Sign in to follow this  
Enright

Fog Lamps When It's Not Foggy

Recommended Posts

I think the arguement over what is a drl and what is a fog light will just come down to what the manufacturer says it is.

As drl are becoming law, and to keep costs down, i think alot of manufacturers will simply reduce the watage in fog lights and wire them perminant ignition live as in the picture of the skoda above and call them drl.

If the owners manual says they are drl then thats what they are. I bet not one single copper will take it to court to prove other wise. The Skoda above, does it have front fog lights?? i wonder because what ever it is thats turned on now sure looks like a fog light to me.

Yes the car comes with front foglights and they are the one's lit in the picture and used as DRL's. They are SMD/LED (4 units per light) and from the two i've seen personally on the roads are the normal foglight brightness unlike the Ford S-Max for example that has the halogen foglights lit but at around 20-30% brightness. That's the reason for the thread i mentioned above in the Skoda forum as it's the first VAG car to use this method for it's LED DRL's.

Sorry for my geekyness on this subject but as i mentioned in the DRL thread on here i've come from 8 years of VAG ownership, (In fact our other car still is), where the DRL's have been commonplace for longer than other marques. :)

Cheers

Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I will openly admit i use my fog lights WHEN it is foggy. Even if the fog is not that bad its an excuse to use them, yes i think they look good on, but i dont drive around with them on when its not foggy simple. i dont get that bothered withpeople who drive round with them on when its not foggy unless they are blinding me.

As for DRL lights having to be a certain height off the ground, i am unsure beacuse i see ford c-maxs s-maxs, 911s, boxters,merc s classes and so on all having the DRL lights in or around the fog lights. in my opinion they are a waste of time some one cant see a car in broad day light really should not be on or near a road!

one last rant although i am not from a council estate myself i find that first statement about the chavs driving back to their a bit stereotypical. If you actually look i would say a good percentage of the people driving around with their foglights on are middle aged or old people who have not took the time to look at their owners manual to see what the buttons or just have not noticed the light on in the dash!

Well said mate. I totally agree with your entire post. DRL i have seen fitted just about all overthe front of cars i think theres a Citroen model out that actually has vertical DRL and are mounted above and below the bumper. I also like the Chav comment Dont know about you but when i was a boy racer and living on a council estate i would have loveda carwith fog lights!! i could afford one and neither could any of my council estate mates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DRLs that are appearing on Porches, Mecedes etc. (the LED strips down by the foglights) are known as 'euro style' hence why its mostly german cars displaying them at the moment. But they are increasing in popularity (both in the UK and Europe) and are being retro fitted by the owners of older models.

I saw someone eariler mention that DRLs will become compulsory as of 2011. This is true, however it only applies to cars that are PRODUCED this year. So you're not breaking the law by not having them on an older car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sprinter,,,, most of the plane spotters are a result of people trying to change their own bulbs. My opinion anyway cuncluded from experiance of having to refit bulbs after failing them on mot for being incorect patern or aiming high low left right. I have come across a few where people have actually tried so hard to change the bulb ,they have yanked the reflector of its mounts inside the headlight. So a car pass its test then 3 weeks after need a bulb change then be spotting planes for the next 11 months with no problem other than dazzle everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeee, I like how people seem to care the most about the things that matter the least. And then miss the bigger problems entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So from the last hour or so of posts we pretty well much decided that front fog lights dont bother anyone unless your a chav hater lol. Front fog lights are a compleate waste of time anyway and no one really is bothered if you have them on or not except people who live near council estates and think they look comman. Great!! so whos up for sorting out world peace.

Middle East !! should i sort a thread ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fil... The key phrase in some of your posts is "Properly adjusted fog lights" and I tend to agree.... The problem is the aim of the front fog light is not checked in the current MOT so if the bumper in which it is fastened has had a bit of a bump or an ebay fibreglass bumper has been fitted, then the fog lights could point anywhere and they are the ones that blind.... And get a healthy dose of full beam... Childish I know ant the recipient never gets what the moron in the Lexus, Jeep or VW van is trying to convey

Middle East? No problem..... Round them up, put them in a field and bomb the bastards..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One further point on this subject is that the new EC directive which comes into force for cars type approvedafter Feb this year actually requires that DRLs only illuminate when the ignition is on and because they are very bright to enable them to stand out in daylight, they will turn off automatically when any of the normal car lights are switched on, thus it would be impossible to confuse DRLs with Foglamps on these vehicles.

Also spotlamps/driving lamps are supposed to be wired in such a way that they only operate with main beam so these also should not be confused with foglamps so it should not really be too hard to enforce the misuse of foglamps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So my point of any badly adjusted lights then stands. Any lights of any kind what ever you want to call them,if they are badly adjusted and point upwards then they should be grounds for a prohibition notice.Simple test park car infront of anything you like,turn lights on. Measure height of lamp from ground, if light pattern is higher than lamp then get car of the road or leave it there until the suns shining.

AS an mot tester i am fully aware that fog lights are not in the mot test i am also aware the bumper isnt in the mot test either!!. As an mot tester i also know the mot isnt worth the paper its written on and if you have ever read an mot certificate it says as much on it.

Lets not just pick on fog lights. The genral feeling seems to be fog lights dont light up the road ,so how do they dazzle??. My arguement is with who ever posted that fog lights are chavy and just council estate rubish. I think i have made my point enough that fog lights dazzle no more than any other badly adjusted light on your car.

AS for DRL what do we need them for? Like some one has already posted if you cant see a car in the day light maybe you shouldnt be driving or crossing the road on foot either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont have a problem with DRLs, they can make cars stand out in dull or misty weather... Especially silver grey cars, however if they will extinguish when sidelights are swiched on then they will make the car harder to see, unless sidelights are done away with as we know them, and we have either DRLs or headlights with a provision for parking lights.... Of course as more cars are fitted with them they will lose their impact in heavy traffic as we are drowned in lights everywhere we look..

I do believe that the MOT has merit, perhaps if we were to go back in time to the days before the MOT our eyes would be opened as to how lucky we are... Granted the car only complies at the time of the test and has 12 months to degrade before another test is required but just imagine what state cars would be in if we were not required to pass minimum standards at least once a year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont have a problem with DRLs, they can make cars stand out in dull or misty weather... Especially silver grey cars, however if they will extinguish when sidelights are swiched on then they will make the car harder to see, unless sidelights are done away with as we know them, and we have either DRLs or headlights with a provision for parking lights.... Of course as more cars are fitted with them they will lose their impact in heavy traffic as we are drowned in lights everywhere we look..

I do believe that the MOT has merit, perhaps if we were to go back in time to the days before the MOT our eyes would be opened as to how lucky we are... Granted the car only complies at the time of the test and has 12 months to degrade before another test is required but just imagine what state cars would be in if we were not required to pass minimum standards at least once a year

I half agree with your point about the mot test, just that a test done properly is so easy to pass it has very little merit. the oass level is something like 25% of the cars serviceable life. I can issue a advice sheet as long as your arm of items that just pass the test. The owner of the car doesnt have to do anything about them. So 4 tyres at 1.6mm would pass the test a week laterthey be bald and no one re checks them again until next year??. Spare tyre compleatly bald,you get a puncture and put it on the car afterall its only a spare to get you home. Still bald though isnt it. spare tyre isnt in the mot test. Did you realise your bumpers are not in the mot test? your bumper could be hanging of unless it has the number plate fixed to it its not a fail. Also as were on the subject of lighting,why have lights on your car at all. Its not an mot fail!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point but a bumper hanging off is not really a major issue really... Sure it could fly off and hit someone but where do you want to draw the line? I had advanced corrosion in the area of structural importance or defective brakes in mind.... If you were to have to consider the condition of the tyres , though legal but close to the limit, where would you draw the line? driven hard enough, then a brand new set of tyres could be bald in days... It is simply a case of what you find on the day what the owner does after that is his business until he needs to visit you again... If he ignores your advisory, then he will be dissapointed on that visit.... If he didn't need to MOT the car, then those issues would never be adressed and the care would become worse...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point but a bumper hanging off is not really a major issue really... Sure it could fly off and hit someone but where do you want to draw the line? I had advanced corrosion in the area of structural importance or defective brakes in mind.... If you were to have to consider the condition of the tyres , though legal but close to the limit, where would you draw the line? driven hard enough, then a brand new set of tyres could be bald in days... It is simply a case of what you find on the day what the owner does after that is his business until he needs to visit you again... If he ignores your advisory, then he will be dissapointed on that visit.... If he didn't need to MOT the car, then those issues would never be adressed and the care would become worse...

Thats exactly the problem with the mot. I can tell the owner about a hugh list of problems, non of which he has to address.So i could tell him about his tyres that are just legal and your saying its ok for him not to do anything about it until the next test?? His car would become worse indeed, might as well not had the test in the first place. Corrosion has to be excesive not just a bit rusty. So just passing the test on corrosion could be well rotten by the next test. So whats the point in the test. I really wouldnt want to be behind a car when the bumper fell of!! Are you really not concerned about a bumper falling of a car??are you really saying its not a major issue?? bear in mind this thread is about people driving with fog lights on when its not foggy,and your saying a bumper falling of isnt a problem. As a tester its my view that the test should be done on a simular basis to Spain. If i test your car and its ok for 3 months, but after that will need work,then you get a three month certificate. Theres no need to advise stuff, simple tyre bald in 3 months ,then only getting 3 month test.If you keep your car in good condition then you should get a 12 month test. just to add vosa are toying with the idea of only having your car tested every 4 years so a just passed car with big long list would be reallly really bad 2 years later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the problem with how you would like things to be is you have no idea how the driver will drive his car... If you say that tyres will be good for 3 months and the guy goes out and burns doughnuts that same day, gets pulled by the police with a 3 month ticket, then that leaves you in an awkward position and the first thing that the driver will do is contact his blame for a claim lawyer as advertised on TV.

Yep, I'm not that concerned about bumpers. But I'm pretty sure that they would be covered by the security of the bodywork, Section6.... The MOT guidlines are just that and it is down to the discression of the individual tester as to what is safe or not in such cases... If you felt that the bumper would be dangerous or would expose sharp edges then you would be within your remit to fail the vehicle, No?

Tyres on the other hand are absolute, enough tread = Pass, not enough tread= Fail

Sadly no form of test is perfect but what we have is better than nothing where bumpers would be attached with string, tyres would look like espadrills and brake discs would be so worn that the pads would wear and slide out of the carriers causing the wheel to lock.

If we were to adopt a Spanish style test, then from what I understand, no car would or could be modified beyond factory fitted options.

I realise that this post started out about the inabillity of drivers to use their lights correctly but it does seem to have developed into a debate over the MOT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is in any dout relating to vehicle lighting laws. you can go to your local police station and they will show you the vehicle lighting book which covers all lights including fog lights, ie - if a light is between centre line bumper or below it is classed as a fog light "no matter what type of bulb you have fitted" (which can only be used in fog or falling snow) and also for those who change there bulbs to a higher or better speck there is a law that covers that to, there is a book there that covers bumpers or anything else about your vehicle, if in dout check yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a tester its my view that the test should be done on a simular basis to Spain. If i test your car and its ok for 3 months, but after that will need work,then you get a three month certificate. Theres no need to advise stuff, simple tyre bald in 3 months ,then only getting 3 month test.If you keep your car in good condition then you should get a 12 month test. just to add vosa are toying with the idea of only having your car tested every 4 years so a just passed car with big long list would be reallly really bad 2 years later

But that does have it's flaws too.... You test a vehicle that has tyres with tread as you say how do you decide what length of time you give that vehicle before testing again?? You say three months in your example... One assumes that it would be an average but you'll still always get the prat who wears them out in a week at one end of the spectrum but then the old dear who only drives 5 or 10 miles a week max at 20 or 30mph and who would easily eek another year or so out of those tyres.

Let's face it unless you have a crystal ball there's no way of saying how long a specific item on any car will last. You're only going to use an average and still not be able to safely say it will last that long as each situation is totally unique and can be affected by how the vehicle is used as well as individual manufacturing factors of the part/item itself.

It is a good idea but obviously still doesn't sort anything out definitively.

I do love how topics can morph from one subject to another..... And more often back again. :whistling:

Cheers

Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think neither of you have seen my point. If i was to say 3 months for a tyre then in 3 months the car would have to come back for another test. Under our current law the car doesnt have to come back for up to 13 months. Fair enough the owner could rip the tyres apart in 24 hours, but under my rules he would only be on the road for 3 months not 13. I knwo which i would prefer.

AS for section 6 it relates to body security to chassis. The bumpers are not conected to the chassis. You cannot elaborate on the manuel. It clearly says body to chassis. Lets face it most cars these days the bumper is nothing more than a big trim to tidy up the front and back of the car.

I stated somewhere on this thread already about "any light under the centre line of the bumper being a fog light" this was dismissed as not true. As i stated before most police dont have a clue about design and use laws which they are ment to up hold. I watched a tv show a while ago (one of the police camera action type things) a copper stoped a lad on a bike with no lights non at all. The lad riding the bike told the copper he didnt need lights as he only rode during the day. The copper held the lad until a traffic cop came and comfirmed the lad was actually right. As it was dark by this time the lad still ended up pushing his bike home!. My point is most coppers wouldnt have a clue what was a fog light and what wasnt.

Bottom line is if the manufacturer says its a fog light its a fog light the police wont argue with that. So basicly if what ever mods you do it looks OE then you probably wont have a problem.

JUst to inforce my pointon what ever the manufacturer says is right someone define "coupe" for me. Bear in mind i am the regional co ordinator for one particular model of coupe and have discussed this topic many times. That will change the thread again lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated somewhere on this thread already about "any light under the centre line of the bumper being a fog light" this was dismissed as not true.

Fog lights, as I posted earlier, must be no more than 1200mm from the ground so your statement would only hold true if the centreline of the bumper was not more than 1200mm from the ground. Also, if a car has driving lights fitted at below 1200mm then they could never be classed as foglights bearing in mind that driving lights (spotlights) should be wired in such a way that they will only work when main beam is on and never with dipped beam or "sidelights".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated somewhere on this thread already about "any light under the centre line of the bumper being a fog light" this was dismissed as not true.

Fog lights, as I posted earlier, must be no more than 1200mm from the ground so your statement would only hold true if the centreline of the bumper was not more than 1200mm from the ground. Also, if a car has driving lights fitted at below 1200mm then they could never be classed as foglights bearing in mind that driving lights (spotlights) should be wired in such a way that they will only work when main beam is on and never with dipped beam or "sidelights".

ye i read your earlier post 1200mm thats just short of 4 feet. Thats dam high!! i just popped outside with a tape measure thats nearly the height of my roof. I know my car is lowered a tad but some of the lads on here have it lower than mine they could mount fog lights on the roof now thats got to dazzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JUst to inforce my pointon what ever the manufacturer says is right someone define "coupe" for me. Bear in mind i am the regional co ordinator for one particular model of coupe and have discussed this topic many times. That will change the thread again lol

Not really sure of the relevance of you being a "regional co-ordinator for one particular model of coupe". Discuss the definition all you like but the definition is:

dictionary.com definition....

1. A closed four-wheel carriage with two seats inside and one outside.

2. also coupe (kp) A closed two-door automobile.

[French, from past participle of couper, to cut, from coup, blow. See coup.]

If manufacturers wish to call certain models "coupe's" that is not really the same as the definition of foglights as coupe is just a "model type". You could apply the same irrelevant hypothesis to various cars.....Ford Sierra...define Sierra?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JUst to inforce my pointon what ever the manufacturer says is right someone define "coupe" for me. Bear in mind i am the regional co ordinator for one particular model of coupe and have discussed this topic many times. That will change the thread again lol

Not really sure of the relevance of you being a "regional co-ordinator for one particular model of coupe". Discuss the definition all you like but the definition is:

dictionary.com definition....

1. A closed four-wheel carriage with two seats inside and one outside.

2. also coupe (kp) A closed two-door automobile.

[French, from past participle of couper, to cut, from coup, blow. See coup.]

If manufacturers wish to call certain models "coupe's" that is not really the same as the definition of foglights as coupe is just a "model type". You could apply the same irrelevant hypothesis to various cars.....Ford Sierra...define Sierra?

Sierra is a name not a model type so there no corilation. You can call any car anything you like call it Fred if you like.

Yes your definition is correct so now explain why the mazda rx8 won best coupe of the year last year when it meets non of your criteria!!!!. It certainly doesnt have a seat outside so not a coupe inder rule one. It has 4 doors so doesn tmeet rule 2. It isnt cut from any other vehicle so deosnt meet your french wording either. My relivance of running the club for the north west means i know exactly what coupe means without having to look it up in the dictionary. Son once again a carmanufacturer can say anything about his car including calling it something it isnt and even getting awards for it. Mazda call it a coupe which it clearly isnt so why not call a fog light a head light and a head light a fog light !! What they say goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sierra is a name not a model type so there no corilation. You can call any car anything you like call it Fred if you like.

Yes your definition is correct so now explain why the mazda rx8 won best coupe of the year last year when it meets non of your criteria!!!!. It certainly doesnt have a seat outside so not a coupe inder rule one. It has 4 doors so doesn tmeet rule 2. It isnt cut from any other vehicle so deosnt meet your french wording either. My relivance of running the club for the north west means i know exactly what coupe means without having to look it up in the dictionary. Son once again a carmanufacturer can say anything about his car including calling it something it isnt and even getting awards for it. Mazda call it a coupe which it clearly isnt so why not call a fog light a head light and a head light a fog light !! What they say goes.

Sierra is a model, as is is200, rx450h, XJS. Coupe is just a name used by various manufacturers to make a particular version of a car appeal to certain sectors of the buying public, whereas a foglight in the motoring sense in UK has a definition which can be used in a court of law, albeit probably almost never unfortunately.

Apologies to OP if thread has been somewhat hijacked.......I do agree with most of the original post. Maybe a new thread might be opened if it is wished to discuss matters further on anything other than the original post

Regards Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sierra is a name not a model type so there no corilation. You can call any car anything you like call it Fred if you like.

Yes your definition is correct so now explain why the mazda rx8 won best coupe of the year last year when it meets non of your criteria!!!!. It certainly doesnt have a seat outside so not a coupe inder rule one. It has 4 doors so doesn tmeet rule 2. It isnt cut from any other vehicle so deosnt meet your french wording either. My relivance of running the club for the north west means i know exactly what coupe means without having to look it up in the dictionary. Son once again a carmanufacturer can say anything about his car including calling it something it isnt and even getting awards for it. Mazda call it a coupe which it clearly isnt so why not call a fog light a head light and a head light a fog light !! What they say goes.

Sierra is a model, as is is200, rx450h, XJS. Coupe is just a name used by various manufacturers to make a particular version of a car appeal to certain sectors of the buying public, whereas a foglight in the motoring sense in UK has a definition which can be used in a court of law, albeit probably almost never unfortunately.

Apologies to OP if thread has been somewhat hijacked.......I do agree with most of the original post. Maybe a new thread might be opened if it is wished to discuss matters further on anything other than the original post

Regards Dave

Thanks Dave think with your last posts we can definatly now agree i am correct. You legal link states that a fog light can be fitted no more then 1200mm above the ground and theres nothing at all to say how bright it is or what buld it has to be or how it is to be switched on. Well i just popped outside and measured my car 1200 mm is almost the top of my windscreen ( car has been lowered a touch). So with what your link and what you state about calling it what you like, Basicly i can nail a pair of lights to just about anywhere on the front of my car and call it a fog light. And a beg to differ a coupe is a particular body style no more or less than a 4 door saloon or a hatch back is. If i went to buy a saloon and it was a hatchback i wouldnt be happy. A coupe is a chopped version of an existing model. I brought up the point to show how manufacturers can call things what ever they like including body styles. A fact which you have now re enforced for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think neither of you have seen my point. If i was to say 3 months for a tyre then in 3 months the car would have to come back for another test. Under our current law the car doesnt have to come back for up to 13 months. Fair enough the owner could rip the tyres apart in 24 hours, but under my rules he would only be on the road for 3 months not 13. I knwo which i would prefer.

Hmmm but then as per my last post the other end of the spectrum would then see old mrs Ena Sharples having to pay for four MOT tests each year as she keeps getting told her tyres are close to, but not yet, worn out and keeps getting a 3 month MOT...... Yeah she could fork out for a new set of tyres but why should she when with the use of that vehicle they could have over a years use left in them without becoming illegal.

I see the point of view for the boy racer but there'll be too many other people needlessly affected too to stop it coming in as far as i'm concerned.

Lets face it if they can't even sort out the issue of the prats on the road with no insurance and the like who hike up our insurance premiums each year then i don't think they'll manage an MOT that deals with the same chavs and their dodgy motors etc....

Cheers

Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also just found this regarding what the law says about the use of fog lights (front and rear) Just to muddy the waters a little more. :winky:

The Law:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/contents/made

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 provide

"Reg 27. No person shall use, or cause or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle on which any lamp, hazard warning signal device or warning beacon of a type specified in an item in column 2 of the Table below is used in a manner specified in that item in column 3:

Front fog lamp

( a ) Used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road.

( b ) Used so as to be lit at any time other than in conditions of seriously reduced visibility.

( c ) Used so as to be lit when a vehicle is parked.

Rear fog lamp

( a ) Used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to the driver of a following vehicle.

( b ) Used so as to be lit at any time other than in conditions of seriously reduced visibility.

( c ) Save in the case of an emergency vehicle, used so as to be lit when a vehicle is parked."

Cheers

Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this