5 ms·

> And probably take out "hi-beams" altogether. This is _complete_ nonsense. I'm going to guess that you are an American living somewhere with probably quite wi

> And probably take out "hi-beams" altogether. This is _complete_ nonsense. I'm going to guess that you are an American living somewhere with probably quite wide and straight roads. Here in the UK, high beam headlights are largely essential on a lot of dark rural/country roads for a number of reasons — uneven road surfaces, soft verges, roaming animals and pedestrians in unlit areas, sudden turns or changes of camber. When used properly, they are an important safety device and they absolutely have a place on a vehicle.

JustSomeNobody 4y ago
In the US, we have the problem with people using ultra bright lights and not aiming them correctly, so they're blinding to other drivers.
throwaway0a5e 4y ago
>This is _complete_ nonsense. I'm going to guess that you are an American living somewhere with probably quite wide and straight roads. I'd wager it's more likely he drives hazardously slow so the extra couple seconds viewing distance don't help him personally or there's always street lighting where he drives. Edit: based on his commentary elsewhere it's almost certainly the former.
- bena 4y ago
  I drive to the conditions of the road. If the road is potentially hazardous, you should slow down. How is 50mph "hazardously slow" when speed limits on these sorts of roads are around 55mph? And I only chose 50 because it is definitely within the full stopping distance.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    I'm not saying this as someone who drives particularly fast. I'm saying this as someone who drives agricultural equipment that literally can't go prevailing traffic speeds. There becomes a point where you are the hazard, not them. 50 in a 55 is probably fine but "I never feel the need to use my high beams despite living somewhere rural" (I'm paraphrasing here) raises massive flags for "grandma, maybe you need to stop driving at night" type behavior and if you don't see this then that is an ever bigger red flag.
    - bena 4y ago
      Like I already said, I picked a speed that completely falls within the stopping distance. So people couldn't claim they need it because they need to see an extra 200 feet to make up for the 25 or so in stopping distance. Also, wouldn't the opposite be true? If I feel fine driving with my lows on all the time because I can see fine, then my vision is still acceptable. Whereas if one needs 50,000 lumen ultra-high intensity high beams to travel down a well-lit boulevard, maybe those people shouldn't be driving at night.
dylan604 4y ago
Well, I'm an American that grew up in very rural (out in the sticks) part of the country. Not sure if this translates to UK/EU, but we have roads known as farm-to-market roads that are typically 2-lane (one in each direction) that are typically decent quality. In certain areas, the speed limit can be 85mph on these roads, but more typically not higher than 65mph. These are also typically not well lit if at all, so high beams are very important, but typically, drivers are definitely overdriving their headlights. These roads are usually pretty straight except for when they have to bend around what used to be someone's property before claimed for the right of way. Pedestrians are much less of a concern than say deer, cows, or other animals.

JustSomeNobody 4y ago

In the US, we have the problem with people using ultra bright lights and not aiming them correctly, so they're blinding to other drivers.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago

>This is _complete_ nonsense. I'm going to guess that you are an American living somewhere with probably quite wide and straight roads. I'd wager it's more likely he drives hazardously slow so the extra couple seconds viewing distance don't help him personally or there's always street lighting where he drives. Edit: based on his commentary elsewhere it's almost certainly the former.

bena 4y ago
I drive to the conditions of the road. If the road is potentially hazardous, you should slow down. How is 50mph "hazardously slow" when speed limits on these sorts of roads are around 55mph? And I only chose 50 because it is definitely within the full stopping distance.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  I'm not saying this as someone who drives particularly fast. I'm saying this as someone who drives agricultural equipment that literally can't go prevailing traffic speeds. There becomes a point where you are the hazard, not them. 50 in a 55 is probably fine but "I never feel the need to use my high beams despite living somewhere rural" (I'm paraphrasing here) raises massive flags for "grandma, maybe you need to stop driving at night" type behavior and if you don't see this then that is an ever bigger red flag.
  - bena 4y ago
    Like I already said, I picked a speed that completely falls within the stopping distance. So people couldn't claim they need it because they need to see an extra 200 feet to make up for the 25 or so in stopping distance. Also, wouldn't the opposite be true? If I feel fine driving with my lows on all the time because I can see fine, then my vision is still acceptable. Whereas if one needs 50,000 lumen ultra-high intensity high beams to travel down a well-lit boulevard, maybe those people shouldn't be driving at night.

dylan604 4y ago

Well, I'm an American that grew up in very rural (out in the sticks) part of the country. Not sure if this translates to UK/EU, but we have roads known as farm-to-market roads that are typically 2-lane (one in each direction) that are typically decent quality. In certain areas, the speed limit can be 85mph on these roads, but more typically not higher than 65mph. These are also typically not well lit if at all, so high beams are very important, but typically, drivers are definitely overdriving their headlights. These roads are usually pretty straight except for when they have to bend around what used to be someone's property before claimed for the right of way. Pedestrians are much less of a concern than say deer, cows, or other animals.