Honda Car Forum

HPG wrote:
> And if it's an attempt to look "cool"...give it up.

how bout "normal"? that count? i dont like the fact its a power drain.
if i want the lights on, ill turn em on myself.

Dufus Systems <peon@somecompany.com.invalid> wrote in
news:Xns976CD11BFFFpeonsomecompanycomin@127.0.0.1:

> "'Curly Q. Links'" <motsco__@interbaun.com> wrote in
> news:43F40EE0.243B4BE4@interbaun.com:
>
>> Dufus Systems wrote:
>
>>> I supposed I could wire it up...
>>
>>============================
>>
>> Take a google at HAMSAR relay Daytime Running Light kits. There's a
>> few excellent web sites that feature installations on Honda S2000,
>> etc.
>>
>> 'Curly'
>
> Thanks. I'll look it up.



HAMSAR is probably the most common aftermarket DRL solution.



--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

SoCalMike wrote:

> HPG wrote:
>
>> And if it's an attempt to look "cool"...give it up.
>
>
> how bout "normal"? that count? i dont like the fact its a power drain.
> if i want the lights on, ill turn em on myself.

Oh, boy, a do it yourselfer - spare us the rugged individualism, okay?

<vbg>

SoCalMike <Mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in
newsfmdnSviU59JuWnenZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com:

> HPG wrote:
>> And if it's an attempt to look "cool"...give it up.
>
> how bout "normal"? that count? i dont like the fact its a power drain.
> if i want the lights on, ill turn em on myself.
>

I can think of a couple reasons to disable it along with reasons to keep
it.

1) Works the alternator harder, headlight are what, 50 watts each? so with
2 on you have nearly 10 amps that the alternator has to supply constantly.

2) Reduces fuel economy. The more current you draw from the alternator, the
harder it is to turn.

You know for years, honda ECU's in the US have had control of the
alternator charging circuit. You notice it at night where the head lights
will dim and brighten (like a flicker) as you're driving down the road. I
just cut the control wire so, now I have a normal alternator. Lights don't
flicker any more. So, I'm sympathetic to people who want to change their
cars to suit them.

Dufus Systems <peon@somecompany.com.invalid> wrote in
news:Xns976C5EDDD4C9Apeonsomecompanycomin@127.0.0. 1:

<snip>



What say we kill this thread right now? The original question's been
answered in both directions.

Descents into political OT are what killed alt.autos.toyota, which used to
be an excellent group. Let's not let this group die that way.


--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 14:20:06 GMT, Dufus Systems
>1) Works the alternator harder, headlight are what, 50 watts each? so with
>2 on you have nearly 10 amps that the alternator has to supply constantly.
>
>2) Reduces fuel economy. The more current you draw from the alternator, the
>harder it is to turn.
>
>You know for years, honda ECU's in the US have had control of the
>alternator charging circuit. You notice it at night where the head lights
>will dim and brighten (like a flicker) as you're driving down the road. I
>just cut the control wire so, now I have a normal alternator. Lights don't
>flicker any more. So, I'm sympathetic to people who want to change their
>cars to suit them.



Unfortunately, I'm not sympathetic and neither is my company. I'm an
insurance investigator. Whenever I'm called in to investigate an
"accident", I ALWAYS look for evidence of tampering or disabling of
any safety equipment. If the accident is judged to be your fault and
there is evidence of tampering, it no longer is a simple insurance
claim, but rather becomes a case for our legal department. Those
folks do NOT like the outcome.

HPG <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in
news:4to7v1dfqnqvohf3r6iq552q83lcdssipf@4ax.com:

>>alternator. Lights don't flicker any more. So, I'm sympathetic to
>>people who want to change their cars to suit them.
>
>
>
> Unfortunately, I'm not sympathetic and neither is my company. I'm an
> insurance investigator. Whenever I'm called in to investigate an
> "accident", I ALWAYS look for evidence of tampering or disabling of
> any safety equipment. If the accident is judged to be your fault and
> there is evidence of tampering, it no longer is a simple insurance
> claim, but rather becomes a case for our legal department. Those
> folks do NOT like the outcome.
>
>
>

Well, you know what, if they screw the car up and hurt themselves or
someone else then I'm all for blaming them. When I was in Germany back in
'81 they'd passed a law that pretty much stated, you're not required to
wear a seat belt but, your insurance doesn't have to cover you if wreck
your car without one on. I'd like to see non-nanny laws like that here.

Dufus Systems wrote:
>
> I can think of a couple reasons to disable it along with reasons to keep
> it.
>
> 1) Works the alternator harder, headlight are what, 50 watts each? so with
> 2 on you have nearly 10 amps that the alternator has to supply constantly.

Do you know how much this might shorten alternator life?
>
> 2) Reduces fuel economy. The more current you draw from the alternator, the
> harder it is to turn.

Again, do you have a quantitative measure of this impact?

I'm pretty sure driving around with a high performance sound system
blaring causes a greater draw from the alternator than DRLs and keeping
a window open has a greater impact on mpg as does driving around on
underinflated tires. In short, 1) and 2) aren't compelling reasons to
disable DRLs. From a styling standpoint GM's use of separate colored
DRL lamps is a superior implementation IMHO, but I don't hear anyone
claiming that DRLs aren't a valuable safety feature. I can point to
several two-lane roads in my State that require headlight use in order
to reduce crashes.

dimndsonmywndshld@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1140179100.570920.81480@z14g2000cwz.googlegro ups.com:

> Dufus Systems wrote:
>
> Again, do you have a quantitative measure of this impact?
>
> I'm pretty sure driving around with a high performance sound system
> blaring causes a greater draw from the alternator than DRLs and
> keeping a window open has a greater impact on mpg as does driving
> around on underinflated tires. In short, 1) and 2) aren't compelling
> reasons to disable DRLs. From a styling standpoint GM's use of
> separate colored DRL lamps is a superior implementation IMHO, but I
> don't hear anyone claiming that DRLs aren't a valuable safety feature.
> I can point to several two-lane roads in my State that require
> headlight use in order to reduce crashes.
>
>

Just to be clear, I wouldn't disable DRLS. I like that feature (if I had
it that is). I was just suggesting reasons someone might want to disable
it to defend the original poster who was being attacked as some kind of
ludite.

Do I need quantitive measurements? If you're using 100 more watts of
power from the alternator (and the engine) with the lights on versus off
then the power has to come from somewhere. It's coming from the engine
so, while you may not be able to measure the fuel economy change in a
tank or two, there's some affect. It's not magic or anything. More load
on the engine requires more fuel.

So, I'm not saying anything about how much it affects fuel economy just
that there has to be some affect even if it's so little it's only
measurable over 1000's of miles.

"TeGGeR®" wrote:

> What say we kill this thread right now? The original question's been
> answered in both directions.
>
> Descents into political OT are what killed alt.autos.toyota, which used to
> be an excellent group. Let's not let this group die that way.
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

-------------------------

Staying COMPLETELY away from the political / moral debate, it should be
noted that DRL (on many makes / models) use a tiny bit of power compared
to just 'turning on your lights'. In Canada, many DRL's just run the
HIGH BEAMS on about 40% power, leaving everything else OFF. Cheap.
Turning on your headlights runs the low beams at full power and you you
also get your dash lights, front and rear park lights, license plate
lights, and side marker lights.

In Canada, the DRL's on GM, Dodge, and Ford trucks draw NO POWER because
the bulbs burn out or the controllers fail within 6 months. :-)

The farmers don't bother to replace them and the hot shots disconnect
them intentionally, right after they install the dark tinted tail lights
and the BLUE front turn signals. :-(

'Curly'