Daytime running lamps?

[biggo]

While on this subject I notice the Police ST1300 around Wellington also have illegal after market DRL,s fitted.

[Scubbo]

coudlnt you just put a switch between them and the battery or whatever so that they aren't position lamps but auxiliaries?

[Jeff Sichoe]

While on this subject I notice the Police ST1300 around Wellington also have illegal after market DRL,s fitted.

Haha yeah I noticed the same thing, good for the goose?

[AllanB]

While on this subject I notice the Police ST1300 around Wellington also have illegal after market DRL,s fitted.

Bet they come under a special emergency vehicle lighting sub-clause.

[AllanB]

- You can't have DRLs on when your headlight is on.
- Position lights can only be fitted to motorcycles wider than 1.5m

There is also the statement: "A vehicle originally manufactured with a daytime running lamp arrangement that differs from what is required or permitted in this section may retain the original daytime running lamps provided they remain fitted in their original position and perform as intended by the vehicle manufacturer."

My ducati effectively has DRL - either side of the lower part of the headlight (spiffy LED ones) they can't be switched off and run with the headlight (which is also always on).

They run exception rules in many areas - factory window tints for example, I've seen imported cars with very black windows that are factory so they pass compliance etc. Tint your clear windows to the same degree and you will fail.

[nerrrd]

coudlnt you just put a switch between them and the battery or whatever so that they aren't position lamps but auxiliaries?

I did that with exactly the same lights on my bike, plus my front indicators are on all the time as it’s a used Jap import. I must have gone to a more understanding (or ignorant?) bike shop for my last warrant as they didn’t say anything.

[rambaldi]

I did that with exactly the same lights on my bike, plus my front indicators are on all the time as it’s a used Jap import. I must have gone to a more understanding (or ignorant?) bike shop for my last warrant as they didn’t say anything.

I thought the indicator DRL thing was fine if they come like that stock.

[nerrrd]

I thought the indicator DRL thing was fine if they come like that stock.

Good point, but they didn't bring up the additional Stonk lights either (mounted at the base of my mirrors) and I didn't bother turning them off.

[NordieBoy]

BluTac some coke bottle lids (if they fit) over the DRL's for the WoF.

I've been pulled over at checkpoints and complimented on my LED's

I've also been pulled over at a checkpoint and quizzed about my seat because the cop didn't like his stock one.

[Moi]

I fitted Stonk running lights to my Shiver three years ago, hoping to avoid future SMIDSY incidents. These improve visibility and the triangle pattern improves depth perception by other motorists...

I did the same to my Honda for the same reason. It recently passed its WoF with no mention of the extra lights which are mounted under the engine protection guards.

Have you heard from the MSAC in response to your question?

I may be being a bit simplistic about this, but if DRLs have been fitted in order to improve a bike's visibilty then when the bike goes through a WoF rather than saying the lights don't comply the inspector should be able to assess the suitablitiy of the lights to be DRLs and, if he considers the lights to be suitable, to order the bike be checked by a certifying engineer who can then allow for the lights to remain on the bike. This could be noted on a certification plate on the bike and on the bike's online WoF records.

Surely, the MSAC could take up this with NZTA and produce a working solution that allows for bikers to retro-fit DRLs in order to enhance their visibility and safety. Perhaps this is just a bit too simplistic and I am deluded as to what the MSAC does...

PS Due to the Honda coming from the UK - not NZ new - the headlight is able to be switched off and so I could ride with just the two Stonk lights showing to the front...

[leathel]

I did the same to my Honda for the same reason. It recently passed its WoF with no mention of the extra lights which are mounted under the engine protection guards.

Have you heard from the MSAC in response to your question?

I may be being a bit simplistic about this, but if DRLs have been fitted in order to improve a bike's visibilty then when the bike goes through a WoF rather than saying the lights don't comply the inspector should be able to assess the suitablitiy of the lights to be DRLs and, if he considers the lights to be suitable, to order the bike be checked by a certifying engineer who can then allow for the lights to remain on the bike. This could be noted on a certification plate on the bike and on the bike's online WoF records.

Surely, the MSAC could take up this with NZTA and produce a working solution that allows for bikers to retro-fit DRLs in order to enhance their visibility and safety. Perhaps this is just a bit too simplistic and I am deluded as to what the MSAC does...

PS Due to the Honda coming from the UK - not NZ new - the headlight is able to be switched off and so I could ride with just the two Stonk lights showing to the front...

My Valkyrie is also a UK model with light switches, I was questioned about the lights being on at low beam but I said they are fog lamps set below dip beam so can run with or without headlights (will run with park lights too).....just like the lower bumper lights on cars, they are bright enough to run at night with them on with park lights so if a headlight bulb dies its not an issue

Being the Valk is not facing the camera they don't stand out much but my daughters little Valcan gives you a better idea to how they look in daylight

[AllanB]

Just goes to shop some pathetic people are in charge of writing pathetic rules.

[Gremlin]

While on this subject I notice the Police ST1300 around Wellington also have illegal after market DRL,s fitted.

They're not ST1300. They're ST1300P, the LEDs are fitted as factory, OEM exemption clauses mean that since the bike was manufactured with it, it complies.
Had a curious cop ask me when the first ST1300Ps started getting issued.

[rastuscat]

They're not ST1300. They're ST1300P, the LEDs are fitted as factory, OEM exemption clauses mean that since the bike was manufactured with it, it complies.
Had a curious cop ask me when the first ST1300Ps started getting issued.

Ironic that even a motorbike cop didn't know the rule.

This dumb rule is in the same category as the one saying no demerits for red light offences, and no demerits for seatbelt offences.

[rastuscat]

They're not ST1300. They're ST1300P, the LEDs are fitted as factory, OEM exemption clauses mean that since the bike was manufactured with it, it complies.
Had a curious cop ask me when the first ST1300Ps started getting issued.

When they bought the ST1300Ps they should have got VFR1200Ps, but that model belongs to Honda Europe.