Non driving cyclists

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
BearOnWheels
Posts: 46
Joined: 12 Mar 2011, 7:10pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by BearOnWheels »

You can turn DRLs off on most cars - I am aware of three very different vehicles that I look after, all have DRLs and they can be turned off via a control panel.
I ALWAYS keep them on simply for insurance reasons. On the accident report form..'did you have lights on?' tick a YES! So a precaution…

Oh and they are not always LEDS..they can be what we used to call side lights (with an old fashioned bulb too).

I'm not sure about the legality of turning them off. It may be if you have them you have to use them, but I am unaware of the exact wording of the Vehicle Construction and Use regulations on these.

Certainly in Canada they are mandatory as well as in parts of Europe. My recollection is that they are a Swedish idea…like the 3rd brake light. Personally I like them.

Coming back from Cumbria today my experience tells me it makes drivers more careful about pulling out in front of you…they can gauge the distance better, but this could be a matter of perception.

Oh and the prospect of rear daytime running lights looms - I have seen these in Canada….

Not sure whether a DRL failure (or having to switched off) would constitute an MOT failure or something that VOSA would pick up on.

To be honest there are so few traffic police anyway you probably can get away with it….they certainly never seem to stop people having blown headlights, brake lights, tail lights, indicators etc!
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Bonefishblues »

661-Pete wrote:I recollect, that when I hired a car in Sweden nearly 20 years ago, the car hire chap pointed out a switch on the fascia and moved it to the 'on' position. He warned me not to move that switch at any time, or I'd be breaking the law. DRLs were compulsory in Sweden, even back then.

The car was a Saab, IIRC; I can't remember what model. So back then, on some cars at least, it was possible to turn the DRL's off - presumably for driving in countries where it wasn't obligatory.

But of course a lot must have changed, since.

Back here in the UK: if I had a car with DRLs (my present one doesn't) and I disabled them by removing a fuse or something, with a view to saving energy - would I be breaking the law?

They weren't DRLs as we know them now, they were ordinary headlights. The Nordic countries compelled their use at all times long before European legislation.

Surprised to read above that DRLs can be turned off - can I ask which vehicles they are?
BearOnWheels
Posts: 46
Joined: 12 Mar 2011, 7:10pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by BearOnWheels »

Vehicles I have seen where DRLs can be switched off:-
Skoda Yeti (2 years old)
Audi A6 (6 years old)
VW Transporter Van (newish)

BE careful about taking fuses out..they often serve more than one circuit - I had an old BMW where the indicators jammed on.. I thought I would remove the fuse, until I saw it also was attached to the brake lights!
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Bonefishblues »

Mistik-ka
Posts: 505
Joined: 5 Feb 2012, 10:01pm
Location: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Mistik-ka »

Daytime head and tail lights are indeed required by law in Canada for cars, but not for pick-up trucks (a classification which includes 4x4's, for some bizarre reason). As a cyclist who rides daily on country roads I love 'em — they show up instantly in my mirror and give me advance warning of overtaking traffic without my having to take a lot of attention off the road in front of me. I wish they were required on the damned 4x4's and small trucks that fill the traditional role of Audis and BMW's in making life unpleasant for cyclists on the Canadian prairies. :(
drossall
Posts: 6115
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by drossall »

Some campaigns against - Lightmare, NMA, DaDRL.

I've no association with any of these, but I'm broadly in the "there's too much lighting already" camp. It seems obvious to me that distraction is a real risk when more is introduced.

Our 2011 Ford has DRLs with an off switch. I always switch it off.
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Bicycler »

c53204 wrote:All road users should be aware of such things as the Highway Code - is that not the case. Removing the fact that the cyclist had no reason to know about motor vehicle regs, he thus had no reason to comment. Even less riding through a red light - now that he should be aware of.

Ride or drive on the road, the read the Highway Code and stick to the rules and laws when using the road - simples. The roads would be a lot better if everyone did.

Agreed that all road users should know the rules which apply to them. I implied from your titling the thread "Non driving cyclists" that you thought that whether somebody had a driving licence or not had some bearing on their behaviour as a cyclist.

Maybe the guy thought he was being helpful by reminding you that your lights were on? Misguided it may have been but I wouldn't hold it against somebody who was just trying to do a good deed. It would be sad if we refrained from simple acts of courtesy out of worry that some will tell us to mind our own business. I make a point of telling people if they have a light out if the situation arises. Most are grateful for the heads up.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by mjr »

BearOnWheels wrote:You can turn DRLs off on most cars - I am aware of three very different vehicles that I look after, all have DRLs and they can be turned off via a control panel.
I ALWAYS keep them on simply for insurance reasons. On the accident report form..'did you have lights on?' tick a YES! So a precaution…

What, so you will get blamed for distracting another road user and contributing to the collision? :twisted:

I agree about how rare it is for police to question failed lights lately.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Chris the Sheep
Posts: 154
Joined: 13 May 2009, 1:20pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Chris the Sheep »

Something I've seen a lot of is newish cars driving in the dark with no rear lights on, but with front DRLs. I think many drivers think their lights are on all the time, front and rear - but many/most are only on at the front. This certainly applies to our Kia Picanto, and many Citroens.

It's not a problem if the driver (correctly) switches on their main lights at dusk, but there are many who prefer to drive in town without headlights, and think the DRLs are all they need.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by 661-Pete »

BearOnWheels wrote:Coming back from Cumbria today my experience tells me it makes drivers more careful about pulling out in front of you…they can gauge the distance better, but this could be a matter of perception.
So ... not a lot of help to cyclists then.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Flinders »

Light in daylight ought to be banned outright. They make it far harder to see pedestrians, cyclists, and animals.
They are also a complete waste of energy.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by reohn2 »

If the OP changes the thread title to ''Kind but idiotic cyclist encounter'' we'll know what s/he means.
DRL's haven't anything to do with the thread at all,but the loonie who on the one hand thought he was offering a bit of good advise,on the other hand was so willing to risk life and limb by RLJing :?
There's one born every minute ,as they say :shock:

If we're to debate the pros and cons of DRL's IMO they only make life worse for vulnerable road users by encouraging drivers to only look for light points.
When it's raining or when vision is limited ie;fog,etc,they have their uses,especially on motorways.
Otherwise if you can,switch them off please.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by Bonefishblues »

reohn2 wrote:When it's raining or when vision is limited ie;fog,etc,they have their uses,especially on motorways.

In those circumstances drivers should have their headlights on, and the DRLs would therefore be off, since they don't run together.
The Mechanic
Posts: 1922
Joined: 23 Jul 2010, 1:38pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by The Mechanic »

Flinders wrote:..... They make it far harder to see pedestrians, cyclists, and animals.



How?
Cancer changes your outlook on life. Change yours before it changes you.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Non driving cyclists

Post by reohn2 »

Bonefishblues wrote:
reohn2 wrote:When it's raining or when vision is limited ie;fog,etc,they have their uses,especially on motorways.

In those circumstances drivers should have their headlights on, and the DRLs would therefore be off, since they don't run together.


Yep,agreed,I always drive on dipped h/lights in those conditions :)
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Post Reply