Dealer refusing to disable DRL's?

[Foobar]

Originally Posted by zaptorque

Would love to see some actual data to prove "DRLs" make you and others around you "safer". I bet the difference in actual "safety" (however you choose to quantify that) is negligible. Cars have been without DRLs for decades upon decades, and the fact that they are now mandating it is an annoyance for some. Personally I don't like the way they look, its personal preference.

Automakers are putting them on cars now as a potential legal safeguard, but I highly doubt they account for significantly fewer accidents on the road. Would be interesting to see if there is any data that backs me on this.

I don't have an opinion one way or the other - but here's an NHTSA document on it.

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811029.pdf

[tuckdaddy]

Originally Posted by zaptorque

Has anyone had trouble getting the dealer to disable to DRLs? When I brought it in for my first routine maintenance and asked for them to be turned off, he told me it was a Federal Safety requirement and he couldn't. Anyone else had this happen to them?


**I realize this is probably the wrong section to post in, but I did it for the exposure views - so mods feel free to move.

No but not sure if your ever down here in San Antonio but i got mine turned off and all the chimes killed no questions asked at Toyota of Boerne

[Synack]

Why don't you all just stick some off-road fogs on your roof and call it a day. Then EVERYONE will see you

[zaptorque]

Source: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811029.pdf

"The analysis found that DRLs have no statistically significant overall effects on the three target crashes. When combining
these three target crashes into one target crash, the DRL effects were also not statistically significant. When examined
separately for passenger cars and light trucks/vans (LTVs), DRLs in LTVs significantly reduced LTVs’ involvements in the
target two-vehicle crashes by 5.7 percent. However, the remaining DRL effects on these three target crashes were not
statistically significant. Although not statistically significant, DRLs might have unintended consequences for pedestrians and
motorcyclists. Particularly, the estimated negative effects for LTVs were relatively large and cannot be completely ignored."

"Not statistically significant". All I needed to hear. So please, tell me more on how DRL are a "safety" feature...

[zaptorque]

Originally Posted by Foobar

I don't have an opinion one way or the other - but here's an NHTSA document on it.

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811029.pdf

good find! I guess it would have helped had I actually searched for some research, hah.

[Khyron686]

Originally Posted by zaptorque

good find! I guess it would have helped had I actually searched for some research, hah.

2. How effective are DRLs? Nearly all published reports indicate DRLs reduce multiple-vehicle daytime crashes. Evidence about DRL effects on crashes comes from studies conducted in Scandinavia, Canada, and the United States. A study examining the effect of Norway's DRL law from 1980 to 1990, found a 10 percent decline in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes. A Danish study reported a 7 percent reduction in DRL-relevant crashes in the first 15 months after DRL use was required and a 37 percent decline in left-turn crashes. In a second study covering two years and 9 months of Denmark's law, there was a 6 percent reduction in daytime multiple- vehicle crashes and a 34 percent reduction in left-turn crashes. A 1994 Transport Canada study comparing 1990 model year vehicles with DRLs to 1989 vehicles without them, found that DRLs reduced relevant daytime multiple-vehicle crashes by 11 percent.

In the United States, a 1985 Institute study determined that commercial fleet passenger vehicles modified to operate with DRLs were involved in 7 percent fewer daytime multiple-vehicle crashes than similar vehicles without DRLs. A small-scale fleet study conducted in the 1960s found an 18 percent lower daytime multiple-vehicle crash rate for DRL-equipped vehicles. Multiple-vehicle daytime crashes account for about half of all police-reported crashes in the United States.

How's that metric coming along?

[zaptorque]

Originally Posted by Khyron686

2. How effective are DRLs? Nearly all published reports indicate DRLs reduce multiple-vehicle daytime crashes. Evidence about DRL effects on crashes comes from studies conducted in Scandinavia, Canada, and the United States. A study examining the effect of Norway's DRL law from 1980 to 1990, found a 10 percent decline in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes. A Danish study reported a 7 percent reduction in DRL-relevant crashes in the first 15 months after DRL use was required and a 37 percent decline in left-turn crashes. In a second study covering two years and 9 months of Denmark's law, there was a 6 percent reduction in daytime multiple- vehicle crashes and a 34 percent reduction in left-turn crashes. A 1994 Transport Canada study comparing 1990 model year vehicles with DRLs to 1989 vehicles without them, found that DRLs reduced relevant daytime multiple-vehicle crashes by 11 percent.

In the United States, a 1985 Institute study determined that commercial fleet passenger vehicles modified to operate with DRLs were involved in 7 percent fewer daytime multiple-vehicle crashes than similar vehicles without DRLs. A small-scale fleet study conducted in the 1960s found an 18 percent lower daytime multiple-vehicle crash rate for DRL-equipped vehicles. Multiple-vehicle daytime crashes account for about half of all police-reported crashes in the United States.

How's that metric coming along?

Did you read the report from the National Highway and Traffic Safety Admin? Took data from over 9 different states from 2000-2005. Found that DRLs in passenger cars had a -8.9% effectiveness in fatal crashes, 2.3% effectiveness in injury crashes, and -2.0% effectiveness in ALL crashes. None of these results tell anything of actual statistical significance. The only data point I found that could possible support the effectiveness of DRLs was the 19.1% rating in passenger cars against pedestrians and cyclists, but showed a strong ineffecitveness of DRLs in trucks/vans.

Although not statistically significant, DRLs in cars were more likely to reduce daytime Single-PC-to-PED/CYC fatal and injury crashes. In contrast, DRLs in LTVs seemed to have an unintended consequence against single-LTV crashes involving pedestrians and pedalcyclists. The large negative effects, although not statistically significant, cannot be totally ignored.

Given how the data is more recent, the study was done here in the states, and the rigor of the design and methods, I'm much more inclined to believe this one.

[BlaineWasHere]

Originally Posted by zaptorque

Did you read the report from the National Highway and Traffic Safety Admin? Took data from over 9 different states from 2000-2005. Found that DRLs in passenger cars had a -8.9% effectiveness in fatal crashes, 2.3% effectiveness in injury crashes, and -2.0% effectiveness in ALL crashes. None of these results tell anything of actual statistical significance. The only data point I found that could possible support the effectiveness of DRLs was the 19.1% rating in passenger cars against pedestrians and cyclists, but showed a strong ineffecitveness of DRLs in trucks/vans.



Given how the data is more recent, the study was done here in the states, and the rigor of the design and methods, I'm much more inclined to believe this one.

Statistically speaking I think that's a VERY poor sample. I would have liked to see data from way more than 9 states. I've lived in multiple states and I can tell you ones with better weather year 'round DRLs would make little difference because visibility is rarely reduced by weather during the day.

However when I lived in Michigan almost all motorists would drive with full headlights on during the day. This is because it is far more frequent for there to be reduction in visibility during daytime hours, particularly during the winter.

I also think these dates the data was taken from is a problem. Pretty much the only manufacture putting DRLs across the line-up back then was GM, while they sell a ton of cars I'd like to think that most of the cars on the road back in 2000-05 didn't have DRLs and sample sizes were so small that the data is almost irrelevant.

Again, this is just my opinion on some of this data. I have nothing to back it up! So don't quote me boy, I ain't said shit!

[KSC]

It's one thing for an advocate of jailbreaking to balk at Apple for sandboxing the iPhone, for instance. Someone pays good money for something, they should be entitled to use it how they see fit, but this seems excessive to me. I get it, it's your car, but damn, it's 2 little lights for cripes sake! Lights that cant even be that cant even be seen by the driver of the car.

As far as stats are oncerned, even if a single accident per 1000 DRL equipped vehicles is prevented, isn't that worth it? Its not like having them are going to cause any more.

[Khyron686]

Originally Posted by zaptorque

Did you read the report from the National Highway and Traffic Safety Admin? Took data from over 9 different states from 2000-2005. Found that DRLs in passenger cars had a -8.9% effectiveness in fatal crashes, 2.3% effectiveness in injury crashes, and -2.0% effectiveness in ALL crashes. None of these results tell anything of actual statistical significance. The only data point I found that could possible support the effectiveness of DRLs was the 19.1% rating in passenger cars against pedestrians and cyclists, but showed a strong ineffecitveness of DRLs in trucks/vans.



Given how the data is more recent, the study was done here in the states, and the rigor of the design and methods, I'm much more inclined to believe this one.

I did read it (well the conclusion and sample sizes) - but the best studies are where EVERONE has to change, and you monitor the difference over time. That's why countries that switch sides of the road, or imperial to metric or enforce DRLs on everyone are the best to study.

The point is, it's either NEUTRAL difference, or POSITIVE difference. There is no case where it somehow makes it worse, unlike even an airbag. I get not paying extra to put it in, but it's already there.

Again, it's like bitching about the 3rd brake light because you don't like the color, or the shape. Seriously - if someone came on here bitching about the 3rd brake light and how they could disable it, 90% of the posters here would think that person was a moron. But I also hate on drop in HID kits, so maybe I'm just grumpy old man.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Correlation is not causation.

[bdanisi]

I just drive with my parking break engaged. It's pretty cool but I have a manual so I have to park on absolutely flat surfaces now, kind of fun playing the where did my car roll to game tho

[sol740]

I just constantly lay into the horn while I'm driving, everyone knows where I am, and everybody seems to give me props for being so safe. Many times I see someone mouthing compliments at me, but I can't ever quite make out exactly what they're saying, with all the safety going on.

[Figo]

looks great!
Where did u order them from? can u show me some more pictures?

Originally Posted by BlaineWasHere

I just put yellow bulbs in mine. I wanted to retain the DRLs for safety, but get some style! Anything that helps protect my FR-S from idiot motorists is a good thing!!!