I understand (i was talking to someone who was buying an audi, so my word is only as good as his) that those "look at me" side lights wot you get off of the front of new Audis, are an optional extra, not standard on any model.

I also understand they are a 1600 quid optional extra!!

which goes someway to explaining why people feel the need to have them turned on ALL the time.
but what does that say about the type of feckmook who spends that much on "tartyness"

they are REALLY starting to get my back up. My boss asks; "it doesnt affect you, wheres your problem?" and he right, it doesnt, and i dont know where the problem is, but its REALLLY grinding my gears seeing these TARTS driving around in the middle of summer (it was glorious yesterday) with thier **** laser eyes turned on

do YOU have a car with 4 c*ckrings on the front of it?
do YOU drive around with stupid christmas tree lights on all the time?
do YOU live in Devon, drive on the M3/M25/M26 on a friday, or shropshire and wales at the wekends? (if not, it isnt going to irritate me as i wont see you)
if so, can you do me the favour of turning off your look at me lights as i pass you please, otherwise im going to have a stroke or heartattack or something.

Maybe im Jealous i hear you say? maybe your/theyre a **** feckmook!!
YARGGGHHH!!!

even bmw halo lights didnt annoy me this much, yes they are a stupid tarty extra, but they dont administer laser eye surgery as they pass, and can be easily ignored.

thank you for your time, that is all.

but what does that say about the type of feckmook who spends that much on "tartyness"

I suspect there may be several cases of stones + glass houses to be found in these parts!

I don't have the 'laser eyes', but I do have the little switch which puts the lights on 'auto'.. thereby meaning I don't need to worry about what lights are on.

I would suggest that you refer your complaint to whoever wrote the settings for the auto lights on new audis. I doubt that people are turning them on themselves.

Dave

feckmook!

bonus for invented words

(are they maybe like Vulvas? sidelights permanently on?)

Is this what you mean Olly?

If so, you are not alone, they piss me off too, cannot explain why, but they just do 😉

Aren't they supposed to be on in daylight – they're there for visibility, a la Volvo head lights? I'm not an Audi fan either but if it means they're more visible then I'm all for it.

Is this the modern version of those people who always drive on side lights so they can have the front fogs on when they drive. The same people who then think side lights and fogs are enough when it's actually dark in the middle of nowhere?

Is it foggy? No! Turn the bl00dy things off then!

thems is the ones ski.
yyaaarrrgghhhh (hulks out in office)
ALSO!!!
VOLVOS!!!
turn your lights off!!

"oooo we cant, cause in sweeden its the law fnar fnar fnar"

RTFM!!!!!

They're not sidelights, they're Daylight Running Lights and are supposed to increase visibility.

There's some daft euro legislation proposing that all cars have daylight lights installed for safety reason.
Seems totally bent thinking to me. A car isn't a difficult object to see. If they all have lights on, then people will starting thinking lights = road user, no lights = clear road. Which strikes me as pretty disastrous for anything that isn't car shaped.

From a thread the other day….

mastiles_fanylion – The thing is, daytime running lights (which I assume are what you mean), are about to become a legal requirement on all new vehicles (2012 IIRC). Audi and Saab already have them as standard on most models (not sure about BMW). Pretty soon all cars will have them.

take a chill pill, think of them as failed personalities who can only identify themselves by the car they drives badge. It's a BMW thing but now for Skoda/VW drivers with an Audi label.

They are Daytime Running Lights and will be a legal requirement on all new cars from 2012 I believe so you had better get used to seeing cars with them on.

And I believe you are wrong in suggesting they are a £1600 option – I think you will find that xenon lights are the £1600 option (on some lower spec models) and those light clusters also have the LED DRL on.

My business partner has an A4 SLine and it came with DRL as standard.

Not quite sure why someone would be upset at cars being more visible. Unless you are a crybaby biker who likes to get motorists' attention in the hope that all the cars in front will move over to let you through because you are always in such a hurry.

Thanks Stato 🙂

Haha! You would really like me. Not an Audi, but Xenon headlights on ALL the time. I'm in a small dark car (making progress(awaits to be flamed)), so anything that increases visibility to cocks in BMWs/Audis on mobile phones thinking of there next sale or bints in their pink micras doing hair and make-up is a good idea.

There's still talk of making headlights on all the time compulsory in the UK.

Not quite sure why someone would be upset at cars being more visible.
Because it makes everything else less visible to car driver.

one of the reasons they bemuse me is akin to the "S-line", where you pay 2 grand for a body kit which makes it look like the model you couldnt afford. The LED lights were first on the R8, so when you see a pair coming towards you you go "ooh look, an audi R…..ahhhh, no.".

Daytime running lights are an EU safety directive, and one reason I'm not for it is that daytime headlights used to be about the only way a Vulva driver could compute seeing an oncoming motorcycle before it bounced of his armour-re-inforced wing…

Where on the Audi website does it say that the running lights are optional or cost 1600 quid?

good rant, and for the majority of it I agree with you, however, you used the phrase "wot you get off of" a la Scott Mills FROM Radio 1, so I automatically think you are, to quote you, a ****mook.

😉

seeing an oncoming motorcycle

The motorcyclist that is pushing through an impossibly small gap on double whites on a blind corner in the wet don't you mean? Yeah I like to be able to spot THOSe c*cks.

Because it makes everything else less visible to car driver.

Only if its dark enough for them to have an effect, its designed to make cars more visible in scenarios of changing light conditions (tree lined avenues, moving into shade on a sunny day etc. In these situations 'other road users' are difficult to spot anyway and being able to see a car will not detract from spotting a cyclist. As for the argument that drivers will decide no lights = clear road well they will most likely end up with an old Corsa/Fiesta/ZX wrapped around thier wing. If your worried about being less visable on the bike then ride with your lights on too, i do already if its not a sunny day (ie, most days!) but then i have decent lights that are quick and easy to charge, not some cheap faffy torch ;0)

As I said, I'm all for them. Where I live you can be driving in bright sunshine one moment then be plunged into tree induced darkness the next. I drive with my side lights on almost all of the time and wish more people would.

What a retarded rant it's best to get facts right first, they're not optional extra as MF points out, they're on all the time as Volvo has had for years like others have pointed out and they're not that bright to glare you.

But life must be good if that's all you can find to rant about.

In these situations 'other road users' are difficult to spot anyway and being able to see a car will not detract from spotting a cyclist

I'm not too sure that's true either physiologically or psychologically.
I imagine to some extent that eyes are naturally drawn to pay attention to lights, and thus less attention to things away from lights, the contrast also means that anything adjacent to the light will be less visible. And minds are naturally pattern forming, and the pattern lights = something to avoid will work pretty well for a lot of the time.
Of course this is pure conjecture on my part, but then so is the assertion that it will make things safer for all road users.

£1600 your serious?
we have software that can turn them on (as long as they are fitted) on audi and bmw.

i'm going to check for one next time we are testing and see if i can turn them on.. £1600 for that is stupid.. personally i think he is wrong it maybe £1600 for the "adaptive" headlight system of audi's which would be the turning duel lamp HID ones VAG fit to audi's, VW's and skoda's.

It's been the law in Scandinavia for a long time I think to have your lights on all the time – even when it's light all the time in the summer. Apparently it reduced accidents.

Having said that I read another comment somewhere that suggested motorcyclists having their lights on all the time was actually detrimental to their safety. I do find that a piercing bright light in amongst all the non-lit traffic in the day time (ie a motorcyclist with his lights on beam) is pretty annoying and baffling on the eye. Maybe it's because of their height though.

what's the problem with Datime lights or side light on ? I just got back from Poland where it's a legal requirement to drive with lights on. I also used to work in Canada where we wwould be fined for leaving the work depot without lights on. It is a good thing. (Disclaimer: I am a Vulva driver)

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/vehicles/doc/consultations/drl_ctc.pdf

Drac.
there is a switch in the switch box of older volvos to turn the "drl"s off.
in newer ones, the ecu is able to be reprogrammed to keep them off by turning the ignition, and the light stalk, in a certain combination.
also, may i bring your attention to my opening sentance:

I understand (i was talking to someone who was buying an audi, so my word is only as good as his)

get your facts right 😉 :p

None of this is my opinion, but.

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4681

CTC opposed proposals for a blanket requirement because daylight running lights will make the roads less safe for cyclists, making it less likely that drivers will spot them for the following reasons:

* headlights cause ‘visual darkening’ in the area around them, masking cyclists and pedestrians.

* the widespread use of lights would divert the attention of driver’s away from other visual information (e.g. the presence of a pedestrian or cyclist).

* drivers become increasingly accustomed to the habit of looking for lights (rather than people or vehicles) to signify the presence of a hazard on the road

* they're the sort of thing that only feckmooks have

It's not the lights themselves that annoy me but the way certain Audi drivers who have them drive. They're so intimidating when they run up behind you at speed and sit on your tail on the motorway (I'm good at using lanes by the way and don't hog the middle ta)

Sure they're supposed to stand for safety and visibility, but what they actually stand for is "**** Audi coming through!"

As a driver and cyclist I can see that low-power DRLs do not really affect the perception of bikes from cars, but headlights do. If full-on headlights were used they'd mask anything a bike can carry, and this is one problem I have with people who have HIDs on their car – if I'm cycling next to you and you have your HIDs on, the car in the side road ahead will not see my comparatively meagre headlight in the glare of your HIDs and will pull out in front of me. This has happened on numerous occasions, and after chatting to a couple of the drivers who pulled out on me this is exactly the reason they gave for not seeing me. There is NO reason for HIDs if you drive at or below the speed limit, and they glare like mad when the car hits the tiniest of bumps, in an epileptics nightmare of flashes and blinding. Edit, and looking above it seems my opinion on DRLs is agreed with by the CTC.

However audi DRLs really dont bother me, I'd be more concerned with my own sense of self worth etc than someone elses if I were to care about such things.

Maybe it's because of their height though.

Maybe it's because motorcyclists think they are somehow more important than other road users? I would be interested (seriously) to know the stats on motorcycle accidents – how many are due to third party error (ie, not seeing the biker) and how many are because of the rider's error. I must say that, proprtionally, I see many more motorcyclists acting like complete idiots with no regard for other road users than I do car drivers. Especially on a hot summer evening when Johnny-40-something-highdisposableincome-midlifecrisis gets home from a hard day sitting in the office and takes his bike out for a 'blast'.

there is a switch in the switch box of older volvos to turn the "drl"s off.

Fair point never owned and never own a Volvo so no idea.

I understand (i was talking to someone who was buying an audi, so my word is only as good as his)

That was my point check before ranting but seems I did the same with the Volvo comment. 😳

daylight running lights = good idea, i've got a volvo and since getting it not one person has tried to pull out in front of me (although that may be down to luck)

can't help but notice this is aimed more at Audi drivers rather than the lights themselves – plenty cars now have this feature and if it helps safety then i'm all for it

as for rtfm on volvos…i had a v50 a few years ago with DRL and wanted to turn them off (had xenon lights so had no desire to give all and sundry arc eye during the day). You cannot turn them off yourself, but volvo would do it for an hours labour and as long s you signed a disclaimer!

i didn't bother….

Gotta be a 0/10 rant.

Apparently actually incorrect & ignorant of forthcoming (EU) and historic (Swedish) legislation, also based on cliched 20-something brand-stereotypes.

Drac, Surfr, they WERE an optional extra on the A3 and A4; you had to get the Xenon Plus headlight package ie. Xenon headlight + LED running lights, as an upgrade over the standard Halogen H/light.

I'm not the OP but a rant's a rant, since when do they have to be proportionate or logical, its the disproportionate reaction that makes it amusing (see David Mitchell, Charlie Brooker etc etc). Seems some people either didnt see any humour, or have Audis/volvos/bmws and thin skins.
I ride an R1 but as I dont fit the stereotype mastiles vented against (with no attempt at humour) I see no reason to launch a defensive strike. Unless mastiles IS that SMIDSY volvo driver waiting to leap from the side road, in which I'll drop my 100mph wheelie so he can see my headlights…

edit;

Mastiles, that some pretty impressive anti-motorcycle feeling, and Im interested to hear what experiences have spawned it (do you live on or commute on a rural "bike haunt" road?). However you are sadly mostly right, from memory of reading such stats over half the serious injury/fatal bike accidents are single vehicle accidents (ie. involve no one else) and can be ascribed to rider error. I ride a sportbike but dont ride like a c*ck, nor do I have a loud obnoxious exhaust to aggravate and alienate other road users or residents, and (touch wood) havent had an accident in 20yrs. As with any group its a visible (or audible) minority that tarnish the image of the majority, and there are usually sufficient examples around to enforce negative stereotypes.

Olly, youll love this then

Audi LED driving lights on a Corsa.. sort of!

I thought it was a good rant.. funny anyway.

Thing is, I like those Audi lights. Am I alone in thinking they look nice? Deffo not bright enough to give laser eye surgery thats for damn sure.

(I own a battered old Saab with lights that switch off, btw)

get one