# Bright headlights..a pain at night and days too!



## ed2000 (Feb 16, 2007)

When are the law authorities going to monitor and force offenders to correct mis-aimed, high output headlights.
..and... what the hill does a driver need auxiliary driving lights for night time city driving?


End of old man rant.


----------



## bagpipe (Sep 19, 2006)

Thats a pet peeve of mine too. In the UK, you have to get a yearly safety inspection on your car (MOT), and the one of the requirements is that the headlights have to be adjusted to the correct angle. Be a good thing to implement here.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I quite agree.

Both the ridiculously bright types of bulbs and mis-aimed (generally pick ups or SUVs) lights are a bloody nuisance. The reason I point out trucks and SUVs is because if they're aimed even slightly high, it puts them at a very nasty level when they're behind you, perfectly aimed to blind you in your mirors.


----------



## Accept2 (Jan 1, 2006)

The new generation of lights are being tested that actively aim themselves from being in direct to the oncoming cars.............


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

I can live with most of the lights - my ford has an auto dimming rear view, and I just bump out my side mirrors slightly when I drive at night to avoid the headlight in the face.

However, my pet peeve is oncoming drivers who keep their high beams on, until they are about 200 feet from me, then kick them off. By that time I am already blind, thanks.

Some of the lights in the high end cars (bmw, mercedes, etc) are pretty damn bright though... 

AJC


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

The irony is that the "safety" such lights supposedly provide can be easily erased by blinding a driver headed right towards you.

As what often feels like one of the few remaining drivers on the road who is NOT perched 4ft up, those lights are even more dangerous for me. I hate 'em. Hate 'em, hate 'em, hate 'em.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

mhammer said:


> The irony is that the "safety" such lights supposedly provide can be easily erased by blinding a driver headed right towards you.
> 
> As what often feels like one of the few remaining drivers on the road who is NOT perched 4ft up, those lights are even more dangerous for me. I hate 'em. Hate 'em, hate 'em, hate 'em.



Yup, me too. Way too many SUVs and pick ups out there. Most people who drive them do so for style, taste and/or status, not for practical needs. I drive a car because I live in Southern Ontario and in the more than thirty years I've lived here I have yet to see anything south of Barrie that would require four wheel drive.

The lights on trucks and SUVs are often aimed way too high in my opinion.


----------



## Sneaky (Feb 14, 2006)

Milkman said:


> The lights on trucks and SUVs are often aimed way too high in my opinion.


Yes, and the monster truck jerks usually have their fog lights on too, so you are blinded no matter where you look. 

Those after market HID bulbs are the worst. They are putting them into old cars that weren't designed for that kind of light. The ones in new cars are very focused and do not blind the oncoming traffic.


----------



## CocoTone (Jan 22, 2006)

They will start enforcing them, when they start prosecuting left lane bandits,,the guys that think they own the left lane, and park there at 100 kph. Speeders are easier revenue I'm afriad.

CT.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

CocoTone said:


> They will start enforcing them, when they start prosecuting left lane bandits,,the guys that think they own the left lane, and park there at 100 kph. Speeders are easier revenue I'm afriad.
> 
> CT.


Not to mention the clowns who keep jumping out into the on ramps and exits just to get a few feet further down the road when there's a traffic jam. Why, why, why do I never see the cops looking for them? but yes those lights practically blind me! As a long time contact lense wearer, my eyes can be very sensitive and those headlights are a killer!


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

ed2000 said:


> When are the law authorities going to monitor and force offenders to correct mis-aimed, high output headlights.
> ..and... what the hill does a driver need auxiliary driving lights for night time city driving?
> 
> 
> End of old man rant.


You mean you don't carry one of those BB pistols to shoot the lights out of those vehicles with the mis-aimed lights?:2guns:


----------



## ed2000 (Feb 16, 2007)

I'm thinking of mounting a rear facing mirror in the back window to give 'Billy Bright Beam' a visual clue of what he's projecting.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...what truly amazes me is that, no matter how poor the visibilty, you can count the number of drivers who turn on their full lighting system on one hand, and still have enough fingers left to play like jeff beck.

assuming, of course, that you can play like jeff beck...


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...my life has been put at risk way too many times by speeders to worry about left lane bandits causing me to be a few seconds late. the faster they get these clowns off the highway, the safer we all will be.

besides, it is a piece of cake, for a skilled driver, to safely navigate around a left lane bandit when the traffic is light. when traffic is heavy, we all need to get over ourselves. no one is more important than everyone around them.



CocoTone said:


> They will start enforcing them, when they start prosecuting left lane bandits,,the guys that think they own the left lane, and park there at 100 kph. Speeders are easier revenue I'm afriad.
> 
> CT.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

left lane bandits are very dangerous, as they cause traffic to constrict around them. I think the main problem is semantics... in europe you're taught to "drive right and pass left"... here they say "slow vehicles keep right"... well no one thinks of themselves as slow of course... so, park a few people in the left lane and then mix in a bunch of people who don't understand how to merge (you're supposed to enter the highway AT SPEED), and you get a nasty situation.

mis-aimed headlights are annoying... i'm also tired of people who run their fog lights on all the time... they're only useful in fog and sometimes driving snow! any other time, all you're doing is lighting up a section of road that, if there IS something there, you're already running over it!

oh also... a trick a trucker told me... if you have very bright headlights coming at you, keep your eyes focussed on the right hand lane marker about 50 feet ahead of you.... you'll keep your position on the road, and preserve your night vision.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...that is what i have heard said. many, many times. but, that is not what i have witnessed. and i have done a lot of driving and commuting, especially on larger highways. i'm a fast driver, so i do understand how annoying left-lane bandits can be, but you lose me when you describe them as a safety risk. i've seen first hand the carnage that speeders and other arrogant, me-first drivers cause.
i have never heard of even one accident that was the result of someone driving too slow, in the left lane or otherwise, much less an epidemic. the left lane bandit issue always comes across as a red herring, way out of proportion to any real signifigance it may have. yeah, they are annoying, and a real mystery. the lights are on but there's nobody home. but talking about it always obscures the real dangers on the highways, which is the aforementioned speeders and other me-first asses.
a female friend of mine was killed in a head-on collision in bolton a few weeks ago and we're pretty sure the other driver was texting but, of course, the police will not give out any information.




fudb said:


> left lane bandits are very dangerous, as they cause traffic to constrict around them. I think the main problem is semantics... in europe you're taught to "drive right and pass left"... here they say "slow vehicles keep right"... well no one thinks of themselves as slow of course... so, park a few people in the left lane and then mix in a bunch of people who don't understand how to merge (you're supposed to enter the highway AT SPEED), and you get a nasty situation.
> 
> mis-aimed headlights are annoying... i'm also tired of people who run their fog lights on all the time... they're only useful in fog and sometimes driving snow! any other time, all you're doing is lighting up a section of road that, if there IS something there, you're already running over it!
> 
> oh also... a trick a trucker told me... if you have very bright headlights coming at you, keep your eyes focussed on the right hand lane marker about 50 feet ahead of you.... you'll keep your position on the road, and preserve your night vision.


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

david henman said:


> ...that is what i have heard said. many, many times. but, that is not what i have witnessed. and i have done a lot of driving and commuting, especially on larger highways. i'm a fast driver, so i do understand how annoying left-lane bandits can be, but you lose me when you describe them as a safety risk. i've seen first hand the carnage that speeders and other arrogant, me-first drivers cause.
> i have never heard of even one accident that was the result of someone driving too slow, in the left lane or otherwise, much less an epidemic. the left lane bandit issue always comes across as a red herring, way out of proportion to any real signifigance it may have. yeah, they are annoying, and a real mystery. the lights are on but there's nobody home. but talking about it always obscures the real dangers on the highways, which is the aforementioned speeders and other me-first asses.
> a female friend of mine was killed in a head-on collision in bolton a few weeks ago and we're pretty sure the other driver was texting but, of course, the police will not give out any information.


sorry for your loss.

i don't mean to make it sound like they're (left lane bandits) the worst thing on highways by any means.. but just because you haven't had an accident doesn't mean you haven't caused any... they tend to create pressure points on the highways, because the impatient drivers get stupid around them. you could say that this makes it the fault of the over aggressive drivers, but really.. to be a defensive driver means to be aware of the traffic before and after you... if you want to drive slowly, be my guest... but if you want to do it in a place that will cause traffic to ebb and flow around you instead of going smoothly, then you're a danger on the road too... IMO anyway.. 

speed isn't the killer the news makes it out to be.. in many parts of europe people drive quite a bit faster than we do here.. they have less accidents than we do.. mind you, when they do have accidents, they're more likely to be fatal.. in any case... speed is only one factor... a vehicle's state of repair is just as important, as are properly inflated tires, as is driver training (16 is IMO too young to let people drive)


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

It's important to differentiate between driving in or near a major metropolitan center like Toronto, and driving on the open stretches between say, London and Windsor.

What I see, and I drive to Ohio and Michigan a couple of times a month, is that traffic tends to bunch up much like a bolus. Typically this is caused by one or two slow drivers who don't have the common sense or courtesy to simply move into the right lane to let others pass.

That leads to people trying to pass on the right and also to people getting understandably impatient. When you see clear open highway ahead, but you're help back by such a driver it's very frustrating and can be dangerous.

That's a different condition than someone weaving in and out of traffic, not signalling lane changes and cutting people off, when all he or she is going to accomplish is moving one car length up in an endless stream of dense traffic.

When you have a six hour drive, being stuck behind left lane bandits is the shits plain and simple. I can save an hour of time on such a trip by driving 120 kmph as opposed to 100. That doesn't mean I'm driving dangerously or selfishly. 

If you're being passed by cars on the right, YOU'RE IN THE WRONG LANE.


It's s simple thing.


----------



## Fader (Mar 10, 2009)

A little courtesy can go a long way. There is nothing worse than some selfish and stupid driver who refuses to let faster traffic pass. Some self-righteous SOB who figures they're doing a public service by imposing their own speed limit an entire highway with an improvised rolling roadblock. There should be heavy fines for idiots like that.


----------



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

I know there's a lot of complains about young drivers, true some of us (I'm still 26, are really dangerous and careless) but at every age range there's some dangerous people. 
Why having killin lights? Why cut people line during traffic hours? Why not let pass a pedestran, is two seconds is too long for you?
But look at those dangerous drivers, they are the same on the waiting line at bank, grocery etc

Courtesy is the way to go, but as a society, there a long way to go before arrive at this final goal. Education is hard!


----------



## fudb (Dec 8, 2010)

Milkman said:


> When you have a six hour drive, being stuck behind left lane bandits is the shits plain and simple. I can save an hour of time on such a trip by driving 120 kmph as opposed to 100. That doesn't mean I'm driving dangerously or selfishly.


I wouldn't advise doing that speed through Ohio... flag city (miami county) is - i've been told - the most policed stretch of highway in the world.. and when they say 55, they do NOT mean 56


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

equally as dangerous... when some person decided to drive 40 km UNDER the speed limit, but fails to put their hazards on. Nothing like coming up fast on a super slow driver, not expecting they are doing 60 km/h on the highway where most are driving 100 to 110 km/h. There is a lot of that up North, especially in the winter. People figure they are driving safe... but if you are going THAT slow, put your hazards on to warn the other drivers!

Never mind the time I almost rear ended a slowpoke, driving a mini-van in the dark, pulling a huge trailer (that totally obscured the vehicle tail lights) without ANY working lights... can you can HOLY $Hit!!! 

AJC


----------



## Morkolo (Dec 9, 2010)

ajcoholic said:


> equally as dangerous... when some person decided to drive 40 km UNDER the speed limit, but fails to put their hazards on. Nothing like coming up fast on a super slow driver, not expecting they are doing 60 km/h on the highway where most are driving 100 to 110 km/h. There is a lot of that up North, especially in the winter. People figure they are driving safe... but if you are going THAT slow, put your hazards on to warn the other drivers!
> 
> Never mind the time I almost rear ended a slowpoke, driving a mini-van in the dark, pulling a huge trailer (that totally obscured the vehicle tail lights) without ANY working lights... can you can HOLY $Hit!!!
> 
> AJC


Get a lot of that here too in the winter, some people just shouldn't be on the road when those snow flakes fall... they become idiots behind the wheel.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

fudb said:


> I wouldn't advise doing that speed through Ohio... flag city (miami county) is - i've been told - the most policed stretch of highway in the world.. and when they say 55, they do NOT mean 56



I drive through Ohio a couple of times a month. The tolerence on I75 is 5 mph over the limit. They don't generally bother you if you're within 5 and sometimes 10 mph of the limit.

Anyway 120 KMPH is about 74 MPH (about 9 MPH over the posted limit of 65 MPH). If you put your cruise on at 118 you can drive right by the speed traps in Ohio.


----------



## Morkolo (Dec 9, 2010)

Milkman said:


> I drive through Ohio a couple of times a month. The tolerence on I75 is 5 mph over the limit. They don't generally bother you if you're within 5 and sometimes 10 mph of the limit.
> 
> Anyway 120 KMPH is about 74 MPH (about 9 MPH over the posted limit of 65 MPH). If you put your cruise on at 118 you can drive right by the speed traps in Ohio.


Here on the island you're safe at 110 KMPH, go 120 and they're more than likely to pick you up for speeding.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

In Ontario you can confidently set your cruise at 120 on the 400 series highways and drive right past any speed traps or even pass a cruiser.

I think they're looking for the guys driving 130~150 and driving agressively.

120 kmph is not fast with todays cars and the quality of our highways. If you drive 100~110 kmph between London and Windsor, you'd better install a jump ramp on the back of your car.


----------



## Morkolo (Dec 9, 2010)

Milkman said:


> In Ontario you can confidently set your cruise at 120 on the 400 series highways and drive right past any speed traps or even pass a cruiser.
> 
> I think they're looking for the guys driving 130~150 and driving agressively.
> 
> 120 kmph is not fast with todays cars and the quality of our highways. If you drive 100~110 kmph between London and Windsor, you'd better install a jump ramp on the back of your car.


From what I understand from people visiting Ontario anyway was that traffic is so much faster, I think a ticket at 120 is a load of bull, but what do you do?


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

"It's important to differentiate between driving in or near a major metropolitan center like Toronto, and driving on the open stretches between say, London and Windsor.
What I see, and I drive to Ohio and Michigan a couple of times a month, is that traffic tends to bunch up much like a bolus. Typically this is caused by one or two slow drivers who don't have the common sense or courtesy to simply move into the right lane to let others pass.
That leads to people trying to pass on the right and also to people getting understandably impatient. When you see clear open highway ahead, but you're held back by such a driver it's very frustrating and can be dangerous."

..."understandably impatient" is still no excuse for dangerous driving, or blaming your dangerous driving on someone else.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

fudb said:


> i don't mean to make it sound like they're (left lane bandits) the worst thing on highways by any means.. but just because you haven't had an accident doesn't mean you haven't caused any... they tend to create pressure points on the highways, because the impatient drivers get stupid around them. you could say that this makes it the fault of the over aggressive drivers, but really.. to be a defensive driver means to be aware of the traffic before and after you... if you want to drive slowly, be my guest... but if you want to do it in a place that will cause traffic to ebb and flow around you instead of going smoothly, then you're a danger on the road too... IMO anyway..
> speed isn't the killer the news makes it out to be.. in many parts of europe people drive quite a bit faster than we do here.. they have less accidents than we do.. mind you, when they do have accidents, they're more likely to be fatal.. in any case... speed is only one factor... a vehicle's state of repair is just as important, as are properly inflated tires, as is driver training (16 is IMO too young to let people drive)


1. i do not believe that you can blame left lane bandits for the stupidity of impatient and overly agressive drivers. driving IS a dangerous business. by its very nature.

2. i prefer our chances here than those in europe where they have less accidents but, as you say, they are more likely to be fatal. 

then again, my testosterone levels are dangerously low....

i participated in a similar debate on the gear forum where one 'testosterone tony' explained that if you don't enjoy the "thrill" of driving, you should be forced off the road.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

david henman said:


> 1. i do not believe that you can blame left lane bandits for the stupidity of impatient and overly agressive drivers. driving IS a dangerous business. by its very nature.
> 
> 2. i prefer our chances here than those in europe where they have less accidents but, as you say, they are more likely to be fatal.
> 
> ...


and somewhere near the middle lies a balanced perspective.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

david henman said:


> "It's important to differentiate between driving in or near a major metropolitan center like Toronto, and driving on the open stretches between say, London and Windsor.
> What I see, and I drive to Ohio and Michigan a couple of times a month, is that traffic tends to bunch up much like a bolus. Typically this is caused by one or two slow drivers who don't have the common sense or courtesy to simply move into the right lane to let others pass.
> That leads to people trying to pass on the right and also to people getting understandably impatient. When you see clear open highway ahead, but you're held back by such a driver it's very frustrating and can be dangerous."
> 
> ..."understandably impatient" is still no excuse for dangerous driving, or blaming your dangerous driving on someone else.


No that's true, but deny that cause and effect at your own peril. 

I'm becoming more and more patient as I get older, but if some self righteous or just plain negligent left lane bandit causes someone else to get a bit jumpy and I end up in a pile up because of it, I'm blaming the Left lane bandit just as much as the impatient driver.

That's jst my opinion of course.


----------



## Morkolo (Dec 9, 2010)

david henman said:


> 1. i do not believe that you can blame left lane bandits for the stupidity of impatient and overly agressive drivers. driving IS a dangerous business. by its very nature.
> 
> 2. i prefer our chances here than those in europe where they have less accidents but, as you say, they are more likely to be fatal.
> 
> ...



I don't know testosterone tony, but he sure doesn't sound like sensible sammy.


----------



## Fader (Mar 10, 2009)

If driving slow wasn't dangerous, there would not be a law against it in Ontario.

"No motor vehicle shall be driven on a highway at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic thereon except when the slow rate of speed is necessary for safe operation having regard to all the circumstances."

If you're not driving the same speed as everyone else around you, you're a hazard and hence a dangerous driver.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Well it all comes down to common sense doesn't it? On friday night I had this discussion with friends, one of whom has rolled three cars in the winter, due to excessive speed on icy, snow packed roads. We live rurally. She told me that the day prior she almost went "into the canal" as she could barely stop in time (doing 80 in a 50 zone) the proceeded to tell me that she was excited to be getting snow tires so she would be so much safer. I didn't bother to tell her that snow tires wouldn't be much help if you don't know how to drive properly for the conditions.... She wouldn't get it. Seems there is a lot of that going around today...


----------



## Accept2 (Jan 1, 2006)

I generally call the drive in and drive home, the Special Olympics. Some times driving faster is better and sometimes driving slower is better. At times people need to realize that driving in the pack is much better than serving around every car in your way. However, Im just glad that I am not in Quebec where there can be 2 speed limits posted on the same road at the same time, and if you follow the higher one, you have to swerve around those following the lower one. That is stoopidity............


----------



## Jocko (May 17, 2010)

My pet peeve, here in the UK, is drivers who do not indicate. We have roundabouts at major road junctions and increasingly more minor ones. The law is you give way to cars already on the roundabout which here in the UK means vehicles on the right. There is nothing worse than sitting at a busy roundabout, waiting to get on, then the car you are waiting on turns off, without indicating, onto the road you are on. A signal would have allowed you to enter the roundabout safely.
Another peeve is drivers who wait for a gold edged invitation before pulling out into traffic. In the heavy traffic in the UK you have to take every safe oppurtunity to pull into a main road. You cannot wait for a 200 Metre gap every time! Sitting behind such a driver can be very frustrating and frustration leads to slack driving, which leads to accidents.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Jocko said:


> My pet peeve, here in the UK, is drivers who do not indicate. We have roundabouts at major road junctions and increasingly more minor ones. The law is you give way to cars already on the roundabout which here in the UK means vehicles on the right. There is nothing worse than sitting at a busy roundabout, waiting to get on, then the car you are waiting on turns off, without indicating, onto the road you are on. A signal would have allowed you to enter the roundabout safely.
> Another peeve is drivers who wait for a gold edged invitation before pulling out into traffic. In the heavy traffic in the UK you have to take every safe oppurtunity to pull into a main road. You cannot wait for a 200 Metre gap every time! Sitting behind such a driver can be very frustrating and frustration leads to slack driving, which leads to accidents.


Although roundbouts are not widespread in North America (and frankly, you can have them) we do have the same problem with drivers failing to use their signals. In fact it's so bad that you can't even trust the signals you DO see as people sometimes drive merrily along with a turn signal blinking away and no intention of turning.

It's surprising how many people either forget that part of their drivers test or completely disregard it.


----------



## Jocko (May 17, 2010)

Yes. If a vehicle is signalling and to pull out in front of him would mean he might hit you, you don't go. If however he is signalling and it would only inconvenience him if signal is in error, you go. This is obviously only relevant in heavy traffic. If he is the only approaching vehicle then signalling or not you just wait and see where he is going.
My limited experience of driving in the US leaves me preferring roundabouts to 4 way stops but then I am used to them. For my 1 Km trip to work this morning I negotiated 7 !!


----------

