US safety regulations make it difficult to automakers to add adaptive headlights
cnn.com
cnn.com
You should always adapt your speed to the prevailing conditions. 70pkh on a country road after dark is fast at the best of times, but combined with “I don’t see great at night” is grounds to reconsider your driving habits.
If you had happened to hit that old man with cane, it would have been 100% you at fault both legally and morally, and depending on the outcomes, that’s jail time.
It's not inexplicable, it's the "fuck you, I got mine", "I'm the most important person on the road". It's the same attitude that people will be in a line of cars and they'll pull out to get two or three cars ahead, or just bully their way ahead, because it's obviously more important that they get where they're going than you do.
Here, Headlights are automatic. Imho a matrix LED is at work. And it illuminates wonderfully the surroundings and helped avoiding physical contact with animals, that might have crossed the street. Sometimes, on bumby roads, i get the occasional flashing back to me, or on Autobahn some trucks are bothered by the light. If true or light is only brighter than usual, i can not judge. These things are registered, so i hope they are just brighter than usual.
I had an issue where I noticed that keyless entry wasn't working though the fob had new batteries (and was the same with both fobs), nor the "welcome" lighting, and it seemed like the cellular modem was booting up every time. I have a few alterations via OBDeleven, but nothing I thought would mess with that (some lighting stuff, minimize the seat belt chirps, etc.). I forgot to unplug it and when the dealer came up to me and mentioned "Oh, you have ..." I thought the same as you, ah, crap, they're going to blame that, or charge me a diagnostics fee. They just asked what I might have done and asked my permission to wipe anything should the tech think it was necessary.
It ended up just being a faulty battery, so the car was shutting down "non-essential" systems to save energy.
It seems to work pretty good, maybe not quite as fast as I am but it even turns down when it sees a car ahead going the same way.
I suspect that they also drive around with their high beams on too.
It’s easy to tell on common older vehicles that have separate high beams.
It’s pretty common that people do this with one low-beam out, but blinding everyone to avoid a fix-it ticket is annoying.
Headlights haven’t gotten much brighter, many LED equipped vehicles actually put out less than a really good Xenon from a decade ago, but they have a cooler color temp. Also, lower priced vehicles with LEDs don’t often have the self-adjusting leveling systems that are/were common when HIDs were only available as an expensive option or on pricey cars.
Combing Xenon-like or exceeding brightness, cooler temp (appears brighter to human eye), a lack of self-leveling with poor factory alignment and you get our current situation.
Does anyone know if these headlight technologies are used in Australia? If it's responsible for people no longer bothering to turn off their high beams when noticing other drivers' headlights shining over a hill or around a corner (and now blinding others) then nah keep that rubbish off the roads. Maybe having warmer temperature lights would lessen the impact of these high beams being blasted into my skull?
Old man yells at cloud, and it's me. I would just like my young, astigmatism-free eyes to not be burned so I can actually drive at night again lol.
People have been waiting for the FDA (?) to update several regulations around products used in make up for years while other parts of the world are a bit better on keeping up with that stuff. I just think that's interesting, on the topic of regulations.
They're definitely dangerous when you're on an unlit county road with deer-inhabited woods on either side.
Why would I slow down so I can use my low beams when I can just use my high beams to go the speed limit?
Especially when you stick your head over an hill top.
I think they should be banned, as a traffic danger.
Come again?
> Any other design of headlight not meeting the above requirements is allowed, so long as the car manufacturer's vehicles, over the previous year, have been involved in fewer incidents than the national average.
Basically, all safety related rules shouldn't apply to you if you can demonstrate your products are safer than the rest of the industry. Same for brakes, airbags, seatbelts, etc.
That will push safety innovation far harder than rigid rules would.
Another factor is that plastic headlight housings cloud up and over vigorous polishing will change the optics.
At least when I see the underglow LEDs I think "ha that's kinda cute, wonder when he's getting pulled over". Those don't bother me as much.
I see three major categories of blinding lights on the roads in California:
New cars that are really bright and with appropriate beam shape/cut-offs, but annoying on hills or because of the taller cars you mentioned.
New or not-so-old cars where the driver is using the wrong light settings. That is fog lights and/or high-beams in inappropriate conditions or sometimes the opposite: somehow having daytime running LEDs at night instead of proper headlight activation.
The aftermarket retrofits which have none of the appropriate beam shape/cut-offs or projection. This can be a bit like the daytime running LEDs above in being diffuse but much brighter and often obviously anachronistic on some older car I know is from the basic halogen sealed-beam era. But it also includes trucks with various "offroad" lights being inappropriately activated on streets.
And there's nothing we can do about it. The aim of the lights can't be adjusted. Unintended consequences.
On the other hand, why do we have a new car? Because the old one got written off. Why? Because one of those gigantic SUVs whose hood is at about chest level, with way bright headlights was tailgating and blinding the spouse from behind so she pulled over to let it pass. Only to have the driver lose control (it was winter with some ice/snow on the road) and hit her on the rear corner. If it wasn't for those high-mounted, blinding lights none of this would have happened.
Since headlamp alignment has a legal requirement to meet I don’t see how it could be road legal without adjustability.
That exact scenario is why I think self-adjusting headlamps which were standard on most Xenon equipped vehicles should be required for all HIDs whether Xenon or LED.
However, if it’s noticeable you probably should have it adjusted or the rear ride stiffened.
Insurance companies should encourage it.
Newer headlights seem to have the max lumens possible, much bluer/higher energy light, and from almost a point source.
If they ever blinded an oncoming police car, my faith in humanity makes me hope they'd get pulled over...
I gradually slow down under such conditions of limited vision.
ADAS systems are mostly legal because they are officially "assistance" systems, and the driver is still responsible for whatever the vehicle does. There is exactly one commercially non-assistance "self driving" system that I am aware of in the world, and it's made by Mercedes Benz, and is only operable in very specific situations. MB takes responsibility for what happens when the vehicle is operating in this mode.
Ahh yes, my absolute favorite thing, when I'm on my bike and drivers turn their highbeams on to see me better, putting me into a situation where I have to stop (which isn't really an option because I have no brakes on my bike) or continue forward on pure faith. Luckily I can cache like 8 seconds of road so it's usually fine, but it does make me want to ban cars even more than normal. While I'm at it, please ban super bright bike lights too, front and rear, they're so antisocial. Very cool that you can see at the expense of everyone around you.
in some countries it's also illegal.
Also, if GP is indeed riding a fixed gear bike then they do have the ability to brake, it's just a different mechanism. Weird that they phrased it that way. Fixed gear bikes are more challenging to ride (kind of like a manual transmission vehicle) but are completely roadworthy in the hands of a competent rider.
For reasons that are inscrutable to me, people ride track bikes—lacking brakes—on the streets. It's such a thing to the point where people will buy track-style bikes that include brakes and remove the brakes, even though they never ride at a velodrome.
For what it's worth, a well executed whip skid lets you stop in pretty much the same distance as someone hitting full front brake, and as someone who skids ambidextrously my maximum latency is about a 1/4 turn of the pedals (~1.5m). Though because I'm always planning unplanned stops I will already be starting skids every half pedal turn when coming to intersection or seeing a car that may be trying to back out of a driveway, so it's simply a matter of holding the skid rather than having to start one if something unexpected happens. However all this is largely moot since outside of bike party/other fun events I don't tend to skid at all, generally I will go through about one rear tire every year.
You're riding in an environment where life threatening situations occur... without brakes?
Is that as unwise as it sounds, or is the situation not like that?
I know these aren’t one and the same and they should be able to do two things at once, but there are choices being made about where to put resources.
An update that probably took an engineer less than a day, and CI mere hours to build? The recall terminology is a little silly with an agile-ish developed product, but they really should have done it right the first time. It's not like the standard is hard to read. It probably only bubbled up to the top when someone who has designed these kinds of things in the past noticed it was out of spec, and complained.
Hard to argue that this rule breaking is a problem when literally millions of people saw the rule breaking on literally billions of occasions before the violation was noticed.
Lincoln had a recall on my Navigator that resulted in them sending me two pieces of paper and saying "place these pages between page 165 and 166 of your user manual". The pages were related to something entirely benign, related to adjusting the seat for the captain's chairs in the second row.