Chevrolet Malibu sales jump 51.5%; dealers pleased

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:25:02 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@lycos/com> wrote:

>When the US Congress was considering making DRLs standard in the US, several
>studies showed DRLs caused more accidents then the prevented. Particularly
>at times of limited vision and increases in motorcycle accidents. Do a
>search of the Congressional Record for the facts.
>

Wacko bull****.
Even you could put something in the Congressional Record.
Might as well read the Old Farmer's Almanac.

--Vic

Can we assume you do not ride a motorcycle?

DRLs are NOT standard in the US, the Congress conclude years ago that they
caused more problems than the prevented.

"Vic Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:54:36 -0700, SMS >
> wrote:
>

> There's nothing wrong with DRLs'. Any I've seen.
> The only problem is the anti-GM crowd that jumped on them because GM
> was the first to make them standard in the U.S./Canada.

Go to Committee reports, not member remarks and see for yourself why DRLs
were not made standard.


"Vic Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:25:02 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@lycos/com> wrote:
>
>>When the US Congress was considering making DRLs standard in the US,
>>several
>>studies showed DRLs caused more accidents then the prevented.
>>Particularly
>>at times of limited vision and increases in motorcycle accidents. Do a
>>search of the Congressional Record for the facts.
>>
>
> Wacko bull****.
> Even you could put something in the Congressional Record.
> Might as well read the Old Farmer's Almanac.
>
> --Vic

80 Knight wrote:

> You basically want the vehicle to have a warning system telling the driver
> the DRL's are on, but it's nighttime, and the full headlights should be on?

Yes, because that's the most common problem with DRL equipped vehicles.
The driver thinks that their lights are on because the DRLs (which are
usually brighter than European DRLs) are providing road illumination.
But they don't realize that their tail lights aren't on.

> GM's vehicles already have auto lights. When it gets dark, the headlights
> come on by themselves. As for the high beam DRL's, they don't bother me in
> the slightest, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Nah, we don't have to disagree, anyone that doubts that high beam DRLs
annoy other drivers can simply read the NHTSA report, including the
NHTSA proposal that the European standard for DRL brightness be adopted
in the U.S..

Mike Hunter wrote:
> When the US Congress was considering making DRLs standard in the US, several
> studies showed DRLs caused more accidents then the prevented. Particularly
> at times of limited vision and increases in motorcycle accidents. Do a
> search of the Congressional Record for the facts.

The NHTSA study showed no increase or decrease from DRLs. DRLs increased
rates for some types of accidents and decreased them for others. The
only clear benefit of DRLs that was found was that pedestrians were more
likely to see vehicles with DRLs at dawn and dusk, and hence there was a
reduction in pedestrian fatalities.

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:55:46 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@lycos/com> wrote:

>Can we assume you do not ride a motorcycle?
>
Good assumption, but nothing to do with it. Daytime lights on bikes
have only proven good. Makes them more visible so you don't pull out
in front of them and cause an accident. I've seen it work.
Same for cars, especially the ones colored the same as the pavement,
including bumpers. Seen that too.

>DRLs are NOT standard in the US, the Congress conclude years ago that they
>caused more problems than the prevented.
>
As I said, they are standard on U.S./Canada GM vehicles - as far as I
know. DRL's are the law in Canada.
Easier to standardize production.
Congress should give Canada the "facts" about DRL's.
Include that crap free with the "Waterboarding Manual."
Congress conclude? Might be a good idea.
Probably got paid by some anti-DRL greenie wackos via lobbyists.
DRL's burning use some gas, adding to global warming.
Are you part of that crowd?
Don't worry about it. You can bypass DRL's in the U.S. and do your
part to reduce global warming. Turn down the heat in the house just
to be sure.
I don't care much about DRL's one way or another, except for arguing
More concerned that my toaster doesn't zap me when I stick a fork in
there. So I don't.

--Vic



>"Vic Smith" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:54:36 -0700, SMS >
>> wrote:
>>
>
>> There's nothing wrong with DRLs'. Any I've seen.
>> The only problem is the anti-GM crowd that jumped on them because GM
>> was the first to make them standard in the U.S./Canada.
>

Vic Smith wrote:

> DRL's burning use some gas, adding to global warming.

GM is part of that crowd. They got permission to disconnect DRLs when
conducting their EPA mileage tests. Considering that the amount of extra
fuel that DRLs use is extremely small, you have to wonder why they felt
compelled to disconnect them.

"SMS" > wrote in message
...
> 80 Knight wrote:
>
>> You basically want the vehicle to have a warning system telling the
>> driver the DRL's are on, but it's nighttime, and the full headlights
>> should be on?
>
> Yes, because that's the most common problem with DRL equipped vehicles.
> The driver thinks that their lights are on because the DRLs (which are
> usually brighter than European DRLs) are providing road illumination. But
> they don't realize that their tail lights aren't on.

That is called "driver error". Has nothing to do with the DRL system.

>> GM's vehicles already have auto lights. When it gets dark, the
>> headlights come on by themselves. As for the high beam DRL's, they don't
>> bother me in the slightest, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
>
> Nah, we don't have to disagree, anyone that doubts that high beam DRLs
> annoy other drivers can simply read the NHTSA report, including the NHTSA
> proposal that the European standard for DRL brightness be adopted in the
> U.S..

Oh boy the NHTSA did a report! Seriously, neither you nor the NHTSA can
tell me what bothers my eyes at night, or anytime. DRL's have been standard
in Canada for years, and no one here complains about them. If you live in a
US state where DRL's are not required by law, and wish to disable them, that
is what you need to do. Like I said, agree to disagree.

80 Knight wrote:

> Oh boy the NHTSA did a report! Seriously, neither you nor the NHTSA can
> tell me what bothers my eyes at night, or anytime.

Not you specifically, but 80% of the population.

you got that right! One will see Pennsylvania State Police stopping
Canadian drivers, on I-81 most any evening, for not turning on their
headlamps. A $132 'donation' to the states road system LOL


"SMS" > wrote in message
...
> 80 Knight wrote:
>
>> You basically want the vehicle to have a warning system telling the
>> driver the DRL's are on, but it's nighttime, and the full headlights
>> should be on?
>
> Yes, because that's the most common problem with DRL equipped vehicles.
> The driver thinks that their lights are on because the DRLs (which are
> usually brighter than European DRLs) are providing road illumination. But
> they don't realize that their tail lights aren't on.
>