Minivans & parking lights. Why? Why? Why?

August 17, 2005 8:07 AM

Why do people in minivans drive around with their parking lights on?

I often see minivans running around with just their parking lights (the yellow ones, no headlights), rather than the daytime running lights (low level headlights) which are the default when you turn your car on, and legally required (so far as I know) setting here in Canada. Why on earth would someone deliberately choose to drive with their lights set this way? And why is it *always* minivans?

posted by jacquilynne to travel & transportation (27 comments total)

I think some Chevy minivans, used to at least, have their parking lights on by default. It's their form of daytime running lights. A quick web search hasn't found anything to back me up, but I still think so.

I've also seen a number of cars (some SUV, some sedans) which I'm pretty sure DON'T have any form of daytime running lights that drive with their parking lights on during twilight. I think that's just how some people drive.
posted by skynxnex at 8:33 AM on August 17, 2005

My 2003 Cadillac CTS's 'parking lights' are on whenever the car is in gear, day or night - the manufacturer offers no choice in the matter. I would assume that the minivans you see are in the same boat.
posted by DandyRandy at 8:34 AM on August 17, 2005

Daytime running lights. . or drl. . .all saturns have these. . .and a growing number of other vehicles. . .there is a hack to disconnect them. . but they are benign, imo.
posted by Danf at 8:57 AM on August 17, 2005

Daytime running lights are just lights that are on during the daytime, not necessary headlights. Turning on parking lights for DRL is just a design decision by the auto manufacturer -- they think the van looks better with its parking lights on during the day than with its headlights.

Similarly, Audi prefers to turn on foglights for DRL.
posted by mendel at 9:02 AM on August 17, 2005

Hrmm. I hadn't considered that daytime running lights might not legally have to be the low level headlights, but that manufacturers might have a choice. I just assumed that the type of light was written into the law/standards requiring them.
posted by jacquilynne at 9:07 AM on August 17, 2005

Turning on parking lights for DRL is just a design decision by the auto manufacturer -- they think the van looks better with its parking lights on during the day than with its headlights.

The idea, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is to prevent some sorts of accidents, not to make it look better. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if there were legions of DRL haters, just like there are air bag haters and seat belt haters, and the IIHS is just part of some big huge conspiracy to funnel profits into the pockets of headlight manufacturers (?)
posted by clearlynuts at 9:11 AM on August 17, 2005

Yeah, might depend on where you are. In the states, my pontiac (made in Canada funny enough) uses the parking lights (yellow) as the DRLs. My VW uses its Low Beams at 80% power (typically the setup if headlights are used). What kicks my ass on a side note are these clowns that drive with their actual parking lights or headlights switched on, which lights up the tailights, in the daytime. Driving with the rear lights on in the daylight is unsafe in my opinion, reducing the contrast between no lights and the activation of the brake lights. Its just my opinion, but I drive for a living, and for anyone who does this (especially minivans haha) I can see you just fine - 2 small red lights in the sunlight doesn't increase your visibility vs. the big ass blob of car that is easily seen in front of me. However, having your tailights off gives me a greater "holy sh!t!" response in not hitting you should you stomp on those brakes, especially in if we are driving off into the glare of the sunset... Just IMO
posted by skyguy14 at 9:16 AM on August 17, 2005

Freaky. The state of New Jersey only wants you to use parking lights for parking:
"Parking lights should only be used for a short time, such as when a vehicle is left in a permitted zone to show other motorists where a vehicle is parked." --NJ Driver's Guide.
The wording was softened a bit in the past 20 years as it used to be forbidden to drive with parking lights on and forbidden to park with parking lights on. Go figure.
posted by plinth at 9:22 AM on August 17, 2005

Hold on. When I learned to drive, I was taught to never drive with my parking lights on. Has this changed in the past ~15 years?
posted by mr_roboto at 9:32 AM on August 17, 2005

>When I learned to drive, I was taught to never drive with my parking lights on. Has this changed in the past ~15 years?

Yes, now that DRL lights are required (in certain areas) if your DRL turns your headlights on to less-than-full, there are times when you don't require any extra lighting in front, but you still require extra visibility (such as during a heavy daytime rainstorm). The parking lights accomplish this marvellously. If other drivers think I've got the brakes on all day, during inclement weather that can only be good -- they'll be smart enough not to tailgate (maybe).

I wish more people would use their parking lights during bad daytime weather. There's been plenty of times I've had to get FAR too close to another vehicle to find out it's there during bad weather because they don't have their parking lights on!

And yes, DRL lights can be the front parking lights on certain vehicles. I just assume they have to put brighter bulbs in the front parking lights, since they seem brighter on those vans that do this. The rear lights still seem to operate as usual (ie: They aren't on as parking lights unless the operator chooses them to be).

As for a reason, I think it's just the design of the headlights, and perhaps because minivans have their lights higher than most vehicles. By using the parking lights they aren't dazzling other drivers (good thing) and some vans don't even have highbeams (my ancient bell van is like this, probably circa 1991), so using the headlights for DRL would mean not even a headlight switch, never mind no highbeams! How are you going to flash other drivers to warn them of problems further down the road?!
posted by shepd at 9:49 AM on August 17, 2005

I tried Googling around to see if there really is Canadian law requiring them, (as I seem to recall) and while I found lots of sites saying "Canada has required them to be provided in all new vehicles since 1989" I couldn't find any referece to the specific law these sites claim is in place.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were legions of DRL haters, just like there are air bag haters and seat belt haters, - clearlynuts

Yes, there are DRL haters. I dunno about 'legions' but there certainly is a segment. In my searching, I also found a .org that is dedicated to keeping mandatory DRL's out of the US. I don't care to link to them because they make all kinds of claims that are easily refuted by the research.

FYI - A rough summary of findings from studies into DRL's. A list of studies on the topic, if you're interested in further reading.
posted by raedyn at 9:49 AM on August 17, 2005

If you listen to the folks at Young Drivers, at least here in Canada, you'll be told that driving your car with low-beams on (and therefore tail lights on too) is the safest option, regardless of time of day. Apparently having running lights on at the front reduces head-on collisions, and tail lights on reduces the chance of being rear-ended. Better safe than filling out a claim form.
posted by lowlife at 9:51 AM on August 17, 2005

raedyn, highways are a provincial responsibility rather than a federal one. Having said that, my quick glance through Ontario's Highway Traffic Act didn't turn anything up.
posted by lowlife at 10:01 AM on August 17, 2005

My 1998 New Beetle has daytime running lights, too. I always turn the lights on, even during the day, because I like having the instrument panel lit up if I go into a tunnel.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:06 AM on August 17, 2005

My GM, a 1999, has headlights that are always on by default. There is a little sensor in the dash that detects ambient light, and switches to lower power in bright light, higher power in dim light. I think a lot of newer cars are this way (I know most GMs are).

Like clearlynuts said, the manual for my car indicated that lights on in the daytime reduced accidents.

So the reason some mini-vans drive around with their lights on is mainly because some cars take care of worrying about head lights for you, and on during the daytime is the default behavior.
posted by teece at 10:13 AM on August 17, 2005

raedyn and others: it's a federal regulation, administered by Tranpsort Canada, under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
posted by bonehead at 10:18 AM on August 17, 2005

Further to bonehead's comment, here's the link to the actual regulation (yes, it's really arcane, but it's not like this stuff is meant to be casual reading...):

Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations, Standard 108.

From that link: "Every bus, multipurpose passenger vehicle, passenger car, three-wheeled vehicle and truck shall be equipped with two daytime running lamps or, where the daytime running lamps are optically combined with the upper beams of the headlamps, with two or four daytime running lamps."

It goes on to prescribe the colour of the lights, how bright they have to be, etc etc etc.
posted by gwenzel at 10:47 AM on August 17, 2005

Yep, Dodge Caravans (still the most popular minivan by far) use a special high intensity park light instead of headlights for DRL.
posted by Mitheral at 12:01 PM on August 17, 2005

I heart DRL. It is one of the single best improvements to driver safety -- or, rather, safety of other drivers, as opposed to oneself -- in many decades.

Seatbelts, airbags, ABS, all that jazz has helped the occupants of said car. DRL helps everyone else on the road.

I wish taillights were DRL'd, so that the dummies who forget to put their headlights on at night are at least visible from behind. I hate coming up behind some twit who's running dark at midnight simply because the streetlights are giving him just enough light to see by.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:41 PM on August 17, 2005

I completely disagree. I find them simply annoying. Also, as a motorcyclist, it takes away from the "specialness" of motorcycles on the road. Now that everyone has DRL, motorcylces are back to being invisible.
posted by knave at 2:05 PM on August 17, 2005

knave writes "I find them simply annoying."

Thereby noticing them (and also the car they are attached to) more eh?
posted by Mitheral at 2:58 PM on August 17, 2005

>Thereby noticing them (and also the car they are attached to) more eh?

(speaking for knave here) If by more you mean more than the the other surroundings, like light posts, pedestrians, objects in the road, etc, yes. I don't know if that's good or not, but it's certainly sorta pointless on divided highways...
posted by shepd at 3:22 PM on August 17, 2005

Perhaps I should have used the word "distracting".
posted by knave at 4:37 PM on August 17, 2005

Those (rare, these days) times I encounter a car without DRL, I find it damn irritating: they are so much less obvious without their lights.

I prefer that all the big things on the road that are mobile, have their lights on. One really can't afford to not see them.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:30 PM on August 17, 2005

I don't think anybody answered this above... but what's the point of parking lights anyway? How are they related to parking?
posted by muddylemon at 7:43 PM on August 17, 2005

That's a great question. Might be worth asking on the FP. I've always assumed parking lights were vestigal...
posted by five fresh fish at 11:21 AM on August 18, 2005

muddylemon: When you park on the shoulder of a dark road, you can turn lights on that won't drain your battery like headlights but won't make you invisible to other cars.

(Those of you who find DRL distracting or dazzling: How do you drive at night?)
posted by mendel at 9:15 AM on August 25, 2005