Electrical Lighting: Solutions & Ideas

Since we are required to drive with our headlights on during the day in Austria starting October 1st, I have a question:

Is it possible to have the lights turn on with the ignition in the Golf IV, like it already is with other manufacturers (Japanese cars)?
Okay, so it goes: Light switch on - ignition off, light off - ignition on, light on.

Then you won't forget to turn it on!

"Why don't you check directly with VW to see how it's handled in the Scandinavian models? They also have daytime running lights linked to the ignition."
Possibly even contacting VW Sweden or a similar company directly.
Regards,
Jan.

Hi,

Do you have to drive with your low beams on, or are daytime running lights also allowed? In my opinion, they would be a sensible alternative to always having everything turned on, and they would also solve your problem. They are wired to turn on automatically whenever you are driving, unless you turn on your headlights.

Best regards,

Jan.

It's quite easy to retrofit the daytime running lights (only lights on the front and rear, everything else off), as they are sold in Scandinavia. You simply need to create a few cable connections in the light switch, and then the daytime running lights will activate when the ignition is turned on.
Either you do it yourself, or you ask the friendly person.

Edit Roger:
Link deleted. Please respect copyright.

Do you have to drive with your low beam headlights on, or are daytime running lights also allowed?


06/14/2005

ACE: Mandatory daytime running lights in Austria from October 2005.
Stuttgart (ACE) June 14, 2005 – Following the requirement for high-visibility vests for drivers, Austria is likely to introduce daytime running lights starting October 1, 2005.

According to a statement released by the ACE Auto Club Europa on Tuesday in Stuttgart, the Austrian Federal Council has approved a demand previously made by Austrian road safety organizations. The new regulation stipulates that vehicles must have their lights on at all times, even during daylight hours. This requirement applies both within and outside urban areas, and during all seasons, the club reported. However, according to information from the ACE, there will likely be a grace period until March 1, 2006, during which violations will not be penalized. After that date, fines of up to 36 euros will be imposed.

Regardless of the Austrian proposal, ACE advocates for a mandatory requirement for daytime running lights. This would significantly reduce the number of road traffic accidents. ACE also referred to European studies which indicate that the introduction of daytime running lights across Europe could prevent nearly two million road traffic accidents annually. This would mean 155,000 fewer injuries and 5,500 fewer traffic fatalities each year.

According to ACE, the German Federal Ministry of Transport in Berlin currently rejects the introduction of a daytime running lights requirement. Besides Hungary, Austria would be only the second non-Scandinavian country to introduce such a requirement. In the areas of traffic safety and traffic law, ACE believes it is better to strive for pan-European regulations rather than introducing an increasing number of different national rules. This would turn Europe into a patchwork of traffic laws.

Imprint:
ACE Auto Club Europe.
Public relations and communications.
227 Schmidener Straße.
70374 Stuttgart.

Hi Julian,

IMO, the quote doesn't really answer my question.

The text refers to "daytime running lights" without providing a more specific definition.

Daytime running lights, according to ECE regulations 48 or 87, are allowed to illuminate on their own, without any other lights, and they only consume a few watts because they are "designed to minimize glare."

Above, the Scandinavian configuration (low beam + rear lights) is referred to as a "daytime running light," which is something entirely different from the ECE 48 or 87 regulations. It remains unclear what is exactly permitted or mandatory in Austria (I don't believe the difference between "light" and "illumination" is the key issue).

A requirement that these ECE 48 or 87 devices allow would also be perfectly acceptable to me for Germany; permanent low beam would, in my opinion, be a waste of materials and energy.

Link to ECE 48 and 87:

http://www.hella-online.de/ges_bestimmungen.jsp

Best regards,

Jan.

The new rule stipulates that, even in broad daylight , vehicles must be driven with their lights turned on.

This includes the low beam headlights, taillights, and license plate illumination.

...
Besides Hungary, Austria would be only the second non-Scandinavian country to introduce a daytime lighting requirement.
...

Wow... According to ACE, Italy is not located in Europe or part of Scandinavia. Also, in Italy, daytime running lights are mandatory. Currently, this applies only to highways, but they do exist.

In Switzerland and Turkey, driving with daytime running lights is officially recommended (although it's not always clear what that entails).



...
Wiring diagram for daytime running lights.
...


Super! ... Veröffentlichung von Urheberrechtlich geschützem Material ... KSure, here is the translation of the text from German to English:

'leave.'
Hopefully, the homeowner won't get angry .

Hello,

By the way: In Italy, daytime driving with lights on is mandatory on all roads outside of urban areas.

Bye.

Max.

Hi,

Quote:

This includes the low beam headlights, taillights, and license plate illumination.

You're right, it was actually mentioned there, and I did read it, but I got tripped up by the sentence above it about "daytime running lights."

If that's the case, I find it quite pointless, because what's the use of having the rear lights on in broad daylight? You can't even see them when the sun is shining, even a little bit. And the low beam headlights are overkill, because they don't actually need to illuminate the road here, so all that remains is the function of being seen by others. But you don't need 2x55 watts for that; 2x6 watts in these Hella lamps would be sufficient.

But I can see what's happening... the sales of headlight bulbs are being boosted just like the sales of fuel (it's only 0.0something liters more, but when you consider an entire country, that adds up).

Let's hope they're content with the ECE 48/87 regulations in Germany, because something similar is definitely coming here soon.

Best regards,

Jan.

Hi,
But I can see what's happening... the sales of headlight bulbs are being boosted just like the sales of fuel (it's only 0.0something liters more, but when you consider an entire country, that adds up).


What kind of statement is that? It has been proven multiple times that daytime running lights on vehicles have already led to significant reductions in accidents. I am also always happy when motorcycle riders and car drivers turn on their lights; you can simply see them better.

You're probably one of those people, like the guy I saw the other morning at 6 AM on my way to work: Thick fog, visibility barely 50 meters, and he's driving his black BMW with no lights on, right behind my taillights. All to save 0.0002 liters of fuel per 100 km and 5 euros on light bulbs.
Then he overtook someone in the thick fog.

And I haven't been able to detect any increased fuel consumption due to the lights in any of my vehicles so far; it's just as much nonsense as the claim about incandescent bulb wear.

And... in my case, they are 2x35 watts, thanks to the bi-xenon technology. }

Hi Julian,

Quote:

What kind of statement is that? It has been repeatedly proven that daytime running lights on vehicles have already led to a significant reduction in accidents. I'm also always happy when motorcyclists and car drivers turn on their lights; you can simply see them better.

Hold on... please read my entire post. I didn't say I thought the idea was ridiculous; on the contrary, I find it very useful. I just don't think the implementation is particularly clever, because you can achieve the desired effect just as well with the small daytime running lights, without all the other unnecessary stuff.

Quote:

You're probably one of those people, like the guy I saw the other morning at 6 AM on my way to work: Thick fog, visibility barely 50 meters, and he's driving his black BMW with no lights on, right behind my taillights. All to save 0.0002 liters of fuel per 100 km and 5 euros on light bulbs. Then he overtook someone in the thick fog.

*sigh*

"Why do you conclude that from my statement that I find daytime running lights (DRLs) more useful than low beam headlights? If there were DRLs that I could reasonably install on my car, I would have already done so to use them instead of the low beams. My car is dark, and I drive with lights on even in slightly rainy weather in the city because it's already quite dark on some of the tree-lined roads (like the B179 in Britz, for example). Also, the lights generally come on when I drive faster on the highway (which I often do... you're probably confusing me with someone else)."

But precisely because I often drive during the day with my lights on, I consider TFL as an alternative.

Quote:

"And I haven't been able to detect any increased fuel consumption in any of my vehicles due to the lights being on; that's just as much nonsense as the claim about incandescent light bulb wear."

"Again, you haven't read it completely. If driving with lights doesn't lead to increased fuel consumption, then please explain to me where the energy is coming from. Of course, you won't be able to measure it, not just because the fluctuations in your driving style are too high to be masked by the 0.0something liters. Nevertheless, they are there and make a HUGE difference globally."

Let's calculate: 55x2 + 10x2 + 5x2 for the lights (front, rear, license plate), which is 140 watts per car. Some, like with your xenon headlights, use less, while others use more because there are more than one bulb in the taillights. TFL lights in the Hella design need 2x6 watts, the cheaper ones need 2x21 watts, so that's 12 or 42 watts respectively. If we consider the worst-case scenario, we have a saving of about 100 watts per car. This may seem insignificant when considering the energy consumption for driving, but if we multiply that by 10 million cars, we're talking about 1 gigawatt.

And now, again, the comment that this does not lead to increased consumption... I would say that, given this bill, it cannot stand.

Regarding the light bulbs... their lifespan depends more on the number of operating hours than on their age. If they were previously used in a 50/50 cycle (half on, half off), that would reduce their lifespan by half. Considering how many cars are driving around with broken taillights because drivers don't check them, I would expect that this rate to increase, which would further increase the risk at night.

Okay, let me be very clear: I am IN FAVOR of daytime running lights, but please implement it in a sensible way.

Best regards,

Jan.

Hello!

You find it useful, but you argue against it with all your might? *funny*

The increased energy consumption is, of course, occurring, but it is never obtained for free. However, it has never been measurable.
But to be honest, I wouldn't care about the increased fuel consumption compared to the safety benefits; at least now that motorcycles are required to have their lights on all the time, you can actually see them.

I also use my lights a lot, even though I own a silver vehicle, and even when the sun is shining brightly. Generally, I use them on country roads and highways.

I find your 2x6-watt lamps to be pointless because, for example, with my vehicle, extra headlights need to be installed (due to regulations regarding light output and weight), and they have to be mounted in such a way that they don't extend beyond the end of the bumper, while also not covering any ventilation openings. Frankly, it's extremely difficult to achieve.

The calculation regarding energy consumption is nonsense. People should really focus on properly checking their tire pressure, as there is a much greater potential for savings there than by simply reducing lighting.

There are so many people who dislike bright lights, and those 2x6 watt bulbs only encourage that.

Hi,

Quote:

I find your 2x6-watt lamps pointless because, for example, with my vehicle, extra headlights need to be installed (due to the light output and power-to-weight ratio), and they have to be mounted in such a way that they don't extend beyond the end of the bumper, while also not covering any ventilation openings. Frankly, it's extremely difficult to achieve.

I've already written about that – that's why I don't have anything like that yet. I hope that the accessories industry will pay more attention to this market in the future.

Quote:

The calculation regarding energy consumption is nonsense. People should really focus on properly checking their tire pressure, as there is a much greater potential for savings there than by simply reducing lighting.

What does one have to do with the other? With this approach, you can justify any waste of energy because you can always find something that is even more pointless to waste.

Furthermore - and I want to emphasize this again - I only want to save energy, not lighting - see also the next point.

Quote:

There are so many people who dislike bright light, and using those 2x6-watt bulbs only reinforces that.

I think the problem lies hidden here. Have you actually looked into these things? Do you know the difference between the 6W parts from Hella and the 21W parts from Inpro? Or the difference to a low beam headlight?

In Berlin, some people have installed these TFL lights, and they do exactly what they're supposed to: you can see the car just as well, or even better, than if it had its low beams on.

The reason lies in the design (see also the forum search... I think Rudi wrote something about this two or three years ago): A low beam headlight is primarily intended to illuminate the road. The design ensures that as little light as possible blinds oncoming traffic. Therefore, most of the light generated by the 55 watts ends up on the road, which is completely pointless during the day. Only a small portion, more like the scattered light, contributes to visibility. The taillights are absolutely useless in bright daylight because they are barely visible (twilight, see below).

TFLs, in contrast, are designed to produce maximum glare or to emit their light in a way that almost nothing reaches the road, but rather shines towards oncoming traffic. This can be achieved with just 6 watts of halogen bulbs (the high-intensity ones) and a suitable reflector, as well as with the standard 21-watt lamps used in Inpro's designs.

My experiences with oncoming traffic of this type confirm this – the visible brightness is, at the very least, on par with a normal low beam headlight.

I agree with you that this could lead TFL to turn on the correct lights too late in the twilight, thus reducing visibility from behind. However, even in that case, such a car would still be perfectly visible from the front.

However, as I mentioned before, I see the laziness regarding bulb changes as a bigger problem with "always on" headlights. When I was driving to work earlier (in bright sunshine), I encountered three cars with their headlights on. One had a broken taillight, and the car behind me had a faulty right headlight. Since the failure rate with "always on" headlights increases by at least a factor of two, this is likely to become a problem, especially because the people who drive mostly during the day probably won't even notice.

My dream is that the industry will soon adopt this (the new A8, for example, already has it as standard - they are LED daytime running lights that can be retrofitted). This would significantly simplify the installation process and further reduce energy consumption, not to mention that it would also increase the lifespan of the daytime running lights.

Best regards,

Jan.

Have you ever looked into these things? Do you know the difference between the 6W parts from Hella and the 21W parts from Inpro? Or the difference to a low beam headlight?


Sure, in everyday street life. Here in Wü, there are a lot of US military vehicles being driven around, and that's why I can see the differences between various designs of these TFLs.
The main problem is that, as you correctly pointed out, the goal is to produce as diffuse light as possible. This works well in the city because the light is 'blinding' and therefore stands out.

In my opinion, it's useless on country roads. Right now, it's extremely hot, and the road surface is very reflective. You only see oncoming vehicles with TFL (tail lights) shortly before they pass, whereas you can see vehicles with their low beams from hundreds of meters away.

In low light conditions, TFL might work well because the contrast makes it stand out, but in bright light, the light is too diffuse.

Sorry for jumping in here without having read everything first.

I find the TFL implementation, which uses pulsed high beams, to be quite ridiculous, especially during twilight.

The reflectors of the headlights are aggressively angled forward. When the sun is shining, the brightness is acceptable because the pupils are already constricted.

As dusk approaches, and those Americans continue driving around with their TFL lights on, that weak high beam can really be quite blinding.

I can't think of a better solution right now, other than integrating the daytime running lights into the headlights, as is already standard on some American SUVs.

m;