James C. Reeves
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:18 am Post subject:
Re: Idiotic "Feel-Good" DRLs |
|
|
"Wendy & John" <ardanswj@kilobar.net> wrote in message
news:pWGEd.1255$SS6.1083@trnddc07...
| Quote: |
Modern cars are turned into crash targets by mounting "DRL" lamps with
focused-beams close together and low on the front bumper. The close
spacing suggests distance, encouraging other drivers to turn into the
car's path, and the focused beams annoy or blind oncoming drivers.
|
That claim has been registered with the NHTSA with some studies as backup.
Hopefully that will be a consideration taken when drafting their final rule
on the matter.
| Quote: |
DRLs are effective safety devices if they are:
1.) As far apart as possible. Drivers perceive another vehicle as
"Close" or "Distant" according to its size. That's why they will
pull out in front of a compact car but not in front of a semi truck.
Wider DRL spacing promotes this subliminal sense of larger size.
|
That has been claimed and backed up with studies on file at the NHTSA.
Hopefully they will take this into consideration also when drafting their
final rule.
| Quote: |
2.) As high as possible. Eye level brake lights introduced on the Olds
Toronado significantly reduced rear-end collisions, and are now used
extensively. DRL recognition can only benefit from higher
placement.
|
I disagree with height...unless the DRLs extinguishes automatically when
stopped (so they aren't frying your retnas through the rear-view mirrors
from the vehicle pulled up close behind you at a stoplight. When DRLs shine
over your trunk lid height...they are extremely distracting/glaring. Glare
and being too high are the largest concerns registered with the NHTSA.
| Quote: |
Other desirable features; DRLs should be 3.) as large as possible, to
enhance the sense of closeness, and should 4.) emit non-focused
(diffused light), to prevent interfering with the vision of other drivers.
|
Makes sense...except the "desirable" part. ;-) There's nothing desirable
about unnecessary headache-causing light pollution. Having less focused
"beams" would make them more tolarable for those on the road that are light
sensative.
| Quote: |
Spacing and size matter. Intensity does not. The best compromise
now is to continuously operate the low beam headlights.
|
Except maybe the efficiency issue...fuel used to power a lamp that shines
90% of its light produced down below horizontal and onto the road surface
during the day when that isn't at all necessary. A properly designed DRL
with the correctly designed reflective optics would use 10%-20% of the power
a low-beam lamp would use to perform the same function.
| Quote: | Wendy & John
_______________________________________________________
|
|
|
Roger Maxwell
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:43 pm Post subject:
Re: ABS brakes Safe or not? |
|
|
There are times when ABS does things a human cannot do, such apply maximum
braking force to any combination of wheels. An expert driver without ABS has
only has one pedal to modulate which controls all four wheels
simultaneously. If the left side of the vehicle is on dry pavement while the
right side is on an oil slick (or gravel, wet grass, black ice, etc.), the
expert driver can modulate the breaks to prevent lockup on the slippery
side, but at the same time they are applying almost no braking to the left
side of the vehicle with traction, thereby greatly increasing stopping
distances. With ABS, if they simply stand on the brakes, the ABS system will
apply maximum braking to the wheels with better traction, thereby minimizing
stopping distances and of course maintaining some steering control.
Personally, I don't care whether a vehicle I drive has ABS or not. I'm
comfortable and familiar with how to drive a vehicle with or without it.
However, if I have a choice, I will choose ABS. I can't say that it's ever
saved my life, but it has kept me from flat-spotting an expensive set of
tires during a few standing-brake-pedal stops.
As to whether a failure in the ABS system can affect the basic hydraulic
braking system, that depends on the type of ABS system in use and what
specific failure has occured. Most ABS systems will fail in a mode that
won't affect the normal braking system, but there are a few rare exceptions.
Roger
"Serial # 19781010" <none@none.net> wrote in message
news:deg4u0hl3n6eudibclnjptj9895t34hag0@4ax.com...
| Quote: | When I had a new 94 Buick it had a ABS problem that was promptly fixed
under warranty.
My 2002 also had a ABS problem which was also fixed under warranty.
Anyway the last time I had this problem I insisted on talking to the
Buick brake man about it.
The long and the short of it is that he told me the ABS brake system
is completely redundant with respect to the primary brake system.
The way he put it is that even if your ABS system has a total failure
then you can drive your car as if you had simply bought a non-ABS
equipped Buick and is no more or less safe then any other Buick
without ABS.
He even had the front office make me a copy of one of his service
bulletins from Buick which says as much just to calm my fears.
Thought this would be helpful to someone.
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
