Set to Max if you want the lights to come on longer before darkness sets in. Set to Min if you want the lights to come on when it gets darker.
Auto Headlights on When Wipers On setting
- Thread starter Insighter
- Start date
- Replies 37
- Views 10K
Set to Max if you want the lights to come on longer before darkness sets in. Set to Min if you want the lights to come on when it gets darker.
Richard_arch74
Active Member
Thanks a lot for that! Where is that from? If it's in the manual, I don't understand why I couldn't find it. I've been searching for a few things. I think that is the opposite of what I thought it would be, so that is very helpful.
If you scrolled up, you'd see it on the page I pasted in earlier in the thread. The page is from the downloaded PDF version of the Clarity Owners Manual, which is more complete than the Clarity Owners Guide that comes with the car.
KentuckyKen
Well-Known Member
The “saving grace” for all of these comments on headlights, wipers, rain, legality, and liability is that I’ve found in my record keeping that the LED headlights make a practically negligible effect on battery draw and range. So even though I am very frugal with non-motive electrical drain, I feel free to use the lights with reckless abandon.
Last edited:
I wondered about that. The headlights on my Prius Prime Advanced have a heavy draw, but they are much brighter. There was a criminal case involving some illegal street racers. Someone was killed as a result of their racing, and part of the prosecution's theory of the case was that one or both drivers had turned their headlights off because they thought getting rid of that tiny bit of extra load on the alternator might free up power that would let them go faster. I believe they were convicted. I always thought that could not make much difference in an ICE-powered car.
What cars do you own that will turn the headlights off when you turn them on manually?
The “If/Then” law is quite clearly worded. This is unusual for legalese. It is unreasonable to attempt to interpret it any other way. In a perfect world, lawyers would write laws using clear, understandable language that didn’t need to be explained or interpreted on a constant basis. And let’s not forget that in a court room, two lawyers are trying to convince 12 people that their story is true.
Headlights must be on when wipers are in use is very clear. Much like, No turn on red light. The wipers are either on or off and the light is either red or it isn’t.
Headlights mist be on in adverse conditions or dense fog is vague and open to individual judgement and interpretation.
What constitutes reasonable? Consensus? Would it be reasonable for a reasonable person to determine that since most people are driving 85 in a 70 zone, that they should also drive 85?
I will definitely rest assured that I will operate my vehicles in a safe manner. I haven’t treated the windshield with anything. It is sometimes just more clear when not using the wipers than it is when using the wipers. I will also rest assured that should I be involved in an accident, and found to be at fault, that the implementation of the headlights and/or wipers, at the time of the accident, will be insignificant factors in any potential legal matters that may arise.
I once considered becoming an Anarchist, until I read all the rules.
Speak to any number of attorneys and judges, and they will tell you that laws are constantly interpreted, even when they might seem clear. I'm not denying the apparent logic of your argument. I'm just telling you that that you do not understand how things work in the courts.
What constitutes what is "reasonable" in any situation is a matter for the trier of fact. Both sides make their arguments, and then the trier decides. It's not what any one person thinks is reasonable.
I have seen many auto accident cases in which the proper use of an automobile's equipment was a key factor. The more money involved, or, in the criminal arena, the worse the injuries, and the more things will be accident. Anything from whether someone was using their wipers, whether they had their headlights on, whether their lights functioned properly, and even the presence of and darkness of window tint or having things dangling from a rear-view mirror can be very important in determining fault.
I had a client who killed two little girls who ran out in front of his car. He never saw them coming. It was a weekend morning and he was driving his son and his son's friend to a cub scout meeting. He was not speeding, and he was not in any way impaired. It was quite obviously the girls' fault. Their mother was not supervising them. Nevertheless, they fully considered prosecuting him. If he had had so much as a graduation tassel hanging from his rear-view mirror, that would have been heavily scrutinized. The mother sued, of course. Over his objections, my client's insurance company settled the lawsuit to his policy limits, which really affected him psychologically (he saw it as assigning fault to him, but really it was just the company not wanting to pay to defend a claim they knew they'd lose).
In actuality, logic demanded that my client should have sued the girls' mother for the damage to his car. He did nothing wrong, while the mother had failed to keep her children out of the street. That would have been logical, but logic doesn't always matter.
You’ve convicted him with that sentence. Did not 2 girls commit suicide by running out in front of his car?
Not to make light of the situation, but it is completely irrelevant to a headlights must be on under certain conditions law.
It does present an example of the illogical, unjust and sometimes perverse reality that is our legal system. One never knows if they will be punished for following the laws or disobeying them.
It's not completely irrelevant because you had stated your belief that if you were involved in an accident and found to be at fault, whether your wipers or headlights were on would be "insignificant." The point I was making was that that would not necessarily be so. In a simple accident involving only limited property damage, there would not be much of investigation (if any). However, the more serious an accident, the more everything is looked into and the more things that might seem small end up mattering. My client's situation is particularly illustrative because it was a situation in which my client did nothing wrong, but still might have found himself in dire criminal trouble if he had done the slightest thing wrong. There are situations in which prosecutors want to prosecute (the death of children), and attorneys want to sue.
No, the girls did not commit suicide. Suicide is the intentional taking of one's own life. The girls were trying to cross the street. There was absolutely nothing to suggest they purposefully ran in front of his car (they were running to join some friends across the street). "Killing" is to deprive of life in any manner or cause the death of. It does not need to be an intentional act. My client most assuredly killed those girls, though it was certainly not intentional or even negligent.
You are right that the legal system can defy logic. In a situation like this if/then headlights scenario, it is wise to consider the intent of the law. Were it an unsettled matter of tax law, it might be advisable to use the logical interpretation that suits you best and see what happens.
You asked earlier what cars I have that will turn headlights off when I turn them off manually. My Toyota Prius Prime does that, and I've owned other cars that do. When you turn the headlights on manually, they are on. However, when you park your car, if you don't turn them off, they automatically turn off when you open your door.
I've found that even on a bright, sunny day with the setting at Min, if I have to stop under a wide underpass, even near the edge, waiting for a signal the headlights will come on. So, I doubt there is much difference in settings. If there is, then the lights must come on just about whenever the car is running when the setting is a Max.
Actually, I asked what cars have you owned that will turn the lights off when you turn them ON manually.
This presents another If/Then situation. If you turn them on manually and then they go off automatically, they aren’t really being operated manually. There I go being logical again.
I’ll refrain from any further discussion with you on legal matters, since we clearly won’t agree.
1) That was a typo which I'll correct. If you turn the headlights in my Prius Prime on manually, they will still go off automatically when you park and get out of the car.
2) You asked a very specific question. You asked, and I quote, "What cars do you own that will turn the headlights off when you turn them on manually?" That is the question I answered. If you want to define them as still somehow automated, that is a different matter. They do automatically turn off. That does not change the answer to your question, does it?
3) Yes, you have made it clear you will rely on your own opinion. I will rely on my legal education and years of practicing law. I'm sure you, like most people, have areas of knowledge in which you are very advanced or even expert. Some of those areas are likely things I know little about. I would defer to your knowledge in those areas, which would be logical.
No, it does not change the answer to the question. It does beg a new question.
If a system is activated in a manual mode, shouldn’t it remain on until manually turned off?
I realize, in this case, we are discussing the headlights on a car. As you state, they are, in fact, turning off automatically. It is unlikely that anyone will be harmed by headlights that turn off automatically when a door is opened. It would be an unexpected outcome for someone who turned on a system and expected it to stay on until it was turned off.
There is no "should" as to how manually-activated lights turn off. What would such a "should" be based on?
I'm not sure what you're talking about in the last three sentences in your post. You say it is unlikely that anyone will be harmed by headlights that turn off automatically when a door is opened. I didn't say that would harm anyone. As far as expectations as to how headlights on a modern, advanced car should operate, the operation of headlights is changing all the time with new innovations. I think consumers can only expect change.
When I turn on a light in the kitchen, I expect it to stay on until it is turned off. The same goes for a garden hose in the yard, a fan in the garage or a TV in the den. Something that is manually turned on should remain on until it is manually turned off. This would seem to be a reasonable expectation given the circumstances.
You are correct that you did not say that headlights that turn off automatically when a door is opened would harm anyone. Although it is possible that walking from the car to the house in the dark could present a potentially hazardous situation that could lead to personal injury or death.
Yes, modern vehicles have a number of features, some of which can be a bit annoying. It is wonderful that you are comfortable with manually activated headlights that turn off automatically.
I park in my garage, and my driveway is lit. I don't find myself parking many places that are dark. In any event, we are talking about the manual setting. If you walk away from your car with the headlights set to manual, and you're gone for any amount of time, you're going to come back to a drained (or partially drained) battery. That is when the automatic headlights are good. When you leave your car, they remain on for a set period of time in my Prius Prime, and in the Clarity, and in most cars.