[200q20v] Re: [s-cars] to fog or not to fog...
pjrose at frontiernet.net
Wed Mar 21 14:56:34 EST 2001
At 9:16 AM -0800 3/21/01, PramTT wrote:
>>Despite my earlier diatribe I have no problem whatever with the appropriate
>>use of fogs. Just please reduce your forward lighting to a maximum of two
>>lamps, either low-beams or fogs, whatever is best given the conditions at
>>hand, in the presence of oncoming traffic, or when following another
>>vehicle. When you are alone on the road - go wild!
>I choose not to agree with the "two lights" suggestion.
Well, but it's a law in many places, isn't it?
>Most people that choose to run the fog lights (appropriately aimed)
>with their low beam to increase light intensity to improve their
The problem is that the vast majority of people actually using
foglights haven't made much of a conscious decision. "Most" people
use the aux. lights because they're already installed and/or they
think it looks cool/sporty. In fact I'd venture that a large
percentage of drivers don't even know that they're turned on (or how
to turn them off). They typically haven't a clue about aiming and
don't think about the effect they have on the driver who's ahead. The
exceptions, such as yourself, have keen regard for what the effect on
others might be. But you're pretty rare exceptions to the rule.
Hence, until there's a requirement for *all* aux. lights to be
properly aimed and have sharp cut-off, I think it's not unreasonable
to have a rule to make it obligatory for _everyone_ to temporarily
turn off fog/driving lights in consideration of oncoming traffic and
when behind another vehicle. If your area has no such regulation,
then you should have a clear conscience about your carefully aimed,
low cutoff aux. lights being on full-time. But I hope everyone would
verify how their aux. lights (aiming and cut-off) _actually_ look
to oncoming drivers (by switching cars with a friend some night.)
When there's a law restricting aux lights in one's area, I couldn't
support the rationalization that claims, "Well, it may be a good rule
for others, but I choose to ignore it because _my_ foglights are
carefully aimed, etc." Obviously the rule becomes ineffective when
anyone feels free declare themself to be an exception. When Joe Blow
in his Explorer with glaring aux. lights sees you failing to quench
your lights, he thinks. "Screw it, nobody else is bothering, so I
needn't do it either." The fact that your lights are non-offensive
(while his are blinding) is a point that he misses completely. I'm
sorry for sounding so "preachy", but this is a sore issue for me, too.
Many traffic rules need to be designed for the "average" driver (and
vehicle), so it's unfortunate that we tolerate our driver/vehicle
standards being so pitifully "low" in the USA. That also goes for
the DOT standards that allowed a decade of p*ss-poor Audi lighting.
>The key word is appropriately designed/aimed fog lights should not
>have any more lights shined towards oncoming driver. Fog lights are
>actually supposed to have sharper cut-off than low beam.
Yes, true, but see above.
mailto:pjrose at frontiernet.net
More information about the 200q20v