Fog lights MOT

[polygonum_on_google]

Definition of "cheap car"? Certainly applies across a lot of Mercedes, VAG, and many other makes.

[polygonum_on_google]

Even odder, the legal words say:

On the centre-line or off side of the vehicle (disregarding any sidecar forming part of a motor bicycle combination)

Makes it even more difficult to assess any useful details about the vehicle in front if you don't know whether in is in the middle or at the side.

[Steve Walker]

I had a Mk2 Sierra and I too found myself driving to work with the rear fog lights on the day after an MOT. The switch had an LED in it, but was cunningly designed to be totally hidden when in a normal driving position. I only spotted it as I caught a slight glimmer of a reflection in the glass of the window.

SteveW

[Brian Reay]

Perhaps you should stop digging.

[Robin]

it's similarly not deserving of a substantive reply?

*"Why not in towns? I can't see anything in the Regulations or HC that distinguishes them from any other location."

[polygonum_on_google]

I understand that rules for old vehicles are different, but on a vehicle which otherwise has a full set of lights on both sides, it seems odd to allow a single HIRF.

[NY]

I agree. The lighting regulations baffle me: they allow a single rear fog light and yet you can be prosecuted for having a "single" tail light (due to a bulb failure). And they allow indicators which are very close to (and therefore masked by) headlights or brake lights. Some VW Golfs are guilty of the rear indicator which is almost invisible when the driver brakes. Almost every car made in the last 30 years has its front indicators in the same housing as the headlights and so very hard to see at night on an oncoming car.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Why?

rear lights are there to signal teh presence of anpother vehicle or the intentions of the one its on.

Indicators are one at a time. Plenty of brake lights are in threes. It is only a question of ensuriong that teh vehicle witdh is known that means we generally have two rear riding lights.

One high intensity fog lamp that can cut through to a greater range is better than two that can't. Peak power is what you want here.

[polygonum_on_google]

Indicators are a false comparison as their functionality is achieved by only lighting on one side. (You wouldn't be allowed to fir indicators on one side only, would you?)

I don't think anyone is suggesting any reduction in peak power output from any HIRF. Just that a single light doesn't give as much help as a pair. Especially when the vehicle is being driven on the wrong side of the road (as in, LHD car on RHD road or vice versa).

Potentially, having one each side could give much better visibility to the side than a single lamp.

[Spike]

He can't help pontificating, but really doesn't like being caught out.

And don't ask what happened to his 'Parking' crusade....

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

what happened brian? ....

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

spot on the worse ones are the indicator in the middle of the circular parking light.....but loads of front indicators are away from the headlights though..... also LEDs shouldn't be allowed on cars.....

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

DRLs should also be banned...stupid dazzling things....

[polygonum_on_google]

If you find them dazzling, do you by any chance have a problem with your eyes?

I have been very happy to see them on all manner of vehicles in situations where sight of the vehicle might othrwise have been impaired. Do remember that they can make a big difference when going from bright sun to stygian blackness of a bridge. And, when cycling, I have found it much more difficult to see and maintain awareness of vehicles behind me when they are grey (current top colour), and the weather is grey, and the road is grey... DRLs help a lot.

[polygonum_on_google]

Some appalling designs. There is a particular roundabout near home where the left indicator can be very difficult to see on vehicles coming round - hence difficult to be sure whether they are indicating to leave the roundabout or carrying on round.

Sunshine on reflective bits inside light clusters can play havoc with visibility.

On my car, the DRL switches off and the indicator alone lights - which makes it exceedingly obvious. And, although bright, they seem not to be dazzling. (I report my impression of the same.simlar model being driven by others. Obviously my own perception of my own car when driving it is not significant.)

[NY]

I agree: DRLs are a *very* important safety improvement in making cars more visible in conditions where the driver would not normally have their lights (either side or head) on. The shady sunlight situation (eg going into dense woodland) is a case in point. Motorcyclists have long used their headlights as normal running lights, and it's time that other vehicles did the same, which is what DRLs are for.

I don't find them too bright - no more so than headlights during the day, and you only see them for a short time as an oncoming car passes you. At night they dim or even go out when the headlights are on. Even at dusk, when it's still light enough for headlights to be of marginal benefit (as a means of illuminating the road), DRLs dim to an appropriate level.

What I *do* find very dazzling is cars that keep their brake lights on all the time that they are stationary in a queue. And because the car in front is going in the same direction as you, it's there "forever", not just as a passing vehicle. If I'm stopped in traffic, I do as I was taught ("footbrake to stop; handbrake to *stay* stopped") and come off my footbrake as soon as I can, to avoid dazzling the car behind me. The only exception is when I'm stopped in the middle of the road in a turning-right bay, when I keep my brake lights on until I see a car pulling behind me to turn right, when I come off the brake to avoid dazzling. That's because I'm more vulnerable to being rear-ended by a fast car that hasn't seen me as it goes to overtake another car; that happened to my sister in America when they lived there: she was stopped to turn left, with her indicator and brake lights on, and was rear-ended (luckily at low speed) by someone who was overtaking *at a junction* and hadn't seen her.

Sadly, more and more drivers use their footbrake all the time that they are stopped - do they even know where the handbrake is? I suspect the worst culprits are those with automatic transmission who stay in Drive with the footbrake on to prevent them creeping forwards, rather than knocking it into neutral until they are about to set off again.

[NY]

Yes there are some cars where the temporary absence of a DRL on one side is more noticeable than the flashing of an amber indicator. That suggests a problem with the visibility of the indicator...

[NY]

True, but in thick fog you see a single red light that could be *any* distance away until you get close enough (too close, sometimes) to see the dim tail lights. That's why I maintain that fog lights should be treated as bright tail lights, showing not only the presence of the car in front but also give a clue about its distance away, inferred from the apparent spacing of the lights.

[Fredxx]

Perhaps you could provide the source for your claims?

[The Natural Philosopher]

The use of the handbrake is mandatory in a clutched car. Your left foot has to be on the clutch and the right on the accelerator. In the case of an automatioc its almost the exact opposite. You have to learn to left foot brake to control the car in the same way you can a clutched car: that is, fixed accelerator and then control uptake on the left foot by releasing the brake insietd of the clutch.

My current car has an electric motorised handbrake. It's called a 'parking brake' and thats ALL it is designed for, and its riddy awkward to iuse in a traffic queue on a slope as it takes an appreciable time to disengage