This is topic Turning Off Headlights in Drive-In in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004114

---

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 06-16-2005, 08:09 PM:
 
My wife and I went to a local drive-in last saturday night. We usually go about once a year. I always run into the same problem everytime we go though. I cannot turn off my headlights.

I have a 1999 Chevy pickup and I have no control whatsoever over the headlights. They are the automatic kind which come on and shut off by themselves. In fact, I don't even see why they put a switch on the dash at all. It doesn't work to try to turn the knob to off when the lights are on at night because it won't shut them off.(now they don't even trust us to turn on our own headlights?) I read the owner's manual and couldn't find a way to get them to turn off. Only leaving the parking brake on when you start the car will make them stay off but then I can't drive with the brake on.

When we showed up to the first movie we were late (it was a last minute idea)and I couldn't park because I didn't want to disturb the other people. Anyone else have this problem? I thought about cutting the wires and installing a toggle switch.

When I lived in an apartment I couldn't come home late and park in front of someone else's apartment for fear of the headlights in their bedroom window waking them up. Anyone have any ideas?

[ 06-16-2005, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: Joshua Waaland ]
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 06-16-2005, 08:53 PM:
 
I believe I am correct in this:

I think there is a software control that your dealer can change. You may note that rental cars are like this. My understanding is that if you purchase a used rental car; you can elect to have certain things "changed." If I am right, then there IS a need for the headlight switch. Good luck!!

Louis
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-16-2005, 09:20 PM:
 
There is probably a hidden control to turn off this "feature." On my Volvo, it's a little unmarked screw next to the headlight switch. Your car probably has something similar, although it might be in a less-accessible place (under the hood, perhaps).
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 06-16-2005, 09:28 PM:
 
Where is the photocell which tells it it is night? That should be somewhere somewhat accesible, so that you might be able to make your modification there.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-16-2005, 09:55 PM:
 
No, it's "Daytime Running Lights". The headlights are on at all times whether you have the switch turned on or not.

It's a FEATURE of many new cars. I also believe it's a requirement for new cars in Canada.

I don't have a problem with DRL, per se, but I have always believed that there should be a way to manually override them. My thought that there would be a button you pressed to douse the headlights until the next time you alter the position of the headlight switch, hit the hi-beams or until you shut the ignition off.
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-16-2005, 10:12 PM:
 
The trick is to apply your parking brake ONE NOTCH. This will kill DRL's in most vehicles, and allow you to drive about the lot. We address this in the Drive-In Policy Trailer, from Screen Attractions.



Order from:
Screen Attractions Online Catalog
 

---

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 06-16-2005, 10:17 PM:
 
Randy,

It has daytime running lamps but they are separate bulbs under the headlights. I cannot control any of them. I would like to know if there is a way to "alter" them. Maybe I will do a search.
 

---

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 06-16-2005, 11:33 PM:
 
Ok, I'll play the part of the smart ass.
How about show up on time?
 

---

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 06-17-2005, 06:35 AM:
 
We didn't get there on time because my wife only thought of the idea about ten minutes before the first film started. It's a fourty-five minute drive and we still had to get all the blankets and pillows and radio together.
 

---

Posted by Oscar Neundorfer (Member # 458) on 06-17-2005, 06:57 AM:
 
I feel about these daytime running lights the same as I do about things starting up automatically on my computer: I don't like it. If I want things on, then I will turn them on (with some notable exceptions like my firewall software which should run immediately).

I am glad my car does not have this "feature". If it did, I would be disabling it even if it meant cutting into the wiring harness and adding a switch.

Also, I find it distracting to see cars with lights on in the daytime. I suppose if all cars did it, and I got used to it, the distraction factor would go away, but I personally have no trouble seeing other cars in the daylight (and even in early dawn or dusk conditions), so I really can't see any reason to do this.

I am sure someone will come along with a report about how it reduces accidents because of increased visibility.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-17-2005, 09:16 AM:
 
Here's a page on how to disable daytime running lights: http://www.lightsout.org/disable.html

I haven't figured out why car manufacturers would want to force this "feature" on car buyers. Do they make money off lightbulb sales?

This morning, I turned on the daytime running lights and tried the parking brake trick; it didn't work on my car, though switching to "parking lights" mode did turn off the headlights (but, of course, turned on the parking lights). Your mileage may vary. Another option for temporarily disabling DRLs would be to remove the fuse for the headlights.
 

---

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 06-17-2005, 09:56 AM:
 
If I'm not mistaken, on the full-sized GM & Chevy trucks, repeatidly pressing the "dome light switch" will over-ride the daytime running light feature.

I think we discussed this on the UDITOA disicussion board once, or it may have been mentioned on the Yahoo Drive-In discussion group.
 

---

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 06-17-2005, 11:52 AM:
 
I tried the dome override switch this morning but it didn't work. I tried every variation of lights on, lights off, pushing button repeatedly, holding button down and nothing worked.
 

---

Posted by Jason Miller (Member # 2341) on 06-17-2005, 12:05 PM:
 
use a hammer.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-17-2005, 01:06 PM:
 

 

---

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 06-17-2005, 01:12 PM:
 
Joshua, Use the parking brake trick. I have customers apply the parking brake, shut their vehicle off, and turn it on again.98% of the time it works like a charm
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-17-2005, 01:50 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

...Joe Don Baker

---

The only problem is, Joe Don Baker isn't a very convincing tough guy. He comes off like a wuss. I could never figure out how he got that part.
 

---

Posted by David L Parlier (Member # 1944) on 06-17-2005, 02:03 PM:
 
I decided to check with my brother on this topic since he is a ASE Master Tech working for GM. This is what I found out.

- There is no override for the running lights (pushing your dome light three times) for the 1999 models. This only works for 2000 models and newer and usually has to be done each time you start the vehicle.

- To disable the running lights you can; push the parking brake to the first notch or the notch that disables the DRLs (this should only be done for short distances), bypass the switch at the parking brake, or purchase a after market DRL override kit for your particular vehicle from most after market companies.

- Why DRLs? He was told that GM went to the DRL on all vehicles because it was a cost cutting move. Since all new vehicles sold in Canada must have DRLs it is cheaper to have them on all GM vehicles.

- In the U.S. you can order new GM vehicles without the DRL if you specially request it, but it will cost you extra.
 

---

Posted by Chris Mosel (Member # 1451) on 06-17-2005, 02:51 PM:
 
Pellet gun from the booth
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-17-2005, 03:15 PM:
 

quote: Tim Reed

---

The only problem is, Joe Don Baker isn't a very convincing tough guy. He comes off like a wuss. I could never figure out how he got that part.

---

 

---

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 06-17-2005, 03:31 PM:
 
I don't know what year we (Canada) got mandatory DRL. My '91 Jeep had a system where on start the headlight high beams would get 8V or so for DRL once the car moved a few metres. I put in halogen headlamps and soon learned that halogen bulbs have no tolerance for low voltage operation, so I had to remove the DRL "feature". A special module under the hood controlled it, but the headlight power and the speedo pulse signal passed through it - and the module was a box with a plug on the side, filled with black epoxy. I had to hacksaw the module apart, remove the connector, figure out what all the wires were then jumper the connector so that the headlights and speedo would work again with it connected.
I don't know if I can legally sell a vehicle with deactivated DRL.
I have motorcycles too, in Ontario any bike made since 1970 or so must have the headlight on at all times. I think that's a good idea, I want to be as visible as possible! I've rented bikes in various countries and in Asia particularly, riding with the light on gets lots of attention: pedestrians yell and gesture about the light on and drivers beep horns and flash lights plus yell and gesture too. I don't know why a headlight being on disturbs them so much.
In Japan car drivers stopped at traffic lights at night routinely shut off their headlights until the light turns green. This is a bit startling for us foreign jaywalkers (I sometimes bypass those "30 steps up - walk across - 30 steps down" pedestrian flyovers endemic to Asian cities) when 6 lanes of cars simultaneously light up and race toward you.
Note: don't try jaywalking in Japan until you're very familiar with the left side driving situation! (you UK types can ignore that advice, but be careful if you visit us)
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 06-17-2005, 03:42 PM:
 
Daytime running lights were mandated in Canada in 1989 as a safety measure to protect pedestrians around dusk.

DRLs were illegal in some US states until they were declared legal by federal law in 1992.

Technically it's not legal to sell a vehicle with stock DRLs that are disabled in Canada. Actually, it's one of the checklist items on the Ontario Drive Clean (i.e. money grab) program. A vehicle with disabled DRLs isn't supposed to pass, but very few shops would fail you for it.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 06-17-2005, 05:44 PM:
 
I was sitting in an obscenely expensive GMC pickup at the Twin Cities Auto Show this year when I noticed the headlight switch had a "don't" position (the circle slash mark). It was a snap-back type deal where if you selected it, it didn't stay there...it snapped back to the previous position.

So I asked the GM rep about it. "Well," she said, "some people just don't think they should have the daytime running lights on all the time, so this is a way to turn them off temporarily."

"Why not just use an icepick?" I asked.

She turned and walked away.

The "one tick of the brake pedal" deal works on my Beetle. I may yet order the European switch and get rid of the damn things. I go through headlight bulbs about every 20,000 miles (common in Beetles). Good thing they're cheap.

[ 06-18-2005, 10:43 AM: Message edited by: Sam Graham ]
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 06-17-2005, 07:33 PM:
 
I run my headlights all the time (day or night) even on cars that don't have DRL. Back in '95 or '96 when GM was making the switch, I read some of the before / after statistics from countries that mandated it (Canada... maybe Sweden? I forget which others) and the decrease in accidents was significant... now, whether that is directly attributed to DRL or not, who knows, but I figured it couldn't hurt. I have run with my lights on since.

BUT, I do disagree with not being able to control my lights (parking lights, or completely off). I drive a Jetta now, with DRL, and there is only an On/Off switch, no parking lights (that is only controlled via hand brake)... I find that tremendously annoying.
 

---

Posted by Oscar Neundorfer (Member # 458) on 06-17-2005, 08:31 PM:
 
I find it tremendously annoying when my computer software (or my car, if I had one where it turns the lights on for me) tries to do the thinking for me. For example, if I start a letter in Microsoft WORD, the little paperclip guy pops up and says something like, "I see you're trying to write a letter. Would you like some help with that?" What I would like is to pop the paperclip guy with a hammer, but I know that would cause major aches and pains on my monitor. (And yes, I DO know how to turn him off except for when I really want to see him.)
 

---

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 06-18-2005, 08:59 AM:
 
I agree with Oscar; I'm sick of products thinking they know what I want better than I ...

When the DRL thing first came out, I breifly thought it was a plot to sell more headlamps, reduce the visibility of people 'flashing' their lights to warn other drivers of a speed trap ahead, and for car manufacturers to save money on a lamp switch. All of this under the guise of 'safety.'

My better half has a 1995-ish Oldsmobile. The damn doors lock themselves all the time. When you put in into drive, they lock. When a passenger gets out while the engine is running, they have to unlock their door. When they close the door behind them, it locks again.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 06-18-2005, 10:10 AM:
 
The auto locking thing does tick me off. On our most recent purchase...I informed the dealer that if it was not disabled before we took possesion of the car, we would not buy the car...the feature was disabled (Saturn). Normally there is a sequence of button pushes that will change the lock/unlock mode...however, I've found they are very poorly published (like the DRL "Features")

Anyone remember the Crysler products where you had to hold the door open button on the outside to lock your car without the key? This was to prevent you from locking your keys in the car. The problem is...out of habit you would push the button in every time and still lock your keys in the car.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 06-18-2005, 11:00 AM:
 

quote: Jeremy Jorgenson

---

I run my headlights all the time (day or night) even on cars that don't have DRL. Back in '95 or '96 when GM was making the switch, I read some of the before / after statistics from countries that mandated it (Canada... maybe Sweden? I forget which others) and the decrease in accidents was significant... now, whether that is directly attributed to DRL or not, who knows, but I figured it couldn't hurt. I have run with my lights on since.

---

quote: Jeremy Jorgenson

---

BUT, I do disagree with not being able to control my lights (parking lights, or completely off). I drive a Jetta now, with DRL, and there is only an On/Off switch, no parking lights (that is only controlled via hand brake)... I find that tremendously annoying.

---

quote: Oscar Neundorfer

---

Also, I find it distracting to see cars with lights on in the daytime. I suppose if all cars did it, and I got used to it, the distraction factor would go away, but I personally have no trouble seeing other cars in the daylight (and even in early dawn or dusk conditions), so I really can't see any reason to do this.

---

I believe the point is to be distracting. But my problem with DRLs as well as with the center brake light is that they are only obvious when the concept is new. Once people get used to them, I would venture to bet that they don't reduce accidents.
 

---

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 06-20-2005, 11:06 PM:
 
Did you guys know this one? On every GM vehicle since 1999 they have installed a computer under the drivers seat that records the last (I don't know how many) braking and take-off habits. I learned about it when some guy on the news was being sued for hitting somebody. They took out this "black box" and saw his driving habits. I believe the jury found him guilty.

I can see the benefits when you have someone driving dangerously, but where does it stop? Sure seems like we lose a little bit more freedom everyday. Next thing you know we will all be wearing swastikas and wondering where we went wrong.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-21-2005, 09:55 AM:
 
I've heard about that story.

The "black box" is the PCM (Powertrain Control Module AKA: "Engine Computer") itself and not some extra box secretly installed somewhere. It's part of the OBD II (On-Board Diagnostic) spec. that's part of most/all cars built today.

The PCM records all the data from the last 20 starts, I believe. It is supposed to use that data to keep the engine running most efficiently and to help a mechanic/technician figure out what's wrong in the event repairs are needed.

It does record data that would tell you how the car has been accellerated via a Throttle Position Sensor but I don't know if they have a brake position sensor. I imagine that information could be deduced from the other data, though.

You WANT the PCM to record this data for you.

If you are driving in heavy traffic with lots of stops and starts the computer can adjust the fuel mixture to make the engine run more efficiently. If the car has stalled recently the computer knows that there is likely to be unburned fuel in the cylinders and could momemtarily "lean" the mixture to compensate. If part of the engine/emission system is out of whack, the engine could run ineffiently or not at all. The engine computer can tell you that.

I had a car where the EGR valve stop working. (The EGR - Exhaust Gas Recirculation - recirculates some of the hot exhaust gas back to the intake manifold to improve starting in cold weather and to increase fuel burning efficiency and to reduce pollution.) The valve is supposed to remain open until the engine reaches a certain temperature. Then it momemtarily opens and closes depending on what condidions the PCM senses.

The car would run great in warm weather but it would run terribly in cold weather until the engine warmed up. I took it in to the mechanic. He hooked up the readout device and said, "Let's go for a drive." We had driven less than a mile when he said, "Looks like your EGR valve isn't working." He replaced the EGR valve actuator and the vacuum hoses that operate it and the car ran perfectly. It only took a few hours to fix. If it wasn't for that OBD system it might have taken days or weeks to figure out!

I have heard where people have been involved in accidents/traffic violations and the PCM in their cars was read out to see their driving habits but I believe none of those cases have survived because of the Fourth Amandment. (Search and Seizure.)

The theory is thus: You own the car and everything in it, incuding the PCM and all the data therein. You have a right to expect privacy inside your own car ALMOST as much as you would inside your own house. (Insofar as you drive your car in public.) Therefore, if somebody went into your car and took the data out of that computer without your permission it would be the same thing as somebody searching your house.

If somebody wanted to look at that data without your permission they would need a warrant.

Furthermore, if they were looking at the data for one reason and found OTHER information they could not use that against you unless they had a warrant beforehand.

Let's say they suspected you of kidnapping. They know you had the victim in your car and wanted to know where you had taken him. They could get a warrant to poll the engine computer to find out how far you had driven and thereby deducing likely locations where you have hidden the victim. However, if they also found out the computer says you were speeding they could not use that data to give you a speeding ticket unless that was asked for in the original warrant.

Now, the final question is: How likely are the police to go through all the time, trouble and expense to get a warrant to search your PCM, then to pay a technician to read out and interpret all that data simply to give you a speeding ticket?

Not very!
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-21-2005, 10:29 AM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

You own the car and everything in it, incuding the PCM and all the data therein. You have a right to expect privacy inside your own car ALMOST as much as you would inside your own house. (Insofar as you drive your car in public.) Therefore, if somebody went into your car and took the data out of that computer without your permission it would be the same thing as somebody searching your house.

---

True, except in cases where the car is declared a total loss. Once your insurance company sends you a check for the value of the car, they own whatever is left of the old car, including this box.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-21-2005, 10:47 AM:
 
With that I agree.

But, how much trouble is an insurance company willing to go through in order to retrieve that data? Extracting that module out of a wrecked car can't be easy. Reading the data out and interpreting it for the information you want to gain isn't cheap. I don't believe it's as simple as what happened in my story above. I'm sure it takes a trained technician to read out the data and interpret all but the simplest information.

(EGR valve isn't responding VS. throttle data over the last 20 starts.)

In cases of fraud or in cases where a person has had multiple claims I might imagine they would go through the expense of pulling that data but in ordinary circumstances I can't imagine where it would be worth it.

But then, again, 120 volts judiciously applied to the power terminals on the PCM would answer that question permanenty. Wouldn't it?
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 06-21-2005, 12:55 PM:
 
Is it just based on number of starts, or is there a "timeframe" involved too? For example, if one was worried about their "information" could they just turn on/off their vehicle 20 times? And are these ignitions or engine starts? (I don't know if my terminology is correct... like, if you pop the clutch, you aren't moving the key to the "start" position & so far as I know, you're not using the starter).
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-21-2005, 01:46 PM:
 
From what I know, there is no real-time clock inside the unit. If there was, how could it stay syncronized? You can't guarantee that the PCM will be able to get a lock on the atomic time signal from WWV, et. al., whenever it's needed. Therefore, any real-time clock could never be guaranteed accurate.

I don't recollect there being a memory inside the unit that lasts for more than the last 20 (or whatever number) starts. Newer units may have more functions than I was made aware of when I was working on the problem with my old car.

In a 1995 Dodge Neon, if you wanted to erase the PCM's memory all you had to do was disconnect the battery and leave the unit without power for 15 minutes or more. When I first had my engine trouble that was my first step... reset the PCM... so that we could prove wheter it was a problem in the engine itself or inside the PCM. (That vintage of Neon had a history of PCMs freaking out. If that happened, resetting it solved the problem temporarily.)

Sure, resetting the PCM will probably erase any data that could tell somebody whether you were speeding but you will likely have to put up with a rough-running engine until the PCM rebuilt its "database".

Even IF it was possible to easily get a read-out on whether the PCM detected that the car was speeding there would be almost no way to prove that a given driver was driving the car in an unsafe manner. They would literally have to pull the driver out from behind the steering wheel, tow the car to an auto mechanic's garage, impound the car and extract the data BEFORE the car was started up again. They would have had to get a search warrant BEFORE the fact.

By the time they went through all the time and trouble to "prove" that you were speeding it would have been much simpler to put a cop by the side of the road with a radar gun! (Or whatever speed detection device is appropriate.)

All of that assumes that the owner of the car hasn't tampered with or reset the PCM before the cops or insurance company have tried to read it out.

PS: Isn't it standard procedure for the fire department to disconnect/cut the battery cables when they respond to an auto accident? If so, then PCM data is likely to be erased before the vehicle is even towed from the scene. No?
 

---

Posted by Dieter Depypere (Member # 3184) on 06-21-2005, 01:53 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

Now, the final question is: How likely are the police to go through all the time, trouble and expense to get a warrant to search your PCM, then to pay a technician to read out and interpret all that data simply to give you a speeding ticket?

---

quote:

---

In Europe, truck drivers... have to put a round paper card into the speedometer.

---

That's a tachograph. Trucks in the US used to have those years ago. They were primarily for hours of service compliance, but some drivers used to get paid by them.

Now we only have to keep written log books, which are easily "cooked" if you know how to do it (heh-heh-heh ). Athough, a DOT (Dept. of Transportation) officer can give you a speeding ticket if your logbook shows you went, say, 120 miles in an hour and a half.

There is pending legislation which will require so-called "black boxes" be installed in every commercial vehicle, to keep track of driving time and force sleeper berth breaks. This isn't as good as it sounds, however, because it doesn't take into consideration things like being stuck in traffic, or shutting someone down 10 miles from home.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 06-24-2005, 04:18 PM:
 
A speeding ticket for going 80mph?! What kind of fascist country do you live in!
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 06-25-2005, 09:00 AM:
 
I don't think we should even HAVE traffic cops...besides how would you feel if you got a degree in Law Enforcement and they sent you out with the radar?

Louis
 

---

Posted by Dieter Depypere (Member # 3184) on 06-25-2005, 10:33 AM:
 

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

I don't think we should even HAVE traffic cops...

---

quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea

---

A speeding ticket for going 80mph?!

---

You don't know what cop harassment is until you have been a trucker!
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 06-26-2005, 09:51 AM:
 
Have driven many times in Europe (especially Holland, Germany & Austria). It is a rush to be driving 115-120 mph and be nearly blown off the road by someone who has the right-of-way in the fast lane....the lane in which I had been using to get around much slower traffic. My personal limit is 120. It would appear that others are making 160-170.

Louis
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 06-26-2005, 08:54 PM:
 
One muses that if one had a car equipped with DRL which one had "permanently disabled" and one was involved in a crash, whether the other parties insurance company could use that fact to try and avoid (or reduce) liability...?
 

---

Posted by Dieter Depypere (Member # 3184) on 06-27-2005, 03:03 AM:
 

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

It would appear that others are making 160-170.

---

quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea

---

Recommended limits of 130 km/h are everywhere

---