Forum menu
Sorry if I dazzle a walker but it saves me squashing some bellend in the middle of the road.
You could just drive slower instead of being a prick.
On automatic main beam:
If I switch on main beam then it defaults to automatically dipping mode, switching to dipped if it sees something ahead and then back to main beam afterwards. Tapping the lever a second time disables the auto mode, it operates just like traditional manual headlights.
However, I see no point in doing this. It's slower to react than an attentive driver would be for sure, and it doesn't see everything (as per this thread discussion). But even in auto mode you can still cancel it in exactly the same way as if it was in manual, blipping the stalk towards you will put you onto dipped lights regardless of what mode you happened to be in beforehand.
I consider it an assist rather than an enable-and-forget feature, I still manually dip lights when necessary. If you're out-reacting the system's reactions then it doesn't make the, ahem, blindest bit of difference whether they're manual or auto. Believing "oh I've got auto-dipping main beam so I never need to touch it again" is the problem here.
If you've got main beam on then you're on an unlit road and travelling at least 30mph.
Not necessarily.
My auto-mains cancel at 27mph and under.
They also have an easily accessible doohickey that allows cancelling main beam manually.
Or you can use the mains entirely on manual mode.
Not sure I see a problem with the auto high beam technology...
My auto-mains cancel at 27mph and under.
Yeah, but not all main beams are the same as on your car. Some cars do not have adaptive or auto-dip technology at all. Some dim at different speeds (on my Lexus I think it is 5mph which I personally think is too slow). So - not necessarily.
The matrix headlights on the Corsa e i occasionally drive has some automation based on speed, street lighting and on coming cars.
The lights will illuminate the verge with a couple of the available LEDs from the nearside headlight whilst the oncoming traffic will have a dipped main beam on the offside light so it doesn't dazzle them.
So pedestrians can be illuminated by default on unlit roads even when there is oncoming traffic.
The lights can be used in non matrix mode but the majority of the time the auto setting is used as it combines with the rain sensing auto wipers.
Too many idiots wearing dark clothing or riding scooters / bikes with no lights on. Sorry if I dazzle a walker but it saves me squashing some bellend in the middle of the road. Full beam plus spotties, thank you very much. (Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants).
Suggesting that people you don’t see when you are driving are at fault because they are wearing dark clothes is motornormative victim blaming. All drivers (and many cyclist for that matter) will dazzle pedestrians on occasions. I know I have done so and I know it was my fault and I was in the wrong.
Full beam plus spotties, thank you very much. (Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants).
You use full beams (and 'spotties') in lit areas?
Suggesting that people you don’t see when you are driving are at fault because they are wearing dark clothes is motornormative victim blaming.
It's not just during the night. Check this chap out and how well he blends into the background. In broad daylight. Was he not thinking?
/s
https://twitter.com/ediz1975/status/1979834430425551313?t=2mVPL-2kmwVkjKDr3v_q0g&s=19
The replies on twitter are breathtaking btw.
Interesting experience this morning – 7am, raining, dark and I was driving on a narrow national speed limit lane without a footpath (just wide enough for two cars to pass with care but no centre lines). I had my adaptive high beams on and driving at around 40mph. I saw a small spot of light on the left which made me slow more and I realised it was a pedestrian simply by seeing a faint 'person-shaped' dark blob. Obviously I then switched off the full beams and passed without drama, however, had he not had the small low-powered torch pointing towards me, I doubt I'd have seen much at all until much later – my lights barely illuminated the figure and I saw no real definition. Not sure what my point is, other than even with full beams on, if the pedestrian is wearing dark clothes, they won't be easily seen.
It's odd that we take a driving test when young... including a loose verification that we can see/observe well enough to drive... and then nothing else... forever. The plans to introduce eye tests for the over 70s are welcome... but perhaps something in middle age should be mandated? Night time vision in particular can drop off pretty sharpish with age, without people always being aware just how much they're effected.
I think something more than eye tests should be mandatory say every 10 years from passing the driving test.
I guess that there isn’t much action on this issues as the UK accident stats may suggest that things aren’t too bad… but I suspect that part of the reason for this is that peds avoid some ( especially rural) roads altogether. Where I live, it is rare to see people walk along many stretches of main road as it is uncomfortable and dangerous to do so. People drive as if there won’t be anyone walking and if you do walk at night you would be probably be blamed for any incidents that do occur.
If the people were regularly seen walking long these roads and their right to do so was respected and they were treated accordingly, peoples driving habits would be significantly different.
Yes it's the motornormative issue you mentioned earlier.
The plans to introduce eye tests for the over 70s are welcome... but perhaps something in middle age should be mandated?
I'd be in favour if this. At age 50 you start getting "you're old now, you should probably come see us so we can check you're not about to drop dead" messages from your GP. It doesn't seem a great leap to me to include an eye test as part of the human MOT whether you drive or not.
"Mandatory" is challenging (cf. vaccines) but it could easily be made a condition of obtaining a licence. People resist change but even if we said it was only for new licence applications it'd trickle down eventually, by the time Gen-Z and later are gimmers like us it'll apply to everyone. The easiest way of effecting change is to not have to change from anything in the first place, you don't get many non-smokers going "I'm gasping for a fag."
People resist change but even if we said it was only for new licence applications it'd trickle down eventually, by the time Gen-Z and later are gimmers like us it'll apply to everyone.
Yeah but you'd get young 'uns saying "bloody boomers..."
You use full beams (and 'spotties') in lit areas?
Yes. Did I say something that confused you?
Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants. 2 mins from my house there are no street lights.
Which means "they're not very good at all". We also have a FK TONNE of roos. You really want to avoid them, as well as dark-clothed pedestrians. Or at least try.
Yes. Did I say something that confused you?
Obviously. Nothing in your post suggests you are in Australia until you mention 'roos. Prior to that you just sound like an idiot who can't see and won't slow down, but now I have a context for that you're ok.