Daytime running Lights

Wescyde · Post by **Wescyde** » Fri Jul 12, 2002 4:27 am

Has anyone figured out how to turn the daytime running light off yet?? I didn't see a posting so I don't think we know yet.

lopers · Post by **lopers** » Fri Jul 12, 2002 4:49 am

Yes, drive around with your parking break on.

Frosty · Post by **Frosty** » Fri Jul 12, 2002 4:50 am

Don't do it Leave em on I have been running with my lights on for 24 hrs a day and know for a fact it has saved me from being smacked numerous times.20 years ago when very few people had their lights on acquaintances told me that they looked once didn't see me, started to advance, then noticed my headlights and backed off. It has been the law on new cars in Canada for 14 years and numerous studies has shown the benefits.As the Santana Song goes "leave your lights on".
[Modified by kshields, 3:51 PM 7/12/2002]

d_m_kolb · Post by **d_m_kolb** » Fri Jul 12, 2002 5:45 am

quote:Yes, drive around with your parking break on.No that wont wear brake out quick (removed) hell. or make the engine work harder hurting gas mileage because it'd working to over come the breaks now.Leave them on. They might save your life and it doesn't look bad having them on during the day anyway. It makes your vehicle easier to see during daylight hours.

Narwhal · Post by **Narwhal** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 9:28 am

If you want to disable your DRL's AND your auto-headlights, go here: http://www.matrixowners.com/modules.php ... c&start=15 You'll have to modify the directions a bit (since they're for a Matrix), but it ought to work the same way.
[Modified by Narwhal, 1:31 AM 7/18/2002]

Wescyde · Post by **Wescyde** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 1:20 pm

Thank you Narwhal. I own a 2001 Passat and I took the DRLs off and have had no problems since. There are still cars out there without DRLs so I'm not too worried about the safety issue. I will have to see if I can follow the instructions on the web page you refered me too. I just think that cars with DRLs look silly (Saturns).

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 11:41 pm

It is the law to have DRL in Canada because they make the roads safer for you and me. If you do disable them, I hope you get a ticket. Just imagine this for a second. It's getting dark out but not quite enough for your night lights. The sun is setting behind you and you are enjoying a beautiful day. You just left your girlfriend's house after spending the day by the pool. You let the rpms climb up because you love the lift rush from your GT. You're listening to your favorite rap singer blasting away from the radio. Life is good......and then..... a 5 year old kid crosses the road because she couldn't see you without your DRL. Now image you kill her in front of the eyes of her parents. It's their only child. What if it's somebody you really cared for. You'd make a nice $ex slave for your prison partner, Bubba. While you are at it, why not remove the blinkers too. You don't need them. You know which way you are turning. Put really dark tint on your brake lights too so nobody knows when you are stopping but hey at least you look cool. Disable the third brake light also so you don't blind other drivers while stopping. Hell, remove your headlights and only drive with your fogs lights on that way you'll be really stealthy. I'd also modify my bumbers and put large metal spikes on them so that if I hit something I'm sure to kill it. Ok, I'm getting carried away, it's just that I find it very irresponsible to try to remove a safety feature that could save MY life just because YOU think it looks cooler. I agree some safety features are useless (like the sunroof stoping halfway) but other safety features are for the security of others and they save lives everyday. Even though you might be the best driver in the world, it's sometimes others you need to worry about.Be smart.

d_m_kolb · Post by **d_m_kolb** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 12:00 am

I agree with what Ryan's point is. Why the hell would you want to disable the DRLs? Your Vibe or Matrix will look no better I promise you. You'll actually get more attention to your vehicle having them on because it's easier to spot. I have noticed even on the brightest days that people driving with there lights on or DRLs I spot them much faster than I do the no lights on drivers.This option could save your life or someone elses and getting rid of it really just shows stupidity on the owners part.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 12:41 am

quote:Just imagine this for a second. It's getting dark out but not quite enough for your night lights. The sun is setting behind you and you are enjoying a beautiful day. You just left your girlfriend's house after spending the day by the pool. You let the rpms climb up because you love the lift rush from your GT. You're listening to your favorite rap singer blasting away from the radio. Life is good......and then..... a 5 year old kid crosses the road because she couldn't see you without your DRL. Now image you kill her in front of the eyes of her parents. It's their only child.Hey, let's add that she's with her puppy and looking at a bunch of ducklings crossing the road. He kills them all. Lets add that just before the little girl dies she looks up at her parents and says she loves them while they hold her in their arms.Can you get any more dramatic?It seems to me that we got along for years without DRLs. Plus, they make motorcycles blend in more to other traffic and make them harder to see. Also, while this isn't a problem with the Vibe because it has automatic headlights, I've seen many people driving at night with just their DRLs on. No tail lights and the headlight are at a lower power setting.quote:While you are at it, why not remove the blinkers too. You don't need them. You know which way you are turning.Why not. Nobody really uses them around here anyway.quote:Disable the third brake light also so you don't blind other drivers while stopping.Third brake lights are a waste. If you can't see the tail lights there is a problem. Plus, there are no standards for the third brake light. I've seen some cars where the third brake light is LOWER than the regular brake lights.quote:I'd also modify my bumbers and put large metal spikes on them so that if I hit something I'm sure to kill it.Why not remove the driver air bag on all cars and replace them with a large metal spike. I'll bet you'd drive alot safer with that thing pointing at your chest.quote:Ok, I'm getting carried away,You think?quote:it's just that I find it very irresponsible to try to remove a safety feature that could save MY life just because YOU think it looks cooler. The only way DRLs could save your life is if you were not paying attention to what was coming at you. If that's the case, it's your fault, not the driver of the car with no DRLs.You know, speed limiters to keep everyone at 30-mph or less would be a great safety feature to could save lives too. This way there would be no serious crashes at all. I say GM should require that too. NOT! (now I'm getting carried away)I'm not trying to bust your chops or attack you. It's just me ranting away and offering alternate views to think about.
[Modified by NovaResource, 1:04 PM 7/19/2002]

Frosty · Post by **Frosty** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:02 am

Come over from the "dark" side.Exerpt from: http://www.canadacar.com/magazine/safety/safety.htm "Daytime running lights (DRL) have proven themselves to be among the more effective safety features since they became mandatory in Canada in the 1989 model year. In May 1998, the Federal Government released a study showing that between 1989 and 1998, DRLs were responsible for an 8.3 per cent reduction in head-on and turning collisions in the daylight hours, and a 16.6 per cent reduction in those collisions at twilight. Officials from General Motors, the automaker which pioneered DRLs, say a recent study comparing the collision rates of vehicles before and after DRLs show they helped those in GM cars avoid more than 17,000 crashes, a 5 per cent reduction in daytime, multivehicle, non-rear end collisions. "Every 5 or 10% helps. We are so used to seeing cars with their lights on that when I look down a street and see a car without the headlights on looks weird and antiquated. There are so many sleepy, distracted, impaired, and just plain bad drivers out there every little bit helps. To say that having everyone driving with headlights on is distracting is just too bad! Shouldn't you be distracted by cars coming your direction?
[Modified by kshields, 1:03 PM 7/19/2002]

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:06 am

True, but the problem isn't cars with no DRLs, it's the "many sleepy, distracted, impaired, and just plain bad drivers out there."In the same way, DRL's are like coffee. Sure, it may help 10% of sleepy drivers stay awake but the real solution is for the driver to stop, get some sleep and only continue driving when well rested.
[Modified by NovaResource, 1:10 PM 7/19/2002]

lopers · Post by **lopers** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:07 am

If you don't like the safety features built into the Vibe and/or Matrix, sell your car and buy another one and stop making useless statements that you can't back-up just becuase you don't like the safety features. Trust me, nobody cares. Don't you have better things to do than debate features that you don't like? Obviously, you just want attention.

Frosty · Post by **Frosty** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:12 am

From the same page as earlier http://www.canadacar.com/magazine/safety/safety.htm "Top 10 Safety Features and Technologies Most Desired by Consumers (according to J.D. Power and Associates 2000 APEAL Feature Contenting Report (SM)) 1. Anti-lock brakes - 93 per cent 2. Side-impact airbags - 72 per cent 3. Brake assist - 70 per cent 4. Stability control - 66 per cent 5. Daytime running lights - 63 per cent 6. "Smart" passenger airbag - 61 per cent 7. High-intensity headlights - 61 per cent 8. Auto-dimming rearview mirror - 59 per cent 9. Traction control - 58 per cent 10. Run-flat tires - 56 per cent. "So 63% actually want DRL'sOk enough is enough. Ken steps off his soapbox and ambles off

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:13 am

quote:If you don't like the safety features built into the Vibe and/or Matrix, sell your car and buy another one and stop making useless statements that you can't back-up just becuase you don't like the safety features.What I don't like is "big brother" telling me I need something for my safety.quote:Trust me, nobody cares.Obviously people do because this thread is getting much activity.quote:Don't you have better things to do than debate features that you don't like?No, I don't and apparently, neither do you.quote:Obviously, you just want attention.Yeah, that's what I'm doing.
[Modified by NovaResource, 1:16 PM 7/19/2002]

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:23 am

"Stoopidest" is actually spelled with a "u" not "oo".Don't get me started about air bags. I'm not totally against them but I have a little problem with putting a exploding bag directly in front of me. Air bags are the governments way of protecting us from outselves if we are too stupid to wear a seat belt.

d_m_kolb · Post by **d_m_kolb** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 3:05 am

people will never stop driving sleepy, and at some point aren't paying attention. If DRLs add a little safty to that kind of driving hell yes I'm for them. As for the air bags if you still don't wear your seat belt your an idiot. An air bag can kill you if not wearing a seat belt. Air bags save many lives if wearing a seatbelt also.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 3:19 am

quote:As for the air bags if you still don't wear your seat belt your an idiot. An air bag can kill you if not wearing a seat belt. Air bags save many lives if wearing a seatbelt also.I totally agree. Look at your air bags and you see the letters SRS which stand for Supplemental Restraint System. Supplemental meaning "in addition to". In other words, the air bag supplements your seat belt, it does not replace it.
[Modified by NovaResource, 2:47 PM 7/19/2002]

hoeboe · Post by **hoeboe** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 12:45 pm

funny that you would like seat belts... i'm surprised you haven't made up some excuse about a pain in your neck and gotten a doctors note specifing that you do not have to wear a seat belt!speaking of pain in the neck. enough about it! if you don't goddam well like it then go and find your old friggin 76 chevy nova and be happy with that since that doesn't have ANY of the saftey features which you hate the most.btw, kind of ironic that the Big 3 squashed Tucker's original idea of seat belts because they thought it would mean people would think their cars were unsafe??? seems some of that mentality is still running rampant...

Wescyde · Post by **Wescyde** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 3:51 am

Sorry its taken so long to respond, but it looks like quite the hot topic. I am still going to take the DRLs off. There are tons of cars out there without them and I don't like the way they look. Everyone can have their own opnion. I just like the way it looks without the DRLs.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 4:56 am

quote:funny that you would like seat belts... i'm surprised you haven't made up some excuse about a pain in your neck and gotten a doctors note specifing that you do not have to wear a seat belt!No, the only pain in my neck is you. I like to keep myself in good shape. Do you have to get doctors notices all the time? I know, you're that kid in school who had to get a doctors note to be excused from gym all the time.quote:speaking of pain in the neck. enough about it!You better get the neck checked out by your doctor and get another note.quote: if you don't goddam well like it then go and find your old friggin 76 chevy nova and be happy with that since that doesn't have ANY of the saftey features which you hate the most.I'm sorry you're so jealous of my classic Nova. I'll give you and your Yugo a 15 second head start in the quarter and just drive in first gear as not to embarrass you so much.
[Modified by NovaResource, 4:04 PM 7/20/2002]

hoeboe · Post by **hoeboe** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 5:44 am

if your nova starts that is...of the thousands of cars out there and you pick a nova to restore. you should have picked an "87 then. at least the components are more reliable. if i have to spell it out for 'ya (T.O.Y.O.T.A) and yes i was that kid in school... the one that would bide his time and strike back when you would least expect it, and you wouldn't have a clue as to who did it 'cause you pissed off everyone you met.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 7:59 am

quote:if your nova starts that is...Starts every time. More that I can say for your Yugo.quote:of the thousands of cars out there and you pick a nova to restore. you should have picked an "87 then. at least the components are more reliable. if i have to spell it out for 'ya (T.O.Y.O.T.A)Sorry pal. Those non-Novas are total junk. Obviously you don't know much about cars but then, I already knew that from your previous post.quote:and yes i was that kid in school... the one that would bide his time and strike back when you would least expect it, and you wouldn't have a clue as to who did it 'cause you pissed off everyone you met.LOL! I'm glad to hear you had good dreams and not nightmares when you were a kid. Now wake up and stop dreaming.

d_m_kolb · Post by **d_m_kolb** » Sun Jul 21, 2002 4:38 am

I really hope you 2 aren't going to need a baby sitter. LOL Just kidding but please as much as I love to watch you to go at each other please try to stay on topic. If this keeps going I'll lock the thread.If you really want to flame each other start anouth post. I wont care what you two talk about then. Thanks guys.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sun Jul 21, 2002 11:02 am

Don't worry about me. I'm not looking for a flame war. I'm just offering my opinion and apparently, "hoeboe" doesn't like my opinion and wants to take away my first ammendment rights.If you look, he only has 2 posts and both attacking me. He's probably just some punk trying to cause trouble. I'll bet he signed-up just before his first post. Any way you can check that?

Post by **NSimkins** » Sun Jul 21, 2002 11:32 am

quote:Any way you can check that?Their user profile would have the information you are looking for. Just click their member name in the post, or click the Member List link towards the top of every page on the forum, find the name of the member you are looking for to obtain their details.
[Modified by NSimkins, 10:36 PM 7/21/2002]

d_m_kolb · Post by **d_m_kolb** » Sun Jul 21, 2002 10:22 pm

I read and look at all posts. If there is ever a problem let me know by IM me and send me the link and what's going on. If I see a problem I'll also deal with it. Nova I do see that he only has two posts both of which are flaming you. If it continues it will be handle.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Jul 21, 2002 11:31 pm

Hoeboe, please consider this a warning. If you make another personal attack on a member here at GVC I will suspend your posting privileges immediately. The same goes for anyone else.Everyone has a right to their own opinion as long as they follow the Terms of Service they agreed to when they joined this forum.Thanks,Mike

Frosty · Post by **Frosty** » Mon Jul 22, 2002 12:05 am

Uh Maybe you could refresh us by posting the terms of service or the link.quote:Everyone has a right to their own opinion as long as they follow the Terms of Service they agreed to when they joined this forum.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Jul 22, 2002 1:28 am

Sure. Here they are (not too stray off topic in this thread )Considering the real-time nature of this bulletin board, it is impossible for us to review messages or confirm the validity of information posted. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the contents of posted messages and are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of GenVibe.com or any entity associated with this GenVibe.com. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately.You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the GenVibe.com community forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this forum.Although this forum does not and cannot review the messages posted and is not responsible for the content of any of these messages, GenVibe.com reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless GenVibe.com, ZeroForum, Inc. (the makers of the bulletin board software), and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s).We at GenVibe.com also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any message posted by you.Please note that advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are inappropriate on this forum.- Mike

hoeboe · Post by **hoeboe** » Mon Jul 22, 2002 6:27 am

my sincerest apologies to everyone for my behaviour (even you novaresource). if i have offended anyone please forgive me. i can get a little fired up when it's something i believe in. sorry if this has caused you any grief. i only have one question... which is, what was it that i said that caused the warning i got?

d_m_kolb · Post by **d_m_kolb** » Mon Jul 22, 2002 9:32 am

quote:You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the GenVibe.com community forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this forum.The flaming is the real problem. I can understand getting fired about about something you beleive in and there is nothing wrong with that just do it respectfully as not to upset people.

Robovibe · Post by **Robovibe** » Tue Aug 06, 2002 8:27 am

I don't mind the daytime running lights but the automatic lights on present a little problem for me. I work at a military installation and must pass through a security checkpoint every morning, needless to say the guards get a little ticked off when you approach with your headlights and not your parking lights.

MJN2 · Post by **MJN2** » Tue Aug 06, 2002 11:22 pm

Yeah Robo, that would be a problem. I think I know where you work too As for the DRL's, I like them. My last car didn't come with them ('99 Cougar) but I bought the DRL module from Ford about a week after I bought the car.

935684 · Post by **935684** » Sun Aug 25, 2002 10:22 pm

I might as well add my 2 cents' worth.I live in Canada right now, so DRLs are required. However, since the early 1960s, when I got a job that meant I had to do a lot of highway driving out west, I've been driving with my low beams on, day and night. When I'm not interfering with the vision of other drivers, I use my high beams.The reason I began to do this was that I noticed a lot of truckers and highway bus drivers were doing it. I wasn't the brightest bulb in the area, so I asked some of the people with whom I worked about it. They explained that, although it does nothing to help you see better, it gives you that slight additional safety edge, as other drivers will be aware of your presence, sooner.I've never changed this practice. Even though almost everyone now has DRLs, I still have that edge, because regular lights are much brighter, and my tail lights are also in operation.I like to employ every advantage I can get. It can get dangerous out there, at times.

yank dini · Post by **yank dini** » Mon Aug 26, 2002 3:52 am

Not to go off topic but I had a question for HOEBOE: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO THIS SITE: http://www.okayplayer.com?????????

yank dini · Post by **yank dini** » Mon Aug 26, 2002 3:56 am

Now to jump back to the topic of discussion, I think the DRL's are cool and I need them(the way I drive). But sometimes I wish that you could cut the headlamps off separate from the fog lamps and parking lights.

cibomatto · Post by **cibomatto** » Mon Aug 26, 2002 6:14 pm

I don't mind them however since I am in the military I find them REALLY ANNOYING.. when driving around in the early morning hours of the military base I often have to get stopped for marching platoons and they often ask to turn the lights off. Also at night time when pulling up to a military gate for ID check. when you drive up they request that the lights get turned off... Its not very conveniant in some situations...

935684 · Post by **935684** » Mon Aug 26, 2002 8:29 pm

I can understand your point. You're in a unique situation, especially when it comes to security.I wonder whether it would be possible for you to install a kill switch that would temporarily turn off all but the interior lighting. Aside from the cost (and possible difficulty) of doing this, the only downside I can think of, would be that installing it might give GM an excuse to void your warranty.

LocDog · Post by **LocDog** » Thu Aug 29, 2002 4:07 am

I recently changed my radio and when i took it out i was lookin inside the dashboard and saw a box labeled daytime running light relay box or something like that... i didnt mess with it, but maybe u can take it apart and disable it.

935684 · Post by **935684** » Thu Aug 29, 2002 11:28 pm

It was actually cibomatto who wanted to be able to kill his DRLs. However, I'm sure he's seen your suggestion by now.

Flip-Side · Post by **Flip-Side** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 3:42 am

Engage your parking brake, start the car, release the brake. Your daytime lights get disabled. It's in the car manual plp.

ullbergm · Post by **ullbergm** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 10:49 pm

quote:Engage your parking brake, start the car, release the brake. Your daytime lights get disabled. It's in the car manual plp.They are only disabled for about 15 seconds, not for the whole trip..
[Modified by ullbergm, 8:50 AM 9/15/2002]

LocDog · Post by **LocDog** » Sun Sep 15, 2002 1:15 am

if u start the car with the parkin brake up, they dont tunr on until you put it down.

NovaResource · Post by **NovaResource** » Sun Sep 15, 2002 3:05 am

quote:Engage your parking brake, start the car, release the brake. Your daytime lights get disabled. It's in the car manual plp.Wrong. The come on 15 seconds after the e-brake is realesed. The only way to keep them off is to keep the e-brake on.

Flip-Side · Post by **Flip-Side** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 8:20 am

Ah...I have tested it and u all are right. Use to be that GM vehicles could put their parking brake down 1 click, and they turned off. Kinda pointless to have that in the manual huh.

OlDood · Post by **OlDood** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 8:36 am

Please understand that this is not in any way a judgemental question, but a sincere attempt to understand your position:Why this fixation with whether lights are on or off?As retired military, I understand the requirement to turn off lights as one approaches a military base gate sentry. That is no problem - one simply lifts the emergency brake one notch until the sentry has been passed.But why are so many others so fanatically opposed to their lights being on? What is the problem with daytime running lights?VibeOn!

LocDog · Post by **LocDog** » Mon Sep 16, 2002 10:52 am

u know... if u take out the center console( the thing with cup holders and crap) and go to where the e-brake is. theres a button that it holds down when its in the down position. when u lift it up it releases the button and then the brake light comes on the dash....If u were to cross the wires on the little button, it would tell the car that the ebrake is on and would work the same was as starting the car with the ebrake engaged, the only thing is that the brake light will always be on... unless theres a way to unplug it...then u can put a switch instead of crossing the wires and use it to turn the drl's on. but to turn them off again you'd have to restart the car.It just might work...
[Modified by LocDog, 9:54 PM 9/16/2002]

Photoshots · Post by **Photoshots** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:32 am

Engaging my parking brake does nothing to my Daylight Running Lights (DRL), is it supposed to cut them off while on?

silver_vibe · Post by **silver_vibe** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 1:03 am

Quote, originally posted by Photoshots Â»Engaging my parking brake does nothing to my Daylight Running Lights (DRL), is it supposed to cut them off while on?You need to leave the parking brake on before you start the car...before you start your car release the brake then slowly pull it up to the first click and then start your car (do not release the brake). The DRL should then not turn on. I don't recommend doing this, but it worked for me when I tried it years back.

Imonaride82 · Post by **Imonaride82** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 1:47 am

My Saab explained in the manual how to do it, because Saabs have parking lights on at all times, and the headlights are turned on for daylight. So, in other words, your lights are always on. I forget how now because I wasn't interested and I don't have the car anymore, but there was some fuse you just had to take out. It was something rather simple. Of course, the Vibe may be different.