Fog Lamps When It's Not Foggy

[Garthy]

It DOESN'T make you look classy or like some sort of dude, it just makes you look like a t!t on the way back to his council estate...

Rather ignorant on your part don't you think? Unfortunately, there are no social restrictions on who can own a car, even a Lexus. I hope someone doesn't see me driving around in my Lexus and label me as a snob. :winky:

For my part, rear fog lights bug the hell out of me. Using them on an empty motorway in thick fog will give adequate warning to closing traffic, other than that I think their use is excessive at best, dangerous at worst.

As for the fronts, I've made a point of looking at them since this post has started and I've yet to be dazzled by any. There does seem to be a lot of people that have them on, whether they're daytime lights or not I don't know. And no, I am not one of those drivers that has my front fogs on.

Frankly, you'll dazzle more people if you have your headlight level at a higher setting (via the control in-car) than you will with your front fogs on IMO.

[fil4362]

It DOESN'T make you look classy or like some sort of dude, it just makes you look like a t!t on the way back to his council estate...

Rather ignorant on your part don't you think? Unfortunately, there are no social restrictions on who can own a car, even a Lexus. I hope someone doesn't see me driving around in my Lexus and label me as a snob. :winky:

For my part, rear fog lights bug the hell out of me. Using them on an empty motorway in thick fog will give adequate warning to closing traffic, other than that I think their use is excessive at best, dangerous at worst.

As for the fronts, I've made a point of looking at them since this post has started and I've yet to be dazzled by any. There does seem to be a lot of people that have them on, whether they're daytime lights or not I don't know. And no, I am not one of those drivers that has my front fogs on.

Frankly, you'll dazzle more people if you have your headlight level at a higher setting (via the control in-car) than you will with your front fogs on IMO.

Thank you for this post someone else sees it my way.

Just as an extra wind up seen as my comments have become nothing more than a wind up. I was in front of a golf last night. I was in my van, thsi guy dazzled me for about 2 miles. I was so annoyed that eventually i turned my rearfog lights on to show him he was dazzling me. Nothing happened it changed nothing. I even turned on the hazard warning becon on the roof still nothing i was still dazzled. Eventually i turned all the mirrors on the van so i couldnt see him no more (couldnt see anythign else behind me either. The reason for the dazzle ? Incorrectly adjusted nearside headlight. Wasnt a hid was front fogs on just a dodgey headlight. Why isnt this illegal? if a fog light is then so should this.

AS for ym comment being a wind up, my comments are my opinion backed with a little experiance from my life. Just because people dont agree it doesnt mean i am trying to wind people up. I dont trawl throught the site picking fights because i have nothing beter to do. If you check i post on very little threads, Its just when some one comes out with a comment of "looks like a T!t on the way back to your council estate" it winds ME up. so i set abotu proving the guy didnt have a point other than his own uneducated stereo typical rant. I personally come from a wealthy back ground very wealthy infact. But because of problems with my mum and dad, we ended up on a council estate. I have now worked an got myself out of there. I have brought my brothers and sisters away from the estate as well. Having spent years on the council estates i have nothing against them or the people living there. I still visit my friends on the estate and happily drive my Lexus onto the estate. Maybe it was me the guy was refering to when he mentioned going back to the council estate. Thing is mate i dont live there any more i have a six bedroom house now with indoor pool and 2 double garages. I still have nothing against council estates though. So thats my rant over now i have explained my posts. All of which by the way i still stand by

[fjcfarrar]

To be fair I've seen just as many middle-aged and old people driving around in IS200's with their fog lights on, simply because they are too arrogant to turn them off.

CONFESSION TIME When I am driving, despite trying to avoid it; I admit I sometimes do things that are careless, very stupid or annoying. It is even possible that occasionally I might exceed speed-limits (purely unintentionally you understand).

So for me it is a bad idea to make my car into a police-magnet by deliberately setting out to conspicuously (and largely pointlessly) add-to/change/use my car's equipment so as to break piddling regulations & get it noticed - giving Law the finger and multiplying the chances of being nicked for anything I do wrong. Several offences at once make police paperwork much more worthwhile and penalties more inevitable. So far, trying to keep within the Law has worked for me.

Drivers who are more perfect than me and/or whose luck is always on their side probably don't have to bother with such trifles.

[fil4362]

My old sunday school teacher and now customer was done for driving at 32 miles an hour. This guy has never even swore in his life let alone broke the law. He dives a 5 year old standard Honda civic. Just proves you dont have to stand out to get in noticed. He was handed a fine and points. He was made or given choice of a driver re training course. This guy is 72 years old and never committed a chrime in his life. If the police are having a clamp down they will get you without you having to stand out.

[dave1]

They will also need funds to buy equipment to measure the volume of an exhaust and the law will need changing to allow them to do this. The law on exhaust is/was 101Db at 3500rpm in any gear. The police would have to be able to either test your car there and then or be allowed to impound your car until such a test could be arranged.

fil, just wondering where you obtained the above figures? You should also know that several Police forces DO have equipment for roadside checking.

Which law would need changing to enable the roadside checks which are being done and can/have resulted in prosecutions?

[fil4362]

They will also need funds to buy equipment to measure the volume of an exhaust and the law will need changing to allow them to do this. The law on exhaust is/was 101Db at 3500rpm in any gear. The police would have to be able to either test your car there and then or be allowed to impound your car until such a test could be arranged.

fil, just wondering where you obtained the above figures? You should also know that several Police forces DO have equipment for roadside checking.

Which law would need changing to enable the roadside checks which are being done and can/have resulted in prosecutions?

The figures are about 3 years old. Ministry of transport figures used when type approving or single make testing vehicles. This may not be the law but its the figures used to make sure your car is quite enough to be used on the roads. It must pass this test as part of type approval all new vehicles must pass it.

Which law needs changing?? good question, my thought was police are not allowed to drive your vehicle and to carry out the test they would have to. If they drive your vehicle then find it is defected (as in fails the test) then the police would also be subject to the law, they did afterall commit the same offence for which they are catching you doing.As no one is above the law,not even the police then some law needs to be changed or introduced to allow road side testing. The above stated figures are under load conditions so merely reving the car to 3500 rpm wouldnt work for test.

[dave1]

They will also need funds to buy equipment to measure the volume of an exhaust and the law will need changing to allow them to do this. The law on exhaust is/was 101Db at 3500rpm in any gear. The police would have to be able to either test your car there and then or be allowed to impound your car until such a test could be arranged.

fil, just wondering where you obtained the above figures? You should also know that several Police forces DO have equipment for roadside checking.

Which law would need changing to enable the roadside checks which are being done and can/have resulted in prosecutions?

The figures are about 3 years old. Ministry of transport figures used when type approving or single make testing vehicles. This may not be the law but its the figures used to make sure your car is quite enough to be used on the roads. It must pass this test as part of type approval all new vehicles must pass it.

Which law needs changing?? good question, my thought was police are not allowed to drive your vehicle and to carry out the test they would have to. If they drive your vehicle then find it is defected (as in fails the test) then the police would also be subject to the law, they did afterall commit the same offence for which they are catching you doing.As no one is above the law,not even the police then some law needs to be changed or introduced to allow road side testing. The above stated figures are under load conditions so merely reving the car to 3500 rpm wouldnt work for test.

Why would the police need to drive your car to test exhaust noise? You still don't say which law would need to be changed to enable police to check exhaust noise and prosecute.......which they can already do.

CHECK

[dave1]

They will also need funds to buy equipment to measure the volume of an exhaust and the law will need changing to allow them to do this. The law on exhaust is/was 101Db at 3500rpm in any gear. The police would have to be able to either test your car there and then or be allowed to impound your car until such a test could be arranged.

fil, just wondering where you obtained the above figures? You should also know that several Police forces DO have equipment for roadside checking.

Which law would need changing to enable the roadside checks which are being done and can/have resulted in prosecutions?

The figures are about 3 years old. Ministry of transport figures used when type approving or single make testing vehicles. This may not be the law but its the figures used to make sure your car is quite enough to be used on the roads. It must pass this test as part of type approval all new vehicles must pass it.

Which law needs changing?? good question, my thought was police are not allowed to drive your vehicle and to carry out the test they would have to. If they drive your vehicle then find it is defected (as in fails the test) then the police would also be subject to the law, they did afterall commit the same offence for which they are catching you doing.As no one is above the law,not even the police then some law needs to be changed or introduced to allow road side testing. The above stated figures are under load conditions so merely reving the car to 3500 rpm wouldnt work for test.

And another

My link

[fil4362]

They will also need funds to buy equipment to measure the volume of an exhaust and the law will need changing to allow them to do this. The law on exhaust is/was 101Db at 3500rpm in any gear. The police would have to be able to either test your car there and then or be allowed to impound your car until such a test could be arranged.

fil, just wondering where you obtained the above figures? You should also know that several Police forces DO have equipment for roadside checking.

Which law would need changing to enable the roadside checks which are being done and can/have resulted in prosecutions?

The figures are about 3 years old. Ministry of transport figures used when type approving or single make testing vehicles. This may not be the law but its the figures used to make sure your car is quite enough to be used on the roads. It must pass this test as part of type approval all new vehicles must pass it.

Which law needs changing?? good question, my thought was police are not allowed to drive your vehicle and to carry out the test they would have to. If they drive your vehicle then find it is defected (as in fails the test) then the police would also be subject to the law, they did afterall commit the same offence for which they are catching you doing.As no one is above the law,not even the police then some law needs to be changed or introduced to allow road side testing. The above stated figures are under load conditions so merely reving the car to 3500 rpm wouldnt work for test.

Why would the police need to drive your car to test exhaust noise? You still don't say which law would need to be changed to enable police to check exhaust noise and prosecute.......which they can already do.

CHECK

The test has to be carried out under driving conditions not just reving at road side. This is how it is tetsed at type approval. With out driving the car the car the test could not be done. AS for as i am aware the police have not right to drive your car and they cant ask you to drive it either whilst they test it ,,Can they ??. so a law would need to be brought in so they could drive it to test it. Either way would still be worng as they would be testing a car that they suspect to be illegal and surley wouldnt be allowed to do this. Would be like suspecting you of drink driving and asking you to drive to the station so they can check you out. They cant break the law to up hold the law can they?

[ormi]

My old sunday school teacher and now customer was done for driving at 32 miles an hour. This guy has never even swore in his life let alone broke the law. He dives a 5 year old standard Honda civic. Just proves you dont have to stand out to get in noticed. He was handed a fine and points. He was made or given choice of a driver re training course. This guy is 72 years old and never committed a chrime in his life. If the police are having a clamp down they will get you without you having to stand out.

just spoke with the wife on this one,he should have gone to court it would have been throwen out.....the officer had no right to do someone for 2 miles per hour above the limit!! unless he was in a 20 zone then 32mph is bad..........

not here to argue the reason i asked the wife is she's a traffic cop and has been for a few years now...rule of thumb to get a 100% conviction at court they must be above 5-6mph over the speed limit on the motor way its more...

also on the noise testing the wife has done this but only when out with vosa which involves a mot type test noise at idle and noise at 2500-3000 revs...they do not need to drive the car its a static test with a mic set a mesured distance from the tail pipe..

also if on a mot the mot dude thinks its too loud it can fail the mot...(fil i know you no that..lol)

(scottish law can differ from english law)

[fil4362]

My old sunday school teacher and now customer was done for driving at 32 miles an hour. This guy has never even swore in his life let alone broke the law. He dives a 5 year old standard Honda civic. Just proves you dont have to stand out to get in noticed. He was handed a fine and points. He was made or given choice of a driver re training course. This guy is 72 years old and never committed a chrime in his life. If the police are having a clamp down they will get you without you having to stand out.

just spoke with the wife on this one,he should have gone to court it would have been throwen out.....the officer had no right to do someone for 2 miles per hour above the limit!! unless he was in a 20 zone then 32mph is bad..........

not here to argue the reason i asked the wife is she's a traffic cop and has been for a few years now...rule of thumb to get a 100% conviction at court they must be above 5-6mph over the speed limit on the motor way its more...

also on the noise testing the wife has done this but only when out with vosa which involves a mot type test noise at idle and noise at 2500-3000 revs...they do not need to drive the car its a static test with a mic set a mesured distance from the tail pipe..

Thanks ormi, the law has obvioulsy been changed in recent years. I did say the law i quoted was 3 years old. It did used to be a driving test not a static one. I once had the problem and took the car to my local Vosa centre where they drove the car to test it.So basicly my point is correct that the police cant test your vehicle for noise not without vosa being there as its them with the equipment. So the Police cant just stop you and carry out the test.

My sunday school teacher took the punishment as he is a law abiding person and held his hands up, yes he was speeding, end of it as far as he is concerned. He got caught he took punishment. he didnt even attempt to argue with it through the courts.

[dave1]

??????

[ormi]

fil spot on the police dont carry out the noise checks alone they can say it sounds a bit noisey heres a ticket get it checked but if their with vosa vosa will do the sound test with the mic check as the police watch over..

[fil4362]

Ormi i know your a testerso heres a question just for you as you brought up the point. The ticket the HORTE1 as they are called i think. the police do still hand them out from time to time, since mot computerisation and the stamps being thrown away how do you go about stamping the tickets. The ticket states it has to be the embossing stamp which now no one has got. WE still have ours by the way but i bet most stations dont any more. Surley if the stamp cant be used then it rendors the ticket useless.

[dave1]

fil, check links. these seem to be carried out by "specially trained police officers" so going by articles and quotes from police involved it would seem that they can carry out checks in England and Wales. Whether that is different in Scotland I have no idea.

Irrespective, the means are in place and being used to check exhaust noise and without being driven. You now say that you are correct because, and I quote your post #136

"So basicly my point is correct that the police cant test your vehicle for noise not without vosa being there as its them with the equipment. So the Police cant just stop you and carry out the test."

I honestly cannot see where you have made that point before, I cant even see that you have mentioned VOSA, only that the police would have to drive the car illegally. You really should stop changing your goalposts when you are informed of things which you were unaware of.

Regards Dave1

[ormi]

i just stamp the horte1 tickets with the rubber stamp...we still have our metal stamp but its kept in the safe and no longer comes out..

i have never had any come backs from this mate..

[fil4362]

fil, check links. these seem to be carried out by "specially trained police officers" so going by articles and quotes from police involved it would seem that they can carry out checks in England and Wales. Whether that is different in Scotland I have no idea.

Irrespective, the means are in place and being used to check exhaust noise and without being driven. You now say that you are correct because, and I quote your post #136

"So basicly my point is correct that the police cant test your vehicle for noise not without vosa being there as its them with the equipment. So the Police cant just stop you and carry out the test."

I honestly cannot see where you have made that point before, I cant even see that you have mentioned VOSA, only that the police would have to drive the car illegally. You really should stop changing your goalposts when you are informed of things which you were unaware of.

Regards Dave1

Dave you really need to read my post i have mentioned the ministry of transport on more than one occasion vosa and ministry of transport are the same thing!!! do you still take your carfor an mot test as in Ministry Of Transport or do you take your car for a vosa. No you take your car for an mot test same as the rest of us do. Vosa is mearly the name ministry of transport use these days. I know i work for vosa or ministry of transport or what ever you want to call them,So moving the goal post ha ha read my post mate i quite rightlyfully laugh at your post at least twice i mentioned minsitry of transport. If you can see a diffrence between the 2 then let me know as i have and do worked for both and seen no diffrence. LILL0021 id my I.D. number if you wish to check my credentials.

edit.

I have accepted and posted that my the rules i quoted were 3 years old. I even thanked ormi for updating me of the new rules/laws. Your link doesnt semm to work other than it being something about welsh news. Firstly i dont live in wales secondly i dont do the news. After last year when i had a run in wiht the police and was in just about every paper and radio show in the country i choose to ignore the news. The story the press covered wasnt a story any more and half they stuff the quoted wasnt what i said . So these days i dotn take what i read in the press as gospel.

[fil4362]

i just stamp the horte1 tickets with the rubber stamp...we still have our metal stamp but its kept in the safe and no longer comes out..

i have never had any come backs from this mate..

Cool i have nevertried it to be honest it asks for the embosing stamp and most people dont have it any more just wondered how you did it. Think the HORTE1 ticket is pretty well much out anyway now dont see very many any more

[dave1]

fil, check links. these seem to be carried out by "specially trained police officers" so going by articles and quotes from police involved it would seem that they can carry out checks in England and Wales. Whether that is different in Scotland I have no idea.

Irrespective, the means are in place and being used to check exhaust noise and without being driven. You now say that you are correct because, and I quote your post #136

"So basicly my point is correct that the police cant test your vehicle for noise not without vosa being there as its them with the equipment. So the Police cant just stop you and carry out the test."

I honestly cannot see where you have made that point before, I cant even see that you have mentioned VOSA, only that the police would have to drive the car illegally. You really should stop changing your goalposts when you are informed of things which you were unaware of.

Regards Dave1

Dave you really need to read my post i have mentioned the ministry of transport on more than one occasion vosa and ministry of transport are the same thing!!! do you still take your carfor an mot test as in Ministry Of Transport or do you take your car for a vosa. No you take your car for an mot test same as the rest of us do. Vosa is mearly the name ministry of transport use these days. I know i work for vosa or ministry of transport or what ever you want to call them,So moving the goal post ha ha read my post mate i quite rightlyfully laugh at your post at least twice i mentioned minsitry of transport. If you can see a diffrence between the 2 then let me know as i have and do worked for both and seen no diffrence. LILL0021 id my I.D. number if you wish to check my credentials.

Having re-read your posts on the subject of exhaust noise in this thread you make no reference to mot or VOSA that has any connection with the police testing at roadside. You do in fact refer to taking a car to be checked at your local VOSA and allude to figures laid down you say by MOT for typeapproval but these are totally unrelated to the issue of roadside tests which you stated could not be done and that the vehicles would have to be driven illegally by police officers to do this.

You appear to backtrack/sidetrack/change topic slightly whenever there is a hint that you might be slightly incorrect.

[fil4362]

Dave way back in post 90 i clearly stated 101Db is the limit for exhaust on type aproval. The sva. test is known as type aproval single vehicle aproval. I have excepted that the police can check your carat the road side after also excepting the limits i quoted and method of test were 3 years old. I agreed with ormi that the police cannot test your car with out the presence of vosa. Looks like ormi wis wrons as wellas is his traffic copper wife,although scotish law may be diffrent.

So i except that some of my points may have been outdated and therefore wrong.

One of your links however appears to confirm my limits are correct. the link to A.C.E would seem to confirm my point

The police ARE carrying out the test, wich i now except is ok to do. So no need to change the law to allow police to do this.

The limit laid out in your link though it would appear my quote of 101DB is still the legal limit. It clearly states that any vehicle with an sva (type approval) certificate will not be subjust to prosecution. Your link also states that the test are only guide lines,a vehicle failing side test will be CONSIDERED for prosecution. Any vehicle can be taken for type aproval and if under 101db will get the certificate and therefore avoid the law from having a noisey exhaust. You should read the quote on your link from sgt keenen he seems as mixed up as the rest of us. The limits they test are used as guides so the court can decide to convict or not. So there still seems to be doubt as to where the limit is as it appears to be up to the court to decide if its loud or not. The police are also using the test to educate the public in what is loud and what isnt. This is information i have read on your link.

edit

i have just re read your link and come across this quote

The figure we use in 82-89 dB, this is the EU Limit for Type approval, even though there is no actual legal dB limit on road vehicles.

notice the last line and i repeat,,,,,, there is no actual legal dB limit on road vehicles.

So if theres no legal limit how can anyone be prosecuted for it???????

This is why your link say "considered for prosecution" not will be prosecuted.

It looks ot me like the people who have been done for it are being doen under noise abaitment laws and not motoring laws.

The link also states that they have had problems with inexperianced testers. WEll if they have just bought 7 test machines (as it states they have) then are they not all in experianced at testing. This is why its comman that vosa/ministry of transport, set up road side check points and with the police and test vehicles. Your link also states that the police are targeting a particular area which to me sounds like they are setting up the road side checks like i suggest.These road side check are conducted by vosa and then the police put prohibition notices on such vehicles they think are problematic.

With these points in mind i still stand by my point police cannot prosecute for loud exhaust. Not just yet anyway.

[dave1]

Did you also note that one person had been fined. Also whilst it may say that there is no actual limit, type approval does lay down limits. I accept it is a complex issue but it is also stated that 82 Db is the upper limit for road noise. It doesnt really matter whether the prosecution is for motoring law or noise abatement laws if you are prosecuted because your exhaust is too loud and convicted. With most offences, speeding, jumping red lights, etc you are reported with a view to being considered for prosecution and it does not follow that prosecution will automatically follow......NIP Notice of Intended Prosecution...not Notice of Prosecution. As with most vehicle related laws there are various anomalies which is what makes it such a minefield. Both links if read all the way through are very informative.

[The-Acre]

This evening some wannabe boy-racer in an IS200 was dazzling me with his fog lamps. Odd that he didn't think that driving around with rear ones on (like I suddenly started doing in protest) looked anywhere near as cool! Why wouldn't he want the same wattage back?!? ;)

Can we just get something clear here: fog lamps when you are in traffic, or can see perfectly well, are just for Citroen Saxo drivers and CHAVS!

So if you aren't one, then you must be the other! Next time you're out, check out the sort of people who drive around with them on - you'll soon see what I mean. It's the current equivalent of the backwards Burberry baseball cap. Do you really want to look like that?

It DOESN'T make you look classy or like some sort of dude, it just makes you look like a t!t on the way back to his council estate - oh and by the way, it's also illegal and therefore another thing that the police will use a reason (make that excuse) to pull you over.

Rant mode off.

It's been interesting and amusing to read the comments over the past weeks, and I can't help thinking if this was going on in a pub near closing time blood would be spilt!!

I've always got annoyed with fog lights when it's not foggy, but it's really the tip of the iceberg isn't it?

I get just as annoyed with drivers that don't indicate at roundabouts, drivers that tailgate, drivers using mobiles, drivers with children not strapped in, music up so loud it makes my windows vibrate, loud exhausts, a certain age group driving Rover 25's, dogs on the back shelf, most Audi drivers, darkened rear lenses so I can hardly see the brake lights, supermarket carpark dings in my doors, drivers hogging the middle lane on motorways....the list is endless.

HOWEVER....the front fogs on an early Ls400 are yellow and they look the biz!!!!!!!!!!!

[fil4362]

Agreed my wifes car (toyota import people carrier) has yellow fog lights great big things in middle of front bumper. they as big as the old style subaru ones. I have disconected them so she can use them they really really look naff.

[dave1]

Tend to agree with most of above. Glad you like the look of your fogs.....where do you usually admire them :) :)

[The-Acre]

Tend to agree with most of above. Glad you like the look of your fogs.....where do you usually admire them :) :)

Because it's been agreed that fogs without fog is illegal, we go in the garage together and have a little car and owner moment. Oh yes, I confess I sometimes put them on when it's just murky!