: Can you permanently disable the "automatic lights"?



mckellyb
05-25-11, 09:35 PM
I don't want DRL's, I don't want the lights turning on/off when I pull into the garage, I'm just fine using the simple, convenient knob on the turn signal.

However, they default to "automatic lights on" with every ignition cycle. Is there anyway to change this?

I've searched on quite a bit, but never have found a post on it, though I may have seen so much, I've just forgotten.

chazglenn3
05-25-11, 11:44 PM
Not that I know of.

mckellyb
05-26-11, 07:42 AM
So it goes. I can get into the light-switch habit.

madmanmogan
05-26-11, 09:59 AM
Only thing I can think of is you can trick the sensor, its just a photoresistor, that will make the car think its daylight all the time but that doesnt stop the DRLs from coming on. Back in the day the with the s-10 trucks you just removed a relay and the DRLs stopped working. As for the auto light feature would have to be changed in the software of the car and no stealership will do that since its a safety feature. Unless you are good friends with a gm tech

turnne
05-26-11, 11:35 AM
So it goes. I can get into the light-switch habit.


Just about every luxury car for the last 8-10 years I can think has had them

Curiously though

Does your car have the auto dimming feature?

if you turn off the auto headlights on the stalk does that disable that feature as well?


Warren

mckellyb
05-26-11, 12:36 PM
Lincolns do not, I don't think.

I disabled the ones on my wife's RX300, and I'd consider it a luxury vehicle. They've been quite common on GM's since the mid-90's, because GM wanted to save money by removing changes for different markets, i.e. Canada vs. the US.

I don't belive Infiniti's have them, either. I know Chrysler vehicles do not, but then, they don't have a "luxury" vehicle, either...unfortunately.

There is quite a bit of discussion about how they don't have even remotely long-term benefits. In fact, I make the argument, because DRL's are now common, motorcycles, which used to stand out because of the headlight, now blend. This is not good.

In high latitudes, I can see the reasoning behind DRL's overcoming low-angle sun glare, but that's not an issue on most of the planet.

I've not yet had this machine in the dark, so I don't yet know how the lighting features behave.

onlyuscars
06-02-11, 04:51 AM
Unless I am getting confused with my wife's truck, I think you can at least alter the length of time it takes for the autolamps to engage in the DIC.....30, 45, 60 sec for the garage issue? I turn the lights on manually at night, because for me the auto high beams are always late in turning off for approaching drivers. Other than that this vehicle has the best headlights of any car I have driven regularly.

chazglenn3
06-02-11, 04:52 PM
Those are the delay settings for the lights to turn off after you turn off the engine. Also, you can leave the auto lights on, and turn off the auto high beams.

RippyPartsDept
06-02-11, 05:18 PM
I always thought that DRLs were a safety feature to make sure that at dusk and dawn (the highest risk times of day) everyone would have lights on even if they didn't turn their lights on

ddalder
06-02-11, 09:22 PM
The point is that DRL's increase visibility, even during daylight hours. They just make good sense and I continually fail to understand why some people have an overwhelming urge to disable them. On at least two occasions I'm convinced they prevented a collision for me during daylight hours. Each time, from the corner of my eye, I saw a flash of a DRL in between two vehicles which triggered me not to move. There are countless areas of poor visibility for a variety of reasons and this is just one more tool to hellp. Somebody please explain the logic here... Personally, I'm glad they are law in Canada.

To answer the original question, yes. It can be done but it isn't something most people can do.

mckellyb
06-03-11, 08:10 AM
I dislike them with a passion because they tend to 'hide' motorcycles, which truly need the extra visibility. Cars do not, 99.999% of the time. I don't want bikes camouflaged, or worse, ignored, because they 'disappear' in traffic because everything has DRL's.

Additionally, GM started putting them on all vehicles because it was easier/less expensive than putting them on the vehicles only for export to countries requiring them, NOT because it was for safety. It was money-related, period, due to legislation elsewhere.

I can see their potential for good in extreme latitudes, which, save for Alaska, we don't have here in the US. Southern Africa, Southern SA, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada (eh), sure. Here? Not a requirement. In the continental US, we don't have the sun on the horizon for hours at a time during winter months. This is what they're for.

Granted, DRL's are executed better than they used to be. Initially, they were high beams at 80%, which was glaring and, at least to me, more annoying/distracting than helpful.

I've also found people tend to rely on them for foul weather by NOT turning on the full set of lights (of course, many are just stupid, so they'd not turn lights on, anyway), so they have no tails/markers. During intense rainstorms, I've found vehicles can vanish within 50 feet...sometimes less with roadspray. A better solution would have been having a system which turns on the headlights, like the switch were turned, whenever the wipers are "on". Cadillac had this on the DTS, I think, in the first-gen cars.

Also, I really dislike being "nannied" by my vehicle. I know what the visibility conditions are much better than it does. It has a sensor...I have both sensors (eyes) and a brain to take in other considerations.

Don't get me wrong, I like some of the safety gear which has appeared relatively-recently. ABS. Love it. Stability control. As long as I can turn it off, I like it. I dig on having pressure sensors in the tires, 'cause that's important to me, even though I check with a manual gauge every couple of weeks. Low fuel warning. Nice to have, if it's the same every time. However, DRL's...they're in the US because it's less-expensive for manufacturers, not because of safety, per se. They're "sold" as a safety item, but that's corporations for you. Like politicians, but smarter.

This'll throw you, too... I'd rather have four-point seat belts than frontal SRS systems. I *ALWAYS* wear a seat belt, front or rear, just have (nobody else in the family did), so I don't need a full-force SRS system. Again, they've gotten better, but in many situations, NOT ALL, they'll fire when, for me, they're not needed.

ddalder
06-03-11, 09:51 AM
With all due respect, your story sounds consistent with those who try to rationalize some obscure position because they don't like being told what to do. Your entire explanation screams of fighting back because you're losing control. The engineers and scientists are wrong because somehow, in your mind, you've convinced yourself you know best. Do you honestly believe what you're saying? You really think it's cheaper to configure an option for every vehicle instead of installing these in vehicles for the limited market and passing the cost off to those consumers? I could almost be convinced of your "cost theory" if the requirement was in the US, not Canada and other "smaller" markets. In that case, no, it wouldn't make sense to reconfigure the limited number of export vehicles but the larger market is by far within the US. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you aren't a safety researcher or automotive engineer. I think your logic is extremely flawed.

As for motorcycles, the SMART thing to do would be to ensure they have DRL's too. This would certainly increase their visibility. But that would be the logical thing to do...

Tourist
06-03-11, 11:29 AM
You are aware that the DRLs on the STS are the amber lights in the bumper, not the headlights? The headlights only come on if it is dark, or you turn on the auto wipers.

mckellyb
06-03-11, 11:30 AM
Contrary to what you think, in this case, yes, it is less-expensive for GM to equip all vehicles to one standard. Seems like a small thing, certainly, but multiply it over even a couple million vehicles and several years.

You're obviously unaware motorcycles have had full headlight/tail lights "on" requirements since the 70's. This makes them STAND OUT against a background of larger vehicles. However, if a majority of said vehicles have DRL's, it negates the effect. I've seen studies from Europe which show, statistically, after people adjust to DRL's, their effect is negated. No, I don't have any numbers at hand, but I can find 'em, if need be.

Humans adapt, and there will come a time when vehicles WITHOUT DRL's will be more obvious. Much like horn use. If you live in an area where it's common, people tend to ignore it. Where horn use is rare, you see much gesturing when the device is used.

You're in Canada, I see, so you have a different viewpoint, having had DRL's for many years, and being in conditions duing which they may have more effectiveness.

This is understandable, and with all due respect, I'm not about to insinuate your opinion is childish, wrong, mis-guided, or that you know less than do scientists and engineers. Additionally, GM sells vehicles worldwide, not just in the US/Canada, so there are many other places where this requirement is in force. Streamlining production = saving $'s.

In my opinion, DRL's on other than two-wheeled vehicles is a huge risk to said two-wheelers. Being an ex-two-wheel rider, I know, from personal experience, bikes need all the protection they can get. It got to the point I rode with high beams on, and swapped out the beep-beep horn for a pair of Fiamms. Still, people don't "see" you, or maybe just don't care. The next thing on my list was a headlight modulator, but I no longer ride.

Getting into a discussion (argument?) about personal rights and responsibilities (or lack thereof) would take much too long, and a Cadillac forum is not the place for it. I wish you well, eh. :-)

mckellyb
06-03-11, 11:37 AM
You are aware that the DRLs on the STS are the amber lights in the bumper, not the headlights? The headlights only come on if it is dark, or you turn on the auto wipers.

Yes, I am aware of this.

While this is (much) better than the old style of slightly-lower power high beam headlights, I still don't need/want my headlights turning on in the garage when I start the car in the AM, or when I start it when leaving work during the day because I have a sunshade over the dash.

It's just excessive, IMO.

RippyPartsDept
06-03-11, 01:13 PM
have you talked to your local dealer to see if there's a way that they can change the sensitivity/delay so the lights won't come on so quickly (when entering the garage and when starting the car)?

mckellyb
06-03-11, 03:16 PM
have you talked to your local dealer to see if there's a way that they can change the sensitivity/delay so the lights won't come on so quickly (when entering the garage and when starting the car)?

Not yet, but I will when I go by there to pick up a couple of minor parts whicih have gone missing over the years...a couple of push-in clips for the underhood trim and one top-of-fender rubber bumper which has been gone for a while, based on the rub patterns on the hood/plastic trim.

Thanks for the suggestion!

RippyPartsDept
06-03-11, 04:20 PM
Yeah, it's a long shot (even if it's possible they might not know how and think that it's not possible) but there's a chance so it's worth it to at least ask.

ddalder
06-03-11, 08:46 PM
I understand what has been said about motorcycles, and no, since I don't ride, I was not aware of the lights on requirement since the 70's (although I completely support this). I know there are many responsible riders out there. Everyone needs to be seen but despite safety features, many are foolish and put themselves directly in danger. I can't quote stats, but over the past fifteen years I can confidently say "most" incidents I've dealt with relating to riders have been directly related to how they were operating their bike at the time. I really feel for the innocent and have seen too many of these as well, but it's hard to get worked up over those who are grown yet still do stupid things. It is well known that riders can learn (if they choose) how to dramatically minimize their risks. Unfortunately, when something does happen, it's usually very bad. The problem is, if people always did the right thing, there would be much less need for mandated safety systems.

EChas3
06-03-11, 09:08 PM
I agree with 'DD'. I find no rational reason to defeat the DRL's. Vehicles with lights attract the eye regardless of how many others might also have lights on.

onlyuscars
06-07-11, 02:24 PM
ddalder - thanks for the pearl of wisdom. I will check for the disable feature on the auto high beams, it isn't on the stalk it's in the computer, right?

This may make you nuts mckellyb, but I add the fogs to my DRLs as a course of habit, harkening back to my days driving a small, low sports car (1988 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z) during the mommy needs a 3 ton 4wd urban assault grocery getter while learning how to use her new cell phone and yell at the kids days

EChas3
06-07-11, 09:46 PM
If you're seen, there are always two drivers watching out for you.

ddalder
06-07-11, 11:44 PM
ddalder - thanks for the pearl of wisdom. I will check for the disable feature on the auto high beams, it isn't on the stalk it's in the computer, right?

This may make you nuts mckellyb, but I add the fogs to my DRLs as a course of habit, harkening back to my days driving a small, low sports car (1988 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z) during the mommy needs a 3 ton 4wd urban assault grocery getter while learning how to use her new cell phone and yell at the kids days
There are a number of items here. Just to be clear, the automatic high beams are an entirely different system contolled through the rear view mirror (if the vehicle is so equipped). The DRL's are another item again which is linked (to some extent) with the windshield wipers. Specifically, when the wipers are on for >= 6 seconds, the DRL's go off and the low beams come on (during daylight hours). I believe the wiper controlled headlamps can be disabled, but I'm reluctant to elaborate because A) I haven't tested this and so I can't be certain as to what other system(s) may be affected and B) I view this as a safety related item and feel it's not my place to help in disabling this. What I will tell you is that a wiring change needs to occur for my theory to be put to practice. This is related to how the IPM is programmed.