Driving with Headlights on

Lum

You realise that the legal definition of an agricultural vehicle for the purposes of that rule includes a top speed of below 25mph?

If the tractor can do more than 25mph you can't register it as an agricultural vehicle, you have to register it as something else.

adouglasmhor

Lum wrote: »

You realise that the legal definition of an agricultural vehicle for the purposes of that rule includes a top

No that's a legal definition for a different set of rules. There are some tractors that are legal to drive on a motorway but there are other criteria than being able to go over 25mph, lighting etc.

GolfBravo

knightstyle wrote: »

Iceweasel, the car I have just hired, a VW Polo uses headlights as DRL, so yes I have experience and can see what I said happening very easily!
interstellaflyer when you get in and start up the headlights are on so you think your lights are on and drive away.

1. VW Polo uses the main beam bulb for DRL function - it is a dual filament H15 (55W/15W) halogen light bulb. The main beam output is 1350 lm, and the DRL output is 260 lm. Standard dipped beam VW Polo bulb (H7) is 1500 lm - I don't know how anyone can't tell the difference between 260 and 1500 lumens. 260 lm is only about twice the output of sidelights (usually 110 to 130 lm).
2. The DRLs are on, but the dash illumination and dipped beam headlight tell-tale are both off.

Iceweasel

GolfBravo wrote: »

1. VW Polo uses the main beam bulb for DRL function - it is a dual filament H15 (55W/15W) halogen light bulb. The main beam output is 1350 lm, and the DRL output is 260 lm. Standard dipped beam VW Polo bulb (H7) is 1500 lm - I don't know how anyone can't tell the difference between 260 and 1500 lumens. 260 lm is only about twice the output of sidelights (usually 110 to 130 lm).
2. The DRLs are on, but the dash illumination and dipped beam headlight tell-tale are both off.

Thanks for coming up with the figures to support what I posted - a huge difference between 260 and 1500 lumens - even if someone doesn't know a lumen from a lemon. LOL :rotfl:

Joe_Horner

Iceweasel wrote: »

Thanks for coming up with the figures to support what I posted - a huge difference between 260 and 1500 lumens - even if someone doesn't know a lumen from a lemon. LOL :rotfl:

He was just giving people some lumen-aid

alastairq

Putting others in danger to avoid personal inconvenience is contemptible, and to be honest you disappoint me Lum making the above post.

That is a fallacy.

the slow[er] vehicle isn't putting others in danger at all. If any danger does arise, it is due to the inability of other drivers to cope with that slow vehicle.

It is the 'other drivers' who create the danger.

But of course, no 'driver' likes to think themselves incompetent to any degree....so the slow driver gets vilified.


I do wonder how many drivers out there, travelling at 70 [or above] are actually truly competent in what they are doing?

Bear in mind, these will be the self-same drivers everybody is vilifying in other posts on this forum?

If vehicles are successfully overtaking the slow[er] vehicle, then what is the issue?

Slow vehicles on a motorway may not be what the 'average [skills] driver expects to find..but then, the 'average' driver relies far too much on assumption, when out and about.


The rules haven't changed..nor should they.

What has changed, is driver perception, and driver expectation.

almillar

Lum and jase1 are both right in my opinion, even though they're saying different things, as they're both considering other people on the road, the precise thing alistairq refused to do.
If I personall did have something go wrong on the motorway like the above, I would try to get off to be honest as long as I could still control the car. If I had to crawl off I'd move to the hard shoulder. Get out of the way as soon as possible, if possible, is a good rule.

jase1

almillar wrote: »

Lum and jase1 are both right in my opinion, even though they're saying different things, as they're both considering other people on the road, the precise thing alistairq refused to do.
If I personall did have something go wrong on the motorway like the above, I would try to get off to be honest as long as I could still control the car. If I had to crawl off I'd move to the hard shoulder. Get out of the way as soon as possible, if possible, is a good rule.

To be honest I may have been a little harsh toward Lum... she always talks a lot of sense IMO and I can see the opposite side of the argument. I guess a lot depends on the individual circumstance -- it's not really constructive to make blanket judgement calls regardless of the situation.

Joe_Horner

almillar wrote: »

[...] they're both considering other people on the road, the precise thing alistairq refused to do.

But he's not refusing to. I've just checked back and nowhere has he suggested he would drive in the way being discussed, and no-where has he condoned it as an acceptable standard of driving.

What he has said, rightly, is that the safety of your car when you're driving lies only with you as a driver. So, if you find yourself in a dangerous situation, it's your driving and your failure to cope with what's happening around you in a safe way that's created the danger.

What do you do when you suddenly come up behind a tail-back? or when the car (too close) ahead has a blow-out and loses control? Just plough into it because you "shouldn't have to expect it"?

Motorways tend to be fairly straight with good forward visibility (weather permitting). If you can't see that you're closing very rapidly with that slow car from at least half a mile back - which gives plenty of time to plan a way to deal with it safely ( about 45 seconds with a closing speed of 40mph) - then you should be heading to Specsavers!

Yes, it may be inconvenient and they may well be inconsiderate forcing you to move round them, but if you let the situation develop to the point it's "dangerous" then that's down to you!

jase1

Joe_Horner wrote: »

What he has said, rightly, is that the safety of your car when you're driving lies only with you as a driver. So, if you find yourself in a dangerous situation, it's your driving and your failure to cope with what's happening around you in a safe way that's created the danger.

You could turn that argument around though.

If you find yourself being forced to trundle in limp-home mode at 30mph, and you fail to cope with this (by stopping), then you can only blame yourself if you are subsequently rear-ended by an HGV, as you created the danger.