[HN Gopher] The Headlight Brightness Wars
___________________________________________________________________
The Headlight Brightness Wars
Author : throw0101b
Score : 136 points
Date : 2024-12-17 17:43 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theringer.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theringer.com)
| unethical_ban wrote:
| This is an abdication of duty, or else an unwillingness to admit
| flawed decision-making, at NHTSA.
|
| Any time I am approached by a new vehicle going over a minor
| hill, I am blinded by their LEDs. Makers like BMW obviously
| market such blinding lights as power, awareness, etc. but it is a
| danger to everyone on the road.
|
| If you're in the middle of nowhere highway, hit the brights.
| Otherwise, these lights need regulated. I wonder if there is a
| resistance mod that could be put in to lower the brightness for
| someone who cared to.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I agree with most of what you said, but BMW lights autodim very
| aggressively because they know it's annoying as hell. I know
| because i found how to verify that's enabled, and was testing
| it just hours ago.
|
| Around here, there are geriatric drivers aplenty at certain
| times of year who drive with brights on all the time, hills or
| straightaways or anything. very annoying. including in
| daylight.
| multimoon wrote:
| I'd argue the biggest offender here is Ford/GM
|
| The German cars will at least attempt to dim the beam or auto
| turn off high beams, in Europe they'll even divert the beam
| around you but for some reason we don't allow that in the US. I
| drive a BMW as my daily and the computer makes every effort to
| not blind people.
|
| GM and Ford I just get constantly blinded by gigantic pillars
| of LEDs, regardless if I'm driving another truck or a low
| sports car.
| fiddlerwoaroof wrote:
| I think the NHTSA just approved these, so hopefully they'll
| start being more common
|
| https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-allow-adaptive-
| dr...
| jp191919 wrote:
| But they stupidly didn't follow the SAE's recommendations
| and made it harder to implement in the US by deviating from
| the standard used in the ROW.
|
| https://www.newsweek.com/nhtsa-roadblocking-headlight-
| techno...
| drdaeman wrote:
| > in Europe they'll even divert the beam around you but for
| some reason we don't allow that in the US
|
| Is this true? Moving beams away from incoming traffic
| certainly was a feature (called "Active High Beam") on Volvo
| XC90 that I rented in California a few years ago. I've no
| idea if this was a US market car, or imported from somewhere,
| but it certainly existed and worked.
| multimoon wrote:
| All of the German automakers have this feature that they
| all call something different, but yes. The current NHTSA
| regulations prevent it from being deployed in the US, as
| another commenter pointed out though it seems like the
| NHTSA finally relented and approved it so I'd expect it to
| start showing up. My car already has the hardware and it's
| a software switch to flip it on, so I imagine most other
| newer German cars are the same.
| cameldrv wrote:
| My understanding is that in the U.S. it's allowed to have
| headlights that dynamically turn on and off the high beams
| depending on whether it sees a car coming. The more
| advanced Euro version has a spatial light modulator in the
| headlight that dims the light specifically in the direction
| of the oncoming car, while leaving the high beams on for
| rest of the area in front of the car.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| > headlights that dynamically turn on and off the high
| beams depending on whether it sees a car coming
|
| A nice feature in theory, my mother-in-law's Toyota has
| this, but it doesn't work very well.
| UberFly wrote:
| It's the default startup setting in my Honda CR-V. Too
| many things in cars are being automated like this. Not
| being able to dial in a windshield wiper speed and only
| having an "Auto" option drives me crazy because it
| usually guesses wrong.
| hn_acc1 wrote:
| Tesla is the worst - their DRLs are blinding if you're off to
| the side of them in a sedan like I drive. Apparently, they're
| supposed to be USER aimed / aligned AFTER delivery, but
| pretty sure only 5% of drivers have even the faintest of
| clues about any setting in their car other than "pair phone".
|
| I'm not saying no other cars have issues, including the
| obviously misaimed 70s light-in-a-box bulbs. And don't get me
| started on the number of cars with ZERO lights, or only DRLs
| (no tail lights) at night here in the Bay Area (CA).
|
| I am constantly struggling to avoid glare at night from crazy
| lights. If I could wave my hand and fix one brand, without
| question it would be Teslas - they're systematically bad. All
| others seem like one-offs (bad maintenance, post-
| accident/replacement-misaligned, etc).
| jp191919 wrote:
| Most Tesla headlights have matrix functionality (the
| ability selectively dim areas of the headlight that would
| be aimed at another car) but this is not enabled in the US.
| ghaff wrote:
| >>And don't get me started on the number of cars with ZERO
| lights, or only DRLs (no tail lights) at night here in the
| Bay Area (CA).
|
| As sort of a personal mea culpa, shortly after I got a new
| car, I realized I had done a nighttime drive with just
| daytime running lights. I leave the lights on Auto usually
| but it's relatively easy to hit the headlight dial with a
| finger when activating the turn signal. (Or, as I think was
| the case here I had just gotten a state inspection and the
| lights were just turned off.) I'm more aware now. Something
| seemed a bit off but it was a fairly new car.
| MarkSweep wrote:
| Is there any similar campaign to have something done about loud
| vehicles?
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| That's a war thats being won by EVs.
| Aardwolf wrote:
| By using engine simulation sounds
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| Because they're too quiet?
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| There are EV's that have gotten tickets for being too loud:
| https://www.thedrive.com/news/hyundai-steps-in-to-help-
| elant...
| uxp100 wrote:
| That's a link to a standard gas vehicle being ticketed.
| glennpratt wrote:
| The Elantra N is not electric.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| Electric cars. Although that zany hwooooooooo sound they make
| is naff.
| soco wrote:
| That sound is only when they drive below 30kmh (or 20?) and
| could be actually more obvious if you ask me. Let's not
| forget this warning sound is not for the driver/owner, but
| for the people on the street.
| mattw2121 wrote:
| I am similarly irritated by loud vehicles and wonder why they
| are allowed to persist. Would this be better enforced if it
| didn't rely 100% on officer testimony? I wonder if there is a
| market for a "sound camera" that could be marketed to police
| departments. The idea would be that you point this thing at
| cars, like their radar gun, and it captures video, sound, and
| the # of decibels. Only thing I don't know is if there is a way
| to attribute particular sounds to particular objects found in
| the video. This would, potentially, give them the hard evidence
| to ticket these cases. If there is an easy way to make money
| off these, the police would be sure to enforce it.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Yes, in the Netherlands, NYC and elsewhere:
| https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a60583398/nyc-noise-camera...
| throw0101b wrote:
| > _Is there any similar campaign to have something done about
| loud vehicles?_
|
| There are already US regulations on car noise,[0] and in more
| general circumstances,[1][2] but once it's purchased it can be
| altered by the owner, and then it's often up to local
| authorities to enforce local (and state[3]) noise by-laws.
|
| [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/325.7
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_Control_Act
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_regulation
|
| [3] https://www.semasan.com/resources/exhaust-noise-laws-state
| ortusdux wrote:
| New York has implemented automated tickets for loud vehicles:
|
| https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a39105913/new-york-automat...
|
| I'd like to see a version for headlights, but the logistics
| would be tricky. It's common in my area for people to lift
| their trucks, and they rarely readjust their headlights
| afterwards.
| estebank wrote:
| Every vehicle in (most?) states have to already be checked
| regularly for things like emissions. There's no reason we
| couldn't check for improper lights as part of that.
| ortusdux wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_inspection_in_the_Uni
| t...
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| I'm all in for freedom, but this is kinda crazy.
| toast0 wrote:
| Emissions inspections are being sunset in more places. Even
| where they're alive and well, it's gone from an active
| check with a tailpipe detector and a dynamometer to just
| plugging into the ODB-II and a visual inspection for
| unauthorized emission modifications. _maybe_ a check for
| smoke in neutral when going from idle to full throttle and
| back.
|
| Americans don't want their cars inspected, so a new
| inspection criteria is unlikely. For those subject to
| mandatory safety inspections, it might already be part of
| the test.
| rascul wrote:
| Some states do check for headlight alignment.
| hn_acc1 wrote:
| I'm always amazed at how loud passenger pickup trucks are by
| default here in the US - growing up in Canada, pickup trucks
| were generally quiet / unobtrusive unless user modified. Here,
| they seem to come LOUD from the factory - probably less
| regulations, and it's cheaper to have a loud muffler and/or get
| a few more hp/lb-ft for the towing wars.
| levocardia wrote:
| And because the clientele who buy trucks generally WANT
| something that sounds loud and powerful. Not saying that's
| good or bad, just how it is.
| stonesthrowaway wrote:
| I hope so. It's a "war" that I can get behind. Nothing more
| annoying than some insecure loser revving his engine while
| driving by your house. It's both noise and air pollution.
| Should be banned outright.
| cf100clunk wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42332314
|
| (12 points, 5 comments)
| thefz wrote:
| Whover wants to oppose these kind of headlights, and SUVs, will
| have my vote.
| spydr wrote:
| Is your comment about SUVs simple because you notice this issue
| is more prevalent in taller cars or because you don't like them
| for other reasons? I myself have not noticed this correlation.
| Some of the time it's after market crap the owner didn't bother
| to adjust properly, but most of the time it's newer cars such
| as Teslas where see this issue , and the sedans are fairly low
| to the ground
| HankB99 wrote:
| With taller vehicles the headlights often start out higher
| off the ground. Even if aimed properly, that puts oncoming
| drivers in a brighter portion of the light as the distance
| closes.
| anon84873628 wrote:
| Taller cars with higher lights definitely cause more of a
| problem for other drivers, simply due to the geometry
| involved.
|
| I have a sedan, when another sedan pulls up behind me I don't
| see their lights. When a tall vehicle pulls up behind me,
| their lights shine directly through my rear window, reflect
| directly from the rearview mirror, and cause glare on my
| windshield. Incredibly frustrating.
| thefz wrote:
| Cars with a taller front end are more noticeable and I also
| hate SUVs. There's no need to move a 2000kg monster vehicle
| around, they use a lot of space and pollute a lot.
| k__ wrote:
| I always wondered if polarization could be a solution to the
| problem.
|
| Polarising headlights and adding a filter to the windshield.
| djbusby wrote:
| To all windshields?
| maxerickson wrote:
| Wouldn't the filter also end up dimming the things you are
| trying to see?
| andruby wrote:
| Yes, I think it would. Polarized light typically remains
| polarized when it reflects off a surface. (It's a complex
| interaction so not always)
| bedobi wrote:
| that's easy to fix, just make the light brighter
| estebank wrote:
| Even if this could be made to work, which it can't with
| polarization, it would still show huge disregard for anyone in
| an older vehicle or any other mode of locomotion.
| jp191919 wrote:
| The blame lies completely with the NHTSA.
|
| https://www.newsweek.com/nhtsa-roadblocking-headlight-techno...
| martijnvds wrote:
| Adaptive lighting isn't the best solution either.
|
| Here in the Netherlands there are lots of complaints from
| people on bicycles who get blinded by "adaptive" lights that
| don't adapt, or don't do so quickly enough, probably because
| they dont recognise the "profile" or shape of a bicycle.
|
| The problem is even worse when coming over a hill.
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| Americans seem to hate cyclists, so that's likely to be seen
| as a bonus!
| afiori wrote:
| this sounds like the CGP Grey video about solving traffic whose
| solution* would completely eliminate pedestrian crossings.
|
| My rule of thumb is that f a solution is extremely comfortable
| for drivers then it is likely damaging to everybody else.
|
| * basically turning all cars in a coordinating mesh network
| Avshalom wrote:
| ... or we could take the cheaper, less failure prone, simpler
| option of not using ridiculously bright, blue headlights.
| kjs3 wrote:
| And miss a chance to blame the government for something?
| Perish the thought...
| arpinum wrote:
| Link from the article demonstrates the issue:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkwjMV2of_8&t=697s .
|
| Auto companies are violating the spirit of the regs while being
| technically compliant.
| djoldman wrote:
| > Chris Trechter, a lighting-focused engineer who used to work
| for Magna International, the largest automobile parts
| manufacturer in North America, told me the company would adhere
| to 108 in making headlights for clients like General Motors but
| that the rule is "archaic." "It does not account for LEDs," he
| said, "and there are giant loopholes that allow you to throw
| basically unlimited light as long as you meet all the other
| aspects of 108."
|
| There are multiple references to this idea that you can have a
| basically unlimited brightness headlamp because the way it's
| tested is flawed. Anyone know how the testing process works?
| lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42332716
|
| It sounds like there is an area that is focused on for the test
| and they can engineer the lights to avoid putting too much
| light in that area.
| neuralRiot wrote:
| Casually newer GM vehicles are one of the worst offenders
| together with Tesla with their poorly-shaped light beaming,
| that's maybe a cosenquence of having a front end in the vehicle
| so high that the the headlights are level with the roof of
| "normal" sedans.
| jmole wrote:
| How about taillight brightness?
|
| I'm not sure if this has gotten better in recent years, but there
| are a bunch of high-end vehicles (looking at you AUDI) with
| extremely bright red LED taillights that are just painful to sit
| behind at a red light.
| alamortsubite wrote:
| Yeah, but it's not just the brightness. It's also the strobing,
| which is highly distracting and nausea inducing.
| Zak wrote:
| I'm assuming it saves $0.47 per car to use slow PWM to set
| brightness rather than a linear regulator.
| marssaxman wrote:
| Is it possible to control LED brightness with a linear
| regulator? I am surprised to hear it - when I was making
| light effects with LEDs years ago, I understood PWM to be
| the only practical mechanism, due to the strongly non-
| linear conductivity curve.
|
| But maybe it's possible, if you just want to fix your LEDs
| at a specific brightness which never changes, that you
| could find exactly the right current level...?
| kedikedi wrote:
| You can but it isn't efficient. You lose (V_in -
| V_out)*I_led Watts to heat if you use a linear regulator.
|
| You might ask why not connect them in series and get the
| voltage difference as small as possible. But the "forward
| voltages" of LEDs are highly temperature dependent and
| car battery voltage is (somewhat) engine rpm dependent
| (might swing between 12 and 13.8V between no rpm and some
| rpm. It's kept flat at 13.8V)
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| Linear regulators can do it easily, if used in a
| constant-current driver configuration. That constant can
| be variable, so regulated-current might be a better name.
|
| Your classic LM317 linear regulator can do it pretty
| easily, with a potentiometer instead of a fixed resistor
| to set the output current. Section 9.3.3[1] of the
| datasheet describes the circuit, though in practice you
| might add a couple of capacitors for stability.
|
| There are also a number of discrete-transistor circuits.
| A current mirror with a rheostat is probably the
| simplest, though not generally ideal performance.
|
| [1]https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm317.pdf?ts=1734395
| 381792...
| marssaxman wrote:
| Interesting! I have used plenty of LM317s with LEDs, but
| I never thought of using them to regulate brightness - I
| would just pick whichever resistor corresponded to the
| forward current specified in the emitter datasheet.
| Didn't realize that there was enough room on the curve to
| use current control as a meaningfully configurable
| brightness setting.
| Zak wrote:
| As a flashlight nerd and reviewer, I know a number of
| ways to control the brightness of an LED, and linear
| regulators are a fairly common one. It's important to
| note that a linear regulator can be designed to target a
| specific voltage, or a specific current. LEDs should be
| regulated with current for the reason you mentioned.
|
| One that I think would work well in cars is a fixed-
| current linear regulator like the AMC7135. There's no
| need to do anything fancy to control it; put a 7135 in
| the circuit and the LED gets 350mA. Two in parallel and
| it gets 700mA, and so on. More fancy is a linear
| regulator with variable current output.
|
| Linear regulators are a low-end option for flashlights,
| with switched-mode power supplies being preferred for
| their superior efficiency. A car has a lot more energy to
| work with and more mass with which to sink and radiate
| heat.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| Does slow PWM save money?
|
| I first noticed slow PWM in factory tail lights on
| Cadillacs somewhere around the turn of the century. I
| pointed it out to my dad one night when we were out for a
| walk, and told him how to see it on a car that was
| disappearing down the road.
|
| It took a few seconds for him to understand and to observe
| it himself, and then he said "I can accept that you're
| annoyed by that, but maybe they just build them that way
| because they think it looks cool."
|
| Ever since that night, I have always assumed that slow PWM
| was used as a deliberate visual effect: After all, General
| Motors isn't really trying to squeeze a few pennies out of
| a new Cadillac [that's what Chevrolet is for!].
|
| (I also think it's a dick move on the manufacturer's part,
| whether it is to save forty-seven cents, or if it is to
| look cool, or even if it is both.)
| Zak wrote:
| This prompted me to go look for a better answer, and I
| found a good candidate: pulsed current at a relative low
| frequency (~60hZ) allows higher perceived brightness from
| smaller/cheaper LEDs. From my perspective, it is
| undesirable to increase the brightness of car taillights
| relative to what was typical with incandescent bulbs or
| to make them flicker.
|
| https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/164078/wh
| y-i...
| neuralRiot wrote:
| The PWM function is built-in into the electronic switches
| that drive the light outputs, so you can programmatically
| control the brightness, it also accepts different
| switching frequencies so it's just a matter of increasing
| the frequency for the "strobe effect" to be unnoticeable.
| The advantage of these switches over analog are several,
| including output diagnostic and lower power dissipation.
| Zak wrote:
| Keeping in mind that it's on a moving vehicle, and road
| users often pan their eyes around rapidly, the frequency
| would need to be higher than for many other situations.
|
| Or they could use a variable linear regulator with no
| flickering at all.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| Is a higher switching frequency problematic, somehow? Is
| there an upper bound on switching frequency that makes
| LEDs difficult or unnecessarily inefficient or something?
|
| There's nothing I'm aware of relating to the electronics
| that drive them that would place such a low bound on
| frequency that the resulting pulses would be visibly
| distinct.
|
| MOSFETs are generally good for > tens-of-KHz frequencies,
| and so are the hardware PWM channels in every-day MCUs.
| alamortsubite wrote:
| Those early Cadillac LEDs were the worst, though I've
| seen some new models from other manufacturers whose
| taillights are almost as bad.
| gruez wrote:
| >strobing
|
| I've never seen a strobing tail light. The most "strobing"
| I've seen are some brake/tail lights that flash for 1-2
| seconds right after they're turned on (to alert drivers
| better? still annoying imo).
| spaceisballer wrote:
| I know some cars have the blinking when you are applying
| sudden pressure to the brakes. To alert people behind them
| they may be stopping quickly. People use their hazards in
| some states for the same reason.
| smcameron wrote:
| Almost all LED taillights strobe, but too fast for most
| people to see the strobing due to persistence of vision.
| But if you move your eyes side to side while taillights are
| in your field of view you can catch a glimpse of the
| strobing.
| toast0 wrote:
| That blinking is usually a dealer installed add-on that can
| be hard to get removed (and usually involves modifying the
| factory wiring, thanks), generally on the high mount brake
| light (CHMSL). I personally believe these lights violate
| the law (and I think this letter supports that position
| [1], if it's still current?), but dealers gonna deal.
|
| But I think the poster is complaining about the higher
| frequency flickering that's supposed to be imperceptible...
| if you don't perceive it, that's better for you.
| Unfortunately, I regularly see it especially when moving my
| heads or eyes and find it pretty distracting. There's
| circuit design techniques to reduce the flickering, but
| saving pennies here and there adds up, so there you go.
|
| [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/20288ztv
| alamortsubite wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroboscopic_effect . See the
| "Root Causes" and "Mitigation" sections for a discussion of
| LEDs.
|
| Also: https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1789/4479/
|
| For me, it's the sudden sensation of being mashed in a
| Berlin disco. While driving!
| cbm-vic-20 wrote:
| Are these rear fog lights? They tend to be bright, and lots of
| people always drive with their fog lights on for some reason.
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| This- a lot of European cars have rear fog lights, which
| people sometimes leave on all of the time, but really should
| only be used in low visibility weather.
| sans_souse wrote:
| There are a lot of oblivious drivers operating their vehicles
| with their tow-lamps enabled, who are not towing. There's a
| button by the light cluster, for example on the Audi Quattro;
| you may wonder what it does - or maybe you thought it was a do-
| nothing button. It makes your tail lights equal to the
| brightness of your brake lamps. CEASE USE.
| teslabox wrote:
| The shift to unsafe high-blue lights is simply a matter of
| forgetting what was figured out. In the 20th century the lighting
| companies (GE, etc) had all the money in the world, and spent a
| lot on R&D. They figured out how to get the most efficient lights
| possible for their customers. The scientists figured out exactly
| how blue light causes inflammation in our eyes. There are good
| reasons why cities used orange High Pressure Sodium [HPS] Bulbs
| for street lights: HPS is very energy efficient (as good as most
| LEDs), and they emit light that is almost blue-free.
|
| Then LEDs were invented by companies that didn't have that old
| R&D. The automotive industry gradually switched to LEDs for the
| advantage of not needing to replace bulbs (but lights that fail
| are now >$1000 to replace instead of $5)
|
| Instead of putting safe low-blue LEDs on their cars (~2400K),
| auto manufacturers are using 4000K to 5000K LEDs. These have too
| much blue light.
|
| To understand modern lighting, the term "spectral power
| distribution" is quite helpful:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_power_distribution
|
| Relative Spectral Power Distribution graphs show how much of each
| color of the rainbow is in a given source of light. Incandescent
| bulbs are mostly Red-orange-yellow light with a bit of green and
| even less blue. 5000K fluorescent or LED bulbs are mostly blue
| light with just enough red orange and yellow to trick people into
| thinking the light is 'white'.
|
| I emailed Daniel Stern a few years ago and asked, essentially,
| 'why aren't auto manufacturers putting safe lights on their
| cars?' The essence of his reply was that the automotive engineers
| still know how to design safe headlights, but there were other
| considerations in play. I took this to mean that the marketing
| department told the engineers, "cars with safe headlights don't
| sell anymore, so you need to design headlights with blue-white
| LEDs." Daniel's response also helped me realize that the worst of
| the headlights on the road in 2017 were LED retrofits, where
| people bought LEDs to replace the halogen bulbs their vehicle's
| headlights were designed to use.
|
| The shift to unsafe lights started in the 80's or 90's, when
| luxury brands started putting High Intensity Discharge lights on
| their vehicles. These lights have more blue light than the old
| incandescent and halogen headlights. Headlights with more blue
| became associated with more expensive cars, even though blue
| light is terrible for humans at night.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_discharge_lamp
|
| Daniel has a webpage about how France used to require yellow
| headlights:
| https://www.danielsternlighting.com/tech/lights/light_color/...
|
| The rest of Europe didn't require yellow headlights, and there
| was a problem of having to put cadmium in the glass, so France
| got rid of their requirement.
|
| I submitted an AskHN a few years ago, but it didn't get much
| traction: _Ask HN: What prevents the automotive industry from
| using safe LEDs?_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27334405
|
| In 2020 I sat down to think about why blue light at night is so
| terrible, and sort of figured it out.
| codethief wrote:
| Last year I did a little roadtrip along the West Coast and
| through parts of Nevada and one thing that boggled my European
| mind was that, at night, on ordinary roads cars coming from the
| other direction always had their high beams on and never switched
| to their low beams as we got closer to each other. Same thing
| when cars were behind me. Is switching to your low beams to avoid
| dazzling other drivers not a thing in the US?
| williamstein wrote:
| It is a thing. Your experience doesn't at all match my
| experience driving on the West Coast for the last few decades.
| lupusreal wrote:
| It's absolutely a thing. Sometimes people forget, and you can
| remind them by flashing your highbeams at them. However that's
| maybe one in fifty encounters in my experience, most people
| remember most of the time.
|
| A lesser known trick is you can flash your highbeams before
| cresting a hill or going around a blind turn to warn drivers on
| the other side. I rarely encounter other drivers who do this,
| but when I do it almost always works.
| seiferteric wrote:
| Maybe, but also I get flashed by people thinking I have my high
| beams on when I don't, so could be mistaken.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Because your headlights are too bright.
| crims0n wrote:
| Same, I drive a new model Suburban and constantly get
| flashed. I think it is the combination of the LED headlights
| and height at which they sit. I wish there was something I
| could do about it, but it isn't user adjustable.
| DiggyJohnson wrote:
| You can absolutely adjust the angle of your headlights in
| any modern vehicle. There's usually a screw somewhere
| reasonably accessible. Drop it literally like 1 degree.
| rpdillon wrote:
| I'm not an expert, but it's likely to be an alignment issue
| they could address at a shop.
| neuralRiot wrote:
| Check with your dealer, there was a recall on some GM lines
| due to a DRL not dimming at night causing excess glare.
|
| https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2022/RCLRPT-22V903-6333.PD
| F
| myself248 wrote:
| You are hurting them.
|
| Take the hint and complain LOUDLY at your dealer until they
| do something about it.
| joe_the_user wrote:
| I am currently having that experience here in Eastern Mountain
| California now that it's dark and winter.
|
| It's hard to tell really if always-on high beams are now common
| or if SUVs + superbright beams makes it seem that way,
| especially given there are a lot of hills that can make any
| car's high beams seem on.
|
| Still, I feel like "civility" here is breaking down and not
| turning off high beams may be a part of it (though I'm aware
| that feeling may be coloring my perceptions).
| jghn wrote:
| > always-on high beams are now common or if SUVs +
| superbright beams
|
| I think it's a little bit of both. I believe the latter
| started the trend, and that confusion has led other people to
| just say screw it.
| xeromal wrote:
| It is in the Southeast at least for about 90% of cases
| hn_user82179 wrote:
| Given that you said "always", I suspect they were the regular
| headlights of those cars. Which is really what the article is
| getting at. Especially because the height of cars in the US can
| be much higher than you might see in Europe (e.g. a lifted
| F-250), which point directly into the face of a driver in a
| smaller car. I hate it.
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| Those are almost certainly not the brights! You'll find that
| out real quick if you flash your brights at them, and see the
| real brights!
|
| In Europe lights have much better quality optics, that are less
| blinding to oncoming drivers at the same light output. For the
| most part, these are not US legal, and the even same European
| car models when sold in the USA have much worse lights that
| dangerously blind oncoming drivers.
|
| I have always (illegally) retrofitted my vehicles with European
| versions of the headlights, and I can see much better, and
| blind other drivers less. It is absolutely insane that having
| safe headlights is illegal in the USA.
| MisterTea wrote:
| > Is switching to your low beams to avoid dazzling other
| drivers not a thing in the US?
|
| It 100% is when I was learning to drive in the 90's. Growing up
| I remember driving up the desolate back-roads of upstate NY on
| our way to VT and my father loosing his shit when some moron
| kept their high beams on. It was rare.
|
| I bet a lot of it has to do with modern car automation where
| auto dimming and other features are expected by newer drivers
| to just work and they blissfully drive around expecting the car
| to do everything for them. Laziness rendered by convenience.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| My solution is to minimize driving at night. Harder to do in the
| winter, but still doable especially if you work from home.
| mackieem wrote:
| I used to always find it _easier_ to drive at night because
| cars would be like little Christmas lights, and the contrast
| between headlights & the darkness of night made them very easy
| to spot; now I'm blinded everywhere I go. Haven't ever
| contemplated window tints but at this point it feels like I
| either need to do that, or get a higher vehicle. Or just not
| drive at night :')
| metalman wrote:
| safety! Safety!! SAFETY !!! brighter is safer, you loose:) there
| has been another insane thing ,where the lights in schools have
| gotten impossibly bright, and school bussses have strobes on top
| that can be seen 50 miles away. Its guaranteed that there are
| saftey comitties trying to legeslate much more extream measures
| notatoad wrote:
| this is sort of tangentially related: if you're feeling like
| _every_ car on the road has overly bright headlights, get your
| eyes checked. i 've been hearing people complain about bright
| headlights, and noticed myself feeling really sensitive to it
| lately.
|
| turns out i have a slight astigmatism, and wearing glasses when
| driving at night makes other cars headlights infinitely more
| tolerable. there's still the odd vehicle that has obnoxious
| headlights, but i went from most cars being intolerable to most
| cars being totally fine.
| Melatonic wrote:
| This is also true
| pesus wrote:
| Some of us are also just stuck with naturally sensitive eyes,
| unfortunately.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| California basically sets the standards that all automakers
| follow for cars sold in the USA. If they can't sell a car in
| California that basically makes it impossible for them to make
| money.
|
| California is so fond of regulating everything I hope they take
| this on. But whether it's California, or the Feds/DOT, someone
| needs to act. Headlight brightness is out of control.
| toast0 wrote:
| California emissions used to be a thing. California light
| emissions could be too.
|
| No California Light Resources Board sticker on your headlights
| and you get a ticket. Give it at the same time as you get one
| for no front plate. Somehow cars are sold without front plate
| holders installed even though they're mandatory in California,
| too :P
|
| But yeah, I'd welcome rules in California as a first step if
| the feds can't get it together.
| rpdillon wrote:
| This problem is a result of regulation, as it's not legal to
| have steerable headlights that solve its problem like folks do
| in Europe.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| It is legal, though -- or at least, it has been legal for a
| couple of years.
|
| https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-allow-adaptive-
| dr...
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Steerable headlights seem too complicated/expensive and just
| another thing to go wrong.
|
| Just regulate the beam pattern and brightness with
| consideration given to modern LED lighting not 1980's
| incandescent bulbs.
| pxc wrote:
| I have a degenerative eye disease. As one of its features is loss
| of visual acuity, my driving days are numbered. When they come to
| an end, I'll likely have to move, as it's just not possible to
| efficiently or affordably get around in environments other than
| urban when you're blind.
|
| Another feature of my condition is extreme light sensitivity, and
| difficulties with contrast. I generally need a lot of it, but at
| the same time, bright light washes out everything around it,
| blinding me. That feature seems to be progressing more rapidly
| than the loss of acuity in my case. Consequently, the extreme
| brightness of headlights nowadays is likely to cut my night
| driving still shorter, perhaps by years.
|
| If you're not facing such a prospect yourself, it can be
| difficult to appreciate what a loss of freedom and ease it is to
| give up driving. It sucks bad.
|
| I hope these overbright headlight haters continue to gain
| traction!
| BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 wrote:
| Cataracts are commonplace in older drivers. Until the operation
| is done driving at night can get you dazzled. But if you get
| the fancy multifocal lenses, you will get halos.
| MortyWaves wrote:
| I'm in the UK and there's been an increase in the number of
| people driving with actual full blown full beam headlights on.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| I would also like to add that the dazzling lights make it
| impossible to see the tiny indicators modern cars have
| jandrese wrote:
| Can we get the same thing applied to bike headlights? At night it
| is easier to bike on the road than the bike trail because almost
| every bike headlight is in effectively high beam mode all the
| time and are powered by outrageously bright LEDs. Sometimes they
| even have an epileptic detecting strobe mode.
|
| Personally, I'm not sold on the safety benefits of blinding and
| dazzling all oncoming traffic.
| pleonasticity wrote:
| These cyclists unfortunately need to just point their headlight
| downward--included in the installation instructions for almost
| all bike headlights is the direction to point the light below
| horizontal. That is also the only difference between automotive
| high and low-beams: the angle at which they are directed.
| jandrese wrote:
| You would think that, but most bike headlights are just
| throwing as much light as possible in a 180 degree arc so the
| rider can spot drop bears and other related hazards. It is so
| rare for someone to have a light that directs the photons
| downward like an automotive headlight. When I was looking for
| a headlight my local bike shop didn't sell a single model
| that had that feature, in fact they made a big deal about
| having 180 degrees of illumination and 1000 lumen output and
| an oncoming traffic blinding strobe mode. Also, the bike shop
| stock was hilariously overpriced for what it was. $5 of
| flashlight components in a plastic case and they wanted $80.
| It felt like the entire industry was being grossly
| overcharged and underserved.
|
| I had to construct my own headlight out of a flashlight and a
| homemade deflector.
|
| For example:
|
| https://www.planetbike.com/products/beamer-700-bike-
| headligh...
| ssl-3 wrote:
| The shape of the beam is important, not just the angle of it.
| Part of what differentiates a low-beam headlamp from a high-
| beam headlamp is the shape of the beam.
|
| Bike lights, at least as-sold here in the States, seem to
| generally be built from flashlight parts. And unlike car low
| beams, flashlights project a circular beam.
|
| With a circular beam, it is really hard to illuminate the
| path ahead with any meaningful brightness without blinding
| others.
|
| A better beam pattern, ideally with sharp cutoffs, can
| illuminate a pathway and the obstacles that may be on it
| without unduly blinding others.
|
| ---
|
| I happened to buy one such light, just by chance, several
| years ago. It's a "Schwinn Intensa 100" from Wal-Mart, part
| number SW80251WM. It kind of sucks in terms of overall
| illumination and is no good for high-speed rides at night,
| but it does light up the path ahead and provides a sharp beam
| cutoff to avoid blinding others. (So actually, it's pretty
| excellent for casual riding.)
| throw0101b wrote:
| > _These cyclists unfortunately need to just point their
| headlight downward_ [...]
|
| On well-lit urban streets, you probably don't need more than
| ~500 lumens, as the road is already illuminated and the light
| is mostly about other people seeing you.
|
| Also, having it flash in a _consistent_ manner (and not some
| kind of "random" cycle) is best, as it's easier to track a
| simple on-off pattern with a deterministic frequency.
|
| (If you're riding on non-lit roads or trails, then certainly
| more lumens and further throw is useful.)
| Melatonic wrote:
| Buy bicycle lights designed to meet EU and or the proper German
| / French regulations and they will have a cut off
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| I think they've always mistakenly focused on headlight brightness
| (using wattage as a proxy), but the focus should really be on
| beam shaping and optics quality.
|
| Most cars sold in Europe have had much brighter lights than the
| same models sold in the USA since the 70s and 80s, yet by using
| better optics, they had a sharp clearly defined cutoff that
| virtually eliminates all oncoming light to other drivers, while
| lighting the road itself and the side of the road a lot more.
| Yet, these brighter and more courteous lights had been illegal in
| the USA.
|
| I have a German SUV with extremely powerful HID headlights, and
| on top of that, it is lifted- pretty awful for other drivers
| right? No! Because it has good optics with a sharp cutoff, and
| steerable headlights with tilt sensors on the suspension, and
| always keeps the headlights pointed low enough to not blind
| oncoming drivers, even when going over a bump. On top of that, it
| steers the lights into turns, and away from oncoming drivers
| around bends.
| spaceisballer wrote:
| You've nailed it. I miss my Audi with headlights that moved
| when I turned the wheel. That alone would fix a lot of the
| issues of being blinded when coming around a curve. A lot of US
| pickup trucks just have lights across the whole front end, and
| if you drive a car it's just illuminating the whole inside of
| your car and every mirror.
| michael1999 wrote:
| How is it when you pull up behind me in my hatchback at a red-
| light?
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| From the factory, the high beam cutoff would still be below
| the bottom of your windows and mirrors, so it still wouldn't
| be bright to you at all.
|
| Since I did lift my vehicle for offroad use, if your vehicle
| is unusually low and I pulled right up on your bumper it
| could still shine bright inside (but still below the rearview
| mirror level)- but I am quite aware of this, and never pull
| forward enough that the cutoff rises above the bottom of the
| car window in front of me. This is also just a good driving
| technique for me as well, because it leaves me enough room to
| escape the lane or drive around you if I need to in an
| emergency, e.g. due to a disabled vehicle, etc.
| michael1999 wrote:
| Nice. Then my only problem would be my side mirrors. They
| don't tilt or have a prism, so I'm boned there. But I can
| just move my head to the side until we get moving again.
| MisterTea wrote:
| > This is also just a good driving technique for me as
| well, because it leaves me enough room to escape the lane
| or drive around you if I need to in an emergency, e.g. due
| to a disabled vehicle, etc.
|
| We were taught this in high school drivers-ed.
| Melatonic wrote:
| It's not even that the US has bad optics in our headlights
|
| Dealers are the ones responsible for making sure headlights are
| properly aligned before being sold so that the cut off is below
| the regulated height. This is, however, not at all enforced or
| incentivised. Which means that none does it and many headlights
| are aimed too high
|
| Many people also replace standard or HID bulbs with cheap LED
| bulbs which are not designed for the original housing and that
| results in crazy high lumens spraying everywhere without a
| proper cutoff.
|
| Police mask have no incentive to ticket for any of this and the
| end result is being blinded at night constantly by either mis
| aligned headlights or cheap super bright LED bulbs.
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| That is all true, but even if properly aligned, most new cars
| in the USA have awful headlights with no sharp cutoff line at
| the top, so there is no way to point them to light the road
| well while not blinding oncoming drivers.
|
| Moreover, like I mentioned, quite a lot of European cars have
| systems to automatically align and even steer/shape the beams
| dynamically, and do not require that type of adjustment.
|
| VW's "dynamic light assist" for example, actively detects
| oncoming vehicles and dynamically reshapes the lighting
| pattern to block most of the light going directly towards
| other vehicles, while still lighting everything else.
| MisterTea wrote:
| > Police mask have no incentive to ticket for any of this
|
| You used to get pulled over for running with high beams on in
| NYC. The usual reason for doing so was to hide a broken low
| beam head lamp and hope the cops didn't notice. Nowadays you
| can do whatever TF you want around here and no one seems to
| care.
| jcrawfordor wrote:
| I think the problem with modern cars in the US is quite the
| opposite - the increasingly well-tuned optics are exacerbating
| the problem.
|
| Modern cars indeed have a very sharp, well-designed cutoff at
| the top of their beam patter. This makes correct vertical
| aiming very sensitive: aim just slightly too high and oncoming
| drivers get nearly the full output of your headlights; aim just
| a little too low and your vision range becomes noticeably
| limited. Older headlights, with much softer upper beam
| patterns, were far more forgiving.
|
| The problem is bad enough that, on my 2022, I carry an 8mm
| wrench in the glovebox so I can adjust the headlight aim as
| needed. This is particularly important because the aim is
| sensitive enough that loading or unloading the back of the car
| changes the level stance enough to put the headlights
| noticeably out of aim.
|
| Compounding this problem, it's very common for cars to have
| poorly-adjusted headlights from the factory, often too high. I
| think this is because the factory adjusts the lights for a
| combination of the rated loading and not getting complaints
| from new buyers (which is more likely when they are aimed too
| low). Additionally, at least in the US, the "correct" alignment
| of the headlights is defined by the position of the headlight
| themselves (the top cutoff should be level to the position of
| the bulb, is the simple version, although I think the more
| formal version specifies a measuring distance and slight upward
| tolerance). This means that tall vehicles like pickup trucks
| will blind oncoming drivers of shorter vehicles when properly
| adjusted---once again, this was a much more forgiving problem
| when the top of the light pattern was much softer, but has
| become extremely noticeable now that headlights emit their full
| output almost all the way to the top.
|
| I understand that auto-leveling headlights and headlights with
| a cabin height adjustment are much more common in Europe. For
| whatever reason they're rare in the US, and I think it might be
| difficult to get them to comply with US regulations which I
| understand to be somewhat archaic on this topic. Auto-leveling
| is probably the best technical solution available.
|
| How does it work on your German SUV? are the headlights aimed
| appreciably below level? Perhaps Germany uses a fixed height at
| fixed distance standard, which I think might be a better choice
| overall, but does have its downsides (allows lights on small
| cars to be aimed a lot higher).
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| It works very well- the cutoff is always below the bottom of
| the window even on small sports cars, yet it lights the road
| itself a long ways. When the back squats due to loading it
| up, hauling a trailer, or I go over a bump with the front
| wheels- the headlights always stay pointed down out of
| peoples eyes. My vehicle is 15 years old, newer German SUVs
| have dynamic beam shaping that detects cars and actively
| blocks the light in just the right spots.
|
| Related to your other comments- I think taller vehicles
| should still have the lights themselves mounted low, and
| should angle downwards somewhat, not just forwards. It should
| not be legal to build or drive a car where the cutoff is high
| enough to blind people in normal cars.
| jeffrallen wrote:
| It took thousands of words to get to alignment. That's the key.
| Switzerland has strict vehicle safety inspections, including an
| automated alignment test, and we don't have glare problems that
| I've noticed.
| norir wrote:
| The most compelling issue to me came at the end of the piece, but
| it is much deeper and harder to address: the increasing lack of
| civility and anti-collectivist tendencies in American life.
| mackieem wrote:
| I live in Michigan and my time is spent between two vastly
| different affluence levels; the richer sides have excruciatingly
| bright headlights that blind me in my non-tinted Sonata, and the
| poorer sides are riddled with the droning of modified and/or
| broken exhausts.
|
| Used to like cars at one point but nowadays I find that my only
| (okay, only _daily_) grievances in life are noise from cars &
| driving at night in rich areas, both of which have soured my
| views on cars.
| nunez wrote:
| Shitty truck lifts with improperly adjusted headlights unifies
| them both.
| g8oz wrote:
| Oh God yes please someone do something about this.
| BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 wrote:
| SAE standards are there so North American manufacturers can cheap
| out.
| joe_the_user wrote:
| I gotta say, the tone of this article offends me. They basically
| put things as "these people are complete weirdos though they
| might have a tiny spec of a point, chuckle".
|
| And "war"? You can see these a few voices in the wilderness with
| no leverage 'cause this little society presents the average
| person with no way to do anything about the many "little
| annoyances" of this society presents even when they add up to
| something nightmarish or happen to strongly affect a minority.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Isn't political leverage defined relative to the average
| person?
|
| So this seems like a tautology.
| nunez wrote:
| I'm getting Gunnar computer glasses for night time driving. It's
| designed for the same problem in a different form: ever-bright
| LED monitors.
|
| And that's the heart of the problem, really. LEDs are getting
| brighter everywhere. As thigs get brighter, our vision acclimates
| to the new brightness until it's not bright enough, which drives
| demand for brighter things, which we acclimate to, etc. ad
| nauseum.
|
| As for me, I've switched to eInk panels for reading on the
| Internet (which is most of what I do) and use a red color filter
| at night or in dark spaces. I want to save my eyes for as long as
| possible!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-12-17 23:01 UTC)