How Complex Modern Headlights Can Be(jalopnik.com)
jalopnik.com
How Complex Modern Headlights Can Be
https://jalopnik.com/you-have-no-idea-how-insanely-complex-modern-headlights-1840509448
149 comments
Growing up in rural England I learned to Drive at night with dipped lights. Most of the roads are single track and the thing I damned well want to know is if something is coming the other direction.
I actively control the high beams, raising and lowering in order to allow me to see what's coming and maintaining visibility on the road as appropriate. Automatics just assume you want all the light all the time bar when someone elses lights are already there.
I actively control the high beams, raising and lowering in order to allow me to see what's coming and maintaining visibility on the road as appropriate. Automatics just assume you want all the light all the time bar when someone elses lights are already there.
The lights didn't prevent or reduce that ability.
Of course they do. Your ability to see the high tips of light (not a great phrasing, can't think of a better wording) from something around the corner is predicated on it being dark up there. If your own lights are on high, then it isn't and you simply cannot distinguish as early (and this especially applies if the other driver has dipped lights).
I can’t really follow your argument. You can’t see people coming when there is more light? So in your mind visibility is worst in full daylight?
I think the parents is saying it’s harder to see an oncoming car’s headlights if the entire scene is lit more brightly.
Perhaps it's just my eyes getting older, or changes to headlight tech and/or car design is a contributing factor, but modern headlights at night seem more blinding than I ever remember them being in the past.
I'm with you, and the worst part is the color temperature.
Between brightness and this ridiculous fad of high Kelvin blue headlights, driving at night on the highways of major traffic areas is awful. It's the luminous equivalent of people who utterly ignore decibel limits of their vehicles to the detriment of pedestrian ears.
I wonder about the high Kelvin headlights causing retinal damage, there is some research I recall reading about related to blue light filters.
To think we'll all be blinder and deafer for this is quite agitating.
Between brightness and this ridiculous fad of high Kelvin blue headlights, driving at night on the highways of major traffic areas is awful. It's the luminous equivalent of people who utterly ignore decibel limits of their vehicles to the detriment of pedestrian ears.
I wonder about the high Kelvin headlights causing retinal damage, there is some research I recall reading about related to blue light filters.
To think we'll all be blinder and deafer for this is quite agitating.
What's frustrating is there's actually a very elegant solution to this problem, but it requires buy-in from all manufacturers. If you use polarized glass at 45 degrees for both headlights and windshields, you effectively cancel out the lights when sitting inside a car (it's not perfect, but they'll be incredibly dim). You could easily adjust it to be brighter (assuming everyone agrees on the standard) if people object to not being able to see oncoming headlights.
But it's meaningless unless everyone does it, and it won't work for cars already on the road.
But it's meaningless unless everyone does it, and it won't work for cars already on the road.
That won't work.
The problem with polarized glass is that, by its very nature, it's filtering out ~half the light. This is why cameras don't normally come with polarizing lenses: it'll make them perform worse in low-light situations. So you won't be able to see quite as much, with half the light blocked.
Of course, our eyes are logarithmic, so this might not be that big a deal, and it might be worth it, but you'll never get the US government safety agencies to agree to this. They already forbid anything which reduces light transmission through the windshield below the "AS400" line (the optional tint strip near the top).
They already won't allow aspheric side mirrors because those "confuse" drivers (even though cars in Europe have them).
The problem with polarized glass is that, by its very nature, it's filtering out ~half the light. This is why cameras don't normally come with polarizing lenses: it'll make them perform worse in low-light situations. So you won't be able to see quite as much, with half the light blocked.
Of course, our eyes are logarithmic, so this might not be that big a deal, and it might be worth it, but you'll never get the US government safety agencies to agree to this. They already forbid anything which reduces light transmission through the windshield below the "AS400" line (the optional tint strip near the top).
They already won't allow aspheric side mirrors because those "confuse" drivers (even though cars in Europe have them).
> They already won't allow aspheric side mirrors because those "confuse" drivers (even though cars in Europe have them).
It is so nice to not have a blindspot larger than half a car. That leaves all attention for bikes and bicycles. I've never had a rental car in the US which did not have a blindspot the size of a small car.
It is so nice to not have a blindspot larger than half a car. That leaves all attention for bikes and bicycles. I've never had a rental car in the US which did not have a blindspot the size of a small car.
Wouldn’t that also filter out the light from your own headlights, thereby rendering them useless?
huh, I didn't spot your comment before, and didn't think of searching for the word "polarized" in the comments.
2 days after you I independently posted a similar comment but with circularly polarized light:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21852885
2 days after you I independently posted a similar comment but with circularly polarized light:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21852885
> there's actually a very elegant solution to this problem
Who are you forgetting about there?
Remember pedestrians and cyclists? They don’t have windshields so what about them?
Who are you forgetting about there?
Remember pedestrians and cyclists? They don’t have windshields so what about them?
It doesn't hurt them and it still helps drivers. I never said it was a perfect solution for everyone. It's still a net positive.
This is obviously a reach but you could design specially polarized glasses or goggles that would work for everyone if the cyclists really wanted to reduce the blinding glare. And if the cyclists don't want to wear them then they don't have to and they're in the same situation they're in now.
This is obviously a reach but you could design specially polarized glasses or goggles that would work for everyone if the cyclists really wanted to reduce the blinding glare. And if the cyclists don't want to wear them then they don't have to and they're in the same situation they're in now.
I independently posted a similar idea but with circularly polarized light 2 days later without noticing this linearly polarized light proposal:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21852885
comparatively, they wont be worse of than with original bright headlights when they dont invest in circular polarized glasses for night traffic, while if they do they would benefit. similarily apply the polarization filters to bicycle headlights.
As a cyclist I myself am fed up with bright bicycle lights of others not aimed downward enough, and even when downward there is still a lot of glare... I assume my own bicycle lights are similarily annoying for others.
As a cyclist myself I would prefer a polarization based solution, to be eventually adopted by both cars and cyclists.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21852885
comparatively, they wont be worse of than with original bright headlights when they dont invest in circular polarized glasses for night traffic, while if they do they would benefit. similarily apply the polarization filters to bicycle headlights.
As a cyclist I myself am fed up with bright bicycle lights of others not aimed downward enough, and even when downward there is still a lot of glare... I assume my own bicycle lights are similarily annoying for others.
As a cyclist myself I would prefer a polarization based solution, to be eventually adopted by both cars and cyclists.
It also doesn't work for people not in cars.
It's dangerous as hell these days when it is wet or lightly raining at night. The glare is markedly worse than the old yellowy headlights were.
It doesn't help that all pedestrians wear black Northface or Canada Goose jackets.
It doesn't help that all pedestrians wear black Northface or Canada Goose jackets.
I specifically avoid driving at night due to this. The past 2 or 3 years it has gotten especially awful. I even got new glasses because of this. Nope, just new cars having the most annoying headlights imaginable.
My own brights are lower than most of the low beams/automatic adjustment lights that I encounter.
My own brights are lower than most of the low beams/automatic adjustment lights that I encounter.
I start work before sunrise, and don’t get off until nearly sundown. In the winter months, I can’t really avoid driving in the dark.
I could take the bus but the schedule is so sparse where I’m going it would be quicker to walk (almost an hour). There’s no great options.
I could take the bus but the schedule is so sparse where I’m going it would be quicker to walk (almost an hour). There’s no great options.
it's the absolute worst. car companies are marketing all this tech like highbeams that stay on and move away from oncoming traffic like it all just works and it doesnt... and very bright leds... and more suvs than ever so if you drive a car most other vehicles headlights are higher relative to yours (hence more in your face)
The best thing to do is to stop driving. The whole idea is bad. We should be living in urban environments where we don't need to drive at all; driving is dangerous (30,000 people killed in the US every year, not to mention maimings), and an ecological disaster due to pollution and sprawl.
I cycle when I can, which is a lot but I feel a lot safer in my car and that's not just an illusion, that's born from the number of near misses with vehicles that are straying outside of their lanes and onto the bike path and/or aggressively overtaking my bike when they have to wait behind it for a few seconds until someone from the other side has passed them. It has worked so far but I always wonder how the long term numbers work in cases like these.
20-25 Km average daily every day of the week, that's only about an hours worth of cycling on a slow bike or maybe 45 minutes on a faster one. That's on the order of a few hundred hours of exposure per year. Near misses several times per month at least.
20-25 Km average daily every day of the week, that's only about an hours worth of cycling on a slow bike or maybe 45 minutes on a faster one. That's on the order of a few hundred hours of exposure per year. Near misses several times per month at least.
You are safer in a car, when you're around other cars, than on a bike. I don't I need to explain the physics of why this is obviously true.
The problem here is that there are cars around you when you're biking. If you didn't have to ride alongside cars, then cycling would be far safer, and your main worry would be things like gravel, snow, rain (anything that makes the road surface slippery), and probably pedestrians.
There's a reason that places that put bike lanes next to car traffic, with no barrier, don't get much increase in cycling, and why places with physically divided biking lanes have far lower cyclist deaths and injuries. Cars are just too dangerous to be allowed around bikes.
The fundamental problem here is the existence of cars, and the sheer dominance of cars as a transport method. It makes it almost impossible for anything else to be a viable alternative, for many different reasons including safety and sprawl (cycling isn't all that feasible if you have to ride 30 miles each way because the "city" is so sprawling).
The problem here is that there are cars around you when you're biking. If you didn't have to ride alongside cars, then cycling would be far safer, and your main worry would be things like gravel, snow, rain (anything that makes the road surface slippery), and probably pedestrians.
There's a reason that places that put bike lanes next to car traffic, with no barrier, don't get much increase in cycling, and why places with physically divided biking lanes have far lower cyclist deaths and injuries. Cars are just too dangerous to be allowed around bikes.
The fundamental problem here is the existence of cars, and the sheer dominance of cars as a transport method. It makes it almost impossible for anything else to be a viable alternative, for many different reasons including safety and sprawl (cycling isn't all that feasible if you have to ride 30 miles each way because the "city" is so sprawling).
There are also still scooters and e-bikes to contend with.
Sure, but scooters don't move very fast (slower than bikes), and e-bikes are usually limited to 28mph. So yeah, getting hit by one of those is still dangerous, but nothing like getting hit by a 6000-pound SUV. Being on any kind of moving vehicle will always have some element of danger to it: our bodies just weren't designed for traveling very fast and colliding with concrete or other hard surfaces. But the momentum carried by any kind of car is far beyond that carried by someone on a scooter or e-bike. Also, those small vehicles don't take up remotely as much space as cars, and their riders have far better visibility, plus their riders are also exposed to a high degree of risk in a collision, unlike a car driver who can easily mow down cyclists without any injury at all.
I agree, it's infuriating. I don't have a car and don't drive too often, but when I do it's mostly reasonably long distances (4-6 hours) and almost always at night because it's the only time I have. I try to drive as late (or early in the morning, if you will) as possible, to avoid as much traffic as possible, not because I'll get stuck in queues but because of the damn headlights of other cars. They're blinding!
I'm actually about to buy a truck because of how bright everyone's lights are and how low my car is (Honda Fit).
My car was in the shop the other day, and they loaned me a truck, it was amazing, I could drive at night with NO ISSUES.
My commute is pretty much a single twisty, turny back road that has no street lamps, so everyone thinks they need their brights on... So I'm constantly blinded by high-beams, then they switch to what has to be illegally bright or misaligned low-beams. In the truck though, I wasn't blinded once but people still had their high beams and way too bright low beams.
I haven't driven a truck in 8 years, but maybe its time.
My car was in the shop the other day, and they loaned me a truck, it was amazing, I could drive at night with NO ISSUES.
My commute is pretty much a single twisty, turny back road that has no street lamps, so everyone thinks they need their brights on... So I'm constantly blinded by high-beams, then they switch to what has to be illegally bright or misaligned low-beams. In the truck though, I wasn't blinded once but people still had their high beams and way too bright low beams.
I haven't driven a truck in 8 years, but maybe its time.
(As someone who drives a truck in an area much like yours)
This works, until you realize that because you're higher than everyone else, they all think YOU have your high beams on. And then you get flashed and honked at on a regular basis (at least I do). Then I actually turn on my high beams to show people what it could be like and they take theirs off.
But even then, you're still right. The worst case scenario in a truck is still nothing compared to the blinding light of a lifted F250 with upgraded HIDs when I'm in my fiesta.
This works, until you realize that because you're higher than everyone else, they all think YOU have your high beams on. And then you get flashed and honked at on a regular basis (at least I do). Then I actually turn on my high beams to show people what it could be like and they take theirs off.
But even then, you're still right. The worst case scenario in a truck is still nothing compared to the blinding light of a lifted F250 with upgraded HIDs when I'm in my fiesta.
But you are blinding them. Showing that it could be worse doesn't make it better. (You see that I'm not a fan of trucks.)
Instead of just writing it off as the perks of owning a truck, if that many people are that annoyed about your headlights maybe you should investigate the issue. The issue isn't whether you have your high/low beams on, it's whether you're blinding everyone else on the road.
As aimed from the factory, the headlights on my car were casting way too much bright light up way too high, so I just adjusted them to a slightly more downward angle.
Chances are taking your headlights even a few degrees down from the horizon would solve a lot of problems for everyone else trying to share the road with you without significantly impacting your visibility.
As aimed from the factory, the headlights on my car were casting way too much bright light up way too high, so I just adjusted them to a slightly more downward angle.
Chances are taking your headlights even a few degrees down from the horizon would solve a lot of problems for everyone else trying to share the road with you without significantly impacting your visibility.
I was thinking about some carefully-sculpted "chrome mudflaps" or something on the back of my small car, up near the window. Obviously they wouldn't do much for mud, but if they're purely passive, I think they'd still be legal. If someone's following at an appropriate distance, no issue, but if they get close enough for their lights to point at my window, they'll be eating their own glare.
Headlight tech definitely seems to be getting worse. The German automobile association (ADAC) recently did a test on dazzling/blinding LED lights: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https....
The other thing I've noticed is emergency vehicles flashing lights are getting much brighter. Sometimes flashing police lights are so intense I feel blinded.
Yeah, they definitely have with the newer LED light bars compared to the old ones with bulbs. Police in my area usually turn half of them off (to where only the very edges of the light bar are flashing, the middle lights are off) once they pull someone over or stop at an accident scene. I feel like otherwise they'd just cause more wrecks due to blindness.
Ohio's state troopers have particularly awful ones. It's noticeable any time I drive through the state.
These high intensity alternating blue and red lights have to be giving some epileptic people problems, right?
I have the same issue. My suspicion is that this is going to be analyzed as a serious safety concern at some point.
It seems that headlights got much brighter to benefit the driver behind them, without any consideration that they blind everyone else -- and also reduce the ability for peoples' eyes to adjust to dim conditions. That can't be a good trade-off.
It seems that headlights got much brighter to benefit the driver behind them, without any consideration that they blind everyone else -- and also reduce the ability for peoples' eyes to adjust to dim conditions. That can't be a good trade-off.
The color temperature was much lower in the past with tungsten lamps, and even lower with selective yellow[0]. With xenon and LED lights there's a much bigger blue component.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_yellow
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_yellow
While building my vision-based following robot, I encountered a quite funny phenomenon with its headlights.
The robot uses led strips to highlight its path when it detects that the luminosity from the camera is not enough using simple PID control loop. In normal situation, it is working as intended making the robot more robust to illuminations change.
But every time the robot crashes into an object or wall, it flashes its headlights like if it is trying to call for attention. What is happening is when it crashes the objects are usually really close to both the leds and the camera so suddenly it hide exterior light and it's very dark for the camera so the robot turns the leds on, but because the objects are so close a lot of light is reflected back and suddenly it's too bright so it turns the leds off and the cycle repeat : My "auto-exposure" control loop couldn't keep up and is no longer stable.
The robot had inadvertently acquired a very crude active-light obstacle avoidance / distance sensing system. To add to the complexity of modern headlights, you can now envision that to efficiently exploit this sensor you can plug in a neural network to actively control the headlights to give itself a sense of depth perception. Add multiple robots into the mix and let them evolve a headlight communication strategy/protocol... Here was a little fun dose of complexity to tingle your light-bulb...
The robot uses led strips to highlight its path when it detects that the luminosity from the camera is not enough using simple PID control loop. In normal situation, it is working as intended making the robot more robust to illuminations change.
But every time the robot crashes into an object or wall, it flashes its headlights like if it is trying to call for attention. What is happening is when it crashes the objects are usually really close to both the leds and the camera so suddenly it hide exterior light and it's very dark for the camera so the robot turns the leds on, but because the objects are so close a lot of light is reflected back and suddenly it's too bright so it turns the leds off and the cycle repeat : My "auto-exposure" control loop couldn't keep up and is no longer stable.
The robot had inadvertently acquired a very crude active-light obstacle avoidance / distance sensing system. To add to the complexity of modern headlights, you can now envision that to efficiently exploit this sensor you can plug in a neural network to actively control the headlights to give itself a sense of depth perception. Add multiple robots into the mix and let them evolve a headlight communication strategy/protocol... Here was a little fun dose of complexity to tingle your light-bulb...
That would certainly be something, especially if we can see car pricing become something like this:
Boring sedan, MSRP $25,000, Boring sedan (with AI headlight option), MSRP $1,750,000
Boring sedan, MSRP $25,000, Boring sedan (with AI headlight option), MSRP $1,750,000
>> Lamps to be steady-burning
>...which effectively rules out dynamic-matrix light systems like Porsche uses.
Good! I'm constantly getting flashed by smart headlights and auto-leveling systems that simply don't work well. I wish we could go back to simple lights that work and don't constantly flash me every time another driver hits a bump or their smart algorithms screw up.
>...which effectively rules out dynamic-matrix light systems like Porsche uses.
Good! I'm constantly getting flashed by smart headlights and auto-leveling systems that simply don't work well. I wish we could go back to simple lights that work and don't constantly flash me every time another driver hits a bump or their smart algorithms screw up.
It probably isn't "smart" headlights that are flashing you on bumps, those are normal and perfectly "dumb" lights. The problem is that modern headlights are designed to direct much more light downwards, so that you can see the road, and less light upwards, so you don't blind oncoming drivers or waste light directing it into empty space (you need some to see vehicles and obstacles straight ahead of course, but you need more pointed downwards).
When the car hits a bump, or crests a hill, then "downwards" becomes pointed directly at oncoming traffic. If anything, quick-reacting "smart" lights would be more helpful here.
Generally, when people like you complain about this stuff, what you're really asking for is for everyone to go back to extremely low-output headlights where you couldn't see almost anything at night. I don't see how that's an improvement.
When the car hits a bump, or crests a hill, then "downwards" becomes pointed directly at oncoming traffic. If anything, quick-reacting "smart" lights would be more helpful here.
Generally, when people like you complain about this stuff, what you're really asking for is for everyone to go back to extremely low-output headlights where you couldn't see almost anything at night. I don't see how that's an improvement.
My daily driver has extremely low-output headlights (old school sealed beam headlights). They work great, my eyes adjust to them just fine, except when I'm around other drivers with modern headlights.
Implying that someone doesn't understand the what they are talking about is a little unfair. Headlight brightness is becoming a problem.
Those "smart" headlights definitely do not react correctly/fast enough to prevent blinding someone when they drive over a bump or crest a hill- which are things that are almost guaranteed to happen multiple times whenever someone goes driving. Adding the current level of smarts to a headlight does not fix the issue with brightness.
I think we've reached (or are very near) the point where a brighter headlight won't give you as much additional safety as they degrade the safety of oncoming traffic. It's cool for me to have lights that are brighter than the sun, but if oncoming traffic is blinded and hits something- maybe not me, they could be blind for several seconds after I've passed them and they hit a deer or something- then the overall effect is that my brighter headlights made the roads less safe. I have no personal incentive to get dimmer lights, but society as a whole has an incentive to find the sweet spot where lights are bright enough to drive at night and not endanger other people.
Those "smart" headlights definitely do not react correctly/fast enough to prevent blinding someone when they drive over a bump or crest a hill- which are things that are almost guaranteed to happen multiple times whenever someone goes driving. Adding the current level of smarts to a headlight does not fix the issue with brightness.
I think we've reached (or are very near) the point where a brighter headlight won't give you as much additional safety as they degrade the safety of oncoming traffic. It's cool for me to have lights that are brighter than the sun, but if oncoming traffic is blinded and hits something- maybe not me, they could be blind for several seconds after I've passed them and they hit a deer or something- then the overall effect is that my brighter headlights made the roads less safe. I have no personal incentive to get dimmer lights, but society as a whole has an incentive to find the sweet spot where lights are bright enough to drive at night and not endanger other people.
IMO it's fairly obvious the GP doesn't know what they're talking about. "Dumb" headlights will flash you on bumps and can't react. Smart headlights are at least supposed to react and might not react fast enough.
You get the same problem with old headlights as well when cresting a hill or headlights that aren't properly adjusted. Believe it or not but the difference between high and low beams is a bit more literal than it might seem. High beams are aimed a bit higher up whereas low beams aren't. On my car they're the exact same wattage, color temperature, and beam pattern. The only difference is that they're aimed higher up for longer range. If my low beams were adjusted up as far as the adjuster allows for they would be functionally identical to properly adjusted high beams.
I don't see how a "dumb" headlight would be any better when rolling over a bump.
This is so insanely true. It is the most annoying thing ever.
"Well, it's not supposed to do that..."
You don't say!
"Well, it's not supposed to do that..."
You don't say!
For sure.. it is not a great hardship to have restrictions on these systems here.
These systems are most prevalent on expensive European brands that have terrible reliability ratings.
Totally obvious when you see which cars are blinding you too usually.
These systems are most prevalent on expensive European brands that have terrible reliability ratings.
Totally obvious when you see which cars are blinding you too usually.
I got an airport transfer in a car with smart headlights a few weeks ago.
It was pretty neat - when the road was quiet it lit the road quite broadly, but when there was oncoming traffic it would deactivate the 'pixels' that could have dazzled the oncoming driver. I also got the impression it cast extra light at road signs (although maybe the route I was driven just had very well lit signs)
My country gets dark at 4pm at this time of year, so driving in rural areas involves a lot of switching between main beam and dip beam - and getting mad at oncoming drivers who don't switch early enough. So these smart headlights seem like a good thing!
It was pretty neat - when the road was quiet it lit the road quite broadly, but when there was oncoming traffic it would deactivate the 'pixels' that could have dazzled the oncoming driver. I also got the impression it cast extra light at road signs (although maybe the route I was driven just had very well lit signs)
My country gets dark at 4pm at this time of year, so driving in rural areas involves a lot of switching between main beam and dip beam - and getting mad at oncoming drivers who don't switch early enough. So these smart headlights seem like a good thing!
While I bet they work brilliantly for the driver of the car, for the oncoming traffic it's really annoying. It leaves light spots in my eyes every time I drive in the night and encounter cars with such headlights, as it doesn't deactivate those 'pixels' quick enough for me not to notice. Overall it might be an improvement, but it depends on your situation.
As for extra light at road signs, I believe I've read somewhere that newish signs have ability to reflect near ultraviolet as visible light, and this makes them extra reflective for headlights with ultraviolet range, more so then what you would expect for the given visible light that you see. Although I'm no expert in this and not sure if that actually the reason for why some signs popout so much.
As for extra light at road signs, I believe I've read somewhere that newish signs have ability to reflect near ultraviolet as visible light, and this makes them extra reflective for headlights with ultraviolet range, more so then what you would expect for the given visible light that you see. Although I'm no expert in this and not sure if that actually the reason for why some signs popout so much.
Yes, lots of modern road signs that are put in have a flourescent coating on them. [1]
[1] https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/road-safety-us/resources/road-tr...
[1] https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/road-safety-us/resources/road-tr...
Signs 'pop' because they are very effectively retro-reflective (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroreflector). The brighter headlights with a wider beam would be casting a moderate amount of light on the sign, which causes it to light up brightly in contrast with the surroundings.
The ones in the UK can be so effective that sometimes I have to switch off my full beams so I don't get blinded by the signs (and I'm not driving a new car with fancy headlights).
The ones in the UK can be so effective that sometimes I have to switch off my full beams so I don't get blinded by the signs (and I'm not driving a new car with fancy headlights).
Headlights are also slightly biased to the nearside of the car so more light is cast upon road signs and the side of the road.
The cool thing about smart headlights is that they don't have to dim on the nearside of the car when there's oncoming traffic, so you get more brightness on the side of the road. Regular headlights have to dim both lights equally.
Especially good for pedestrians and bikers which aren't detected by their shitty smart features.
And the drivers long since forgot how to actually do it manually
And the drivers long since forgot how to actually do it manually
I did know someone who didn't know that that you are supposed to dip your headlights when other people could see them. They thought all the people flashing their headlights at them were just being friendly!
Some of this stuff isn't available in the US yet, I caught this...
"Again, it’s worth mentioning that here in America, a land comprehensively crisscrossed with thousands of miles of dark back roads and a whole nation’s worth of wandering deer, this technology is bafflingly illegal."
Apparently they're working on it, here's something from last year that says "coming soon"...
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/10/nhtsa-proposes-new...
"One one hand, this proposed change should help lousy drivers from burning out your retinas on a lonesome country road. But, by the same token, you may no longer have the delicious opportunity to blast them with the brights once they’re within a few feet of your car to let them know to lower those damned high beams."
"Again, it’s worth mentioning that here in America, a land comprehensively crisscrossed with thousands of miles of dark back roads and a whole nation’s worth of wandering deer, this technology is bafflingly illegal."
Apparently they're working on it, here's something from last year that says "coming soon"...
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/10/nhtsa-proposes-new...
"One one hand, this proposed change should help lousy drivers from burning out your retinas on a lonesome country road. But, by the same token, you may no longer have the delicious opportunity to blast them with the brights once they’re within a few feet of your car to let them know to lower those damned high beams."
Despite all the innovation in the headlights themselves, it seems that a significant portion of drivers these days can’t seem to remember to turn them on. I am constantly trying to get cars in front of me on the highways near NYC to realize their lights are off at night. It’s an interesting study in UX, I think: https://www.autotrader.com/car-news/heres-why-so-many-cars-d...
I assign some blame to always-on modern gauge clusters. You couldn’t see the old-style front lit ones at night unless you turned on your headlights, so there was a sort of natural reminder.
I think between always-on/lcd gauge clusters and DRLs that's a large part of the cause, but I think there are also a lot of really simple solutions that could be explored.
Right now the only way to realize you don't have your lights on when you have DRLs is to realize that your gauge cluster is missing the notification that the headlights are on.
I'd wager simply adding an icon in the gauge cluster like an orange icon with a cross through it would solve a large portion of the issue as it would only rely on people noticing the active notification rather than the absence of another.
Right now the only way to realize you don't have your lights on when you have DRLs is to realize that your gauge cluster is missing the notification that the headlights are on.
I'd wager simply adding an icon in the gauge cluster like an orange icon with a cross through it would solve a large portion of the issue as it would only rely on people noticing the active notification rather than the absence of another.
I think it’s more a function of the street lamps that allow you to see the road without having to turn on the headlights. If people can’t see where they’re going, it’s obvious very quickly.
In a lot of northern states in the winter, one of the previous societal expectation was that you'd turn your lights on whenever it was snowing - which, around here, is pretty much constant, as is the resulting salt residue on windshields. It's not very bright either because the sun at solar noon peaks at about 20 degrees above the horizon and is behind perpetual clouds.
But that's still bright enough that a lot of automatic headlights don't turn on.
But that's still bright enough that a lot of automatic headlights don't turn on.
At least in my state, you are required by law to have your headlights on if your windshield wipers are going.
Don't most (if not all) auto headlights turn on when the wipers are on, though? So, off if just cloudy, on in snow/rain.
I know mine do turn on, even at the lowest intermittent setting. I thought I'd read somewhere that that was typical, but... maybe not?
I know mine do turn on, even at the lowest intermittent setting. I thought I'd read somewhere that that was typical, but... maybe not?
Mine don't, and my car is pretty new.
The problem is: I leave my wipers on almost all the time, rain or shine. With automatic wipers, there's little reason to turn them off, so I end up just leaving them on most of the time, and then when I get splashed by a passing vehicle going through a puddle or something, the wipers will automatically clear the windshield.
You wouldn't want the headlights to turn on all the time when wipers are on automatic mode. Now why they don't turn on for regular modes, I'm not sure, but probably consistency: if you don't turn them on for automatic mode, but you do for regular mode, then that's going to be too confusing for the driver. Maybe they should come on when the wipers are activated in any mode and stay on for a certain number of seconds (by "stay on", I mean actively clearing the windshield, not just waiting for water to appear). But this might be too unreliable in practice?
You wouldn't want the headlights to turn on all the time when wipers are on automatic mode. Now why they don't turn on for regular modes, I'm not sure, but probably consistency: if you don't turn them on for automatic mode, but you do for regular mode, then that's going to be too confusing for the driver. Maybe they should come on when the wipers are activated in any mode and stay on for a certain number of seconds (by "stay on", I mean actively clearing the windshield, not just waiting for water to appear). But this might be too unreliable in practice?
Yes, but powdery flurries are blown off by a light breeze not to mention driving at 25+ mph, so wipers don't often need to be used.
Many cars in scandinavian countries don't allow your lights to be turned off when the engine is running. I actually prefer that.
Because it’s illegal to drive with the lights off even during daytime. Which in winter might not be that light anyway.
We have a ’03 VW Golf that turns the lights on when the engine starts, but requires you to turn the knob from Off via Parking lights to On to use the high beams. But then it doesn’t warn you that the lights are on when you shut the engine off. So whenever you use the high beams you’ll probably end up running the battery down afterwards because you’re not used to having to turn the lights off manually.
Bad UX was a thing before computerized dashboards.
We have a ’03 VW Golf that turns the lights on when the engine starts, but requires you to turn the knob from Off via Parking lights to On to use the high beams. But then it doesn’t warn you that the lights are on when you shut the engine off. So whenever you use the high beams you’ll probably end up running the battery down afterwards because you’re not used to having to turn the lights off manually.
Bad UX was a thing before computerized dashboards.
Just curious, but how long have you had that car? I have an '01 Passat that has the same design where the lights come on when the engine starts. It used to beep at me if the lights we still on when I opened the door to the car. But that died a few years ago (and I have since had to get my car jumped multiple times from leaving it on so I definitely get you point). Just wondering if it was more of a "bad part" than "Bad UX"
Oh, didn’t think of that! Only had it for about 1.5 years.
I'm surprised it would run the battery down. My 2004 toyota had fully manual exterior lights, but they would shut off automatically after about 30 seconds if the car was turned off. No help for you if you forget the dome light on though
Aye, Canada requires daytime running lights. Helpful in the snow and dark and dreary winters... like right now...
Its got its own drawbacks though. DRLs don't turn on your taillights so you still get people in dusk/night/bad weather who don't turn their lights on and you cant see them easily when approaching from the rear.
I see this ALL the time. People drive around at night with their DRLs on, and never turn on their real headlights.
Usually taillights turn on automatically when dark.
This seems like one of those things where the industry (and/or regulation) has stagnated and is missing really easy, obvious wins in UX.
Why not beep at me or otherwise alert me if it's night and I'm driving with my lights off? You know there's already a light sensor in the car, and there's already a way to beep at people or show them messages (oil is low, parking brake engaged, etc.)
There's a thing that beeps at me when my gas tank gets low. And there's a thing that beeps at me when my seat belt isn't fastened. So obviously it's OK to beep at me while driving. There's even a thing that beeps at me if I accidentally leave my headlights on and might drain the battery. Which is a fine thing to warn about, but surely not as important as a safety issue like driving with headlights off.
One could say that beeping at people whose headlights are off at night is not necessary because many cars (maybe most?) already have an automatic headlight mode, so the driver can just use that and the problem is solved. But that ignores one simple fact: people aren't doing it. Watch cars drive down a road at night, and it won't take long until you see someone whose headlights are off. I'd wager a lot of the time their car has an automatic headlight mode but they don't have the switch in the right position.
As computer people know from fighting server downtime, if something is important, you monitor whether it's behaving as required, and if it isn't, you alert.
Why not beep at me or otherwise alert me if it's night and I'm driving with my lights off? You know there's already a light sensor in the car, and there's already a way to beep at people or show them messages (oil is low, parking brake engaged, etc.)
There's a thing that beeps at me when my gas tank gets low. And there's a thing that beeps at me when my seat belt isn't fastened. So obviously it's OK to beep at me while driving. There's even a thing that beeps at me if I accidentally leave my headlights on and might drain the battery. Which is a fine thing to warn about, but surely not as important as a safety issue like driving with headlights off.
One could say that beeping at people whose headlights are off at night is not necessary because many cars (maybe most?) already have an automatic headlight mode, so the driver can just use that and the problem is solved. But that ignores one simple fact: people aren't doing it. Watch cars drive down a road at night, and it won't take long until you see someone whose headlights are off. I'd wager a lot of the time their car has an automatic headlight mode but they don't have the switch in the right position.
As computer people know from fighting server downtime, if something is important, you monitor whether it's behaving as required, and if it isn't, you alert.
This is one of those things you didn't realize could be better until someone did it.
My Model 3 has everything set on auto. If the car can't see, it'll turn the lights on. If it doesn't see an incoming car, it'll turn on the high beams.
After a year of driving it as my only car, I needed a second car and got a cheap ICE clunker. Having to manage lights is a PITA and basically a failure of design.
My Model 3 has everything set on auto. If the car can't see, it'll turn the lights on. If it doesn't see an incoming car, it'll turn on the high beams.
After a year of driving it as my only car, I needed a second car and got a cheap ICE clunker. Having to manage lights is a PITA and basically a failure of design.
I had a similar experience when I got a 2018 Honda Accord. I used to rarely ever take advantage of my brights, but now they're on regularly because my car automatically determines when they can be used.
It doesn't do that great of a job though. I consistently get blinded by newer cars with automatic headlights when they are very far away due to rolling hills. The car can't see me but I sure as freaking hell can see its headlights burning straight into my fucking retinas.
I've had instances of them not detecting my smaller, older, car properly even when straight on. It's great to get blinded on a 2 lane 55mph road at night.
I've had instances of them not detecting my smaller, older, car properly even when straight on. It's great to get blinded on a 2 lane 55mph road at night.
homonculus1(2)
I’m borderline thinking the secret agenda behind daytime running lamps is actually not related to daytime at all.
Many (all?) modern cars have an auto mode for night lights but it seems to endlessly baffle people as to how they work. At some point it seems you can throw all the UX you want, some are hell bent to skip on being attentive to basic driving safety anyway.
Many (all?) modern cars have an auto mode for night lights but it seems to endlessly baffle people as to how they work. At some point it seems you can throw all the UX you want, some are hell bent to skip on being attentive to basic driving safety anyway.
Fortunately (at least where I'm living) automatic headlights are already more widespread than the fancy "matrix-lighting" headlights, for the simple reason that a light sensor on the windshield is cheaper than two state-of-the-art headlights. But, I confess, if anybody would move the switch from "Auto" to "Off" on my car, I might join the people driving without lights for some time before I would notice it...
I'm like that too. Furthermore I have a story about that: A couple months ago I found myself driving a car that didn't have automatic windshield wipers. I drove in the rain for a couple of minutes without turning them on and only realized what was happening by the time I asked myself "why can't I see anything?".
Happened to me after taking my car to inspection a couple years back. I keep lights in auto position always, but I guess they test the parking lights and other positions and afterwards left them turned off. Took me quite a while before I realized I'm driving without lights.
I have kids that like to play with switches and it has happened to me a couple of times.
This is my pet peeve. I have seen several police cars with their lights off as they leave a station near my workplace! Unbelievable.
I also see a lot of cars with brights on but no lights. I annoy the people around me by asking them the difference between brights and lights and the answers are very depressing. It seems that many people fiddle with a few buttons until they see light in front of them and then consider everything good.
I also see a lot of cars with brights on but no lights. I annoy the people around me by asking them the difference between brights and lights and the answers are very depressing. It seems that many people fiddle with a few buttons until they see light in front of them and then consider everything good.
https://www.ise.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Bainbrid...
This seems pretty relevant.
This seems pretty relevant.
I hope the bright rectangle and other dynamic features will not blind me when having this insanely complex headlights behing my back, or heading me from the left side, or... actually the stricter road regulations regarding headlights in US are not a bad thing at all.
Start counting up all the different components along with their various failure modes and you quickly realize these are not systems you want to be responsible for keeping in working order much beyond its designed lifespan.
This is one of the reasons I love my 20 year old car.
My wife's 10 year old car's headlight bulb went out. I had to remove the front bumper to get the headlight out to get to the bulb. When I opened the back of the headlight there were bits of colored plastic all over; the insulation on the dozens of wires inside had dried up, cracked, and were flaking off - probably do to the motion of the adaptive lamps, exposing the bare wires. If any of these bare wires shorted out it could easily have started a fire.
Both headlights were like this.
My wife's 10 year old car's headlight bulb went out. I had to remove the front bumper to get the headlight out to get to the bulb. When I opened the back of the headlight there were bits of colored plastic all over; the insulation on the dozens of wires inside had dried up, cracked, and were flaking off - probably do to the motion of the adaptive lamps, exposing the bare wires. If any of these bare wires shorted out it could easily have started a fire.
Both headlights were like this.
>If any of these bare wires shorted out it could easily have started a fire.
You misspelled "blown a fuse". Except for the ~1ft run from the battery to fuse box basically everything in a modern vehicle has a fuse preventing it from catching on fire.
You misspelled "blown a fuse". Except for the ~1ft run from the battery to fuse box basically everything in a modern vehicle has a fuse preventing it from catching on fire.
Its quite possible for even fused circuits to cause fires. If there is a high resistance short then it will heat up without drawing enough current to trip the fuse or breaker.
I don't know how common this is in cars, but it is quite common in household wiring. It was especially problematic with aluminum wiring used in the 70s but can happen even in copper circuits.
I don't know how common this is in cars, but it is quite common in household wiring. It was especially problematic with aluminum wiring used in the 70s but can happen even in copper circuits.
Except cars do spontaneously light on fire sometimes: https://abcnews.go.com/US/bmw-recalls-million-vehicles-fire-...
How blinding modern headlights can be.
My neighbour onthe other side of the street regularly blinds us in teh kitchen when parking in his driveway. It doesn't help that white or blue is the new default color for new headlights.
My neighbour onthe other side of the street regularly blinds us in teh kitchen when parking in his driveway. It doesn't help that white or blue is the new default color for new headlights.
Slightly off topic:
But to anyone with a new(ish) car: do you constantly get people flashing their brights at you in protest of your "modern" headlights being an order of magnitude more blinding than old headlights?
But to anyone with a new(ish) car: do you constantly get people flashing their brights at you in protest of your "modern" headlights being an order of magnitude more blinding than old headlights?
In my older car I constantly flash other people with "modern" headlights believing the high-beams to be on, when, in fact, it is the low-beams which are blinding me.
The increasingly tall front bodywork on which the headlights are located certainly isn't helping.
And, at least where I live, the need for the locals to put lift kits on trucks without some downward adjustment of their headlamps.
If you are getting flashed, hve the dealer re aim your headlights or reconsider your choice of car. People who blind other drivers should be taken off the road.
This seems so much more complex than it needs to be. Basic solutions are consistent, predictable, reliable, cheap, repairable, replaceable.
Surely there are simpler solutions to the "blinding headlights" problem?
Surely there are simpler solutions to the "blinding headlights" problem?
That was already mentioned in the article - you turn them off. Short of that, no, you’ll have to have headlights that direct themselves away from cars.
You could also have some auto-tint on windshields, or drive using some advanced heads up display instead of using your vision directly.
You could also have some auto-tint on windshields, or drive using some advanced heads up display instead of using your vision directly.
Sorry, I don't completely follow. What was mentioned? That there are no simpler solutions to blinding headlights?
The article is very positive about these complex headlights - the only negative mentioned is the price.
I, on the other hand, am quite doubtful about them. There is so much you have to get right to have them run consistently. Such a complex piece of equipment is more likely to break or go wrong in some way, or e.g. perhaps misjudge the wrong thing as being a car and so switch off at an inappropriate time. Is there a manual override, at least?
GPS that takes into account road curvature? That doesn't sound sufficiently fast and accurate.
I'll admit I am ignorant of the tech. It is entirely possible this has all been taken into account, and it works well, and the risk/benefit does work out. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be rolling it out.
My experience with complex computerised systems and software, including in cars, leads me to be distrustful. And there are innumerable instances of advanced technological systems being peddled where the good old fashioned manual way just works better. I say this not as an old Luddite, but as a relatively young software developer.
But hey, reliable software can be built, and has shown itself to be useful in many instances.
I'd need to do more investigation to come to a proper conclusion, but my first instinct is to be doubtful.
EDIT: They don't need to work perfectly. The main question is just, do they work better than humans on average and when it's important?
The article is very positive about these complex headlights - the only negative mentioned is the price.
I, on the other hand, am quite doubtful about them. There is so much you have to get right to have them run consistently. Such a complex piece of equipment is more likely to break or go wrong in some way, or e.g. perhaps misjudge the wrong thing as being a car and so switch off at an inappropriate time. Is there a manual override, at least?
GPS that takes into account road curvature? That doesn't sound sufficiently fast and accurate.
I'll admit I am ignorant of the tech. It is entirely possible this has all been taken into account, and it works well, and the risk/benefit does work out. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be rolling it out.
My experience with complex computerised systems and software, including in cars, leads me to be distrustful. And there are innumerable instances of advanced technological systems being peddled where the good old fashioned manual way just works better. I say this not as an old Luddite, but as a relatively young software developer.
But hey, reliable software can be built, and has shown itself to be useful in many instances.
I'd need to do more investigation to come to a proper conclusion, but my first instinct is to be doubtful.
EDIT: They don't need to work perfectly. The main question is just, do they work better than humans on average and when it's important?
I'd be worried about what happens to the GPS headlights when the map data gets out of date. On my car the out of date maps are now quite noticeable.
Or, say you come up on the scene of an accident where a car has gone off the road at night. You pull your car off the road to illuminate the scene of the accident with your headlights but they stubbornly refuse, turning all the way to max deflection one way or another in an attempt to point at the road.
About a month ago I came upon this exact scenario and had to use my headlights to light up the wreck. Wouldn't have been great if they weren't cooperating.
Though I'm sure (I hope) there'd be a way to disable the GPS tracking.
About a month ago I came upon this exact scenario and had to use my headlights to light up the wreck. Wouldn't have been great if they weren't cooperating.
Though I'm sure (I hope) there'd be a way to disable the GPS tracking.
These are just another “feature” to compensate for inattentive drivers, like adaptive cruise control, auto emergency brake, lane assist and so on, the problem is that the less a driver has to pay attention to, the more bored and distracted will be.
Except if a driver is performing the same task over and over then they will eventually get bored of it as well, leading to the same distracted end result.
Anyone driving a manual transmission can tell you that an automatic makes you feel bored and less “connected” to the car and road, now you don’t need even to pay attention to oncoming traffic to lower your lights or even brake. Who’s gonna pay less attention?
You're expecting drivers to be perfectly attentive 100% of the time, and never have any human failings. That's unrealistic.
More technology nobody asked for driving up the price of automobiles. We can expect the 'safety' lobby to ensure this tech is mandatory in all new vehicles, driving up the baseline price of automobiles once again.
Audi's latest headlights are essentially projectors and fast enough to run animations:
https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/19/audi-e-tron-headlight-te...
https://www.engadget.com/2019/11/19/audi-e-tron-headlight-te...
From a road user's point of view, Audi's headlights are my least favourite. In the UK, emergency vehicles use blue lights. If you see a blue light it is unambiguous and you can be sure that an emergency vehicle needs to get by. Seeing a blue flicker in the peripheral vision will therefore demand your attention. However, so many times this blue flicker turns out to be Audi headlights. I know what they are doing but whatever it is it's too clever. Cars are far too dangerous to play around with this nonsense.
Subtitle: "But, we won’t get it in the US."
It's amazing to me that carmakers can introduce features on headlights "so as not to blind oncoming drivers" -- as if they know they've been blinding us for years. It also suggests these headlights might not have the functionality to keep from blinding drivers ahead of them. My rear view mirror has a dimming switch, but my side mirrors don't.
I would avoid driving at night entirely if I could, but in the winter that's simply not feasible. What am I supposed to do when traffic blinds me? Is it legal to wear an auto-dimming welding hood behind the wheel?
It's amazing to me that carmakers can introduce features on headlights "so as not to blind oncoming drivers" -- as if they know they've been blinding us for years. It also suggests these headlights might not have the functionality to keep from blinding drivers ahead of them. My rear view mirror has a dimming switch, but my side mirrors don't.
I would avoid driving at night entirely if I could, but in the winter that's simply not feasible. What am I supposed to do when traffic blinds me? Is it legal to wear an auto-dimming welding hood behind the wheel?
Ahem. Semi truck driver here.
Enough drivers to notice leave their brights on when approaching me from behind. I think that they think I can't see the lights because I have no rear window and a big trailer.
I have six big side mirrors, three on each side, and unless you're tailgating me (a rant for another day) your lights are shining into my eyes like a police interrogation.
Dim them down, thank you very much.
Enough drivers to notice leave their brights on when approaching me from behind. I think that they think I can't see the lights because I have no rear window and a big trailer.
I have six big side mirrors, three on each side, and unless you're tailgating me (a rant for another day) your lights are shining into my eyes like a police interrogation.
Dim them down, thank you very much.
Amen. I always set my mirrors very carefully and having someone behind me with their brights on makes it next to impossible to see ahead of me.
... but this is not what they are saying. They would be blinding you with the high beams, which will always be on now, unless they wouldn't have come with the system that brings blind spots around incoming/other traffic. This is the quote from the article: "This allows for things like keeping your high beams on without blinding oncoming drivers"
I would advise you to go check an oftalmologist and not trying to be an asshole. I don't have this problem.
I would advise you to go check an oftalmologist and not trying to be an asshole. I don't have this problem.
> My rear view mirror has a dimming switch, but my side mirrors don't.
Aren't side mirrors being replaced by cameras?
Aren't side mirrors being replaced by cameras?
Instead of a piece of silvered glass which requires no power input and always works? K.I.S.S.
Keep in mind that you lose some of your ability to judge the distance with camera/screen setup due to no depth perception. There are no 3D camera+display setups that I'm aware of yet.
I understand they are in Europe, but in the US regulators demand the simple always works mirrors. This is of course subject to change as different pros/cons become known.
No, at least not in the US. It doesn't matter if cameras are better and safer, the US regulators won't allow it for decades if ever.
BMW has had auto dimming side mirrors for years in addition to the rear view mirror.
It's almost funny that it's not permitted in the US because the technology behind the headlights are from Texas Instruments.
[deleted]
Yeah, no. Not agreeing to that. Could someone please sue engadget/Verizon for GDPR violation?
Is there a reason headlights and windshields dont use the properties of circular polarized light? reflections reverse the circular polarization state.
standardize the polarization filter on windshields and headlights, and unreflected direct light (from other cars) can be filtered out, while softer diffuse single reflections (from both your own headlights and those of others lighting targets like road etc) pass through the windshield...
For cyclists and pedestrians one could make "night glasses" that do the same as the windshields... and similar bicycle headlights with circularly polarized light
standardize the polarization filter on windshields and headlights, and unreflected direct light (from other cars) can be filtered out, while softer diffuse single reflections (from both your own headlights and those of others lighting targets like road etc) pass through the windshield...
For cyclists and pedestrians one could make "night glasses" that do the same as the windshields... and similar bicycle headlights with circularly polarized light
I'm really sick of people taking simple technology that worked well and Rube Goldberging it up into complicated, non-serviceable garbage. I'm seriously considering buying a rebuilt automobile from the 80s or 90s to avoid this kind of crap - they are surprisingly cheap at auction for anything that's not super popular.
Also, I'm still baffled that the left-foot stomp pedal for switching between low and high beam settings on headlights went away in favor of yet another thing hanging off the steering wheel. Especially in automatics where you aren't using your clutch foot anyway.
Also, I'm still baffled that the left-foot stomp pedal for switching between low and high beam settings on headlights went away in favor of yet another thing hanging off the steering wheel. Especially in automatics where you aren't using your clutch foot anyway.
No wonder most headlights cost up to (or even more in some cases) $2000.
Lazerlights are freaking expensive. Well above $10k was normal a few years ago.
K.I.S.S.
Do they never learn?
Do they never learn?
I don't miss owning (maintaining) a car.
We have a ten-year-old car and the only complexity in the headlamps is a ratchet to adjust vertical and horizontal axes whilst in a garage.
More modern cars are becoming so complex so quickly that I am reluctant to embrace one even if full EV. Car reviews that state "packed full of technology" are like a warning sign to stay clear.
More modern cars are becoming so complex so quickly that I am reluctant to embrace one even if full EV. Car reviews that state "packed full of technology" are like a warning sign to stay clear.
> More modern cars are becoming so complex so quickly that I am reluctant to embrace one [snip]. Car reviews that state "packed full of technology" are like a warning sign to stay clear.
People have been saying that since that 1980s at least. Today cars are more reliable than ever, and complexity is part of how they got there.
People have been saying that since that 1980s at least. Today cars are more reliable than ever, and complexity is part of how they got there.
[deleted]
My 2006 Mazda MX-5 is super reliable and has very little modern car "technology"--the kind that requires firmware updates, Internet connectivity, phone apps, paid software upgrades, etc. I'm not claiming there isn't complexity in its design, just that the subsystems behind the driving and comfort controls are simple and reliable. The switches are physical buttons and they toggle pins on a microcontroller or make/break a relay contact. This is so much better than poking through touch panel menus.
Yeah, in 1980 they were complaining about computers on the engine. Today we complain about updates. What will we complain about in 30 years I don't know, but it will be something.
"Back in my day we didn't need no fancy Q-bits to run an engine! Deuterium these days is expensive!"
These are two different issues. A computer than maintains engine timing, airflow, fuel flow, etc can make a car much more efficient and reliable. It makes sense for that to be complex. But there's no reason things link headlights need to be complex. They should be cheap and simple. Or, at a minimum, cheap and simple options should exist in the consumer space.
There is a reason they’re complex. Being able to see where you’re going is literally the most important safety system in your car. It’s all pointless if it’s blinding the person coming at you.
I’d argue that non-luxury car makers have been dragged kicking and screaming into modernity by the NIHS which has started dinging automakers safety ratings for including substandard lights in their base cars and making you pay for modern lights.
If you haven’t driven a car with auto high beams it’s hard to explain what a difference they make.
I’d argue that non-luxury car makers have been dragged kicking and screaming into modernity by the NIHS which has started dinging automakers safety ratings for including substandard lights in their base cars and making you pay for modern lights.
If you haven’t driven a car with auto high beams it’s hard to explain what a difference they make.
This highly depends on where you live.
You may want to add some description. Links without any surrounding text are not very helpful.
What I discovered though, was "Intelligent High Beam"... which was an automatic head light mode that looked (from the driver perspective) like it used an LCD matrix over the high beam. It would fade up from the normal beam, flood the road, and then if a car was in front or approaching it would block out the parts of the scene in which those vehicles were present.
It turns out it is this: https://www.osram-continental.com/en/products/smartrix.html
It's something else to have full visibility of the sides of the road (where sheep wandered freely) and still not be blinding anyone in front or oncoming, and to not have to think about it at all. More than that, road signs were singled out and side obstacles made visible... whilst not blinding anyone.
Within a couple of days I took this fully for granted, and not a single vehicle we passed flashed their lights at us (which I'd expect if we'd blinded anyone).
Now if I buy a car I'd like lights like this.