Turning off Daytime running lights

[Snail Style]

Might have to look into setting that up, that seems abit more handy.

[Diesel_vert]

Just as a heads up I believe it is illegal to turn them off if the car comes factory equipped with them.

The authority for this is ADR 13/00, noting clause 8.14.1 which indicates daytime running lamp(s) are optional:

4.2. Where the fitment of a lamp is indicated as optional, this means that it is not mandatory to fit the lamp, but if fitted, the lamp(s) are required to comply with this standard.

8. Where the installation of a lamp is indicated as optional, this means that it is not mandatory to fit the lamp, but if fitted, the lamp(s) are required to comply.

Having said that, the likelihood of being discovered for deliberately disabling DRLs and subsequently having the vehicle flagged as unroadworthy, is probably almost nil, IMO.

[DV52]

The authority for this is ADR 13/00, noting clause 8.14.1 which indicates daytime running lamp(s) are optional:

4.2. Where the fitment of a lamp is indicated as optional, this means that it is not mandatory to fit the lamp, but if fitted, the lamp(s) are required to comply with this standard.

8. Where the installation of a lamp is indicated as optional, this means that it is not mandatory to fit the lamp, but if fitted, the lamp(s) are required to comply.

Having said that, the likelihood of being discovered for deliberately disabling DRLs and subsequently having the vehicle flagged as unroadworthy, is probably almost nil, IMO.

Deisel_vert: I hope that you didn't think that I was implying that Hillbilly's advice was not correct. My apology if I gave this impression. This was certainly not my intention, but thanks for the follow-up.

The interesting thing about your extract is this: Cleary the Golf MKVII is fitted with DRLs as a standard fitting. So, at first blush it would be reasonable to believe that it is captured by ADR 13/00 (as per your quote). However, the VCDS tweak that I posted enables the driver to select that the DRLs can be either on, or off. Sure you need a VCDS cable to activate the on/off trigger mechanism. But, the tweak does nothing more than enable a facility that is there as part of the car's normal operation (i.e. The Discover Media screen for the DRLs is designed into the car). From what others have said, if I had purchased a mk6 Golf, the very same facility to turn the DRLs on/off would have been already programmed into the car from new (albeit the process to do this is different - as I understand).

So the confounder to my question is this: If the car has the on/off facility programmed into it, what is its status wrt ADR 13/00? I'm not a lawyer, so I really do not know the answer to this question. But if the answer is that the provisions of clause 8.14.1 do in fact apply, then is the mk7 and the mk6 really compliant with ADR 13/00 given that the driver can so easily breach the regulation (i.e because it is so easy to turn the DRLs on/off)? There may be some legal types in the forum that can provide their views.

[Diesel_vert]

I hope that you didn't think that I was implying that Hillbilly's advice was not correct. My apology if I gave this impression. This was certainly not my intention, but thanks for the follow-up.

No, no, I just thought I'd mention the source and provide some evidence for his statement.

The interesting thing about your extract is this: Cleary the Golf MKVII is fitted with DRLs as a standard fitting. So, at first blush it would be reasonable to believe that it is captured by ADR 13/00 (as per your quote). However, the VCDS tweak that I posted enables the driver to select that the DRLs can be either on, or off. Sure you need a VCDS cable to activate the on/off trigger mechanism. But, the tweak does nothing more than enable a facility that is there as part of the car's normal operation (i.e. The Discover Media screen for the DRLs is designed into the car). From what others have said, if I had purchased a mk6 Golf, the very same facility to turn the DRLs on/off would have been already programmed into the car from new (albeit the process to do this is different - as I understand).

As far as I can tell, there is no provision in ADR 13 which expressly prohibits manually switchable DRLs.

It's just that you're not supposed to switch DRLs off (if present) in a road-registered motor vehicle that is to be driven on the public highway.

If the car has the on/off facility programmed into it, what is its status wrt ADR 13/00?

I would argue that having the ability to make a vehicle non-compliant (in this case, turning off DRLs), while rendering the vehicle unroadworthy if carried out, has no bearing on the vehicle's compliance status.

In a hypothetical scenario, if ADR 13 expressly prohibited manually switchable DRLs, and the vehicle allowed such a function, only then would the vehicle not comply with ADR 13.

But if the answer is that the provisions of clause 8.14.1 do in fact apply, then is the mk7 and the mk6 really compliant with ADR 13/00 given that the driver can so easily breach the regulation (i.e because it is so easy to turn the DRLs on/off)?

I would argue that the level of convenience in which a vehicle can be made non-compliant would also have no bearing on the vehicle's compliance status. At a point of law, I would find it surprising if the regulations made for such a provision.

Temptation is not an excuse.

In principle, irrespective of how the vehicle is made non-compliant (software or hardware) or the amount of time taken (1 sec or 1 month), the effect is still the same.



Again, if we ignore the regulations and be pragmatic, I doubt anyone will discover it, much less be penalised for it. I think you'd have to give the police a crap load of attitude before they ping you with unlit DRLs (if they don't arrest you first).

I suppose it might be different if DRLs were mandatory here, as it is currently (for new models) in Europe - but they're not.

[Guest001]

Just because there is a provision to turn them off doesn't make it legal. The Passat has them and I wouldn't turn them off Would much rather be seen and I think they look quite good. Amazing how hard it is to see some cars Especially grey in bad light when having DRL's on would make it visible. Enough idiots drive around at night with no headlights.

In Canada it is compulsory for all cars to have sidelights or DRl's on PERMANENTLY in daylight so be thankful you don't live there.

Also should you go for a roadworthy and the examiner is familiar with the model how are you going to explain they aren't working. FAIL LOL.

Should you have an accident and the other party says I didn't see the car but it should have had DRLs showing what will your insurance say.

Just theoretical but hopefully commonsense will apply. Why turn a safety feature off.

This was mentioned on here some time ago when someone asked a dealer to do it for them and the dealer refused for the reason I gave.

Perhaps warranty may come into it if your car is non compliant.

[DV52]

................

................

Thank you both for your responses. Some very compelling logic indeed! Whilst I'm of a view that the tweak that I have posted will remain on my car, the tick on the "Daytime Running Light" entry (on the screen) will remain "on". I will do this in part for the reasons that you have both articulated, but mainly because I like the look of the DRLs as well. Of course others can take their own views on this matter.

[Diesel_vert]

Just because there is a provision to turn them off doesn't make it legal.

Broadly speaking, as far as road-registered vehicles driven on the public highway are concerned, that is how the regulations should be interpreted in general.

Also should you go for a roadworthy and the examiner is familiar with the model how are you going to explain they aren't working.

A possible solution would be to return the vehicle to its road-registerable state prior to inspection.

Should you have an accident and the other party says I didn't see the car but it should have had DRLs showing what will your insurance say.

Assuming the other party is at fault and is indisputable, causing a collision on account of not having seen one's vehicle, irrespective of whether it was equipped with DRLs or not, would still make them liable - otherwise it would set an undesirable precedent.

If DRLs were mandatory, I imagine the worst that would happen is for both parties to share liability, at no less than 50% for the other party for an absolute worst case scenario, IMO.

Of course, the logic behind DRLs is to make one's vehicle less inconspicuous, so depending on the circumstances, the likelihood of that hypothetical collision would have been reduced if one's vehicle were equipped with DRLs and were functioning at the time.

This was mentioned on here some time ago when someone asked a dealer to do it for them and the dealer refused for the reason I gave.

Volkswagen may deny a warranty claim if any unapproved modification is found to have caused or contributed to a fault. However, given the nature of this particular modification, the likelihood of that happening would be fairly remote I imagine.

The dealer is probably just protecting itself from any possibility of liability (no matter how remote), given that it's a modification which hasn't received manufacturer approval (for the Mk7 Golf in Australian markets).

Perhaps warranty may come into it if your car is non compliant.

Volkswagen should not deny any warranty claims based solely on the vehicle's roadworthiness.

For example, Volkswagen should deny a warranty claim for a damaged differential caused by mismatched tyres fitted on the same axle. The fact that fitting mismatched tyres on the same axle renders the vehicle unroadworthy is immaterial to Volkswagen.

[Snail Style]

Guys, not having DRLs won't cause failure of a RWC. I have my roadworthy license and DRLs are counted as additional lighting. Aslong as you have low beam, parkers and high beam then the vehicle is roadworthy, atleast in Victoria. Whether it meets ADR's still is a different story.

[Diesel_vert]

Guys, not having DRLs won't cause failure of a RWC.

In regards to vehicle standards, the presence of DRLs on motor vehicles is not mandatory in Australia, as per clause 8.14.1 in ADR 13 - so you are correct on that point.

However, clause 4.2 and 8 in ADR 13 states that if the lamp is fitted and/or installed, they must comply with the requirements listed in the standard. For DRLs, this refers to paragraph 6.19.7 of appendix A in ADR 13, which states:

The daytime running lamps shall be switched ON automatically when the device which starts and/or stops the engine is in a position which makes it possible for the engine to operate.

The daytime running lamp shall switch OFF automatically when the front fog lamps or headlamps are switched ON, except when the latter are used to give intermittent luminous warnings at short intervals.

Thus, if DRLs are fitted and/or installed and don't function as per above, then it does not comply with ADR 13 - which leads to the next point...

Aslong as you have low beam, parkers and high beam then the vehicle is roadworthy, atleast in Victoria. Whether it meets ADR's still is a different story.

In regards to vehicle safety and roadworthiness, most states will have the following clause written somewhere in the regulations:

If a third edition ADR applies to the design and construction of a vehicle, the vehicle must comply with the ADR.

So in the overall scheme of things, if a vehicle is to be road-registered, it is a requirement that it comply with the ADR.

[Snail Style]

Hmmm yeah didn't consider that point! But as most cops aren't even qualified to check for an oil leak, I think anyone with a good reason for this mod should be safe.

In any case it would only be cause for a minor defect so it would just mean turning them back on and going to get it inspected.

[DV52]

In regards to vehicle standards, the presence of DRLs on motor vehicles is not mandatory in Australia, as per clause 8.14.1 in ADR 13 - ......................................
.

Diesel_vert: Wow - any superlative that I could use to describe your knowledge of the Australian Design Rules for Lighting would be grossly inadequate!! Very inpressive indeed. I hope that you're not the policeman that pulls me over if I ever have my DRLs off!

[Diesel_vert]

Hmmm yeah didn't consider that point!

If you think about it, I suppose it would be inconsistent and contradictory if a vehicle is considered to be road-registerable without simultaneously complying with the relevant vehicle standards.

But as most cops aren't even qualified to check for an oil leak, I think anyone with a good reason for this mod should be safe.

In any case it would only be cause for a minor defect so it would just mean turning them back on and going to get it inspected.

Exactly.

Wow - any superlative that I could use to describe your knowledge of the Australian Design Rules for Lighting would be grossly inadequate!! Very inpressive indeed. I hope that you're not the policeman that pulls me over if I ever have my DRLs off!

I guess I'm merely doing what any ordinary person could've done - which is to simply state what the rules are.

These rules can be found on websites of the relevant government authority, and are free to be viewed by members of the public with internet access and sufficient boredom.

In the interests of our members, I thought it best to highlight the relevant sections (most of which are self-explanatory), lest we start modifying cars under a false assumption or an incorrect understanding of the rules.

I care not what one does afterwards, as it's not my job to care. Enforcement of the rules is the responsibility of the police - not mine (so you need not worry, haha).

[bigtallbloke]

Sorry to revive an old thread, but thanks for the valuable info about DRL mods in VCDS. Just wondered if anyone had discovered an option to disable them when engine not running as opposed to parking brake active? Thanks.

[DV52]

Sorry to revive an old thread, but thanks for the valuable info about DRL mods in VCDS. Just wondered if anyone had discovered an option to disable them when engine not running as opposed to parking brake active? Thanks.

bigtallguy: hello and what a great question!

I assume that you have looked through the VCDS reference thread and that you have discounted the option of switching off the DRLs via the infotainment screen (i.e. you want an automatic method).

I don't have a definitive answer to your interesting question, but here's a suggestion that you might like to experiment-with:
Within the 73 x allowable settings for the "alpha" Leuchte channels is the command Klemme 15 mit Nachlauf bis Fahrzeugstillstand. My German language skills are atrocious, but according to the web-translators this command means something like " Terminal 15 with follow-up vehicle standstill" (I think).

You probably know that terminal 15 is ignition switch-on (with, or without engine-on), so the combination of this and vehicle standstill roughly equates to your requirement (I guess)

So (and again, this suggestion is entirely untested), if you include this command into the two Leuchte-sets for the left/right side DRLs - together with a Dimmwert setting of 0 and a dimming direction setting of minimum, the effect should be to extinguish the DRLs when the car is stationary (and the ignition is switched-on)

Don

[bigtallbloke]

Thanks Don, Yes, I did mean automatic. Due to work, I sit in the car with ignition on, so I was trying to avoid them being on then. I like having them on, but didn't want them to go off when sat in traffic with the parking brake on. It's no big deal, just a silly desirable.
I'll have a tinker when I get a minute and feed back.
Cheers, Mike