On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:32:33 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:12:00 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:08:10 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:25:03 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 04:01:43 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:32:46 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 22:52:32 -0000, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

On 02/12/2016 04:27 PM, wrote:

Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

What about tail lights? There are still many older cars/trucks on the
road yet.


My car is more than ten years old, but yes, there are cars out there
much older. At one time cars did not last very long
My 20 year old pickup had DRL

I see you have .ca email address. AFAIK, DRLs were required in Canada
long ago, but on our Canadian-built '02 Chrysler 300M DRLs weren't even
a factory-fitted option; I bought the module and plugged it in, and they
work.

They were not an option in "export" vehicles in 02 because some idiot
states still had laws on the books making them illegal, apparently.

At least on an Canadian built US market vehicle all you need to do is
plug in a module to make them work and make them legal for importation
into canada.
Many US built "domestic market" vehicles require a real bodge job to
get DRLs working to make them legal to import into Canada (along with
things like having to replace the inferior-spec bumpers etc).It used
to be quite a few US vehicles could not be imported into canada at all
because they could not be brought up to Canadian spec, but most of
them are now over 15 years old and allowed in. There are still some
that cannot be brought in - like 2005 2wd Jimmy/Blazer, any Lotus
other than 01-04 esprit,, Mercedes CLK63 Black Series or S500 Guard
Package, Tesla Model S, some Masaratti and McLaren, and quite a few
Saleen, Shelby and Roush Mustangs (if converted after sale - not
purchased from Ford as finished vehicles) and van conversions not done
by a recognized list of converters.

We just bought a 2008 Pontiac Vibe (re-badged Toyota Matrix) from a
Canadian friend who was returning to Canada and didn't want to have to
mess with beefing it up to Canadian standards on top of having to pay
import duty.

Can't he just drive it registered to the US? Like if you were on holiday?
Easy way to be charged with tax evasion - plus most likely driving
with no insurance since you cannot insure an american licenced vehicle
in Canada.

You have 6 months if visiting, and a couple weeks after importing to
change the registration.
Bringing a car across the border to stay without geclaring it is also
smuggling..

Bad Jiu Jiu if you get caught.

How absurd. Don't the Canadians trust the Americans? If it was ok in one country, it's ok in another one.

The Americans don't "trust" the Canadians any more than the Canadians
"trust" the Americans, but it doesn't come down to "trust" - it comes
down to "regulations"

Does your mommy know you are using her computer?

You can't follow simple reasoning. If the Americans deem a car safe, then the Canadians should accept that, and vice versa.
Different safety requirements. Who is to say the USA is right????
Canadian safety standards tend to be higher than USA standards for
many things. We are 2 different countries - with 2 different legal
systems, 2 different sets of laws,

But it's very childish/pedantic not to accept similar laws from another country.

--
Peter is currently listening to 10 minutes of laughter set to music.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:23:33 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:13:24 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:32:20 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 04:19:59 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:44:50 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 02/12/2016 04:31 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
An even stupider thing about daytime running lights is they don't turn
the tail lights on, which means there are now loads of people driving
around at night with only the front lights on, not realising they are
unlit at the back. If you have no front lights on in the day, when it
gets dark you notice.

Been there, done that, and had a hard time explaining to the cop that
headlights with no tail lights did not mean the tail lights were
defective. That I had to explain how it worked speaks to the relatively
few vehicles with DRL's here.
And the "ignorance" of law enforcement officers

No, the stupidity of the car manufacturer. If the front lights are going to be on all the time, then so should the back ones, that's how Volvos always worked.

You've never seen a volvo with DRLs?

My father had one decades ago, before DRL was anywhere but Sweden.

Anyway, not putting on your taillights is just as bad if not a worse offence than having defective ones, as you could say you didn't realise they were defective.

Ignorance is no excuse. As a driver YOU have the responsibility of
checking your vehicle and making sure it is in safe operating
condition.

That's what I bloody said you moron. You said above that the law enforcement officers were being ignorant, which is irrelevant.

I never said the police officer was BEING ignorant - I said he WAS
ignorant of how DRLs work. VERY different

Forgetting to put your lights on is as serious as having faulty ones. The net result is the same, no lights. And in fact it should be MORE serious, and in the UK it is. If I forget to wear a seatbelt, or forget to stay under the speed limit, I get a fine. If I have a bald tyre or a faulty bulb because I haven't checked it recently, I have to get it fixed within 2 weeks, but no fine.

Here in North America - either Canada or the USA, you also get a fine
if you forget to put your lights on and get stopped. (or drive without
seat belts) But here you can also be charged with operating an unsafe
vehicle for driving on a bald tire or with defective lighting
equipment. The officer MAY give you a "grace period" if it is not a
commercial vehicle, but he doesn't have to. You are usually charged on
the spot - with the priveledge of explaining in court why you should
not be found guilty and why you should not be fined.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:33:09 -0500, Micky
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:25:03 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 04:01:43 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:32:46 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 22:52:32 -0000, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

On 02/12/2016 04:27 PM, wrote:

Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

What about tail lights? There are still many older cars/trucks on the
road yet.


My car is more than ten years old, but yes, there are cars out there
much older. At one time cars did not last very long
My 20 year old pickup had DRL

I see you have .ca email address. AFAIK, DRLs were required in Canada
long ago, but on our Canadian-built '02 Chrysler 300M DRLs weren't even
a factory-fitted option; I bought the module and plugged it in, and they
work.

They were not an option in "export" vehicles in 02 because some idiot
states still had laws on the books making them illegal, apparently.

At least on an Canadian built US market vehicle all you need to do is
plug in a module to make them work and make them legal for importation
into canada.
Many US built "domestic market" vehicles require a real bodge job to
get DRLs working to make them legal to import into Canada (along with
things like having to replace the inferior-spec bumpers etc).It used
to be quite a few US vehicles could not be imported into canada at all
because they could not be brought up to Canadian spec, but most of
them are now over 15 years old and allowed in. There are still some
that cannot be brought in - like 2005 2wd Jimmy/Blazer, any Lotus
other than 01-04 esprit,, Mercedes CLK63 Black Series or S500 Guard
Package, Tesla Model S, some Masaratti and McLaren, and quite a few
Saleen, Shelby and Roush Mustangs (if converted after sale - not
purchased from Ford as finished vehicles) and van conversions not done
by a recognized list of converters.

We just bought a 2008 Pontiac Vibe (re-badged Toyota Matrix) from a
Canadian friend who was returning to Canada and didn't want to have to
mess with beefing it up to Canadian standards on top of having to pay
import duty.

Can't he just drive it registered to the US? Like if you were on holiday?
Easy way to be charged with tax evasion - plus most likely driving
with no insurance since you cannot insure an american licenced vehicle
in Canada.

You have 6 months if visiting, and a couple weeks after importing to
change the registration.
Bringing a car across the border to stay without geclaring it is also
smuggling..

Bad Jiu Jiu if you get caught.

How absurd. Don't the Canadians trust the Americans? If it was ok in one country, it's ok in another one.

You know that American states have the same rules among each other. 30
days after moving to Md. to change your car's registration to Md. and
paid sales tax on it if iirc you didn't pay sales tax before.

And Canadian provinces?
Yes - but the sales tax will have been paid in any province except
Alberta (and that will likely be changing real soon)

On 02/13/2016 03:57 AM, Micky wrote:
OT but my 2000 Solara has a driver's window that goes all the way down
with one push, but requires holding the button to go up.

My friend's '99 Rav4 had a button that went up or down with one push,
a year earlier, cheaper car, but better switch, IMO.

Any vehicle I've had since my '62 Lincoln has had a little crank that
caused the window to go up and down. The Lincoln was a great car until
the gadgets started failing, leaving me with a dislike for power this
and that.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:48 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:30:55 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:25:14 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 00:41:44 -0000, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/12/2016 6:30 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:


Those stupid things should be banned, they're a distraction. Lights are
to inform you of.... someone making a turn, an ambulance, etc, etc. If
everybody has lights, you no longer notice things you should, you don't
see unlit things like pedestrians, etc. In countries like Austria where
they did proper surveys, they found that they INCREASE accidents by 12%.

Austria is not mentioned, but overall, accidents are reduced.

I smell bull****. Just like global warming.

No wonder, for as much as you've posted.

Do grow up.
You seem to to have an opinion that everything done by the auto
companies in Canada and the USA, and the laws controlling what is done
are stupid, just because it's different than what is done in the UK.
You have strong opinions not supportable by facts.

You are entitled to your opinions - but you have to be ready to be
called on them when you keep spouting them off. You say you smell BS -
I tell you where it is coming from.

You don't like it? Too bad...

On 02/13/2016 08:25 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:

How absurd. Don't the Canadians trust the Americans? If it was ok in
one country, it's ok in another one.

How absurd is it that I have two motorcycles that are only legal in 49
states? That doesn't mean I can't ride through California but I couldn't
register them in the state.

On 02/13/2016 01:12 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:

You can't follow simple reasoning. If the Americans deem a car safe,
then the Canadians should accept that, and vice versa.

do you know how many vehicles cannot be imported into the US that are
considered perfectly adequate in the rest of the world?

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:39:52 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:33:18 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:28:38 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:55:24 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:28:37 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:14:13 -0000, philo wrote:

On 02/12/2016 11:06 AM, KenK wrote:
Just about pulled out in front of a car with lights out early this morning.
Not even parking lights. A few seconds earlier...

Why do these people drive with lights out? Save gas - engine runs easier
without generating electricity for lights? Seems I've seen many more of
them in the past year for some reason.

Breeding more of them in your area too?

Sorry to bother you all. Had to vent somewhere.





My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

Not everybody has brand new fancy cars.
As I just said in another message - mine is 20 years old (and
believe it or not MOST of the lamps are still original - along with
the rear brakes, exhaust, alternator, starter, ball joints and
steering parts, etc at 340,000+ Km)

I guess you don't drive with your lights on all the time then?
Yes I do. The truck has DRLs, and a large portion of the miles driven
on the truck were driven with full lighting (early morning and
evening)

What kind of bulbs? At 20 years old they'd be incandescent, not LED surely?
They are hollogen bulbs, same as have been standard equipment on
North American automobiles for over 30 years.

In the last 4 years and 33000km I have changed ONE tail light bulb on
this vehicle..
In the 7 years we owned my wife's Mystique we never changed a
headlight In the 12 years we owned the Chrysler before that I changed
most of the sealed beam lamps once...

I've had good luck with headlights.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:39:00 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:23:33 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:13:24 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:32:20 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 04:19:59 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:44:50 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 02/12/2016 04:31 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
An even stupider thing about daytime running lights is they don't turn
the tail lights on, which means there are now loads of people driving
around at night with only the front lights on, not realising they are
unlit at the back. If you have no front lights on in the day, when it
gets dark you notice.

Been there, done that, and had a hard time explaining to the cop that
headlights with no tail lights did not mean the tail lights were
defective. That I had to explain how it worked speaks to the relatively
few vehicles with DRL's here.
And the "ignorance" of law enforcement officers

No, the stupidity of the car manufacturer. If the front lights are going to be on all the time, then so should the back ones, that's how Volvos always worked.

You've never seen a volvo with DRLs?

My father had one decades ago, before DRL was anywhere but Sweden.

Anyway, not putting on your taillights is just as bad if not a worse offence than having defective ones, as you could say you didn't realise they were defective.

Ignorance is no excuse. As a driver YOU have the responsibility of
checking your vehicle and making sure it is in safe operating
condition.

That's what I bloody said you moron. You said above that the law enforcement officers were being ignorant, which is irrelevant.

I never said the police officer was BEING ignorant - I said he WAS
ignorant of how DRLs work. VERY different

Those are the same thing. He doesn't know how DRLs work, so he is ignorant of that particular piece of knowledge.

Forgetting to put your lights on is as serious as having faulty ones. The net result is the same, no lights. And in fact it should be MORE serious, and in the UK it is. If I forget to wear a seatbelt, or forget to stay under the speed limit, I get a fine. If I have a bald tyre or a faulty bulb because I haven't checked it recently, I have to get it fixed within 2 weeks, but no fine.

Here in North America - either Canada or the USA, you also get a fine
if you forget to put your lights on and get stopped. (or drive without
seat belts) But here you can also be charged with operating an unsafe
vehicle for driving on a bald tire or with defective lighting
equipment. The officer MAY give you a "grace period" if it is not a
commercial vehicle, but he doesn't have to. You are usually charged on
the spot - with the priveledge of explaining in court why you should
not be found guilty and why you should not be fined.

Ouch, glad I don't live there. Here in the UK I was stopped for going 95mph in a 70mph limit, driving with half my exhaust missing, one bald tyre, one soft tyre, one tyre with a split in the side, and a non-functional handbrake. I got a "pink slip" to get the defects fixed in 2 weeks then stamped by a mechanic, and they forgot the speeding offence.

--
I just sent my lawyer something for his birthday. Unfortunately, he wasn't home when it went off.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:47:15 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:48 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:30:55 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:25:14 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 00:41:44 -0000, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/12/2016 6:30 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:


Those stupid things should be banned, they're a distraction. Lights are
to inform you of.... someone making a turn, an ambulance, etc, etc. If
everybody has lights, you no longer notice things you should, you don't
see unlit things like pedestrians, etc. In countries like Austria where
they did proper surveys, they found that they INCREASE accidents by 12%.

Austria is not mentioned, but overall, accidents are reduced.

I smell bull****. Just like global warming.

No wonder, for as much as you've posted.

Do grow up.
You seem to to have an opinion that everything done by the auto
companies in Canada and the USA, and the laws controlling what is done
are stupid, just because it's different than what is done in the UK.
You have strong opinions not supportable by facts.

You are entitled to your opinions - but you have to be ready to be
called on them when you keep spouting them off. You say you smell BS -
I tell you where it is coming from.

You don't like it? Too bad...

I wasn't referring to Canada and the USA, I was referring to the so called statistics about DRLs increasing safety, when it's bloody obvious they don't. Read this (DaDRL is a worldwide voluntary group of experienced motorists including Scientists, Engineers, Mathematicians, Lawyers and Ophthalmological experts who are supported by the leading Pedestrian, Cyclist and Motorcyclist organisations): http://www.dadrl.org.uk

--
Flabbergasted (adj.), appalled over how much weight you have gained.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:40:11 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:34:24 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:29:24 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:57:13 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:30:08 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:09 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 12:14:18 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/12/2016 11:06 AM, KenK wrote:
Just about pulled out in front of a car with lights out early this morning.
Not even parking lights. A few seconds earlier...

Why do these people drive with lights out? Save gas - engine runs easier
without generating electricity for lights? Seems I've seen many more of
them in the past year for some reason.

Breeding more of them in your area too?

Sorry to bother you all. Had to vent somewhere.

My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

This can't be much of a problem anymore, can it? The vast majority of
cars on the road now have daytime lights on, ie if the car is running
the lights are on. Not sure if it's a law though.
Probably should be though.

Those stupid things should be banned, they're a distraction. Lights are to inform you of.... someone making a turn, an ambulance, etc, etc. If everybody has lights, you no longer notice things you should, you don't see unlit things like pedestrians, etc. In countries like Austria where they did proper surveys, they found that they INCREASE accidents by 12%.
Mr Parrott. you are crazy.
Daylighting makes ALL vehicles more visible.. If other cars on the
road are a distraction to you, you should quit driving and stay aff
the road.

Says the person who cannot see an object which doesn't have bulbs all over it.

I'm a photographer, I know all about contrast and apertures, so shut up until you have a clue please.
You may be a photographer, mabee even a good one - but I have my
doubts about your driving.

We're discussing the ability to see objects.
When we are driving in real world conditions - not looking through
the viefinder of a high end professional camera.

You say "shut up untill you have a clue" then tell me to "grow up"
when I tell you the BS you smell is coming from your own posts.

3 words.

Pot

Kettle

Black

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:48:44 -0000, rbowman wrote:

On 02/13/2016 08:25 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:

How absurd. Don't the Canadians trust the Americans? If it was ok in
one country, it's ok in another one.

How absurd is it that I have two motorcycles that are only legal in 49
states? That doesn't mean I can't ride through California but I couldn't
register them in the state.

Very absurd. All states should have the same laws.

--
Reality is only an illusion that occurs due to a lack of alcohol.

On 02/13/2016 01:13 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:

I drive at a speed sensible for the roads, I don't need to know the
numerical value.

We have a number of roads where 45 was considered sensible for years.
Then one day the county put up shiny new 35 mph signs. Can you make the
distinction between 35 and 40? If not, the county deputies are standing
by to help you.

I suppose you don't scan your mirrors either?

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:51:10 -0000, rbowman wrote:

On 02/13/2016 01:12 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:

You can't follow simple reasoning. If the Americans deem a car safe,
then the Canadians should accept that, and vice versa.

do you know how many vehicles cannot be imported into the US that are
considered perfectly adequate in the rest of the world?

I've heard of one where they had to fit larger wheels so the headlights were at the correct minimum height. In the UK we only have a maximum height.

The fitting of larger wheels actually ruined the handling and made the car more dangerous. Health and softy shooting itself in the foot.

--
There once was a time when all people believed in god and the church ruled. This time was called the Dark Ages. -- Richard Lederer

On 02/13/2016 08:27 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
Mass production, robotics, etc, etc we should be working less!

As Hillary Clinton said, this isn't Denmark. Somebody has to work so the
CEO of Bank of America can get 13 million a year.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:40:46 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:35:07 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:29:39 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:57:53 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:30:39 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:30:29 -0000, philo wrote:

On 02/12/2016 11:25 AM, trader_4 wrote:



My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

This can't be much of a problem anymore, can it? The vast majority of
cars on the road now have daytime lights on, ie if the car is running
the lights are on. Not sure if it's a law though.
Probably should be though.

Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

Disconnect the stupid things. If the car moans about it, connect a dummy load under the hood where it can't distract other road users.
Id10t

Says the person using mobile phone speak.
OK I'll spell it out for you.

I D I O T.

Now try explaining your opinion instead of just dismissing mine as though everybody knows yours is correct.
I have explained my opinions very clearly, and have had decades of
experience in the automotive technical field, as well as years of
experience in competive motorsport and millions of miles of driving on
the roads of North America (All provinces of Canada and half the
states of the USA) as well as both Europe and Africa (south central
and west)

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:46:50 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:36:59 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:30:03 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 04:02:47 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:33:49 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:48:05 -0000, Mr. Emann wrote:

On 2/12/2016 11:30 AM, philo wrote:

Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

The daylight running lights on my truck will turn off when the emergency
brake is set. If I want to turn them off I just push the emergency brake
pedal just far enough to turn off the lights but not enough to engage
the brakes.

So people who use the emergency/hand/parking brake at junctions will make their lights go on and off, that's really stupid.
Apparently not as stupid as you.

Says the person who doesn't know the difference between her name and her email address.
Her???

I'm all male

Most Clares are female.

Around hear most Claires are female. Clare is the short form for
Clarence. I know MANY Clares - and virtually ALL of them are male.

- and my email address is my email address, not my name.

You put your email address in the From field. Most people put their name there.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:52:09 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:39:52 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:33:18 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:28:38 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:55:24 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:28:37 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:14:13 -0000, philo wrote:

On 02/12/2016 11:06 AM, KenK wrote:
Just about pulled out in front of a car with lights out early this morning.
Not even parking lights. A few seconds earlier...

Why do these people drive with lights out? Save gas - engine runs easier
without generating electricity for lights? Seems I've seen many more of
them in the past year for some reason.

Breeding more of them in your area too?

Sorry to bother you all. Had to vent somewhere.





My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

Not everybody has brand new fancy cars.
As I just said in another message - mine is 20 years old (and
believe it or not MOST of the lamps are still original - along with
the rear brakes, exhaust, alternator, starter, ball joints and
steering parts, etc at 340,000+ Km)

I guess you don't drive with your lights on all the time then?
Yes I do. The truck has DRLs, and a large portion of the miles driven
on the truck were driven with full lighting (early morning and
evening)

What kind of bulbs? At 20 years old they'd be incandescent, not LED surely?
They are hollogen bulbs, same as have been standard equipment on
North American automobiles for over 30 years.

We have halogen for the headlights, but not for brakes, tails, indicators, etc.

In the last 4 years and 33000km I have changed ONE tail light bulb on
this vehicle..
In the 7 years we owned my wife's Mystique we never changed a
headlight In the 12 years we owned the Chrysler before that I changed
most of the sealed beam lamps once...

I've had good luck with headlights.

I changed a headlight when I hit a deer with it.

--
Foreploy (v): Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:54:36 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:40:11 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:34:24 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:29:24 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:57:13 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:30:08 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:09 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 12:14:18 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 02/12/2016 11:06 AM, KenK wrote:
Just about pulled out in front of a car with lights out early this morning.
Not even parking lights. A few seconds earlier...

Why do these people drive with lights out? Save gas - engine runs easier
without generating electricity for lights? Seems I've seen many more of
them in the past year for some reason.

Breeding more of them in your area too?

Sorry to bother you all. Had to vent somewhere.

My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

This can't be much of a problem anymore, can it? The vast majority of
cars on the road now have daytime lights on, ie if the car is running
the lights are on. Not sure if it's a law though.
Probably should be though.

Those stupid things should be banned, they're a distraction. Lights are to inform you of.... someone making a turn, an ambulance, etc, etc. If everybody has lights, you no longer notice things you should, you don't see unlit things like pedestrians, etc. In countries like Austria where they did proper surveys, they found that they INCREASE accidents by 12%.
Mr Parrott. you are crazy.
Daylighting makes ALL vehicles more visible.. If other cars on the
road are a distraction to you, you should quit driving and stay aff
the road.

Says the person who cannot see an object which doesn't have bulbs all over it.

I'm a photographer, I know all about contrast and apertures, so shut up until you have a clue please.
You may be a photographer, mabee even a good one - but I have my
doubts about your driving.

We're discussing the ability to see objects.
When we are driving in real world conditions - not looking through
the viefinder of a high end professional camera.

You say "shut up untill you have a clue" then tell me to "grow up"
when I tell you the BS you smell is coming from your own posts.

3 words.

Pot

Kettle

Black

You do realise your eye has an iris which works like the aperture in a camera?

--
"I'll have the rump steak, rare, please."
He said, "Aren't you worried about the mad cow?"
"Nah, she can order for herself."
And that's when the fight started....

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:55:05 -0000, rbowman wrote:

On 02/13/2016 01:13 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:

I drive at a speed sensible for the roads, I don't need to know the
numerical value.

We have a number of roads where 45 was considered sensible for years.
Then one day the county put up shiny new 35 mph signs. Can you make the
distinction between 35 and 40? If not, the county deputies are standing
by to help you.

If it was sensible then, it's sensible now.

I suppose you don't scan your mirrors either?

No, I don't have tunnel vision. I can see the police car in the mirror out of the corner of my eye, and then I look at the speedo.

--
Hello, you have reached technical support.
Please dial 1 to report an issue, 2 to report a challenge, 3 to report a problem, or 4 to report a cockup.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:56:47 -0000, rbowman wrote:

On 02/13/2016 08:27 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
Mass production, robotics, etc, etc we should be working less!

As Hillary Clinton said, this isn't Denmark. Somebody has to work so the
CEO of Bank of America can get 13 million a year.

It's very easy to scam banks.

--
CO2 emissions aren't a problem. CO2 is supposed to be there. It feeds plants for ****s sake! If greenies want plants to be healthy, we need MORE CO2! They pump CO2 into greenhouses to make plants grow better!

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:58:18 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:40:46 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:35:07 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:29:39 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:57:53 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:30:39 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:30:29 -0000, philo wrote:

On 02/12/2016 11:25 AM, trader_4 wrote:



My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

This can't be much of a problem anymore, can it? The vast majority of
cars on the road now have daytime lights on, ie if the car is running
the lights are on. Not sure if it's a law though.
Probably should be though.

Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

Disconnect the stupid things. If the car moans about it, connect a dummy load under the hood where it can't distract other road users.
Id10t

Says the person using mobile phone speak.
OK I'll spell it out for you.

I D I O T.

Now try explaining your opinion instead of just dismissing mine as though everybody knows yours is correct.
I have explained my opinions very clearly, and have had decades of
experience in the automotive technical field, as well as years of
experience in competive motorsport and millions of miles of driving on
the roads of North America (All provinces of Canada and half the
states of the USA) as well as both Europe and Africa (south central
and west)

That explains why you believe your opinion has more value, but you still haven't explained the opinion.

--
Watching his date from the corner of his eye while he poured her a drink, the young bachelor said, "Say when."
She replied, "Right after that drink."

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 22:00:32 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:46:50 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:36:59 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:30:03 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 04:02:47 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:33:49 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:48:05 -0000, Mr. Emann wrote:

On 2/12/2016 11:30 AM, philo wrote:

Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

The daylight running lights on my truck will turn off when the emergency
brake is set. If I want to turn them off I just push the emergency brake
pedal just far enough to turn off the lights but not enough to engage
the brakes.

So people who use the emergency/hand/parking brake at junctions will make their lights go on and off, that's really stupid.
Apparently not as stupid as you.

Says the person who doesn't know the difference between her name and her email address.
Her???

I'm all male

Most Clares are female.

Around hear most Claires are female. Clare is the short form for
Clarence. I know MANY Clares - and virtually ALL of them are male.

Clarence is a very old male name, and I've never heard anyone shorten it to Clare, it would sound female.

You've got it backwards anyway: "Clare is a given name, the Medieval English form of Clara.[1] The related name Clair was traditionally considered male, especially when spelled without an 'e',[2] but Clare and Claire are usually female." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clare_(given_name)

--
Watching his date from the corner of his eye while he poured her a drink, the young bachelor said, "Say when."
She replied, "Right after that drink."

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:49:01 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:40:44 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:31:04 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 03:58:47 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:31:49 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:38:53 -0000, Tony Hwang wrote:

philo wrote:
On 02/12/2016 11:25 AM, trader_4 wrote:



My car is set to automatic and the lights go on and off as needed.

That said, if it's very dark, it's odd they don't notice that they can't
see anything

This can't be much of a problem anymore, can it? The vast majority of
cars on the road now have daytime lights on, ie if the car is running
the lights are on. Not sure if it's a law though.
Probably should be though.




Yes, even with my lights in the "off" position there are still "running
lights". I don't know if there is anyway to turn them off completely

What about tail lights? There are still many older cars/trucks on the
road yet.

An even stupider thing about daytime running lights is they don't turn the tail lights on, which means there are now loads of people driving around at night with only the front lights on, not realising they are unlit at the back. If you have no front lights on in the day, when it gets dark you notice.
You don't have lights on your speedo and other guages either, dummy.

That would be because I can see them without lights all over them, just like I can see other cars without lights all over them.

Again, why do you want the front of cars lit up but not the back?
Pretty obvious to anyone who actually drives. The front of the car
is comming towards you

On the other side of the road, it's far easier to hit the back of another car than one going the other way on the wrong side.

Not all roads are "devided coachways" like your motorways. There are
millions of miles of "2 lane blacktop" in the world - and a whole lot
of them are in North America (also lots of it in Europe and Africa -
as well as the rest of the world)
Without seeing approaching cars, pulling out to pass can be a very
deadly move.

at the combined speed of the car approaching
and your car. He's doing 100kph and you are doing 90, the closing
speed is 190kph.,

Oh no, you don't actually believe that do you? Answer this simple question:

Situation 1: You drive at 50mph into a brick wall.
Situation 2: You drive at 50mph into another identical car going at 50mph the other way.

Which causes more damage to your car and you?

Most definitely 2 vehicles meeting at 50kph. The same as 100kph into a
solid brick wall.

But that is NOT the issue. It is the amount of time you have to react.
You are just as dead when you hit at 100 as you are at 190. The secret
is in NOT being dead.. Closing speed is not as important as closing
TIME.

From the rear, you are approaching at the difference between his speed
and yours. If he's doing 100 and you are doing 90 you will never meet.
If you are doing 100 and he is doing 90, you are approaching at 10kph.

The problem arises when he stops and you don't.
And it is still going to happen in twice the time as if he was
aproaching you.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 14:10:38 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 02/13/2016 08:25 AM, wrote:
You are one of the more rational. Back when DRLs were first proposed
you wouldn't believe how many people south of the border ranted and
raved about government intervention and forcing them to burn more
gas!!!!

I don't think the average motorist can even make the connection between
a miniscule increase in gas consumption and DRLs.
Not only can the average motorist not make the connection, nore can
an instrument like a "scanguage" or the fuel mileage monitors built
into many of today's cars - but in a lot of peoples "minds" there is a
large savings.

Never mind trying to convince them with facts - their minds are
already firmly set.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 14:12:48 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 02/13/2016 09:51 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

The purpose of the DRL is to help see the car coming at you. If it is
going away from you it won't hit you.

No, but if you're a soccer mom putting on your lipstick, you might hit
it. The more lights the better was the rationale for the extra stop light.
No, the rational for the "high level brake light" was it can be seen
over or through the car ahead of you, giving more warning about what
is going on ahead. You can't see the brake lights of the vehicles 2 or
3 cars ahead through the solid bodies of the vehicles between you and
the vehicle braking.

You CAN see the high mounted brake light.

Per Ed Pawlowski:
Or he was going 110 KPH or 68 MPH. When you look as the speedometer in
Germany you usually have to translate.

Trust me, I translated....
--
Pete Cresswell

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:29 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I know he read the email btw. He seemed to open it 3 times over 4 or
5 days.

How do you know he read the email? Not those read receipt things? I used to forward all my work email to another address so I could read them both together. The forwarding process returned a certificate saying I'd deleted it without opening it. Some people got upset, then surprised I'd done what they'd asked me to in the email I had "deleted".

LOL. Not return receipt. There's some service that would email me
when he opened his email, but it was free only for 30 days and
expensive after that, given that this is the first time in 20 years I
wanted to use it.


other big mistakes in treatment that month too, the exact same mistake
twice. What a jerk.

Eventually I'm going to go to his office to get him to talk to me. If
he's embarrassed in front of his other patients, that would be fine.

Doesn't your dental practice have more than one dentist? If I have a toothache and my regular dentist is away, I can use another one.

He would only have to have an arrangement with another dentist or two.
It wouldn't even have to be someone in the same practice**.

But if I have a toothache, I don't phone my dentist, she's busy doing dental work. I phone the practice receptionist, who book me in with her, or someone else if she has no available time soon enough for me.

I''ve never had an emergency during office hours. Medical or dental,
they are always Friday night.

And I assumed he did. I assumed that any decent dentist has that*** and
later I saw that he had an emergency number on his webpage. But the
number was, I guess, his number, not some service that would find the
dentist on call.

**For example my brother is a radiologist, and even though it was
known when he started that he would take vacations, iiuc when he went
out of town, it was his responsibility to arrange with another
radiologist to work for him. Fortunately there was one who didn't
work full time because she had a young child, and she would work two
weeks for him or two days, as she did sometimes for other radiologists
in town. But not 50 weeks a year.

People should employ receptionists and not take calls themselves.

He does have a receptionist during office hours.

***which implies he's not a decent dentist, and he's not.
......

The switch is on all the time, and the lights go on when the engine
goes on. The photocell on the dash determines which lights go on. But
maybe if I turn the switch off and back on again, the lights really
will go on even if the engine's not running. I'll try it. I had
this all settled two or three years ago, but then I forgot how it
works. This plan doens't ring a bell, but maybe.

Are you saying your car won't allow headlights if the engine is off, or it won't allow them if it's light?

Only that I don't know how to do it.

If it's when the engine is off, go in the fusebox and change the incoming wore to the headlight fuse from IGN to BATT.

Change the wire to the fuse? Do you know how much effort that is? Of
if you mean run a wire from the hot end of one fuse to the cold end of
the other fuse, that's a lot of effort too. I'm looking for a way
to turn the lights on when the engine is off, just like all cars
worked until 1995. Not a whole project.

If it's when it's daylight, I don't know why you need that,

To see how well the lights are working, to see if changing a bulb
really fixed it, etc.

but just cover the light sensor up, then you can use them as if it weren't automatic.

There are two sensors and I've forgotten which is which. I suspect
if your method, turning the switch off and on, works, it will work day
and night.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 14:54:31 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 05:57:35 -0500, Micky
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:40:58 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 02/12/2016 01:22 PM, wrote:
My 20 year old pickup had DRL

Yes, but you're in Canada. I don't know when DRL's became mandatory in
Canada but they are not in the US. Some manufacturers installed them,
some did not. My 2007 Toyota had them; my 2011 does not. Go figure.

OT but my 2000 Solara has a driver's window that goes all the way down
with one push, but requires holding the button to go up.

My friend's '99 Rav4 had a button that went up or down with one push,
a year earlier, cheaper car, but better switch, IMO.


Since they are not illegal in the US I'm surprised they are not
installed across the board.


One touch "up" was "outlawed" because it was too easy for a kid to
get caught in a window by bumping the switch.

But it would be more convenient for me!

Just kidding. Your reason makes sense.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 23:06:09 -0000, Micky wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:29 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I know he read the email btw. He seemed to open it 3 times over 4 or
5 days.

How do you know he read the email? Not those read receipt things? I used to forward all my work email to another address so I could read them both together. The forwarding process returned a certificate saying I'd deleted it without opening it. Some people got upset, then surprised I'd done what they'd asked me to in the email I had "deleted".

LOL. Not return receipt. There's some service that would email me
when he opened his email, but it was free only for 30 days and
expensive after that, given that this is the first time in 20 years I
wanted to use it.

So how did you know?

other big mistakes in treatment that month too, the exact same mistake
twice. What a jerk.

Eventually I'm going to go to his office to get him to talk to me. If
he's embarrassed in front of his other patients, that would be fine.

Doesn't your dental practice have more than one dentist? If I have a toothache and my regular dentist is away, I can use another one.

He would only have to have an arrangement with another dentist or two.
It wouldn't even have to be someone in the same practice**.

But if I have a toothache, I don't phone my dentist, she's busy doing dental work. I phone the practice receptionist, who book me in with her, or someone else if she has no available time soon enough for me.

I''ve never had an emergency during office hours. Medical or dental,
they are always Friday night.

I don't think I have a 24 hour number. FFS just take a painkiller and phone them in the morning! It's toothache not a heart attack.

And I assumed he did. I assumed that any decent dentist has that*** and
later I saw that he had an emergency number on his webpage. But the
number was, I guess, his number, not some service that would find the
dentist on call.

**For example my brother is a radiologist, and even though it was
known when he started that he would take vacations, iiuc when he went
out of town, it was his responsibility to arrange with another
radiologist to work for him. Fortunately there was one who didn't
work full time because she had a young child, and she would work two
weeks for him or two days, as she did sometimes for other radiologists
in town. But not 50 weeks a year.

People should employ receptionists and not take calls themselves.

He does have a receptionist during office hours.

My vet has a 24/7 number, a pet could be in danger of dying. You don't die of toothache.

***which implies he's not a decent dentist, and he's not.
......

The switch is on all the time, and the lights go on when the engine
goes on. The photocell on the dash determines which lights go on. But
maybe if I turn the switch off and back on again, the lights really
will go on even if the engine's not running. I'll try it. I had
this all settled two or three years ago, but then I forgot how it
works. This plan doens't ring a bell, but maybe.

Are you saying your car won't allow headlights if the engine is off, or it won't allow them if it's light?

Only that I don't know how to do it.

If it's when the engine is off, go in the fusebox and change the incoming wore to the headlight fuse from IGN to BATT.

Change the wire to the fuse? Do you know how much effort that is?

Virtually none. Takes about as long as changing a wheel.

Of if you mean run a wire from the hot end of one fuse to the cold end of
the other fuse, that's a lot of effort too.

No, just change the hot end of the fuse to the other input. There's 2 inputs to a fusebox, one is only on with the ignition, the other comes straight from the battery. There will be unused fuse containers, use one of those if it's easier.

I'm looking for a way
to turn the lights on when the engine is off, just like all cars
worked until 1995. Not a whole project.

AFAIK all Vauxhalls do that anyway. Bloody annoying as you can more easily run the battery flat. Plus when I park the car for two minutes and don't turn the lights off, I've got a parked car dazzling people unnecessarily. I already removed the bleeping thing in anger that warns me I dared to open the door and left the lights on.

If it's when it's daylight, I don't know why you need that,

To see how well the lights are working, to see if changing a bulb
really fixed it, etc.

Just turn on the ignition?

but just cover the light sensor up, then you can use them as if it weren't automatic.

There are two sensors and I've forgotten which is which. I suspect
if your method, turning the switch off and on, works, it will work day
and night.

If I ever got a car that decided itself when it was dark, I'd disable it immediately, or at least adjust it to when I think it's dark.

--
A woman walks into a drugstore and asks the pharmacist if he sells size extra large condoms.
He replies, "Yes we do. Would you like to buy some?"
She responds, "No, but do you mind if I wait around here until someone does?

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 23:13:16 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 23:06:09 -0000, Micky wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:29 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I know he read the email btw. He seemed to open it 3 times over 4 or
5 days.

How do you know he read the email? Not those read receipt things? I used to forward all my work email to another address so I could read them both together. The forwarding process returned a certificate saying I'd deleted it without opening it. Some people got upset, then surprised I'd done what they'd asked me to in the email I had "deleted".

LOL. Not return receipt. There's some service that would email me
when he opened his email, but it was free only for 30 days and
expensive after that, given that this is the first time in 20 years I
wanted to use it.

So how did you know?

They sent me an email.

other big mistakes in treatment that month too, the exact same mistake
twice. What a jerk.

Eventually I'm going to go to his office to get him to talk to me. If
he's embarrassed in front of his other patients, that would be fine.

Doesn't your dental practice have more than one dentist? If I have a toothache and my regular dentist is away, I can use another one.

He would only have to have an arrangement with another dentist or two.
It wouldn't even have to be someone in the same practice**.

But if I have a toothache, I don't phone my dentist, she's busy doing dental work. I phone the practice receptionist, who book me in with her, or someone else if she has no available time soon enough for me.

I''ve never had an emergency during office hours. Medical or dental,
they are always Friday night.

I don't think I have a 24 hour number. FFS just take a painkiller and phone them in the morning! It's toothache not a heart attack.

I've never had a toothache, and until this past year, I'd never had
any other dental emergency, but if something happens on Friday
evening, I'm not going to wait until Monday.

That's what 24 hour dentists are for.

When I lived in NY, on a Sunday afternoon, I went with my girlfriend
to the apt. of a friend of hers, and his girlfriend had had a
toothache since Friday or Saturday, getting worse and worse. She
couldn't eat, could barely talk. I said, Why don't you go to the
dentist! They said, Monday. I said, Why don't you go now? It's
Sunday. I said, That's what 24 hour dentists are for.

So NYC has over 2 million people, not counting the other boros (and
why count them?) and in the yellow pages were about 20 24-hour
dentists. One of us called them one by one and learned that the first
seven didnt' do that anymore. Because they only do that until they
get enough patients to keep busy. No one wants to be bothered on
weekends or the middle of the night. But the 8th guy said come on
over. It took less than 30 minutes for her and her boyfriend to get
there, less than 30 minutes for the dentist to fix her. and she was
back in less than 90 minutes. And he didnt' charge any more than her
regular dentist would have charged, or maybe 10% more.


And I assumed he did. I assumed that any decent dentist has that*** and
later I saw that he had an emergency number on his webpage. But the
number was, I guess, his number, not some service that would find the
dentist on call.

**For example my brother is a radiologist, and even though it was
known when he started that he would take vacations, iiuc when he went
out of town, it was his responsibility to arrange with another
radiologist to work for him. Fortunately there was one who didn't
work full time because she had a young child, and she would work two
weeks for him or two days, as she did sometimes for other radiologists
in town. But not 50 weeks a year.

People should employ receptionists and not take calls themselves.

He does have a receptionist during office hours.

My vet has a 24/7 number, a pet could be in danger of dying. You don't die of toothache.

Most dentists have emergency numbers. This one did too. It's just
that HE was the only dentist reachable at the emergency number and he
wasnt' always reachable.

***which implies he's not a decent dentist, and he's not.
......

The switch is on all the time, and the lights go on when the engine
goes on. The photocell on the dash determines which lights go on. But
maybe if I turn the switch off and back on again, the lights really
will go on even if the engine's not running. I'll try it. I had
this all settled two or three years ago, but then I forgot how it
works. This plan doens't ring a bell, but maybe.

Are you saying your car won't allow headlights if the engine is off, or it won't allow them if it's light?

Only that I don't know how to do it.

If it's when the engine is off, go in the fusebox and change the incoming wore to the headlight fuse from IGN to BATT.

Change the wire to the fuse? Do you know how much effort that is?

Virtually none. Takes about as long as changing a wheel.

Of if you mean run a wire from the hot end of one fuse to the cold end of
the other fuse, that's a lot of effort too.

No, just change the hot end of the fuse to the other input. There's 2 inputs to a fusebox, one is only on with the ignition, the other comes straight from the battery. There will be unused fuse containers, use one of those if it's easier.

I'm looking for a way
to turn the lights on when the engine is off, just like all cars
worked until 1995. Not a whole project.

AFAIK all Vauxhalls do that anyway. Bloody annoying as you can more easily run the battery flat. Plus when I park the car for two minutes and don't turn the lights off, I've got a parked car dazzling people unnecessarily. I already removed the bleeping thing in anger that warns me I dared to open the door and left the lights on.

If it's when it's daylight, I don't know why you need that,

To see how well the lights are working, to see if changing a bulb
really fixed it, etc.

Just turn on the ignition?

If you really think that is the right answer, why did you just spend
several lines explaining your much too difficult way to turn the
lights on without the engine.

but just cover the light sensor up, then you can use them as if it weren't automatic.

There are two sensors and I've forgotten which is which. I suspect
if your method, turning the switch off and on, works, it will work day
and night.

If I ever got a car that decided itself when it was dark, I'd disable it immediately, or at least adjust it to when I think it's dark.

I like it. And while I've thought about making the intermittent
wiper wipe less often, I've been fully satisfied with the light
sensor.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 23:37:29 -0000, Micky wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 23:13:16 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 23:06:09 -0000, Micky wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:29 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I know he read the email btw. He seemed to open it 3 times over 4 or
5 days.

How do you know he read the email? Not those read receipt things? I used to forward all my work email to another address so I could read them both together. The forwarding process returned a certificate saying I'd deleted it without opening it. Some people got upset, then surprised I'd done what they'd asked me to in the email I had "deleted".

LOL. Not return receipt. There's some service that would email me
when he opened his email, but it was free only for 30 days and
expensive after that, given that this is the first time in 20 years I
wanted to use it.

So how did you know?

They sent me an email.

Saying, "I read your email but I'm smokin' a fag!" (Harry Enfield deference).

other big mistakes in treatment that month too, the exact same mistake
twice. What a jerk.

Eventually I'm going to go to his office to get him to talk to me. If
he's embarrassed in front of his other patients, that would be fine.

Doesn't your dental practice have more than one dentist? If I have a toothache and my regular dentist is away, I can use another one.

He would only have to have an arrangement with another dentist or two.
It wouldn't even have to be someone in the same practice**.

But if I have a toothache, I don't phone my dentist, she's busy doing dental work. I phone the practice receptionist, who book me in with her, or someone else if she has no available time soon enough for me.

I''ve never had an emergency during office hours. Medical or dental,
they are always Friday night.

I don't think I have a 24 hour number. FFS just take a painkiller and phone them in the morning! It's toothache not a heart attack.

I've never had a toothache, and until this past year, I'd never had
any other dental emergency, but if something happens on Friday
evening, I'm not going to wait until Monday.

That's what 24 hour dentists are for.

How can anything dental be that much of an emergency? It's just sore, take a paracetamol.

When I lived in NY, on a Sunday afternoon, I went with my girlfriend
to the apt. of a friend of hers, and his girlfriend had had a
toothache since Friday or Saturday, getting worse and worse. She
couldn't eat, could barely talk. I said, Why don't you go to the
dentist! They said, Monday. I said, Why don't you go now? It's
Sunday. I said, That's what 24 hour dentists are for.

I've put off visiting a dentist for toothache for 2 weeks, at which point I was getting fed up of taking so many painkillers. Two days is not a problem.

So NYC has over 2 million people, not counting the other boros (and
why count them?)

What is a boro?

and in the yellow pages were about 20 24-hour
dentists. One of us called them one by one and learned that the first
seven didnt' do that anymore. Because they only do that until they
get enough patients to keep busy. No one wants to be bothered on
weekends or the middle of the night. But the 8th guy said come on
over. It took less than 30 minutes for her and her boyfriend to get
there, less than 30 minutes for the dentist to fix her. and she was
back in less than 90 minutes. And he didnt' charge any more than her
regular dentist would have charged, or maybe 10% more.

And I assumed he did. I assumed that any decent dentist has that*** and
later I saw that he had an emergency number on his webpage. But the
number was, I guess, his number, not some service that would find the
dentist on call.

**For example my brother is a radiologist, and even though it was
known when he started that he would take vacations, iiuc when he went
out of town, it was his responsibility to arrange with another
radiologist to work for him. Fortunately there was one who didn't
work full time because she had a young child, and she would work two
weeks for him or two days, as she did sometimes for other radiologists
in town. But not 50 weeks a year.

People should employ receptionists and not take calls themselves.

He does have a receptionist during office hours.

My vet has a 24/7 number, a pet could be in danger of dying. You don't die of toothache.

Most dentists have emergency numbers. This one did too. It's just
that HE was the only dentist reachable at the emergency number and he
wasnt' always reachable.

***which implies he's not a decent dentist, and he's not.
......

The switch is on all the time, and the lights go on when the engine
goes on. The photocell on the dash determines which lights go on. But
maybe if I turn the switch off and back on again, the lights really
will go on even if the engine's not running. I'll try it. I had
this all settled two or three years ago, but then I forgot how it
works. This plan doens't ring a bell, but maybe.

Are you saying your car won't allow headlights if the engine is off, or it won't allow them if it's light?

Only that I don't know how to do it.

If it's when the engine is off, go in the fusebox and change the incoming wore to the headlight fuse from IGN to BATT.

Change the wire to the fuse? Do you know how much effort that is?

Virtually none. Takes about as long as changing a wheel.

Of if you mean run a wire from the hot end of one fuse to the cold end of
the other fuse, that's a lot of effort too.

No, just change the hot end of the fuse to the other input. There's 2 inputs to a fusebox, one is only on with the ignition, the other comes straight from the battery. There will be unused fuse containers, use one of those if it's easier.

I'm looking for a way
to turn the lights on when the engine is off, just like all cars
worked until 1995. Not a whole project.

AFAIK all Vauxhalls do that anyway. Bloody annoying as you can more easily run the battery flat. Plus when I park the car for two minutes and don't turn the lights off, I've got a parked car dazzling people unnecessarily. I already removed the bleeping thing in anger that warns me I dared to open the door and left the lights on.

If it's when it's daylight, I don't know why you need that,

To see how well the lights are working, to see if changing a bulb
really fixed it, etc.

Just turn on the ignition?

If you really think that is the right answer, why did you just spend
several lines explaining your much too difficult way to turn the
lights on without the engine.

Because I thought you wanted to do it regularly.

but just cover the light sensor up, then you can use them as if it weren't automatic.

There are two sensors and I've forgotten which is which. I suspect
if your method, turning the switch off and on, works, it will work day
and night.

If I ever got a car that decided itself when it was dark, I'd disable it immediately, or at least adjust it to when I think it's dark.

I like it. And while I've thought about making the intermittent
wiper wipe less often, I've been fully satisfied with the light
sensor.

Is it anything like half the drivers who turn lights on when it's not even dark enough for me to be able to tell it's got darker? A camera could, but not my eyes.

Anyway now they've got those bloody DRLs, lights will just be wired straight to the ****ing ignition.

--
My car is a hybrid. It burns petrol AND oil.

On 2/13/2016 2:26 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/13/2016 12:23 AM, Don Y wrote:
If you want to be noticed, you have to stand out by "being different".
E.g., a headlight that flashes, etc.

Some bike riders install aftermarket headlight modulators that sort of makes
them warble, if that's a word to apply to a visual effect. That may be illegal
in some jurisdictions and certainly isn't wide spread.

Ah, I'd seen that a couple of times. I always thought the lamp ass'y
was *loose* and bouncing around as the bike hit bumps in the road
(though I couldn't *tell* that there were bumps -- or not -- just
"that must be what's causing the light to bounce around!"

I don't know how effective they are. After having people pull out in front of
me when I was driving a 13' 6" high, 65' vehicle with a bright red cab and the
headlights on. I find it safer just to consider my fellow motorists as escapees
from a sheltered workshop.

And, no doubt, they were *angry* that you CREPT UP so close behind them!

I *try* to be aware of what's around me. And, what *their* problems are
likely to be.

E.g., you won't see me in the "road sheep" role (clinging in another
driver's blind spot -- speeding up and slowing down to *ensure* that
relationship remains constant). If driving next to a carload of little
kids, I'll expect "Mommy" to turn around to scold one of them WHILE
driving. When passing a truck, I'll be sure I've seen his *eyes* in
his mirror as I head past. etc.

People take too many things in life as if they were "rides" at DisneyLand;
as if they were not responsible for how the "ride" operated; that someone or
something would magically keep them safe (from themselves).

On 2/13/2016 2:20 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/13/2016 12:26 AM, Don Y wrote:
he issue is that there are no "obvious" rules governing when/where you
should ENTER that lane! So, I could opt to start *driving* in it
(not just waiting to turn) long before I plan on actually turning.
This, of course, means anyone wanting to make a turn at any of the
places I "drive by" gets screwed into waiting (in their LEFTMOST
lane of traffic) until I've driven past.

I've seen that a lot on the five lanes here. Someone sees a clear spot in the
two lanes on their side and crosses them, hanging out in the suicide lane
waiting for a break so they can merge in.

Exactly. But, now they are a "fixed obstacle" to anyone wanting to use
that lane for a turn from *either* direction!

As you say, there's no real
definition. We have a lot of four way stops. Most drivers have figured out the
etiquette and they work well. Conflicts in the suicide lanes don't occur
regularly enough for there to be an etiquette.

We have a lot of places where another "traffic control" (sign/light)
*should* be installed. But, the bean counters only act based on
actual TALLYABLE *accidents*. So, all the "grief" a lack of control
may cause doesn't count for anything.

Our biggest "control" problem lies with the f*cked up way they
redefined the intersections. When you approach an intersection,
you encounter the Stop Line ("stop here"). Then, typically, a
"cross walk" (domain of pedestrians). Then, some distance further
afield the intersection *legally* begins.

For an interesting example:
,149m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x86d66f8252320bfb:0xf2093 af34cd6dcd6

(hopefully I've snipped the URL correctly for the satellite view)
Note the distance (car lengths) between the stop line (first stripe
across roadway), crosswalk (second and third stripes) and "wait"
line (fourth stripe at the "curb extension" defining the intersection).

So, you end up with folks stopped *in* the crosswalk. Illegal to enter
the intersection (which may *begin* 20 ft further down the road!) after
the light changes -- but, you've already crept past the stop line
in the hope of getting through the intersection on the preceding
green/yellow (think: turns).

Folks don't know how to handle it when they find themselves trapped.
So, you get folks trying to backup to creep back in front of the
stop line, etc.

Morons in Feenigs who feel it is their moral duty to just keep (re)writing
laws...

At least we don't have the Tucson system where the direction of the lane
changes depending on the time of day.

No, that's primarily in D.C.

I thought Grant or one of those had a fifth center lane that was westbound in
the afternoon and eastbound in the morning.

No, that was "done away with" (can't say "eliminated" cuz the lane is still
*there*, just no longer has that "feature!") about 10-12 years ago. Now the
"center lane" is intended solely for traffic entering or exiting the
respective lanes.

It's still a source of confusion as many folks are intimidated by it.

Ditto the "lagging left".

On 02/13/2016 03:04 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
You've got it backwards anyway: "Clare is a given name, the Medieval
English form of Clara.[1] The related name Clair was traditionally
considered male, especially when spelled without an 'e',[2] but Clare
and Claire are usually female."

As someone from a country where Evelyn Waugh married Evelyn Gardner and
it wasn't a same sex marriage, there might be some confusion with
British names

On 02/13/2016 01:40 PM, wrote:
From the rear, you are approaching at the difference between his speed
and yours. If he's doing 100 and you are doing 90 you will never meet.
If you are doing 100 and he is doing 90, you are approaching at 10kph.



More likely around here he's a senile old fart doing 40 kph while I'm
doing 125 kph so I'm closing at 85 kph.

On 02/13/2016 03:19 PM, wrote:
ver or through the car ahead of you, giving more warning about what
is going on ahead. You can't see the brake lights of the vehicles 2 or
3 cars ahead through the solid bodies of the vehicles between you and
the vehicle braking.

You CAN see the high mounted brake light.

When you drive a Yaris in the land of SUVs and F250 pickups, you can't
see ****, including traffic signals over an intersection. I'm better off
on a bike where I can stand on the pegs.

On 02/13/2016 02:34 PM, Muggles wrote:
My husband did OTR for a while, and then drove locally for a while. He
said a lot of people had that same quaint idea about playing chicken
with trucks!


I've sometimes wondered what goes on in the mind of an Audi TTS driver
trying to force his way into traffic when he has to loop up to read the
logo on the 11/R22.5 steer tire. He may be a master of the universe in
his world, but he was a speed bump in mine.

In most circumstances I let people in but when someone figures they're
so important they deserve to cut into the head of the line my stubborn
streak comes out.

On 02/13/2016 02:36 PM, Muggles wrote:
I've come close to pulling out in front of a motor cycle at dusk time -
right before people turn their headlights on.

If you want to rob banks you should ride a bike; they're invisible. It
got up to 43 today so I went out for a ride. I'm particularly cautious
this time of year since people don't even think about motorcycles being
in traffic in February around here. Later on in the spring, the city has
a motorcycle awareness campaign but you're on you own in late winter.

On 2/13/2016 8:25 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/13/2016 03:04 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
You've got it backwards anyway: "Clare is a given name, the Medieval
English form of Clara.[1] The related name Clair was traditionally
considered male, especially when spelled without an 'e',[2] but Clare
and Claire are usually female."

As someone from a country where Evelyn Waugh married Evelyn Gardner and
it wasn't a same sex marriage, there might be some confusion with
British names


Clare can be a last name too.