The headlights come on when the engine is running, and the vehicle is moved more than like 5 feet.

They come on in the high beam position, but dimmer than usual.

I tried doing a board search, & the only thing I found on being able to turn them off is pulling some relay under the hood.

This is also supposed to disable some other things though, such as the dash highbeam indicator.

Does anyone know if it is possible to turn the daytime lights off another way, that doesn't require pulling a relay?

This is a 1998 XJ.

 

Leave them alone. It's a safety thing and doesn't hurt you.

 

Find the output wire of the relay and unplug it?
Or put it on a switch, and have two steps to turn on the headlights?
All in all, running lights don't seem like that big of an issue to me. I have my headlights on most of the time anyways

 

It's called "Daytime Running Lights," and it's a specious safety measure (thanks to DRL, motorcycles not have those annoying "flicker" DRL setups. I'm all for safety, but let's not get stupid...)

My wife's 2005 Verona has them - I haven't disabled them yet (it's on the list, along with TPMS. Anything that requires purchase of a $45-$120 sensor to replace a two-dollar battery is badly designed.)

They come on when the key is in the ON position (engine running or no) and the handbrake is off - if I pull the handbrake up one click, that will turn the wretched things off.

I recall reading a study a few years back that shows that DRL actually does not help to prevent roads incidents - but they're codified in 46CFR, so we're stuck with the damned things...

(46CFR, Part 1 is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards - FMVSS - which governs Federal regulations on vehicle equipment and construction. Some of the stuff is stupid, some of it makes sense. Getting something struck from 46CFR is probably about as easy as getting something struck from 26CFR, the Internal Revenue Code...)

 

I don't have DRLs, but I have my headlights on most of the time so people recognize that my car is turned on and moving. There are a lot of cars parked on the street in my town, and it isn't hard to mistake a car for being parked when it's really moving...
I think city lights are a better idea than DRLs, but I don't have those either

 

I'd really like to be able to turn them off & on at will. Nice to have if i'm in North Carolina & it starts raining. headlights are required to burn during rain. ( I live in South Carolina though, and it's not required)

On the other hand, it seems like there should be a switch somewhere that can turn them off too.

As for whether they help prevent accidents is up for debate. A lot of idiots pull right out in front of me, to the point of me having to slam on the brakes.

So people don't always see them, even though they are on.

 

this right here.

we've had them in canada since the 80's.
before that, we always turned our headlights on manually. i kinda got into the habit. it's a good habit.
funny tho, when i lived in oregon in 95, my friends kept saying why you have your lights on? you don't need them on during the day.
i think i was the only vehicle in the u.s. then that drove with them on during the day.

now up here, it's odd to see a vehicle without the lights on.

my 93 has a blown drl module, yeah, the high beam light doesn't work. you don't realize just how important that little blue light is.

 

I just wish it would dim with the rest of the dash. It's so freaking bright...

 

Just leave em on. It's good to always have lights on. I usually have my headlights or even my Hellas turned on in the day time. The part of my town I live in has skinny streets and a bunch of cars parked so it's always good to be visable.

 

Foul weather - I turn them on.
Nautical twilight - I turn them on.
Before dawn - I turn them on.

I don't need a computer to do it for me, and if I need lamps, I need them at full power, not half-power.

When I learned to drive, cars did a lot less, and I like them that way. I neither want nor need all of this added crap on vehicles, and I function better without it. I don't need a computer to tell me to feather the brakes when it's slippery - I do so automatically. I don't need a computer to turn on my headlamps, I do that automatically (besides, DRLs don't turn on the taillamps - and I consider them more important to being visible than headlamps!) I don't need "speed-proportional steering" to keep me from overcorrecting at freeway speeds - I do that just fine on my own.

And don't even get me started on the efforts to institute "drive-by-wire." I seriously doubt they're going to do that right...

 

AGREED. I'm only 19, but I know exactly what you mean. Automobile companies are dumbing everyone down from knowing WHAT you need to know while you're driving. The more electronics on a vehicle the worse it is. An don't get me started on fly by wire. Ahhhhhh.

 

I definitely agree with the point on DRLs. I really don't understand why the tail lights are not illuminated either. Some drivers at night won't do their headlights because they can see out the front just fine (especially with such bright lighting in the city). It's really unsafe to drive around without the tail lights illuminated.

Part of the problem with all of this is that the barrier to entry for a drivers license is so low. Owning and operating a vehicle is actually quite complex to do so responsibly. Governments only seem to be recognizing that now with banning stuff like cellphones. A lot of these convenience features encourage laziness indeed. Like automatic transmissions. Now that I've learned how to drive a manual I am amazed at really what amounts to ignorance and lack of attentiveness that an automatic encourages. So many drivers just mash the pedal and go! (and ignore their oil for a year then wonder why it seized)

ABS, however, is a real safety feature. If you think you can 'feather' the brakes as well as the computer can control braking then you must have 4 feet and wicked reflexes. Expecting a vehicle to stop when a kid jumps out in front of you during the rain is not something just for lazy people or the inept.

 

I love talking about these same topics with the old timers that live round me. ABS is only good if you use it right. It's not just to stop in rain it's to keep the tires moving so you can steer around the obstacle. All these companies are doing is makin it easier for newer drivers to think they are invincible and drive like animals, which they happily do. They feel their car will always stop if they step on the brake. And I love muscle cars but sedans dont need over 300hp let alone even around that much. All these sensors in cArs make repairs more costly and so much more can go wrong. I'm happy I don't have abs and auto light. I've had. Y mishaps and I've learned to slow down and I always use my DRL. And headlights like the other poster said, before dawn, in rAin/ cloudy weather etc. oh well technology will never stop I guess :end rant:

 

I see it all the damned time around here - and you have no idea how irksome it is to me... Frankly, I think it's unsafe for the average California driver to be on the road in the first place - they're untrained, untested, and incompetent; and they prove it every day.

Entirely too low - and in several languages. When I went to transfer my DL to CA (from IN, along with an International and a DoD for heavy vehicles...) I had to take the (very poorly) written test for CA.

Failed it three times on the go - not because I got answers wrong, but because California go them wrong! I kept trying to prove them so (using their own material as proof!) but didn't get anywhere.

I was told I'd have to come back in 90 days to take the test again, but I honestly didn't feel like running around (and I had to do enough running about to get my name right in the first place!) So, I asked if I could take it in another language that day (I spoke, read, and wrote about a dozen.)

He got smirky, then went and checked with his boss. Came back five minutes or so later, and told me that I could do it - and what language did I want it in? (Really snarky about it, too.)

I looked at the wall for languages I recognised for the Driver Handbook, picked Arabic.

The test was easier in Arabic!

I'd also taken it in Spanish and Greek - and it was easier in those languages than in English as well! (And, I still don't understand why it's offered in languages other than English in the first place...)

We allow people to take the test in a language other than English, the practical barely tests them (horror stories about that from my kids...) the test doesn't really test them, and we wonder why they all suck at driving.

It's no particular mystery to me!

As far as creature features on cars - "Build a car any idiot can drive, and every idiot will have one."

ABS, however, is a real safety feature. If you think you can 'feather' the brakes as well as the computer can control braking then you must have 4 feet and wicked reflexes. Expecting a vehicle to stop when a kid jumps out in front of you during the rain is not something just for lazy people or the inept.[/QUOTE]

 

Ah, I hadn't thought of that. Good point. I guess the way 5-90 was ranting about all these damn kids with their new-fangled techno-lology on his lawn sort of set me off Totally agree with you.

Ayup. To add to the low barrier to entry, another massive pet peeve of mine is lack of repeat testing. Just because you barely passed some lame "test" 30 years ago doesn't mean you have any idea what current laws are, or remember what that funny looking stick on the left side of the steering wheel does (last time I hit it I heard a clicking, I thought something broke so I never did that again!) Even though the tests themselves are crap, so many drivers on the road today wouldn't even pass them.