LIGHTS ON: is it illegal in NZ?

[saltydog]

Just sitting in the garage with wifey and she asked me if it was compulsary to ride with your lights on?
Alas, they change the rules all the time.
Do any PC's in here know the rules?
i dont.

[EJK]

I say it is legal. Come on! Its for our safety!

Riding with lights on is like wearing a bright vest(?)
Guy at Mt. Eden motorcycles told me to ride with "High Beam" on during the day lol

[Cajun]

i guess legally don't have to ride with lights on unless its dull/night

many modern jap bikes you can't even turn the headlight off, opinions are low beam/high beam thats it
turn the key its on/or comes on once thumb the starter

[Toaster]

Just sitting in the garage with wifey and she asked me if it was compulsary to ride with your lights on?
Alas, they change the rules all the time.
Do any PC's in here know the rules?
i dont.

No, it is not compulsory, except for the normal times when all motorists are supposed to use their headlights as per the road code/land transport rules.


I say it is legal. Come on! Its for our safety!

Riding with lights on is like wearing a bright vest(?)
Guy at Mt. Eden motorcycles told me to ride with "High Beam" on during the day lol

Depending on the bike, high beam can still dazzle during the day, especially with firm suspension. It could cop you a fine from the police as well as the odd finger from annoyed motorists. Dipped is perfectly adequate. Ride to the conditions and always assume other road users have not seen you.

[sunhuntin]

course its legal for during the day. many bikes and cars have them hard wired on.

[TRAINING WHEELS]

Must be cool as i have lights on 24/7 (when in use) on both cage and bike and never been questioned...

[saltydog]

We've also just looked on the LTSA site as well.
Must be a luxury to even be able to turn them off thesedays!

[dogsnbikes]

Just sitting in the garage with wifey and she asked me if it was compulsary to ride with your lights on?
Alas, they change the rules all the time.
Do any PC's in here know the rules?
i dont.

Its not compulsary to have lights on 24/7 but its makes alot of sense to have them on....considering the colour schemes of bikes and cages alike that blend in with the country side so well,

At the end of the Day it should be compulsary but until then,how much do you want too be seen is what you should be asking :2thumbsup

[deanohit]

Yep, if it's an overcast day, I ride with mine on, black bike and gear can be a bit hard to see, bright sunny day, depends on traffic, if theres heaps, I'll turn the light on.

[barty5]

if you read the VIRM and read the bottom of page 11 i states that a day time running light must not operate when head lights are in use so there for they are not day time running lights and there for not ment to be used for this purpose but hey we all do it and no one seams to care i dont ride bike on the road but on when out of town allways run the fog lights on theopen road just to make yourself more visable from a distance

[EJK]

I bet no police will pull me over and say "Hey! you have your headlight on! Thats $50 fine and 10 points for you young lad!"

:rolleyes:






Will they? :crazy:

[Usarka]

its htfu day. my lights are wired OFF.

[erix]

My piece of thought is if you feel more safe to do it, then do it, reasonbly!

just like all most evey 6L holder dont follow the 70kph limit on open road, its 100% agaist the law (as far as my understanding) but Ive never heard anyone been fined for that reason. EVEN there is a such case, and i cant avoid using highway, who really gives a damn about the fine when you felt your live is in danger?

I personly feel more safe with my light on regardless time (even tho I cant turn it off, lol), but using low beam, high beam annoys other people(yeah, I consider myself a polite rider/driver) and cant see the road very well(that means even more dangerous)

[Lucy]

just like all most evey 6L holder dont follow the 70kph limit on open road, its 100% agaist the law (as far as my understanding) but Ive never heard anyone been fined for that reason.)


Um, I think the point is a learner should stay away from roads with a higher than 70k limit?


:calm:

[tri boy]

I ride with lights on always. Couldn't care less if people think it's "dorkey" or not. At least they have seen me, to register me as a dork.
ADR, (Aussie Design Rules), brought it in about 15yrs ago. Lowered the bike fatalities quickly. Havn't got the figures, so flame me for talking shit.:yawn:

[McJim]

Depending on the bike, high beam can still dazzle during the day, especially with firm suspension. It could cop you a fine from the police as well as the odd finger from annoyed motorists. Dipped is perfectly adequate. Ride to the conditions and always assume other road users have not seen you.

From what I've seen riding/driving around New Zealand at any time only about 30% of motorists bother to switch to dipped beam in the face of oncoming traffic. Why can't the police gather revenue by pinging all those fukkas for blinding me rather than something as benign as 11km over?

[ElCoyote]

I bet no police will pull me over and say "Hey! you have your headlight on! Thats $50 fine and 10 points for you young lad!"

:rolleyes:






Will they? :crazy:

I was recently pulled up in my cage and told driving lights were illegal unless in fog or extreme conditions. Seems there is a blitz on, especially with big trucks and their Christmas tree lights. I was not happy and told him to do his worst which amounted to nought, but he showed me the instructions from his puppet Meister and it is a fact, but common sense beats laws any day.

[jtzzr]

Must be cool as i have lights on 24/7 (when in use) on both cage and bike and never been questioned...

Mate you must be tired riding 24/7 p/t , I ride all the time with my lights on (well on my bike anyway).

[unhingedlizard]

cant turn them off on my bike.

[nudemetalz]

My Guzzi has no off/on switch for the lights, they only turn off when starting the engine, so the Italians must have great faith in their electrics....... :rolleyes:

[vifferman]

I was recently pulled up in my cage and told driving lights were illegal unless in fog or extreme conditions. Seems there is a blitz on, especially with big trucks and their Christmas tree lights.
I'm pleased to hear it. :niceone:
Sorry - nothing personal - it's just a pet hate of mine, all the dorks that drive around with their driving lights on. It's a bit dazzling for other road users, and like the cop said, it's illegal. There seems to be no reason for doing it, other than either laziness ("Oh... I didn't realise they were on...") or to say, "Look at me! I have driving lights!" :2thumbsup)

All three of our cars have low-set driving lights, and I found when testing them that they are pretty much useless except when driving at under say 70km/h on winding country roads. At 100km/h, the illumination is too close to the car to be of any help, and around town, they're not required, unless it's foggy.

Besides, all that light blasting out the front of your car must slow it down somewhat, surely? :blink:

[LilSel]

mine are on when the bike is on...

[Dave Lobster]

Mine are on all the time when commuting to work. Generally on full beam. On my 8km journey into the city, it drops the near death experiences from five (on dipped) to two on main. I can live with the odd peasant being dazzled. Not ONE has waggled a finger or flashed his lights at me in nearly twelve months.

I would hope a policeman has better things to do with his time that pull someone up for riding with main beam on. Every second car seems to have his fog lights on, or no lights at all - even in the pissing rain.

[sparky10]

if you read the VIRM and read the bottom of page 11 i states that a day time running light must not operate when head lights are in use so there for they are not day time running lights

This only relates to cars with factory fitted daytime running lights i.e. Volvos/Saabs etc, these dont use headlights but side lights for this purpose.
only relates to import/warrent checks.

I dont ride without dipped headlights on, nor should any sane rider as bikes are hard enough to see, some cage drivers cant even see other cars.

At work i drive trucks/utes and travel a lot of the time from job to job, as a rider i look out for bikers but even in sunny conditions i find it hard to see bikes behind me.

just the other day traveling along Portsmouth Drive(dual carrigway) i was watching a car comming from behind i expected him to pass just waiting for him to, then i had to look twice to make sure, but a bike was comming up behind him and he was about to pass us both. biker had to brake hard as car driver didnt see him, i could hardly see him, black bike n gear no lights 4pm sunny day.

Its your neck if other motorists dont see you, for the sake of flicking a switch.

[sparky10]

I was recently pulled up in my cage and told driving lights were illegal unless in fog or extreme conditions.

Yuo can use dipped headlights in a car during the day but not any factory or aftermarket FOG lights, as that what the switch tells you its for.:mad:

Bikers should only use dipped headlights NOT highbeam as this IS illegal

[fredie]

high beams 24-7 fuckem:Punk:

[Monsterbishi]

Key thing to remember is that having your lights on all the time, DRL's(Daytime running lamps), etc - only work in your favour if the majority are using them.(You risk becoming the next statistic regarding target fixation)

[boonie]

Um, I think the point is a learner should stay away from roads with a higher than 70k limit?


:calm:


Living on the north shore its hard to avoid roads that have limits higher than 70km/h if you want to hed south. Surely im safer going at 100 untill i can get off the motorway than i am going at 70 and waiting for some idiot in a cage to get impatient and try and run me off the harbour bridge?

[99TLS]

my lights are on as soon as the key is on, pity there trying to promote cars to keep lights on at all times makes us all less visible

[TOTO]

The road code specifically sais that it is very recommended to have the full beam n all the time. thats what I do. hi beam 24/7 unless I follow someone during the night on a long country road and they light up my way better than I would. then I switch to low beam not to make them speed so they can get away from my bright enough to blind people but not well possiytioned to light the road with no street lighting...wish I could have high and low beam at the same time. :mellow:

[Monsterbishi]

Living on the north shore its hard to avoid roads that have limits higher than 70km/h if you want to hed south. Surely im safer going at 100 untill i can get off the motorway than i am going at 70 and waiting for some idiot in a cage to get impatient and try and run me off the harbour bridge?

Or, you just use a form of transport that means you're not breaking the law, public transport, car pooling, etc - it's not a very long time between learners and restricted when you can go faster than 70kph, 6 months actually

ps, welcome to the forum.

[pete376403]

It is compulsory in Australia to have lights hard-wired on (Australian Design Rules) so possibly we get Australian market bikes. My KLR has no light switch, but it is possible to buy (off the web) the European spec left handle bar switch block that has a on-off switch, a dip switch and a seperate headlight flasher switch. Plugs straight into the loom behind the headlight.

[Conquiztador]

Surprised re the lack of understanding re lights. U must have lights on 1/2 hour after sun has gone down and until 1/2 hour before sun goes up while driving/riding. That is a minimum. You also must have lights on when visibility is poor as in fog, rain etc.

Cars/bikes that have "driving lights" fitted will have these on as soon as motor is on. They can not be turned off. In many countries is is obligatory to have lights on day and night when driving. If car/bike is not fitted with driving lights you must have low beam on. Parking lights is not enough.

We do not have this ruling in NZ yet. But you will find that cagers and bikers who visit NZ and drive/ride will have lights on always as it is compulsory in their countries. There is statistics showing that it has greatly reduced head on crashes.

I have never heard of any rule in NZ that states that you must have lights off in daytime??? As far as I am aware it is up to your own discretion if you want to drive/ride with them on. I tend to do so when in a cage and outside town/cities. And always when on a bike.

High beam should only (day or night) be used when you do not have other traffic in sight so that you do not "blind" them. If your low beam does not show you enough road when driving/riding night time, then I recommend getting your lights adjusted/repaired/seen to. To have high beam on while following someone is also illegal. It will blind them in their mirrors.

[mowgli]

The road code specifically sais that it is very recommended to have the full beam n all the time.

Yes, but it also goes on to list circumstances where you must dip you lights (see below). High beam 24/7 is only legal if you never encounter those circumstances. Highly unlikely would have thought.



8.3 Use of motor vehicle lighting equipment on road

(1) A person must not use vehicle lighting equipment in such a way that it dazzles, confuses, or distracts so as to endanger the safety of other road users.

(2) If a vehicle's headlamps are in use, a driver must dip those headlamps—

(a)whenever they would be likely to interfere adversely with the vision of another driver in motion on a road; or

(b) when approaching an intersection or other place where the traffic is or appears to be under the control of an enforcement officer; or

(c) when the vehicle is parked.
(3) A driver, during the hours of darkness, must use the vehicle's headlamp or headlamps.

(4) A driver during the hours of darkness must use the vehicle's position lamp or lamps.

[mowgli]

I'm pleased to hear it. :niceone:
Sorry - nothing personal - it's just a pet hate of mine, all the dorks that drive around with their driving lights on. It's a bit dazzling for other road users, and like the cop said, it's illegal.

I agree completely



8.4 Use of optional lights

(1) A driver may use a fog lamp only in conditions of severely reduced visibility, including fog or snow, but not under clear atmospheric conditions even during the hours of darkness.

(2) A person may use a work lamp only—

(a) when the vehicle to which it is fitted is stationary or travelling slowly; and

(b) to illuminate a work area or scene.

[ital916]

Haha I laugh when i hear all the HTFU replies. I'd rather be lit up like a christmas tree on ym bike and have car drivers going what the fuck is that btter stay away from it than being all dressed in black with lights off. I ride with high beams on all the time plus a high vis vest and as much non black gear as possible, witha nice bright non black red and white bike. If i could have my way i'd somehow invent a giant holographic arrow to appear above my bike , just so extra blind cages would see me.

[Maffoo]

i havent turned the light switch to 'off' since i started riding

[Hanne]

The lights in my volvo (cringe, I know!) are wired to come on with the engine, and I always ride/ drive with headlights, even during the day. I know that not many people do (I can always recognise my Dad's car driving along becasue of the headlights) but Ifind that it really helps with visibility when I see other cars/ bikes doing so. Especially on a bike I think it is super important, becasue otherwise they are even easier to miss, even during daylight hours.

SO, illegal? No, Idon't think so, my driving instructor was mildly suprised when I went for my test and reached to switch them on (in Dad's car) but said nothing about having to turn them off.

[owner]

Yeah I reakon

[nick69]

Riding with your lights on is not an offence. Using your high beam when appraoching other road users is. My police bike is hard wired and are always on low beam. I try to put all the lights on i can so people see me. Even with blue flashing lights/siren they dont see me, so anything you can do to make yourself more visible to other drivers is good.

[HungusMaximist]

I try to put all the lights on i can so people see me. Even with blue flashing lights/siren they dont see me, so anything you can do to make yourself more visible to other drivers is good.

Far out....

Are Aucklanders that dumb?

[vonstringer]

My Yamaha Scorpio lights can be turned off. I use them at night, dusk, dawn, and in bad weather. When it comes to daytime riding with lights on, I have my own little theory...

When people renew their license, they get their eyes checked, so they should be able to see. What they see on the road is threats.

The rider in high-vis gear and with their headlight shining brightly doesn't look like much of a threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he is just going to get a little upset and I'll say I never saw him and all will be well.

The rider who looks most like a gang member dressed in black leather, no lights, and a bandana across his face looks much more intimidating and poses a BIG threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he will drag his angry broken body off the ground and haul me out of the car to do unspeakable things to me and my family.

It's very hard to look a threat on a 225cc commuter bike, but I try my best. Of course there is another problem with my bike. I read somewhere these things are manufactured in Italy. My friend who owns a Ducati reckons you only get a set amount of power dished out at manufacture time with an Italian bike, so the more you can conserve, the longer you can run trouble free! :whistle:

[heyjoe]

There is no requirement to have headlights on all the time. It is not compulsory for motorcycles to have them on during the daytime. As someone said earlier in this thread - have them turned on if the conditions warrant it.

On my bike they are on as soon as you turn on the ignition. I can't switch them off. I Would like to be able to though. There are times when I think it is totally unncessary eg on a bright sunny day.

[JMemonic]

The rider in high-vis gear and with their headlight shining brightly doesn't look like much of a threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he is just going to get a little upset and I'll say I never saw him and all will be well.

The rider who looks most like a gang member dressed in black leather, no lights, and a bandana across his face looks much more intimidating and poses a BIG threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he will drag his angry broken body off the ground and haul me out of the car to do unspeakable things to me and my family.

This assumes that the said mythical driver is

A/ not intoxicated (alcohol or drugs)
B/ not distracted (kids in car, changing radio etc)
C/ is wearing glasses or contacts needed
D/ is in a mental space where they just give a dam about looking for bikes
E/ in not one of the second mentioned folks (you know them, they are out there)

For the sake of a little added safety where is the harm in running your lights full time, most manufactures recommend it,and unless you or someone has screwed with the wiring there is little to no chance of it damaging you bike.

[The Stranger]

Must be cool as i have lights on 24/7 (when in use) on both cage and bike and never been questioned...

Personally, I would discourage their use by day in a cage, particularly as you are a biker. It causes bikes to "get lost" and stops cage drivers from associating a head light with a motorbike.

[The Stranger]

Guy at Mt. Eden motorcycles told me to ride with "High Beam" on during the day lol

1) It pisses the opposition off - not good for you.
2) It makes it easier to see you but makes it harder for the opposition to judge you speed and distance. They already have enough problem with this.

Don't be fooled into thinking that all those "I didn't see you" excuses are real. Mostly motorists just say that as it is more convenient than telling the truth i.e. I saw you but figured I had time to pull out anyway, and even if I didn't, you were going to give way cause you are in a smaller vehicle, and if worst comes to worst, it wont hurt me anyway.

So don't make it harder for them to judge time and distance.

[NZsarge]

Its not compulsary to have lights on 24/7 but its makes alot of sense to have them on....considering the colour schemes of bikes and cages alike that blend in with the country side so well,

At the end of the Day it should be compulsary but until then,how much do you want too be seen is what you should be asking :2thumbsup
You and 86 don't seem to have a "blending in" issue on those Trumpy's :laugh:

[pritch]

Most bikes are hard wired to have the lights on if the ignition is on. The only downside I can see is that if the battery was a bit low, and having no kickstart, the bike could be a bit hard to start.

Some companies now hard wire their cars the same. The LTSA and ACC both recommend this.

Sometimes though, like around the time of the full moon, I find that two headlamps just doesn't do it. So I turn all four on just in case that helps...

[Mikkel]

The rider in high-vis gear and with their headlight shining brightly doesn't look like much of a threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he is just going to get a little upset and I'll say I never saw him and all will be well.

The rider who looks most like a gang member dressed in black leather, no lights, and a bandana across his face looks much more intimidating and poses a BIG threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he will drag his angry broken body off the ground and haul me out of the car to do unspeakable things to me and my family.

I think you attribute more than what's fair to the general cognitive capacity of your average kiwi driver!


Personally, I would discourage their use by day in a cage, particularly as you are a biker. It causes bikes to "get lost" and stops cage drivers from associating a head light with a motorbike.

That's bullshit. If everyone rode/drove with their lights on it would be:

1) Easier to spot motorised traffic.
2) Easier to distinguish between parked and moving cars.
3) Easier to judge speed and distance.
4) Everyone would start paying attention to the lights instead of the outline of the vehicle (e.g. not as big a difference between a bike and a truck then).

Let's face it - almost all of the civilised world has seen the light and realised that making the lights mandatory during daytime improves road safety. But I guess the kiwis find it more important to save on light bulbs for their cars than avoid getting into an accident.

[vifferman]

When we went to The Sultanate of Kalifornicatia in 2006, they'd just introduced a rule that if you used your wipers (i.e., it was raining, foggy, whatever) you HAD to turn your headlights on.
Not a silly rule at all.

[Ixion]

I very much dislike the silly practice of hard wiring the lights on. I am perfectly capable of operating a switch if I want them on. And they have even done on my Yamaha. It's a chook chaser for heaven's sake, how stupid is that. So I have cut the headlamp feed to the dip switch and put a Lucas type handlebar dip switch in the line, as an on off switch (nowhere easy to mount a toggle switch). I will do the same on the SV (except use a toggle) when I get time. *I* will make such decisions. Just give me a switch damn it

And , after spending years and years riding with headlamps on (even before anyone did it, on account of DC dynamos and such), I now often don't. Because there are now so many vehicles with lights on that I think it has lost it's utility. I now use the 'Pass' switch to flick them on if I see someone who looks dubious.

Back in the day, headlights on worked. Joe Idiot would notice them, because it was something usual "Duh, look up the road, uh nuffink coming I guess, Oh, wait wozzat ? Oh idsa mudaboike, n the silly cunt god is eadloight orn. Silly twit". But at least he noticed. Now a head light in the daytime is common, Joe Idiot no longer notices, it is filed in what passes for his mind along with all the other clutter which he ignores as not being important to him personally.

Whereas, a light suddenly coming on may still get his attention.

[scumdog]

Whereas, a light suddenly coming on may still get his attention.

IF you have noticed that he has not noticed you....

[Soul.Trader]

It's funny how a lot of people think they know better than the experts whos job it is to study this sort of thing. There's a reason organisations like ACC and private insurance companies recommend lights-on during the day - because the research has been done, and it IS EFFECTIVE. Whether your cynical/uninformed mind allows you to conceive it or not, insurance companies are usually the authorities on this type of thing, as they have a huge vested interest in road safety.

[The Stranger]

I think you attribute more than what's fair to the general cognitive capacity of your average kiwi driver!



That's bullshit. If everyone rode/drove with their lights on it would be:

1) Easier to spot motorised traffic.
2) Easier to distinguish between parked and moving cars.
3) Easier to judge speed and distance.
4) Everyone would start paying attention to the lights instead of the outline of the vehicle (e.g. not as big a difference between a bike and a truck then).

Let's face it - almost all of the civilised world has seen the light and realised that making the lights mandatory during daytime improves road safety. But I guess the kiwis find it more important to save on light bulbs for their cars than avoid getting into an accident.

So it's bullshit is it?
It couldn't be a contrary view?
There is no chance that anything I said has an element of truth and it was a deliberate deception on my part?

So you are saying that someone looking in thier rear view mirror, or approaching from the opposite direction. will more easily distinguish a bike in the right wheel track with it's head lights on when the 4x4 following it also has it's head lights on?

Well bullshit, it wont.

For your information, the added difficulty in judging time and distance when a head light is on has long been the main argument against headlights on on bikes by day, So I assure you, I am not the only bullshitter.

By all means, however, please substantiate your arguments as BRONZ is currently opposing the use of headlights by day for other than motorcycles and I am sure your research would be helpful in ensuring we do not spread bullshit everywhere.

Twat!

[scumdog]

By all means, however, please substantiate your arguments as BRONZ is currently opposing the use of headlights by day for other than motorcycles

Now THERE'S an idea I support - lights on during the day for bikes only.

[Ixion]

IF you have noticed that he has not noticed you....

That's my job. I never rely on him noticing me. Or seeing me, light or no light.

[Mikkel]

So it's bullshit is it?

It is indeed.


It couldn't be a contrary view?
There is no chance that anything I said has an element of truth and it was a deliberate deception on my part?

Don't be so narrowminded - it can both be a contrary view and bullshit... I'm not for excluding any possibility here.
However I don't think you were being deceptive - just ill-informed.


So you are saying that someone looking in thier rear view mirror, or approaching from the opposite direction. will more easily distinguish a bike in the right wheel track with it's head lights on when the 4x4 following it also has it's head lights on?

Well bullshit, it wont.

I fail to see how this is relevant. If you're coming up from behind it's your responsibility to exercise caution around the roadusers in front of you.
The guy in front of you will know that there's stuff behind him - that should be enough to exercise caution if he's going to turn, brake or change lanes.


For your information, the added difficulty in judging time and distance when a head light is on has long been the main argument against headlights on on bikes by day, So I assure you, I am not the only bullshitter.

Funnily enough there are plenty of evidence that the added safety of turning on the lights far outweighs any difficulties (real or imagined - it's just a conditioning issue) judging distance and speed. I can't see how lights would make it more difficult to judge time though - I usually look at the clock if I want to judge that, not other motorists.


By all means, however, please substantiate your arguments as BRONZ is currently opposing the use of headlights by day for other than motorcycles and I am sure your research would be helpful in ensuring we do not spread bullshit everywhere.

Yes why wouldn't they? I mean after all it would make bikes stand out more. And unlike car drivers and their ilk bikers are all very observant and cautious drivers so we'd never miss a car or a truck even if it didn't have its light on.
And why worry about the safety of other motorists? I mean, they're all out to kill us anyway, so fuck them! (/sarcasm)


Twat!

So you ran out of arguments. Too bad. Could you please enlighten me as to what you mean by "Twat!" - here's a few to choose from:


twat /twɑt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[twaht] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation,
–noun Slang: Vulgar.
vulva.
[Origin: 1650–60; perh. orig. dial. var. of *thwat, *thwot, presumed mod. E outcome of OE *thwat, akin to ON thveit cut, slit, forest clearing (> E dial. (N England) thwaite forest clearing)]


twat (twŏt) Pronunciation Key
n.

1. Vulgar Slang The vulva.
2. Offensive & Vulgar Slang A woman or girl.



twat
1656, of unknown origin. A general term of abuse since 1920s.

The T-word occupies a special niche in literary history, however, thanks to a horrible mistake by Robert Browning, who included it in 'Pippa Passes' (1841) without knowing its true meaning. 'The owls and bats,/Cowls and twats,/Monks and nuns,/In a cloister's moods.' Poor Robert! He had been misled into thinking the word meant 'hat' by its appearance in 'Vanity of Vanities,' a poem of 1660, containing the treacherous lines: 'They'd talk't of his having a Cardinalls Hat,/They'd send him as soon an Old Nuns Twat.' (There is a lesson here about not using words unless one is very sure of their meaning.) [Hugh Rawson, "Wicked Words," 1989]


twat

noun
1. a man who is a stupid incompetent fool [syn: fathead]
2. obscene terms for female genitals [syn: cunt]

[The Stranger]

I fail to see how this is relevant. If you're coming up from behind it's your responsibility to exercise caution around the roadusers in front of you.
The guy in front of you will know that there's stuff behind him - that should be enough to exercise caution if he's going to turn, brake or change lanes.



Yes, you have a habit of that - failing to see the relevance. The first step to cure is acceptance of your problem, congratulations, you are on the way.

So you are riding along - in the right wheel track, with your headlight on. A 4x4 is behind you a few seconds back. A vehicle approaches from the opposite direction, sees 2 headlights and assesses the RH headlight as belonging to the 4x4 and decides to execute the right hand turn as he has space to the 4x4. Uh oh, now he becomes aware of the motorcycle as it is protruding from the front left door.

For the record, no, I didn't run out of argument, unlike yourself, I have no need to invent spurious argument to support silly assertions.

[Mikkel]

Yes, you have a habit of that - failing to see the relevance. The first step to cure is acceptance of your problem, congratulations, you are on the way.

Hooray, there might still be hope for me then. Who are you who know me so well? :rolleyes:



So you are riding along - in the right wheel track, with your headlight on. A 4x4 is behind you a few seconds back. A vehicle approaches from the opposite direction, sees 2 headlights and assesses the RH headlight as belonging to the 4x4 and decides to execute the right hand turn as he has space to the 4x4. Uh oh, now he becomes aware of the motorcycle as it is protruding from the front left door.

Unless you make a concerted effort to stay exactly between the driver of the oncoming car and the RH headlight of the 4x4 you'll be quite visible to the driver wanting to turn. I mean, that should be obvious - correct me if I'm wrong. (why does it have to be a 4x4 btw? - because of the height above the road surface or...?)

Lights or no lights - there's no way we can MAKE people use their eyes and brains. We can only help them by being easier to spot and position ourselves where we are in the best position to avoid trouble.


For the record, no, I didn't run out of argument, unlike yourself, I have no need to invent spurious argument to support silly assertions.

Good thing you'll settle for petty name calling then.
Oh and thanks for teaching me a new word - spurious...
I guess an appropriate use would be that the claim you just made - besides illustrating appaling grammar - is spurious.

[The Stranger]

Lights or no lights - there's no way we can MAKE people use their eyes and brains. We can only help them by being easier to spot and position ourselves where we are in the best position to avoid trouble.



Ah thank you, we are in complete agreement, it took some time, but I knew you would come around.
Now if the bike has it's headlight on and the following vehicle (say a 4x4, but numerous others would be just fine) doesn't the bike will be easier to spot.
I mean that's the reason for having the headlignt on after all isn't it?

[The Stranger]

Good thing you'll settle for petty name calling then.


Goodness me no, that wasn't petty name calling.
As you can see by your definitions, it was entirely accurate and appropriate.

Don't shoot the messenger.

[Mikkel]

Ah thank you, we are in complete agreement, it took some time, but I knew you would come around.
Now if the bike has it's headlight on the the following vehicle (say a 4x4, but numerous others would be just fine) doesn't the bike will be easier to spot.
I mean that's the reason for having the headlignt on after all isn't it?

Of course, if motorcycles all had their lights on and noone else were allowed to use their lights that would make motorcycles easier to see. No argument there - but why stop there?

Give all motorcycles blinking blue and red lights, sirens, an escort helicopter with a big-ass floodlight, etc. and they'll be easier to spot yet again.

Or even better - ban everything but motorcycles. /sarcasm

However, road safety is about more than just motorcycles. Everything in a non-perfect world will be a compromise. Mandatory lights on for all motorists would improve traffic safety as a whole.


Goodness me no, that wasn't petty name calling.
As you can see by your definitions, it was entirely accurate and appropriate.

Don't shoot the messenger.

As I said - you know me too well! :rolleyes:
A contrary, but not spurious mind you, argument in this case would be that you come across as a rather condescending prick. But I don't know you nearly well enough to pass that judgement.

[Ixion]

Of course, if motorcycles all had their lights on and noone else were allowed to use their lights that would make motorcycles easier to see. No argument there - but why stop there?

Give all motorcycles blinking blue and red lights, sirens, an escort helicopter with a big-ass floodlight, etc. and they'll be easier to spot yet again.



I like it. I like it.




Or even better - ban everything but motorcycles. /sarcasm


Even better. Now you're making sense




However, road safety is about more than just motorcycles. Everything in a non-perfect world will be a compromise. Mandatory lights on for all motorists would improve traffic safety as a whole.



Maybe so, but I don't care about the non motorcycle bit. So if it improves things for them , at the expense of making it worse for bikes, I'm against it.
Forcing cagers to pay a teensy weeny bit of attention to what they are doing would improve road safety as a whole, too.

[The Stranger]

Of course, if motorcycles all had their lights on and noone else were allowed to use their lights that would make motorcycles easier to see. No argument there - but why stop there?

**Snip**

However, road safety is about more than just motorcycles. Everything in a non-perfect world will be a compromise. Mandatory lights on for all motorists would improve traffic safety as a whole.



Ok, now we are getting somewhere, so it would seem that we agree on my original premise that it is preferable for motorcyclists if we have our lights on and others don't. Thus I fail to see that my statement was bullshit in it's original context, the point of my argument.

As to safety as a whole, yes it is a compromise. Right now, we put up with the attitude that it is good to save a few cars at the expense of motorcyclists (wire roap barriers). Our argument (BRONZ) is that, sure there is no problem in favouring one group over another, provided it does not disadvantage another group i.e. use concrete barriers.
However, it is already accepted practice by the powers that be, that they are prepared to sacrifice one for another, so screw them, it may as well be the motorcyclists that get an advantage this time.

Are you in posession of or aware of research to show that lights on by day on all vehicles actually reduces injury or death rates?
I am aware of the Greyhound bus study, however, that was busses only and did not account for all vehicles having their lights on and showed a reduction in minor accidents only if I recall correctly.

[biggerbud]

Turn ya lights on and - RIDE NAKED!

[Mikkel]

Maybe so, but I don't care about the non motorcycle bit. So if it improves things for them , at the expense of making it worse for bikes, I'm against it.
Forcing cagers to pay a teensy weeny bit of attention to what they are doing would improve road safety as a whole, too.

Sorry Ixion, but that's pretty ignorant. What about improving safety for all - because that would be readily acheivable.
It's the free world mate, you can't force anyone to do anything. Just punish them if they break the law. If the punishment isn't big enough it doesn't work as a deterence...
Upping the licensing system would be a good way to start. Then imposing harsher restrictions upon what pieces of crap you're allowed to use on the roads - and bigger penalties for not meeting those restrictions.


Ok, now we are getting somewhere, so it would seem that we agree on my original premise that it is preferable for motorcyclists if we have our lights on and others don't. Thus I fail to see that my statement was bullshit in it's original context, the point of my argument.

Not at all - because you're not considering the most important effect of mandatory lights on.

If all vehicles have their light turned on when the ignition is turned on you'll get the added benefit of easily being able to distinguish between operating vehicles and non-operating vehicles. And this is good for you because of three things:

1. It makes it easier to identify vehicles that may pose a hazard to you. (E.g. no car without lights on is ever going to pull a sudden U-turn on you)
2. It makes it easier for other motorists to spot you.
3. It makes it easier to identify operating vehicles for ALL motorists.

Number 3 is the most important thing here. I guess we can all agree that being a good driver/rider is very much dependant upon your ability to collect and process information. The faster you can do that the better you are. Now collecting data is not just about sucking up as much as possible... It's a selection process that is happening automatically for the routine driver. The more stuff you can disregard the more time you can spend on the important bits.
It's just like it's easier to find important parts of a text after you've high-lighted them...
Dunno if I need to explain more or if this is adequate to illustrate why I honestly think that bikers would be safer if ALL motorists had a mandatory lights on... Think about it for a second and I'm sure you'll see what I mean.


As to safety as a whole, yes it is a compromise. Right now, we put up with the attitude that it is good to save a few cars at the expense of motorcyclists (wire roap barriers). Our argument (BRONZ) is that, sure there is no problem in favouring one group over another, provided it does not disadvantage another group i.e. use concrete barriers.
However, it is already accepted practice by the powers that be, that they are prepared to sacrifice one for another, so screw them, it may as well be the motorcyclists that get an advantage this time.

I agree fully, it's not good enough. Wire rope barriers could easily and cheaply be made much safer. Well, welcome to the life as part of a minority. Surely you can not expect the goverment to allocate very many resources towards what is mainly a threat to a minority group - and a group based mostly on recreational use of motorised transportation.


Are you in posession of or aware of research to show that lights on by day on all vehicles actually reduces injury or death rates?
I am aware of the Greyhound bus study, however, that was busses only and did not account for all vehicles having their lights on and showed a reduction in minor accidents only if I recall correctly.

Let's just say that the idea came out of Sweden. Then most of the rest of Europe adapted it inside a couple of decades. I'm pretty sure you can assume they wouldn't have changed legislation unless there was something in the statistics for the countries that had the mandatory lights on that suggested an improvement.

And even then, if it's a reduction of minor accidents only - it's still worth it. Get this: "It's free and it'll improve road safety to some degree." Truly, there isn't and argument for NOT doing it.

[H00dz]

my 10cents worth Norfland Style:headbang:

me and a couple of mates ride approx 35kms one way to work on open roads all the way. the roads are smooth and fast and there are nice windy sections.

Travelling speeds are at the top of the legal limit and there is heavy traffic such as logging trucks, slow moving rural school buses and people movers to contend with so We ALL ride lights on as a rule.

:shifty:Being a big guy I have customed made gear which came in the colour range of Black, black or black!!! (sorry there was a choice of optional black trims).
If I could I would like to wear some multi coloured gear or High Vis jacket but alas I haven't come across anything suitable. EVEN my Lid is Black
So for me ridin lit up is the least that I can do to improve my visibility......

[BiK3RChiK]

Yeah, I asked my instructor why the gear was black if visiblity is such an issue and he said 'good point' with no other answer!

Today I was driving my 4x4 to pick up the daughter from the bus and almost didn't see a yellow bike without the light on! I was about to u-turn! Gave me a start as my ride is yellow too but I always ride with the light on dip. Mind you, there were a lot of kids about and traffic was mayhem as everyone was there to pick the kids up, so maybe she should have had the light on too! Good reminder for me too.

[The Stranger]

Let's just say that the idea came out of Sweden. Then most of the rest of Europe adapted it inside a couple of decades. I'm pretty sure you can assume they wouldn't have changed legislation unless there was something in the statistics for the countries that had the mandatory lights on that suggested an improvement.



They say assumption is the mother of all fuck ups, and I see you are at it agian - both assumptions and fuck ups.

Perhaps you could re-educate FEMA, MAG and BMF, whom are also opposed to daytime running lights on all vehicles. Whilst you are at it, EC whom dropped their proposal to implement them in all EU countries. One reason was the dearth of studies on the subject. Also you may care to point out to the Austrian govenrment, whom reportedly (though I admit, I don't know as I wasn't there) had implemented compulsory daytime running lights and now banned them due to deaths of pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists, where they went wrong.

You may care to start your studies here (http://www.dadrl.org.uk/)


Twat!

[Mikkel]

my 10cents worth Norfland Style:headbang:

me and a couple of mates ride approx 35kms one way to work on open roads all the way. the roads are smooth and fast and there are nice windy sections.

Travelling speeds are at the top of the legal limit and there is heavy traffic such as logging trucks, slow moving rural school buses and people movers to contend with so We ALL ride lights on as a rule.

:shifty:Being a big guy I have customed made gear which came in the colour range of Black, black or black!!! (sorry there was a choice of optional black trims).
If I could I would like to wear some multi coloured gear or High Vis jacket but alas I haven't come across anything suitable. EVEN my Lid is Black
So for me ridin lit up is the least that I can do to improve my visibility......


Yeah, I asked my instructor why the gear was black if visiblity is such an issue and he said 'good point' with no other answer!

Today I was driving my 4x4 to pick up the daughter from the bus and almost didn't see a yellow bike without the light on! I was about to u-turn! Gave me a start as my ride is yellow too but I always ride with the light on dip. Mind you, there were a lot of kids about and traffic was mayhem as everyone was there to pick the kids up, so maybe she should have had the light on too! Good reminder for me too.

The issue of whether black actually does reduce your visibility is not something there is a general consensus on. Personally the only time I find that it matters at all is for grey vehicles without lights driving in fog.


They say assumption is the mother of all fuck ups, and I see you are at it agian - both assumptions and fuck ups.

Perhaps you could re-educate FEMA, MAG and BMF, whom are also opposed to daytime running lights on all vehicles. Whilst you are at it, EC whom dropped their proposal to implement them in all EU countries. One reason was the dearth of studies on the subject. Also you may care to point out to the Austrian govenrment, whom reportedly (though I admit, I don't know as I wasn't there) had implemented compulsory daytime running lights and now banned them due to deaths of pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists, where they went wrong.

You may care to start your studies here (http://www.dadrl.org.uk/)


Twat!

So you're basically throwing a handlful of acronyms at me and descend into petty name calling again. Can't say I'm surprised, seems to be the standard reaction when people are running out of good arguments.

I mean, seriously, what has FEMA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fema), and BMF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMF_%28record_label%29) to do with road safety?

As for Oz, the premise of this whole discussion is that the "ass-end" of the world (NZ and Oz) has so far failed to follow the example of countries that can display significantly better road statistics. But then again, down here in the shadows illumination is generally frowned upon.

But hey - if you insist on spewing shit I suggest you start your studies by following the link on this (http://www.beefytreats.net/mt-archives/000040.html) homepage.

Or I could be mistaken and you understood the tongue in cheek sarcasm of using Sweden as an argument followed by what should in and of itself be considered adequate proof of my hypothesis - in which case your whole post was a joke and I must say I am both surprised and impressed. On the other hand - if that isn't the case there's still a joke involved.

[PrincessBandit]

On my bike they are on as soon as you turn on the ignition. I can't switch them off.

same with my bike

[The Stranger]

Or I could be mistaken and you understood the tongue in cheek sarcasm of using Sweden as an argument followed by what should in and of itself be considered adequate proof of my hypothesis - in which case your whole post was a joke and I must say I am both surprised and impressed. On the other hand - if that isn't the case there's still a joke involved.

Ha, ha, always the risk when baiting isn't it?
Though I am certain you did actually believe your inital clap trap, it became a little too obvious when you started contradicting yourself, yet still maintained course - that and the lack of red bling.

[Mikkel]

Ha, ha, always the risk when baiting isn't it?
Though I am certain you did actually believe your inital clap trap, it became a little too obvious when you started contradicting yourself, yet still maintained course - that and the lack of red bling.

Some people say: "Hook, line and sinker"...

I always preferred - "Fish, barrel, shotgun..." ;)

I wasn't aware I contradicted myself - I may have been vague in my expression though. Always the danger when debating in what ultimately is ones second language.

I very rarely use red bling, only in the case where I think that a post may actually have a negative real-life impact or is hurtfully abusive (not necessarily towards my person) do I bother using it...

That being said - I strongly believe that mandatory lights on for all vehicles would be a benefit for everyone. I'm certainly not going to drive without my lights on out there.

[The Stranger]

Some people say: "Hook, line and sinker"...

I always preferred - "Fish, barrel, shotgun..." ;)

I wasn't aware I contradicted myself - I may have been vague in my expression though. Always the danger when debating in what ultimately is ones second language.

I very rarely use red bling, only in the case where I think that a post may actually have a negative real-life impact or is hurtfully abusive (not necessarily towards my person) do I bother using it...

That being said - I strongly believe that mandatory lights on for all vehicles would be a benefit for everyone. I'm certainly not going to drive without my lights on out there.

Well I did signal my appreciation by adding you to my sig - thank you for that.
But, had you red blinged me perhaps I would have thought you were taking this matter seriously.

Luckily for the rest of us, what you believe is of no import is it.

[Mikkel]

Luckily for the rest of us, what you believe is of no import is it.

Ditto. +10 chars.

[Monsterbishi]

In todays Timaru Herald re DRL's:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4408970a10.html

[The Stranger]

In todays Timaru Herald re DRL's:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4408970a10.html

Pffft what would he know, Mikkel will be along shortly to refute this amature's position.

[Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)]

i guess legally don't have to ride with lights on unless its dull/night

many modern jap bikes you can't even turn the headlight off, opinions are low beam/high beam thats it
turn the key its on/or comes on once thumb the starter

Yep my lights come on automatically as soon as I start the bike and I cannot switch them off. I have always ridden with the front light on anyway.

[Mikkel]

Pffft what would he know, Mikkel will be along shortly to refute this amature's position.

Fuck yes, with comments like this I think one needs to be rather critical of the contents of such a report:

(And what is a post graduate diploma in this case? A doctorate, a masters or just someone who needed a break from their career?)


However, Mr Piercy said these countries had lower latitudes and lower ambient light levels than New Zealand.

...

"It is apparent that those supporting the use of DRL's predominately refer to studies carried out in countries at lower latitudes which have significantly lower ambient light levels.

We're talking about Scandinavia >50° North Latitude.
New Zealand ~47°-34.5° South Latitude.

Now, which is the lower latitude?

If you mess up something that basic it doesn't lend a lot of credibility to the study.



Mr Piercy said as well as light levels there were also issues relating to increased fuel usage, monetary and environmental costs.

He said using DRLs potentially increased fuel usage by two per cent per vehicle per year.

I could be wrong - but I don't believe there's an automatic clutch for the alternator. If so the alternator will be running at all times and the load of running the alternator doesn't change with the amount of current being drawn from the electrical system.

As such I'm very tempted to dismiss that claim as bullshit.


Besides there's more to it than ambient light levels - rapidly changing conditions (sometimes and issue in NZ btw.) where DRLs would be of even more benefit but may be neglected due to the fact that the road user doesn't think of it.

I'd like to read the report. I am sure that Mr. Piercy has done a good job - but as always you can not rely on media to relate any scientific findings. I'm guessing that the conclusion of the report is more along the lines that: The benefit of DRLs in countries with high ambient light levels is comparatively lower than for countries with low ambient light levels -QED.

[Ixion]

He means higher latitudes. Lower down on the globe.

EDIT: I agree with him. Lights off for cages please.

[Mikkel]

He means higher latitudes. Lower down on the globe.

...or higher up for that matter!

That was of course my point. I just hope it was the media getting it wrong - if it's in his report then it's truly hare-racing (sic).

If the media got that bit wrong what else could they have gotten wrong?

Also, statements like:

However, for countries with high ambient light levels, such as New Zealand and Australia, using headlights during the daytime is not as effective as people think.
makes me want to cry.

"...is not as effective as people think." doesn't say a whole lot now does it? It should be apparent from this thread that what people think varies quite a lot and taking an average on an opinion doesn't actually provide any factual results.

There's enough pseudo-science out there as it is - and the media isn't help the situation!

[biggerbud]

Notice the word 'former' ! what a pillock! No, headlights during the day are not the perfect answer but then nothing is, but every little bit helps.
Glare, high ambient light levels are a moot point as if they don't see the headlights when they are on, they certianly won't see them when they are off now will they. The headlights come on with the key on my 1996 Triumph
and if they didn't, I would turn them on anyway. I do a shit load of open road traveling in a cage and I can catagorically state that headlights being on on a bike is a definite advantage at a bike being seen.

[biggerbud]

I would suspect there has never been an actual study to say that having your headlights on at night prevents accidents. Maybe every one should travel at night without their headlights on untill this is confirmed....but then maybe common sense will continue to prevail even though headlights are designed for us to see, not be seen.

[BiK3RChiK]

I would suspect there has never been an actual study to say that having your headlights on at night prevents accidents. Maybe every one should travel at night without their headlights on untill this is confirmed....but then maybe common sense will continue to prevail even though headlights are designed for us to see, not be seen.

Yeah, like in Egypt where they drive with their lights off 'to save the battery' and turn them on when they see something coming!!!!!... or NOT!!

[Ixion]

Yeah, like in Egypt where they drive with their lights off 'to save the battery' and turn them on when they see something coming!!!!!... or NOT!!

FRiidng without headlights at night was a common practice when I was young. For bikes and trucks (cars were rare on the open road at night).

With the headlamp off, ones eyes accomodate to the natural light, and one could see further and better than by Joe Lucas's feeble candles (acetylene was brighter, but erratic)

One detected oncoming either by their sidelights (which then were often literally at the side), or the glow of the taillamp.

Riidng by moonlight or starlight is even now , if a lonely enough road can be found, a most pleasant experience. But the light pollution of cities and towns is such that it is hard to find anywhere sufficiently rmeote for moonlight , let alone starlight.

If you youff would eschew electric light for the more pleasant illumination of candlelight, the night would be a nicer place.

[pete376403]

I could be wrong - but I don't believe there's an automatic clutch for the alternator. If so the alternator will be running at all times and the load of running the alternator doesn't change with the amount of current being drawn from the electrical system.
yes it does - otherwise we could all have lawn mower engines out in the backyard driving big fuck-off alternators that power the whole house, including the spa pool heater and a kiln for pottery.
You can't get more watts out of the alternator than you put in so you add another 200 or so watts of lights (thinking car here, 2 headlights, 2 sidelights, tail lights, etc) thats 200+ (approx 1/4 hp) more watts that the engine has to provide - and that means more fuel consumed

[biggerbud]

yes it does - otherwise we could all have lawn mower engines out in the backyard driving big fuck-off alternators that power the whole house, including the spa pool heater and a kiln for pottery.
You can't get more watts out of the alternator than you put in so you add another 200 or so watts of lights (thinking car here, 2 headlights, 2 sidelights, tail lights, etc) thats 200+ (approx 1/4 hp) more watts that the engine has to provide - and that means more fuel consumed

would the increase in fuel usage warrent the use of headlights during the day due to alternator loading is an interesting point so I did a quick calc on your figures just to see the outcome as I have never considered it before.

1/4 horsepower/200 watts more load for my bike would mean an economy loss of about .4725 miles per gallon or about 56c for a full tank of riding.

[TimeOut]

yes it does - otherwise we could all have lawn mower engines out in the backyard driving big fuck-off alternators that power the whole house, including the spa pool heater and a kiln for pottery.
You can't get more watts out of the alternator than you put in so you add another 200 or so watts of lights (thinking car here, 2 headlights, 2 sidelights, tail lights, etc) thats 200+ (approx 1/4 hp) more watts that the engine has to provide - and that means more fuel consumed

Cages alternators will increase output to suit demand, but most motorbikes generate at maximum all the time. If you don't use the power it's dissapated as heat through the thingie with the finns (someone will know the proper name) So you don't save anything by turning your light off.

[Mountlocal1]

Im in the process of modifyn the front of my bike. Before I pulled the lights etc off I contacted the LTSA etc and spoke to half doz people who all said that I must have legal lights working at all times on my bike....

Whoever they are a government agency so may be wrong....:confused:

[Ixion]

Different question. All motor vehicles, bikes cars trucks, whatever, must , at all times, be of WoF standard (this even applies to mopeds).

Since the WoF requires lights, you need to have them to meet that test. But there is nothing says that you can't turn them on and off.

So you must have the ability to have your lights on, always. But you only need to turn them on at night.

(There are special provisions for vintage vehciles that never had lights)

[Radar]

Haha I laugh when i hear all the HTFU replies. I'd rather be lit up like a christmas tree on ym bike and have car drivers going what the fuck is that btter stay away from it than being all dressed in black with lights off. I ride with high beams on all the time plus a high vis vest and as much non black gear as possible, witha nice bright non black red and white bike. If i could have my way i'd somehow invent a giant holographic arrow to appear above my bike , just so extra blind cages would see me.

Last week I test drove a couple of bikes and then drove home in my car (this is before I bought my bike). Its a rural drive and a main highway, in the afternoon on a sunny day. I came upon a slow car, checked ahead and saw that it was clear and started to pass.... but then I saw lights way in the distance... still OK I thought and continued to pass (all this happening in 1 second). But craaaaaap :eek5: that was not TWO headlights from a car but ONE light on a motorcycle!! I slowed down immediately and fell in behind the slow car. A few seconds later the bike passed and he gave me a wave to say thanks - or was it the finger?? :rolleyes: :lol:

The point is that if that bikie did not have his light on, I would not have seen him until later, probably not causing an accident but it would have been close enough to cause the adrenaline to rush. BTW, close shaves like this happen ALL THE TIME in India and other parts of Asia - unbelievable really - you think a crash will happen but cars and bikes miss each other by a few cm's and no one even gets upset or ruffled - crazy!!

I drive with my high beams on. If oncoming traffic flashes me to dim them, I will, but I don't think that will happen.

[Mikkel]

yes it does - otherwise we could all have lawn mower engines out in the backyard driving big fuck-off alternators that power the whole house, including the spa pool heater and a kiln for pottery.
You can't get more watts out of the alternator than you put in so you add another 200 or so watts of lights (thinking car here, 2 headlights, 2 sidelights, tail lights, etc) thats 200+ (approx 1/4 hp) more watts that the engine has to provide - and that means more fuel consumed

Apparently you misunderstood my meaning. Of course you can not take out more power than you put in.

My point was that the mechanical power required by the engine to run the alternator does not vary with the amount of power being drawn by the electrical system.

If the alternator produces less electricity than the car uses the battery will drain. If the alternator produces more electricity than the car uses the battery is being charged. Obviously you'll design a car so that there's a sufficient amount of surplus electrical power being generated.

[Big Dog]

Depending on the bike, high beam can still dazzle during the day, especially with firm suspension. It could cop you a fine from the police as well as the odd finger from annoyed motorists. Dipped is perfectly adequate. Ride to the conditions and always assume other road users have not seen you.
2nd that.

A good way to make dozy drivers in your lane get back in their own is to go high beam on the 'busa.
On one of my taupo trips in broad daylight a car came round the corner on wrong side, No panic a few hundred meters of clear road.
100m pass bozo is still in the wrong lane.
Put on highbeams, toot the Stebel.
Fucknuckle looks up from his cell phone long enough to turn white, over react wipe out trying to get back in his own lane and end up facing the wrong way in the ditch.

Pretty sure if I had only flashed he would not have spun out....

[BiK3RChiK]

2nd that.

A good way to make dozy drivers in your lane get back in their own is to go high beam on the 'busa.
On one of my taupo trips in broad daylight a car came round the corner on wrong side, No panic a few hundred meters of clear road.
100m pass bozo is still in the wrong lane.
Put on highbeams, toot the Stebel.
Fucknuckle looks up from his cell phone long enough to turn white, over react wipe out trying to get back in his own lane and end up facing the wrong way in the ditch.

Pretty sure if I had only flashed he would not have spun out....

Yeah, well he bloody deserved it!!! Idiot coulda killed ya!! They should ban cellphones while being behind the wheel..

[Big Dog]

The rider in high-vis gear and with their headlight shining brightly doesn't look like much of a threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he is just going to get a little upset and I'll say I never saw him and all will be well.

The rider who looks most like a gang member dressed in black leather, no lights, and a bandana across his face looks much more intimidating and poses a BIG threat. Car Driver: If I run him over he will drag his angry broken body off the ground and haul me out of the car to do unspeakable things to me and my family.

I fully reckon there are two ways to be seen.
Be scary - Explains the way I dress on the Busa.
Be funny - Explains the way I dress on he scooter, no way can I pull off scary on a cooter

[YellowDog]

The idea came from the Scandinavians where in winter you can get 4 hour days and 20 hour nights. It's worse the further North you go. Volvo and Saab started hard wiring their car lights to always be on and then it occurred to someone that it may be a good idesa for safety, particularly with bikers. And seems to have stuck.

I never ride without lights on.

But as I don't have a bike at the moment. I never ride period!

[Mikkel]

The idea came from the Scandinavians where in winter you can get 4 hour days and 20 hour nights. It's worse the further North you go. Volvo and Saab started hard wiring their car lights to always be on and then it occurred to someone that it may be a good idesa for safety, particularly with bikers. And seems to have stuck.

Yes yes, good to hear someone knows what it's like in Scandinavia :rolleyes:

Just remember that it's the other way around as well - in summer we get 20 hours of light and 4 hours of "darkness". If you go far enough north it can be light or dark all the time depending upon what time of year it is.

I'm pretty sure scandinavian drivers would be as competent as NZ drivers to make the call whether turning on the lights or not is necessary... As such how many hours of daylight you get during winter is irrelevant.