Porsche Enthusiasts Club Forum
https://forums.tipec.net/

Lighting requirement question
https://forums.tipec.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=14807		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  broady_6 [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Lighting requirement question
In the recent past VOSA made it illegal to have front and rear side markers on separate switches as many many older car did and i suspect still have. I know I haven't modified any.

I also know that they recently introduced a new law that all new cars sold in the UK must now have permanent day lighters. Because most people are to stupid to turn on their lights at the right time so the government has to do it for them.

With this knowledge, why do i need new cars with day lighters (side markers) on the front but no side markers on the rear?
Author:  tr7v8 [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
Because it is an EU requirement. I assume you mean DTRLs or Day Time Running Lights. The lack of including the rears is mad though. Some retard on the M25 a few weeks ago, big look at me Dame Edna DTRLs on her Audi with no other lights on. Oh & it was around 7 PM!
If you truly mean side markers then I had them on my TR7 with no problems.
Author:  broady_6 [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
i do mean day time running lights.
But why implement a law saying that if front lights are on backs must be on and the bring in a law to contradict it.

i see endless cars with no lights on. mostly a dusk i assume the driver is thinking "well i dont need my lights on to see so why else would i need them?"

I spent most of my evening drives home from work flashing people trying to make them realize the alternative use for the bright making things on their cars
Author:  lindsayhbrown [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
My current daily Smax has these front DTRLs only !! It also has auto lights on and tonight visibility was getting quite poor and they didn't come on, yet on some days they will come on and visibility is very good. I know I can turn them on/off manually but you would think that there would be some sort of variable resistor you could adjust the on/off light intensity with
Author:  garyw [ Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
tr7v8 wrote:
Because it is an EU requirement. I assume you mean DTRLs or Day Time Running Lights. The lack of including the rears is mad though. Some retard on the M25 a few weeks ago, big look at me Dame Edna DTRLs on her Audi with no other lights on. Oh & it was around 7 PM!

Seen the same thing on the M1, late at night!! everyone was passing and hooting/waving and they were totally oblivious to it :x
Author:  broady_6 [ Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
lindsayhbrown wrote:
My current daily Smax has these front DTRLs only !! It also has auto lights on and tonight visibility was getting quite poor and they didn't come on, yet on some days they will come on and visibility is very good. I know I can turn them on/off manually but you would think that there would be some sort of variable resistor you could adjust the on/off light intensity with



That's because they are light sensative, not visa ilty sensative. The number of people driving in the fog with no lights amazes me. Its mainly newer cars with auto lights!

People are simply to stupid to realise that it is quite bright which is why their lights haven't come one. But just because its bright doesn't mean visabilty is very good!

What happened to public service announcements on TV
Author:  RH944 [ Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
I often think that it is a mistake to start having more auto sensors on cars.
The driving population is getting so complacent and expecting the car to do everything for them.

Look at all the problems already.
Lights left on after fog cause they don't realise they don't automaticly switch off.
Lights not on when required.
Windscreen wipers that come on at the slightest touch of rain.
Auto Parking systems will just add to the lazy attitude of most motorists.

Think I'm becoming a Luditte

rant over
Author:  broady_6 [ Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Lighting requirement question
RH944 wrote:
I often think that it is a mistake to start having more auto sensors on cars.
The driving population is getting so complacent and expecting the car to do everything for them.

Look at all the problems already.
Lights left on after fog cause they don't realise they don't automaticly switch off.
Lights not on when required.
Windscreen wipers that come on at the slightest touch of rain.
Auto Parking systems will just add to the lazy attitude of most motorists.

Think I'm becoming a Luditte

rant over



Completely agree with you, its not a rant its a statement of facts! I drive cars from the 1920's at work.

If cars were like that, there wouldnt be time for texting or being on the phone. In the Rolls aside from actualyl driving you have to control the mixture, ignition timing, engine temp. The gear stick and hank brake are on the right along with a number of gauges to watch.

I often think everyone should be made to drive older cars as part of the driving test.

Much like experiencing a motorcycle, and some version of lorry and agricultural vehicle so people appreciate the driving properties of different vehicles.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/