Technical First stupid question.. should I have DRL's?

Currently reading:
Technical First stupid question.. should I have DRL's?

chicaneuk

New member
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Messages
83
Points
16
Hi,

Now I finally have my Fiat 500.... it's a 2011 1.2 Pop... on the headlight stork, I can basically turn headlights on and off - there are no side lights. I assumed on a car this new it'd have DRL's but that doesn't seem the case.

Are / were these an option or should the car just have them?

Thanks. And I did use the search! :)
 
I just read the manual and found there is an option to enable / disable DRL's in the car computer - I will check that tomorrow and make sure they've not been disabled! :)
 
Are people generally used to the 500's DRLs these days or do you still get the odd person full beaming you thinking they're fog lights? I always see loads of 500's with them turned off wondered of that's still happening? X
 
Yep - found the option in the Menu, and yep they were disabled :) Have stuck em back on and they work fine.

Thanks!
 
I just drive with my headlights always on. When you turn off the engine they close automatically so I just leave them in the on position at all times!
 
I realise I am about to open a very large can of worms, but I'd suggest that anyone considering using any form of lighting in normal daylight, whether DRL's or headlights, puts their preconceived ideas, preferences & prejudices to one side for a moment and has a good look at the information on this website:

http://www.dadrl.org.uk/
 
Last edited:
No-one has ever flashed (no smutty remarks please :) ) either me or my wife when driving. The DRLs on the 500 seem to be at around the right level of brightness.

If I had a Skoda or a Citroen DS3 with their flipping DRLs I wouldn't blame anyone for flashing. As for Audi and Mercedes they look like blooming Christmas lights.
 
I realise I am about to open a very large can of worms, but I'd suggest that anyone considering using any form of lighting in normal daylight, whether DRL's or headlights, puts their preconceived ideas, preferences & prejudices to one side for a moment and has a good look at the information on this website:

http://www.dadrl.org.uk/

The people behind that website are a bunch of absolute halfwits and morons, I implore people to place no weight on what you may read on that site. it just spews mindless facts out without any thoughts regarding statistical analysis or looking into individual accidents. I'm sorry but that site makes me so angry.

If the DRL's on a 500 cause temporary blindness for these people, then their eyesight is obviously so poor that they should not be driving on the road.

The temporary blinding of the 3 people in the UK whose eyesight is so poor that they shouldn't even be driving at all is a small price to pay to eliminate that period at dusk where a scary proportion of equally feckless drivers seem to think they can get away with no lighting or with parking lights.

Anyway I'm off to start a site called "Drivers against the sun rising and setting each day" :laugh:
 
I just read the manual and found there is an option to enable / disable DRL's in the car computer - I will check that tomorrow and make sure they've not been disabled! :)

I forgot to good on you for actually getting your manual and having a look :) A lot of people on here would rather just ask on the forum instead of reading the manual which has the answers to most questions in it ;)
 
Is that site for real ?

Looking at the 'reason' and the individuals behind it
To combat the spread of dangerous DRL, an alliance has been formed comprising of UK and European pedestrians, ramblers, cyclists, motorcyclists, animal and drivers associations
is enough to really question it.
I for one was a cyclist and broke every rule in the book but didn't resort to wearing a Helmet cam. Ramblers - I enjoy good walks but would never consider suing a farmer after trepassing over his land and climbing over a bit of barbed wire and cutting myself - a lot of the laws that gave individuals ramblers rights are now being reversed.
I had a black car and without the DRLs I would say that it was a hazard and it needed the lights. Quite a few motor cyclists drive with their lights on so that they can be seen and not end up getting 'taken out'.
I for one will not be supporting this campaign.(n)
 
Is that site for real ?
Sadly it is......

I just love how all these statistics are presented and somehow we're meant to believe that's it's all DRL's fault.....

The Sunday Times 27 February 2006

"In 2004, the latest year for which figures are available, 134 cyclists were killed on Britain’s roads, a rise of 18% on the previous year."

Seriously wtf? What about the weather? On average was visibility worse/better? With the rising cost of fuel, were more people cycling? Are people who are cycling more or less visible on average? How many of these incidents even involved cars? How many involved cars with DRL's?

They've also got support from Nigel Farage and rather hilariously, from Nick Griffin also. Seriously, if you want people to take you seriously you could do worse than to have support from Satan himself :dozey: Seriously, who in their right mind thinks "Hmmmm we need some support from some reputable politicians that the general public know they can trust...... I know! Let's call Nick Griffin! People like him don't they?"
 
I had a black car and without the DRLs I would say that it was a hazard and it needed the lights. Quite a few motor cyclists drive with their lights on so that they can be seen and not end up getting 'taken out'.
I for one will not be supporting this campaign.(n)

There's nothing to support Michael, this is just a small group of unintelligent idiots who have cherry picked some statistics and analysed them in a completely moronic fashion to arrive at the conclusion that DRL's are killing people.

We've got a green car in the household and it's NEVER driven without its headlights being on dipped beam, if you've ever been to North Wales you'll know why as well.
 
There's nothing to support Michael, this is just a small group of unintelligent idiots who have cherry picked some statistics and analysed them in a completely moronic fashion to arrive at the conclusion that DRL's are killing people.

We've got a green car in the household and it's NEVER driven without its headlights being on dipped beam, if you've ever been to North Wales you'll know why as well.

Just to clear up this Daniel - I'm not supporting this web site or whatever is being 'campaigned'. This is would be a very interesting topic in the 'Leisure Lounge' section - I'd imagine that a few 'choice' words would be used.
 
Last edited:
Just to clear up this Daniel - I'm not supporting this web site or whatever is being 'campaigned'. This is would be a very interesting topic in the 'Leisure Lounge' section - I'd imagine that would be a few 'choice' words would be used.

I wasn't saying you were supporting it. I was merely saying that there is nothing to support. The website is majorly flawed and no reasonable person could arrive at a conclusion after reading it unless they have no idea about statistical analysis.
 
Volvo`s have used drl`s for years i think people really try and make statistics up good or bad these days .
One thing they forget to mention is that in fact is the increase in motor cars all over the world.:),thus more chances of collisions.:(
 
Volvo`s have used drl`s for years i think people really try and make statistics up good or bad these days .
One thing they forget to mention is that in fact is the increase in motor cars all over the world.:),thus more chances of collisions.:(
Exactamundo. For those statistics to be of any use we'd have to know roughly how many miles were driven and calculate deaths per mile and then compare.

Still..... Nick Griffin can't be wrong? :ROFLMAO:
 
Back
Top