a motorbike, does that make you more inclined to drive into it? That would suggest when you see a motorbike your natural reaction would be to plough into it. Its backwards logic.

Taking it further, if another bike thinks its a bike, and its near the middle, perhaps the car is so close that he cant pass, would he naturally take the chance and go head on with another bike? I doubt it.

They are there to make you more aware. The same with a satnav, you dont follow it blindly, you use it as a guide.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 11:57 AM
Well I look at it objectively, I can see cars better, so im going to say yes for me.

No, that's a subjective viewpoint. Perhaps if you need lights on to see cars more easily it might be time to evaluate whether or not your attitude is the right one for driving on todays roads?


Also its very easy to distinguish between DRL's and motorbike lights. They are completely different.

The DRL's on my Golf uses the same bulbs as when the dipped lights are on so they are no different to motorcycle lights.


Even so the point is, if you see a DRL and you think its a motorbike, does that make you more inclined to drive into it? That would suggest when you see a motorbike your natural reaction would be to plough into it. Its backwards logic.

You have completely missed the point. It's not about seeing a DRL and thinking it's a motorcycle, it is about the effectiveness of motorcycle headlamps being diminished because of more cars with DRL's, thus making them less visible with more light sources about from other vehicles. This is going to be the same issue for pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers will start to respond to what vehicle is more brightly lit up and start paying less attention to pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists, which will make use of the roads for them far more hazardous.

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 12:00 PM
It doesnt matter, your logic is wrong.

If you see a light dont drive into it. Assume its a roadgoing vehicle. Bikes always go down the middle of the road, if you see a single light floating down the middle, you move over, let it go.

Its really quite a stupid argument. I think all thats needed is a little common sense being applied.

Why does everything have to be served on a plate for people here? Its plain lazy driving.

I dont need DRL's to help me see cars, but they certainly make all vehicles more visible in built up traffic, or even seeing something approaching in the distance. I really think its a pointless argument is all.

If you dont like the DRLs on your golf. Get some tools out, and change them.

Also most DRL's are LED strips, so i dont understand your point. If they are like small dipped bulbs, change the lens, change the bulb, or disconnect them.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 12:10 PM
It doesnt matter, your logic is wrong.

And how is my logic wrong?


If you see a light dont drive into it. Assume its a roadgoing vehicle. Bikes always go down the middle of the road, if you see a single light floating down the middle, you move over, let it go.

Who said anything about driving into a light source? One of the arguments about DRL's is that they will make the roads a more hazardous place for vulnerable road users. And bikes do not always go down the middle of the road. Its not uncommon to see them riding in the gutter or riding close to the centre white lines.


Its really quite a stupid argument. I think all thats needed is a little common sense being applied.

Just what is a stupid argument? Please elaborate.


Why does everything have to be served on a plate for people here? Its plain lazy driving.

It's plain lazy driving looking out for cars with headlamps/DRL's on rather than taking a proper look up the road to see the full extent of what is out there.


I dont need DRL's to help me see cars, but they certainly make all vehicles more visible in built up traffic, or even seeing something approaching in the distance. I really think its a pointless argument is all.

If you think its a pointless argument then you really haven't looked into DRL's that much. Why not do a Google search and see what it throws up. You might find it enlightening (pardon the pun).:D


If you dont like the DRLs on your golf. Get some tools out, and change them.

You don't need tools to disable the DRL's on my Golf, it is easily done, and something I have already completed.

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 12:11 PM
Well get pedantic, its a stupid argument regardless.

I dont know about you, but I use all my windows and mirrors when driving. You have a neck you know.

Use some common sense, and your problems will dissapear. Thats all I have to say on it.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 12:24 PM
Well get pedantic, its a stupid argument regardless.

No explanation as to why it is a stupid argument though. I'll take it that you haven't looked into the subject in any great depth so all you are capable of doing is being rude by calling my points "stupid".


I dont know about you, but I use all my windows and mirrors when driving. You have a neck you know.

That's good to hear, but have you thought about using your eyes?;) And how do you know I have a neck? I could be Gladstone Small for all you know:D


Use some common sense, and your problems will dissapear. Thats all I have to say on it.

Perhaps you need to use some common sense and actually look into DRL's in more detail before you start calling people "stupid" and telling them to use common sense.:rolleyes:

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 12:37 PM
You sound like a danger behind the wheel. I suggest you take a refresher course, particularly hazard awareness.

If you struggle to distinguish between a DRL and a motorcycle light I would worry.

People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.

I asked some opinions on your argument here at work, and they all think you are a bit bonkers. But you are entitled to your opinion, I can't dissuade you so I will just pray to god im not near your golf and that it isnt anywhere near mine on the road.

I wouldnt feel safe with you driving near me.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 01:26 PM
You sound like a danger behind the wheel. I suggest you take a refresher course, particularly hazard awareness.

On what basis do you think I am a danger behind the wheel?


If you struggle to distinguish between a DRL and a motorcycle light I would worry.

If you could point to where I said I struggle to differentiate between a DRL and motorcycle headlight it would be appreciated.


People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.

Ah, we've moved on to quoting proverbs. Here's one for you :-

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

Quite apt really given how you have demonstrated a very limited knowledge of DRL's and the issues around them.:D


I asked some opinions on your argument here at work, and they all think you are a bit bonkers.

They must be amazing people to come to such a conclusion without knowing a single thing about me, I can just imagine the conversation:-

Sammo : "There's this geezer on the internet and he thinks DRL's are not a good idea"

Work colleagues : "What the f*** are DRL's?"

Sammo: " You know, headlights on in the daytime on cars"

Work colleagues : "What do you need your headlights on in the day for?

Sammo : "So I can see cars more easily you idiots! Are you stupid?"

Work colleagues wander off mutering under their breath "should have gone to specsavers"


But you are entitled to your opinion,

Indeed I am.



I can't dissuade you

You never will by calling people stupid without having a solid argument to persuade them they are wrong.



so I will just pray to god im not near your golf and that it isnt anywhere near mine on the road.

I wouldnt feel safe with you driving near me.

And how do you come to that conclusion without knowing how long I have been driving for, what driving courses I have been on, what qualifications I have and what my experience is?

Don't worry about answering me Sammo. It is abundantly clear you are an idiot and my father said the following to me:-

"Don't argue with idiots, they will only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience every time!"

Adios dear boy.:D

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 01:41 PM
To clarify your points you clearly missed from my arguments:

1 - I dont care for or against DRL's I just see it as a non-plus and if anything a benefit to make cars more visible. I have them, I use them, I find people notice me in the mirror more because of them.


2 - Its daytime anyway, so the lights should be the least or your worries.

3 - If you see a headlight with a DRL or a bike headlight, what difference does it make about how effective it is, when all its needed for is to indicate the presence of a vehicle. This shouldnt affect the way you drive with or without DRL's.

4 - Your worry about this issue flags up a lack of observation as a general driving skill, that concerns me as its not only my safety, but other road users AND passengers in those cars.

If someone has an issue with DRL's they have bigger problems than 'making motor cycle lights less effective'

The bottom line is, it doesnt matter. Its a light, you recognise that a vehicle is present sooner as it becomes more obvious. Act with safety accordingly.

Its daytime, so you should see the car well before the lights, but regardless - on chatoic roads, anything to improve safety helps.

I fail to see the negatives of it. You should treat cars/bikes/cycles and pedestrians with equal respect and care.

If you see a DRL or a motorbike lamp, it really doesnt make a blind bit of difference. Its a vehicle, when it gets closer, you can see.

What about people who drive around with dipped beams on during the day?

Dont they cause mass accidents?

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 02:09 PM
Most people would have taken their foot out of their mouth long ago, but you continue to demonstrate that your understanding of the issues around DRL's is non existent.

SammoVWT
01-03-2011, 02:13 PM
Im really not bothered about your personal gripe with me.

I think its a daft argument over lights. If it was that dangerous in our nanny state of a country they would ban them.

Motorway speed limits are still 70, they are reducing urban speedlimits wherever they can.

More speed cameras are getting reactivated, obviously primarily as revenue. But they use this an excuse.

I think if it was a major issue, it would have been banned already. Same with bullbars, and seatbelts (both dealt with).

Give me some conclusive proof that they are dangerous and fine I will agree with you. But I really dont understand the problem with them. Simple as that - hence why I feel its a daft argument.

All i see is, I give reasons for saying I dont think its an imporant issue because, and you flat out dismiss them without even reason. Im not the ignorant one here.

In addition - I would rather have my tax money spent somewhere more important than on some law which is useless, which will cost a lot to review, and then to pass. Better driver training would avoid this.

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 02:21 PM
And the boy keeps on digging:D

welshpedro
01-03-2011, 06:10 PM
By all means introduce DRL's if there is real evidence that shows they will be effective in reducing accidents, but don't bring them in just because some EU politicians have accepted flawed research and think they are a good idea.

My comments were all based on my perception alone and not on any research that I have read, so maybe you could point me at the flawed research for DRLs and also the research you mention that is againt...

Maybe I'll understand it better myself, cos a quick straw poll in the office here of around 12 people, and guess what... not one person can see the downsides of DRLs (including 2 people who commute by motorcycle and 2 by cycle)

Bob_S
01-03-2011, 06:37 PM
Lots of information about DRL's and links to reports and research available here:-

http://www.dadrl.org.uk/index.html

Hughesynights
01-03-2011, 09:30 PM
The sooner DRLs are compulsary, the better. Except they should be normal dipped beam like in Denmark, etc.
I see so many idiots without lights on when conditions really demand them. The only way to force these people is to take the switch away.

I like the fact that the Golf auto lights turns the dipped beam on if it is just a little bit dull. Very sensitive. And I like that normal mode is DRL bulbs.
In previous cars, even with auto lights, I usually just switched dipped beams on when setting off. With the Golf I just leave it on auto all the time.

It costs pretty much nothing to put lights on, and might just avoid an accident.

welshpedro
01-03-2011, 09:32 PM
Lots of information about DRL's and links to reports and research available here:-

http://www.dadrl.org.uk/index.html


Thanks for the link... but already confused by the very front page..


This extract from a manufacturer's sales brochure shows that Daytime Running Lights are deliberately designed to focus light at up to 1,200cd (dipped headlights are 800cd) directly into the eyes of drivers causing temporary blindness which masks vulnerable road users i.e. Pedestrians, Cyclists and Motorcyclists

Is this suggesting that DRLs are 1.5 times more powerful than dipped headlights, because it doesnt appear to be on the Golf?

Some of the reasons for opposition not thought out too well..... increase in road rage!! They are having trouble convincing me on the other reasons, and adding this just loses even more credibility...

Gotta love the quotes page showing support.. 2nd one down.. Nick Griffin MEP... always been one to give a fair opinion eh.. (the man is an idiot!!)

I thought DRLs seemed like a good idea... this website has now convinced me...

Bob_S
02-03-2011, 01:27 AM
The sooner DRLs are compulsary, the better. Except they should be normal dipped beam like in Denmark, etc.
I see so many idiots without lights on when conditions really demand them. The only way to force these people is to take the switch away.

I like the fact that the Golf auto lights turns the dipped beam on if it is just a little bit dull. Very sensitive. And I like that normal mode is DRL bulbs.
In previous cars, even with auto lights, I usually just switched dipped beams on when setting off. With the Golf I just leave it on auto all the time.

It costs pretty much nothing to put lights on, and might just avoid an accident.

The answer to your gripe would be auto lights and not DRL's. As to putting the lights on, it might cause accidents for pedestrians, motorcyclists or cyclists if we all started doing that.

Bob_S
02-03-2011, 01:41 AM
Thanks for the link... but already confused by the very front page..


This extract from a manufacturer's sales brochure shows that Daytime Running Lights are deliberately designed to focus light at up to 1,200cd (dipped headlights are 800cd) directly into the eyes of drivers causing temporary blindness which masks vulnerable road users i.e. Pedestrians, Cyclists and Motorcyclists


Is this suggesting that DRLs are 1.5 times more powerful than dipped headlights, because it doesnt appear to be on the Golf?


Some of the reasons for opposition not thought out too well..... increase in road rage!! They are having trouble convincing me on the other reasons, and adding this just loses even more credibility...


Gotta love the quotes page showing support.. 2nd one down.. Nick Griffin MEP... always been one to give a fair opinion eh.. (the man is an idiot!!)



I thought DRLs seemed like a good idea... this website has now convinced me...


I note you choose to ignore the views of ROSPA, IAM, the Green Party, the RAC Foundation and the UK Government(to list a few who have concerns about DRL's) in coming to your conclusions.

As a motorcyclist I do have grave reservations about how DRL's will affect my safety. Perhaps it is time that more emphasis was placed on teaching people to drive properly in the first instance and placing more emphasis on defensive driving, hazard perception and forward observation and anticipation, rather than taking the path of least resistance and increasing the risks for the vulnerable road users by fiting cars with DRL's.

SammoVWT
02-03-2011, 09:40 AM
Today I blinded everyone with my HID DRL's with my 0.5w bulb. I rock, carnage everywhere.

Driving properly removes the issue of whether you have DRL's fitted or not.

welshpedro
02-03-2011, 10:20 AM
I note you choose to ignore the views of ROSPA, IAM, the Green Party, the RAC Foundation and the UK Government(to list a few who have concerns about DRL's) in coming to your conclusions.

As a motorcyclist I do have grave reservations about how DRL's will affect my safety. Perhaps it is time that more emphasis was placed on teaching people to drive properly in the first instance and placing more emphasis on defensive driving, hazard perception and forward observation and anticipation, rather than taking the path of least resistance and increasing the risks for the vulnerable road users by fiting cars with DRL's.

Bob.. you need to get some correct facts first... ROSPA website excerpt below ( http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/policy/carsinthefuture/vehicle-conspicuity.aspx )

"The conclusions of the experiment were that the conspicuity of other road users did not suffer, in terms of the time taken until their detection. The report concluded that although it is impossible to test every combination of possibilities and complexities on the road, if there was an overwhelming adverse effect upon the conspicuity of other road users then it would have shown up within the data under review."

ROSPA are clearly not against DRLs...

Bob_S
02-03-2011, 05:01 PM
Yet ROSPA also said this:-

"
“RoSPA’s view is that if cars are fitted with Daytime Running Lights, then there is much concern that the conspicuity of other road users without DRL will suffer. The risk is that when drivers are making observations and looking out for other road users, that drivers will search for the DRL on other vehicles rather than surveying the whole scene and spotting vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians.

“This is a serious concern as research has shown that ‘looked but failing to see’ errors contribute to 23 per cent of unimpaired drivers’ accidents during daylight, and a more recent report identified that 32 per cent of all accidents were caused when road users ‘failed to look properly’. Cyclists are at a risk of suffering a serious injury if hit by a car and so being spotted by other road users is important to a cyclist’s safety.

“Although the counter argument would be that DRL may make it easier for cyclists to spot cars, enabling them to plan an ‘escape route’ to prevent an accident if the car were to pull out, it does not address the issue of drivers making poor or incomplete observations and failing to spot a cyclist."



So, are there two ROSPA's saying different things?

SammoVWT
02-03-2011, 05:30 PM
They are saying it doesnt account for people not looking properly. Hence why they would be thinking to make it mandatory at a guess.

Not strictly down to DRL's.

welshpedro
02-03-2011, 05:40 PM
Yet ROSPA also said this:-

"
“RoSPA’s view is that if cars are fitted with Daytime Running Lights, then there is much concern that the conspicuity of other road users without DRL will suffer. The risk is that when drivers are making observations and looking out for other road users, that drivers will search for the DRL on other vehicles rather than surveying the whole scene and spotting vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians.

“This is a serious concern as research has shown that ‘looked but failing to see’ errors contribute to 23 per cent of unimpaired drivers’ accidents during daylight, and a more recent report identified that 32 per cent of all accidents were caused when road users ‘failed to look properly’. Cyclists are at a risk of suffering a serious injury if hit by a car and so being spotted by other road users is important to a cyclist’s safety.

“Although the counter argument would be that DRL may make it easier for cyclists to spot cars, enabling them to plan an ‘escape route’ to prevent an accident if the car were to pull out, it does not address the issue of drivers making poor or incomplete observations and failing to spot a cyclist."



So, are there two ROSPA's saying different things?

Can you provide the link to the above, so we can review. Wouldnt want to think this was cut from the biased, mickey mouse website you pointed us to previousley.....

SammoVWT
02-03-2011, 06:01 PM
Even by that statement, they are saying people without DRL would be worse off not because DRLs are dangerous, but because their cars would be less visible for drivers who arent paying attention.

Hardcorism
02-03-2011, 08:40 PM
All this over a freakin light. I can't see a problem with them. Half the road already have them. They seem fine. Anything that makes a vehicle more visible to everyone is a good thing.

HHGTTG
02-03-2011, 08:48 PM
What a lot of fuss about nothing. Having said that, some of the newer LED strip lights appearing in all configurations and shapes are sometimes a bit too bright and more importantly don't have a defined beam pattern or focus/direction and as a consequence can dazzle quite markedly even in bright conditions.
Before I took delivery when the concept of DRLs was a bit new to me I thought about them quite a bit but now don't give them a second thought, other than to worry when that filament blows and then the dealer will be given the job of fitting a replacement no doubt removing the skin off HIS knuckles on the process!!

welshpedro
03-03-2011, 11:59 AM
What a lot of fuss about nothing. Having said that, some of the newer LED strip lights appearing in all configurations and shapes are sometimes a bit too bright and more importantly don't have a defined beam pattern or focus/direction and as a consequence can dazzle quite markedly even in bright conditions.
Before I took delivery when the concept of DRLs was a bit new to me I thought about them quite a bit but now don't give them a second thought, other than to worry when that filament blows and then the dealer will be given the job of fitting a replacement no doubt removing the skin off HIS knuckles on the process!!

You are correct.. a fuss about nothing. These people who setup the Drivers Against DRL website, need to find something worthwile to moan about, and when they find it not be so biased in what they print...

Keithuk
03-03-2011, 01:45 PM
I think this thread has gone on long enough 11 pages and you still won't get a result as people have their own views to everything.

My Mk 6 has obviously come with the daytime running lights, i have the lights set to auto also.

Has anyone managed to turn off the daytime lights on thiir own or is ia dealer fix? I have tried to follow the instructions in the manual but they are still on.

Ideally i want to keep the lights set to auto but not have them on in the daytime. People keep telling me i have left them on and i am concerned that im going to get through bulbs at a much higher rate than normal.

Thanks
The original OP question has been answered you can turn the DRLs of if you have standard halogen manually which I've already stated or with Xenon you need VCDS.

All thats happended is bickering since page 6 is it safer or not. Its up to the driver if he wants them on or not for his own peace of mind.

If you check Hacienda's replies to his thread he hasn't been back since. I'm not surpprised with whats been said.

Case closed of far as I'm concerned.

HHGTTG
03-03-2011, 03:35 PM
I have more important things in my life to be concerned about and these don't include two fairly innocuous 15watt bulbs that are alight, when the headlights aren't on.

QED and QEF or perhaps not!!

Bob_S
03-03-2011, 04:34 PM
You are correct.. a fuss about nothing. These people who setup the Drivers Against DRL website, need to find something worthwile to moan about, and when they find it not be so biased in what they print...

Yes, they shouldn't be so fussed about the potential for people to be killed or injured because of DRL's.:rolleyes: Shame on them for being so concerned.

Berisford
03-03-2011, 04:37 PM
If you check Hacienda's replies to his thread he hasn't been back since. I'm not surpprised with whats been said.




He's not been around for 18 months or so, not that bothered I think?

As for DRL's, I'm in the leave 'em off camp, I'll put my headlights on whenever I feel they are needed.

I dare bet that most (if not all) those in the pro camp* reach for the rear fog light switch at every opportunity too. :mad:


*There seems, to me, to be 3 camps, anti, don't care either way and pro.

Bob_S
03-03-2011, 04:40 PM
Can you provide the link to the above, so we can review. Wouldnt want to think this was cut from the biased, mickey mouse website you pointed us to previousley.....

It was taken from a ROSPA "Care of the Road" newsletter published in February 2007. Nice to see your unbiased approach to the subject Pedro.:D

Berisford
03-03-2011, 05:06 PM
This thread takes me back and puts me in mind of central London and mainly Oxford Street some years ago when London Transport sold off all the buses to the highest bidders.

I think it was Arriva (or some well meaning but misguided overpaid graduate in the organisation) that deemed all (mainly Routemasters at that time) buses should run with their headlights on at all times. What a farce, as if the 2 45watt Lucas sealed beams fitted to the AEC's were going to make the big red double decker anymore obvious!

I can only assume the graduate moved on and got a job in Brussels.

As I said in my previous post, I'm against DRL's, mainly because I'm a motorcyclist and I see compulsory DRL's for all vehicles as a threat to me as rider.

The basic argument is flawed, sure, show someone a street scene with vehicles in it, put DRL's on a couple of vehicles and yes they stand out more, but do the same to all the vehicles and nothing stands out.

I see this leading to ever more brighter, bigger and more elaborate DRL's/headlamps as manufacturers and owners strive to make their vehicles stand out.

In fact that problem has already started to manifest itself on Range Rovers and the like.

The UK lighting regulations have become a bit of a free for all since the introduction of HID's and LED's.

Simon6
03-03-2011, 07:18 PM
Good point about the bikes becoming lost in the sea of lights, but they could give bikes a different colour DRL like red which would easily be distinguishable from the cars.

My only concern is if I turn off my DRL's and have an accident will it go against me in the eyes of the law/insurance and am I right that the mrk6 golf has no side lights? Getting my GTD next week and going from my current car which has xenons and side lights will take a bit of getting used to.

Keithuk
03-03-2011, 07:48 PM
He's not been around for 18 months or so, not that bothered I think?
Sorry I didn't notice the original date.

It just shows how long this thread has been dragging on.

Bob_S
03-03-2011, 07:56 PM
Good point about the bikes becoming lost in the sea of lights, but they could give bikes a different colour DRL like red which would easily be distinguishable from the cars.

My only concern is if I turn off my DRL's and have an accident will it go against me in the eyes of the law/insurance and am I right that the mrk6 golf has no side lights? Getting my GTD next week and going from my current car which has xenons and side lights will take a bit of getting used to.

As red is used for tail lights Simon that would be very confusing.

DRL's are not a mandatory requirement so it will not go against you, unless there are other circumstances such as poor visibility. The Golf does have side lights.

HHGTTG
03-03-2011, 07:57 PM
I'm unsubscribing now!

welshpedro
03-03-2011, 09:02 PM
Yes, they shouldn't be so fussed about the potential for people to be killed or injured because of DRL's.:rolleyes: Shame on them for being so concerned.

We are all concerned about the potential for people to be killed or injured, thats why I will use DRLs, to reduce accidents, as per ROSPA statements etc....

What I wont do is quote a website with flawed data, and ridiculous claims and point others to it as a source of "information" ......

ps. I havent punched any cyclists since having the Golf (early days though)... see claim 2 in reasons for opposition .. increase in road rage on "Information" page.

Simon6
04-03-2011, 01:49 AM
As red is used for tail lights Simon that would be very confusing.


DRL's are not a mandatory requirement so it will not go against you, unless there are other circumstances such as poor visibility. The Golf does have side lights.

Yes I feel stupid for say red, but another colour that stands out may be blue, if it was standardised for all new motor bikes sounds like the only solution to keep them visable.

That's good news, I will probably keep them on but would like the option to turn them off if I wish. Thanks for the info on the side lights.

Bob_S
04-03-2011, 12:13 PM
We are all concerned about the potential for people to be killed or injured, thats why I will use DRLs, to reduce accidents, as per ROSPA statements etc....

So you wll happily use DRL's despite the obvious dangers to vulnerable road users? ROSPA have also voiced reservations about DRL's.


What I wont do is quote a website with flawed data, and ridiculous claims and point others to it as a source of "information" ......

Your comment shows how little you actually read on the website. There is a vast amount of information including a variety of reports (including pro and anti DRL reports) and other links. But is it seems you prefer the easy option of having cars lit up just so that you won't have to concentrate as much when you are out driving.

It's a shame that the EU is not putting more effort into improving driving standards. Instead it comes up with DRL's as it aims at the lowest comoon denominator rather than tackle the wider isues. As someone who rides a motorcycle and cycles I have grave doubts about how DRL's will improve my safety.


ps. I havent punched any cyclists since having the Golf (early days though)... see claim 2 in reasons for opposition .. increase in road rage on "Information" page.

Yet you ignore the other issues such as the lack of real evidence saying they will improve safety,the increase in emissions through using them and increased bulb consumption, the increase in visual fatigue, and the reduction in a drivers ability to perceive hazards.

You also ignore where they say they would like to see the fitment of non glaring DRL's, which is on the same page as the claim about promotion of road rage. There is also support for the fitment of automatic lights which would solve the issues of drivers driving in conditions of low light without any lights on at all.

Hardly "ridiculous claims" or "flawed data" but genuine concerns for road safety and the implication for ALL road users, not just those in cars.

welshpedro
04-03-2011, 01:23 PM
Bob

We could go on for ever here, so this is my last post on the subject.. please feel free to have the last word...

I could get quotes like the one below almost ad infinitum:-

"RoadSafe director Adrian Walsh says: "We welcome the safety improvements that xenon and daytime running lights bring. Legislation takes into account evidence from extensive research, which shows xenon and bi-xenon headlamps, and DRL improve safety."

DRLs are here to stay... I for one (plus all those I have asked about this - see previous posts ) am glad.

Your above comments regarding how little I read of that website have some truth... with the headline statements used on the site I felt little encouragement to read further... a cursory glance through some of the detail was enough to convince me about its blatently biased view, choosing to ignore anything that may have been pro DRL.

Saying that I prefer cars to be lit up with DRLs, so that I can concentrate less is exactly the type of statement that would be used on "that" site. You dont know me, or my driving ability.*

I too think more should go into promoting better standards and it is these poor driving standards of a minority that is more likely to cause of accidents, and not DRLs.


* >25 years, accident free, no convictions. Car plus HGV Class 2.

Simon6
04-03-2011, 02:14 PM
[QUOTE=welshpedro;621744]Bob

We could go on for ever here, so this is my last post on the subject.. please feel free to have the last word...



By the time this topic is resolved all cars will be fitted with an auto stop feature like in the volvo's but more advanced making it impossable to hit anything.

Hughesynights
04-03-2011, 09:50 PM
My only concern is if I turn off my DRL's and have an accident will it go against me in the eyes of the law/insurance.

I think this is a real concern, especially when eventually all newer cars have DRL fitted.
Imagine someone steps out in the road and you hit and kill them. If you were not speeding then it's not your fault. But the police say in court that you had deliberately turned off a safety feature designed to make your vehicle more visible, DRL. Had you left the lights on, it is possible they would have seen you. Uncomfortable situation there.

Today I saw loads of cars at 6 pm driving without lights at 70 mph on a dual carriageway, most silver or black - almost invisible. What will it take to get these forgetful (or worse, plain ignorant) numpties from putting people's lives in danger like this? Only compulsary lights on.
Having driven quite a bit in Scandinavia, lights on all the time is much safer.

I've ridden motorcycles for 16 years, and always ride with light on. I do the same in my car, for the same reason. The more visible all road users are, the better. Cyclists and pedestrians should also make themselves more visible, and be sensible about using the road in poor light.

Just my thoughts on the subject. Nice to read lively debate here!

Bob_S
14-03-2011, 06:47 PM
The auto lighting feature would solve the perceived problem of drivers not putting their lights on in poor lighting conditions. Simples! But not lights on all the time, especially as the research is far from conclusive on the subject. So until it is thoroughly proven, DRL's cannot be described as a safety feature by any stretch of the imagination.

Just a thought, what would cyclists and pedestrians have to do to make themselves more conspicuous if all cars drove with headlights/DRL's on at all times?

And Welshpedro, there are plenty of quotes out there from the pro and anti camps on DRL's. I could indeed find them from a number of sources, but they mean jack without proper research. At the end of the day Adrian Walsh is expressing an opinion and nothing more. But I stand by my comments about drivers relying on their DRL's to be seen rather than good forward observation, hazard awareness and perception and defensive driving.

dcdick
14-03-2011, 09:30 PM
Hmmm

As the driver of a dark blue car my opinion on this is,

Factory supplied DRL's, on in winter off in summer

If my car was fitted with high intensity daylight/LED type DRL's I would use them at all times

****

vc-10
14-03-2011, 09:50 PM
I think this is a real concern, especially when eventually all newer cars have DRL fitted.
Imagine someone steps out in the road and you hit and kill them. If you were not speeding then it's not your fault. But the police say in court that you had deliberately turned off a safety feature designed to make your vehicle more visible, DRL. Had you left the lights on, it is possible they would have seen you. Uncomfortable situation there.

Today I saw loads of cars at 6 pm driving without lights at 70 mph on a dual carriageway, most silver or black - almost invisible. What will it take to get these forgetful (or worse, plain ignorant) numpties from putting people's lives in danger like this? Only compulsary lights on.
Having driven quite a bit in Scandinavia, lights on all the time is much safer.

I've ridden motorcycles for 16 years, and always ride with light on. I do the same in my car, for the same reason. The more visible all road users are, the better. Cyclists and pedestrians should also make themselves more visible, and be sensible about using the road in poor light.

Just my thoughts on the subject. Nice to read lively debate here!

One thing I would like to see is a system that turns on the lights within 1 hour of sunrise/sunset and whenever the wipers are switched on. I've been behind countless cars that disappear into the spray (grey cars especially) in the rain, and in low level lighting (especially in the winter) cars get become silhouettes and often merge into the background. These are the real reasons for DRLs IMO. Although yesterday I saw another idiot driving around at 10pm with no lights on at all!

Hughesynights
14-03-2011, 10:07 PM
Just a thought, what would cyclists and pedestrians have to do to make themselves more conspicuous if all cars drove with headlights/DRL's on at all times?


This is a good arguement for headlights on all the time, since retroreflective clothing worn by cyclists and pedestrians is much more noticable by motorists.

For this reason, and simplicity, I would prefer Scandinavian style compulsary dipped beams, rather than low wattage or LED DRLs.

vc-10
14-03-2011, 10:11 PM
The Scandinavian style dipped beams are exactly what the new Polo has- I think having the tail lights on are as important as having headlights on.

mustard
30-04-2011, 08:36 AM
There's no way it will be made law that driving lamps have to be on during the day; it would never work.

However, it is now new EU legislation that all NEW cars from 2010 onwards have to have DRLs FITTED when built.

In Denmark, it is the Law that all cars have to have either DRLs or dipped beams illuminated during daylight hours.

Bob_S
30-04-2011, 07:47 PM
One thing I would like to see is a system that turns on the lights within 1 hour of sunrise/sunset and whenever the wipers are switched on. I've been behind countless cars that disappear into the spray (grey cars especially) in the rain, and in low level lighting (especially in the winter) cars get become silhouettes and often merge into the background. These are the real reasons for DRLs IMO. Although yesterday I saw another idiot driving around at 10pm with no lights on at all!

That's what automatic lights do, they switch on when they sense low level of light. Having cars with lights on all the time would be overkill just to cover for the very small minority of people who forget to switch their lights on.

vc-10
02-05-2011, 11:25 AM
The problem with auto lights is that people turn them off. My mum has them in her Golf, but the switch is always in the off (0) position, never the auto position.

Keithuk
02-05-2011, 01:20 PM
The problem with auto lights is that people turn them off. My mum has them in her Golf, but the switch is always in the off (0) position, never the auto position.
Yes your mum has sense she knows how to turn the lights on when she needs them?

At night I use Auto only because it saves turning to Auto, sides, headlamps.

Bob_S
02-05-2011, 07:53 PM
In over 30 years of driving the number of people I have seen driving at night without their headlights on has be negligible, but in poorer light conditions that is a different matter. But proposing compulsory DRL's to combat this is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Steve_D
03-05-2011, 06:22 AM
In over 30 years of driving the number of people I have seen driving at night without their headlights on has be negligible.........
..............and they tend to be of the older generation who still think they are using dynamo's on their cars. A dying breed!

Bob_S
03-05-2011, 06:31 PM
..............and they tend to be of the older generation who still think they are using dynamo's on their cars. A dying breed!

Not so many of the older generation who remember dynamos and six volt electrics still out there I suspect.

vc-10
03-05-2011, 10:15 PM
Yes your mum has sense she knows how to turn the lights on when she needs them?

Not always, it has to be said. I've had to remind her a few times!

Re people with no lights on, I can remember 4 occasions since I started uni in Bristol last October, with one resulting in a crash. Guess there must be quite a lot of idiots in the west country!

Darklien
11-06-2011, 02:00 PM
I think having them is a legal requirement on all new cars now.

Having faulty lights could cause you grief should you ever have an accident or cross the police in some way.

Exactly right.