[Kalos]

Marction,Oct 4 2004, 06:25 PM Wrote:

Kalos,Oct 4 2004, 11:39 AM Wrote:I understand dealers can't sell new cars without DRL, but apparently owners can legally remove DRL.

source? (just curious...I find it hard to believe that if, by law, cars manufactured and sold here after a particular date are required to have DRLs, that it's then legal for owners to turn around and disable them).

If people with mods are getting hassled by insurers, you can bet that disabling what is clearly considered a safety feature on the car could have similar consequences...would you win if you fought the insurer in court if they deny/reduce a claim? maybe. I'd hate to be in your shoes in front of a judge explaining why you disabled the DRLs though ;)

...I still fail to see the point of disabling DRLs..."because it looks better" is a *really* lame reason if there's any research that backs up the safety benefits of having them enabled.

I haven't removed my DRLs (Daylight Running Lights). My "source" for this statement is several threads discussing removal of DRLs . Apparently, dealers can't do it but legally but owners can. The insurance issue is separate.

I think the science over DRL has pretty much established that when a few cars have DRL - but most don't - then the cars with DRL have a survival advantage because they are seen more easily and noticed than cars without DRL. The debate is whether this advantage is real when ALL cars have DRL. Then it could be there's no significant advantage to DRL and it's just a waste of gasoline (~$10/year) and bulb life.

If the $10/yr is true, then switching the DRL to fogs from low beams may save about $3.30/yr.