auto high beam lights

[mjr]

This is what Toyota say:-

Automatic High Beam contributes by detecting the headlights of oncoming vehicles and automatically switching from high to low beam (dipped) headlights to avoid dazzling other drivers. Consequently, high beam can be used more often, meaning pedestrians and obstacles are easier to spot.
Automatic High Beam is available as standard on new Prius, Avensis, Verso and RAV4, with the system optionally available on Yaris too.
(My emphasis)

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/toyota-car-saf ... icHighBeam

Would anyone like to complain to Toyota and maybe the ASA about advertising recommending motorists violate the highway code rule 114 and dazzle pedestrians?

[CliveyT]

Many of the users see this as a way of not having to pay attention while driving.

What evidence for you have for this statement? It sounds to me like a wild generalisation based on prejudice.

I think the number of car drivers that don't bother to override the automatic lights when it's foggy gives some indication. Car thinks it's light enough, I can see, it's all these idiots pulling out in front of me without seeing me that are the problem

[PDQ Mobile]

FWIW, I always did and still do prefer a left foot operated dip switch. Especially on rural roads.


However it shows my age and actually getting to drive a vehicle so equipped is quite rare!
Though as it happens I did the weekend before last. And it brought it all back!!

[Nigel]

This is what Toyota say:-

Automatic High Beam contributes by detecting the headlights of oncoming vehicles and automatically switching from high to low beam (dipped) headlights to avoid dazzling other drivers. Consequently, high beam can be used more often, meaning pedestrians and obstacles are easier to spot.
Automatic High Beam is available as standard on new Prius, Avensis, Verso and RAV4, with the system optionally available on Yaris too.
(My emphasis)

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/toyota-car-saf ... icHighBeam

Would anyone like to complain to Toyota and maybe the ASA about advertising recommending motorists violate the highway code rule 114 and dazzle pedestrians?

Got time to waste today with the complaint ?
There's nothing in the Toyota statement which encourages dazzling of pedestrians. If a pedestrian is 200+yards away, and the driver is on dip, they won't be illuminated. On main they might be illuminated and easier to spot. The driver can still dip their lights manually as appropriate.

Vast numbers of cars have automatic main beam switching. Just about every maker offers it, either as standard or an option. Its been around for quite a few years now.

My (2015) car has automatic main beam, you have to switch it on each time you use the car with a single button press. Its quicker at dipping with respect to vehicle lights (including cyclists) than I am manually most of the time. On a night time A road, its very effective. On a twisty rural minor road probably better than manual most of the time. Like many cars it also has automatic switching between side-lights (on all the time) and dipped beam, and like many cars, it sometimes needs to be over-ridden and told "lights please, its somewhat foggy/grey today" due to a fairly light sky but dullness elsewhere.

Coming soon to cause further anguish will be the realisation that some makers have selective dipping lights, that only dip in part of the illuminated area, leaving full beam for the rest of the field of light. Trick is done by having an array of LEDs pointing at different angles, and selectively turning some on/off. Its been offered on several up-market brands of car for a few years.

[mjr]

There's nothing in the Toyota statement which encourages dazzling of pedestrians. If a pedestrian is 200+yards away, and the driver is on dip, they won't be illuminated. On main they might be illuminated and easier to spot. The driver can still dip their lights manually as appropriate.

They might be easier to spot. They will definitely be dazzled and the automatic system won't do a damn thing to stop it, plus I think a driver with automatic high beam is far less likely to be covering the dip control than one with manual, so they'll be dazzled for longer.

Vast numbers of cars have automatic main beam switching.

Please link to any evidence, else I'm going to think that's like the previous claims that all cars have sat nav or whatever it was.

[661-Pete]

I had never heard of this feature either, and like others here I am appalled.

Looking at T[he]O[ne]Y[ou]O[ught]T[o]A[void]'s own website, I note that

Consequently, high beam can be used more often, meaning pedestrians and obstacles are easier to spot.

I suppose cyclists are amongst the many mere 'obstacles' that these drivers will find 'easier to spot' - and b***er any inconvenience to said 'obstacles'!

Well, if this is to become the norm in cars, I can strike back. Like many rechargeable front light sets, mine has a high-lumen mode which is stupidly bright, excellent for illuminating dark, poorly-lit country lanes at night. I tend not to use that mode on busy roads; on quiet roads, I do, but I dip my light (manually) when a car approaches.

But I could change my habits. At least my stupid-bright mode will be easier for a car's robot sensor to pick up...

[thirdcrank]

Most of this type of thing is so-called trickle down marketing. The top end models get it to start with as optional extras at big prices, then it's available on more basic models, in this case the Yaris.

[Cyril Haearn]

Then it is compulsory even if one does not want it

[661-Pete]

The driver can still dip their lights manually as appropriate.

True - but having an automatic system means that a driver may be more likely to 'forget' to dip manually: being conditioned to leave it all to the robot. The robot may be spot-on, but there's always human error.

When I'm driving in the countryside at night (and my car has no such system), I'm constantly aware of the need to flick the dipswitch at a moment's notice. This hair-trigger consciousness makes good sense in such driving conditions. I would not wish it otherwise.

[Bonefishblues]

There are numerous occasions where I wish that other drivers were so equipped.

[Nigel]

There's nothing in the Toyota statement which encourages dazzling of pedestrians. If a pedestrian is 200+yards away, and the driver is on dip, they won't be illuminated. On main they might be illuminated and easier to spot. The driver can still dip their lights manually as appropriate.

They might be easier to spot. They will definitely be dazzled and the automatic system won't do a damn thing to stop it, plus I think a driver with automatic high beam is far less likely to be covering the dip control than one with manual, so they'll be dazzled for longer.

"They might be easier to spot" was Toyota's claim.

Vast numbers of cars have automatic main beam switching.

Please link to any evidence, else I'm going to think that's like the previous claims that all cars have sat nav or whatever it was.

The full statement included "as standard or an option".
When I was last shopping for a new car, in 2015, it was offered on: Audi A3, Mini Clubman, BMW 1-series, Volvo V40 because I looked at all of them. So, those and any car larger/more upmarket model from those makers from at least 2015.
I've just looked at Ford's website, its an option on the Focus and Fiesta. The thread shows its available on most Toyota models, and that would also mean Lexus as Toyota's "posh" brand. You can check for yourself whether other makers offer equivalents, I'd expect them to do so.

[ferrit worrier]

FWIW, I always did and still do prefer a left foot operated dip switch. Especially on rural roads.


However it shows my age and actually getting to drive a vehicle so equipped is quite rare!
Though as it happens I did the weekend before last. And it brought it all back!!

Got one on my 1964 swb landy mind you I dont go fast enough to need high beam, if I do you can hear dynamo shout "whats goin' on 'ere

Malc

[Cyril Haearn]

FWIW, I always did and still do prefer a left foot operated dip switch. Especially on rural roads.


However it shows my age and actually getting to drive a vehicle so equipped is quite rare!
Though as it happens I did the weekend before last. And it brought it all back!!

Got one on my 1964 swb landy mind you I dont go fast enough to need high beam, if I do you can hear dynamo shout "whats goin' on 'ere

Malc

You can teach us all double-declutching too, it is like the Loch Ness monster or the Afanc, one has heard about it, but does it really exist?

[Mick F]

Had a foot dip switch on a couple of cars.
Also rented a Ford Escort that had a button on the floor for wash/wipe.

My Triumph Herald had a synchro problem on 2nd, so when you changed down from 3rd, you needed to double declutch. It was ok going from 2nd to 3rd.

Still amazed and gobsmacked at the stupidity of auto full beam. It must be terrible on the unlit motorways at night as being dazzled from miles away isn't nice at all. It happens, I know, but if all cars had it ...................

If you can override this at will when you should be dipping and the system doesn't recognise that you should, what's the point of it?
This is referring to crests of hills or bends or houses on corners, let alone spotting a cyclist or a pedestrian going home from the pub.

[Bonefishblues]

AIUI the rationale is all about the fact that relatively few people take the opportunity to use main beam when they could (and therefore should), so is a mechanism designed to maximise usage, with its attendant benefits in terms of much-improved visibility for a driver.

As such, it feels like a good thing, but I'm conflicted as I can see both sides of this. I guess the key is how well it is applied, and whether drivers would, as is suggested, take their brains out of gear* v-a-v their role when using this function.

ETA
*and if so, is this perhaps exactly the type of road user that needs such system help, I wonder?