Are cars in Britain required to have their headlights turn on during the day?
I ask because I know people in the UK are trained to drive standard cars by using the hand break when the car is stopped on a slopped road.
Here in Canada this is not what people are taught (for some reason, people believe quickly releasing the brakes then slamming the accelerator is a good idea, but that’s another story)
Having British family help me learn to drive stick, I use the hand brake constantly.
Cars here are required to have daytime running lights, which basically just means the headlights are always on. In automatic cars I believe they come on when the car is taken out of park. But on my standard, it comes on when the hand brake is released. Since I frequently engage the hand brakes at lights, it means my headlights are turned off while I’m waiting.
I’m just wondering if this is the case in the UK because if it is, watching cars at a traffic light (especially one on a hill) must be quite amusing.
BTW, incase you’re wondering… it’s not a danger at night… the lights can be turned on in a standard fashion also which over-rides the daytime running lights.
No. Some people choose to (not very many), and some people drive Volvos. I don’t know if it’s just Volvos’ side or headlights are hardwired to the ignition, though.
That said, if the light’s bad, most people are sensible enough to use side or headlights.
You got me there. I can’t envisage what the handbrake is for if not for that purpose. But yes, that’s how we’re taught. Bear in mind that most cars in the UK are what stick shifts. Does that have a bearing on it? I don’t know.
Ahh, the penny drops! I see where you’re coming from now. Unfortunately in the UK it’s nowhere near as funny as your scenario, because there’s no link between the handbrake and (any) lights. Sorry to burst your bubble
However, once a year for about a week a lot of motorists attach large red hemispheres to the front of their cars. Just imagine how funny that is.
From my experience and observations, the standard of drivers in the UK is WAY better than that of where I live.
Having said that, I live near Toronto… I’m told that the standard of driving is much better when you get outside the greater city area.
I couldn’t agree more. To NOT use it is dangerous IMO. But everytime somebody is in my car who hasn’t seen me drive before, they will make a comment about how often I use my hand brake.
Two major reasons why people don’t do this here.
1: Most cars are automatic
2: You can take your test on an automatic and then drive a standard. I don’t know anyone who took their test on a standard.
Ah, red nose day or something right? I lived there the first year they had it… can’t believe it’s still going!
It is a legal requirement in Sweden though. It has been since about 1977 - they did a trial before intorducing it which showed that accident rates fell dramatically - I think it was something like 20%, but have been unable to find a cite for it today.
**
It does have a bearing on it, as unless you are in neutral or park in an automatic, it is subject to transmission creep…ie the car will move forward the whole time, even if you don’t have your foot on the accelerator (a manual car would stall if you didn’t have the clutch engaged & no gas was supplied). This is why auto drivers sit at the lights with their foot on the brakes and why they don’t need to use the handbrake. As soon as they release the brake, the car will be moving forwards, with none of the roll back that you get with a manual transmission car.
[slight hijack] If they do put it into neutral or park to save fuel, they have to pass through reverse in all the models I’ve seen to get to drive, which can be quite alarming the first time you see it, if you’re fairly close behind & aren’t familiar with automatics [/slight hijack]
wooba - yes, red nose day. They have it on alternate years so that people wouldn’t get charity burn-out with regards to it, but it is still going.
I’m not sure we’re better, but we’re probably faster (when we can) . Anecdotally, I’ve
a) been a passenger in a car in the UK with another Canadian passenger, driven by a UK driver, going about 85 on the motorway. 85 was (imho) about right for the prevailing conditions but my fellow passenger was clearly (very) agitated. Not making a point about Canadians, other than they’re perhaps used to driving more slowly (which would probably class them as safer by most)
b) been pulled over while driving in Canada, for speeding (insert guilty smiley). Cop looked at my UK driving license - which has a couple of old speeding offences on it - and lets me off with ‘the 110$ lecture rather than the $110 dollar fine’ because ‘you’re obviously used to driving faster over there’. Very droll, I thought, as I kissed his feet.
Am I understanding this correctly? In the UK, it’s routine for the handbrake to be engaged at traffic lights? Even ones on flat ground?
Having grown up in the US, I was taught that the primary use of the handbrake was as a parking brake. In fact, all owner’s manuals and such that I’ve seen refer to it as the “Parking Brake”.
This is true even for manual transmissions, which are in the minority here. Having a hand-operated parking brake (as opposed to a foot-actuated one), is regarded as a convenience when starting on hills, but not a necessity.
My pickup, for example, has a manual transmission and a foot-operated parking brake (i.e., no handbrake). Not having three feet, I can’t use it to keep me from rolling backwards when I start on an uphill slope, but with a little practice one can get on just fine without it.
With the occasional exception of uphill starts, drivers here are taught to use the handbrake only as a parking brake. Disengage it when you start the engine, and don’t touch it again until you have parked the car at your destination. At least, that’s been my experience. Sounds a lot like what the Canadians get taught, too.
OK, I have to confess. The prevailing attitude among many folks I know is that using the handbrake on hill starts is “wimping out,” and is only to be done when one’s driving skills aren’t up to the task of doing “the real way.” The “real way” being, of course, letting the clutch out until it starts to bite, then moving your right foot from brake to gas and moving out. It’s not that hard, and like I said, I have no choice in my truck.
Can’t speak for the rest of the populace (and I’m too old to remember the section from the highway code) but I was certainly taught to use the handbrake at traffic lights. Some days I even do.
:eek:
Over here in Britain, if you take your test on an automatic you can’t drive a standard till you’ve taken the standard test.
I always use the handbrake at lights even when it is “flat” (I grew up in a very hilly city) but my boyfriend who grew up in the fens (very flat) doesn’t as much. It depends on where you learnt to drive I guess. I tend to put it on whenever I’m stopped for more than a minute as it means I dont need to keep my foot on the pedal.
Hill starts using the handbrake were part of the test when I did it about 5 yrs ago and I think they still are. The rational is probably that if you are parked on a hill you’ll have the handbrake on.
Oh, don’t worry about the Wimp War[sup]TM[/sup], Xerxes. I’d be tempted to toss the victory to you guys just because more than a small fraction of you know how to drive stickshifts at all.
The daytime running lights that were the source of this whole thread haven’t really caught on in the US, based solely on my observations. Sure, you see some cars that have them, but they’re definitely in the minority around here.
I, personally, find somewhat objectionable the notion of my car having lights that I cannot turn off while the engine is running and/or I’m moving. The primary example that comes to mind for me is driving into a stargazing site after dark - common rule of etiquette demand that one kill his headlights and drive into the site on parking lights only. In a car with the automatic DRL’s, this is impossible.
Catmarie, I’ll second what wooba said. No special certification is required to drive a stickshift here in the states. The common wisdom here is that you’re better off taking the test in an automatic, 'cause there’s less to screw up.
In my experience, Driver Education classes (required in most states to get a license before a certain age), use exclusively automatics in their teaching. If (and that’s a big “if” here) you want to learn to drive a stick, you’ll do that on your own.
That said, I think US driving tests could use some serious improvement. Mine (in Texas) was little more than a trip around the block. Rather than seeing whether you can really handle your car in real-life situations, they make sure that you can obey the really ticky-tack traffic laws in a wholly unrealistic fashion.
Trouble is, it’s quite hard to drive an automatic badly (from a transmission point of view that is). It’s fairly hard for someone with a bit of experience to drive a stick-shift badly, but when they do, Jeez, the noise of stripping gears is worse than fingernails on a blackboard. Did I mention my dear Aunt?
Yep, I think I’d find that pretty annoying too. One group of road-users over here which do tend to use headlights are the power-bikers. And I’m very glad they do, too. Some of these crazies are zooming about at > 100mph on far less than motorways, and the extra warning you get is sometimes useful.
I think they’ve tightened the test since I took it; they’ve certainly split it into two parts (theory/written and practice/driven). Makes sense, I think.
And now, ladies and gentlemen, to hijack the hijack, a pet peeve.
What is the point of an automatic transmission on what purports to be a sports car? I drive an oldish MX5 (US=Miata) - naturally a stick-shift, but I do know that elsewhere it’s not uncommon to find these with an automatic transmission. I suppose they could tweak the gear-change points to be more ‘sporty’ (read higher revs) but really, most of the fun of this thing is dropping a cog and taking it up to past 7000 rpm… that’s where all the power is. I’m not anti-automatic; I’ve driven them in Canada and the US and for long rides they’re excellent, but…
The standard procedure if you need to turn off your DRLs when approaching, say, a stargazing group, is to lift the parking brake one notch. That’ll disengage the DRLs but is barely noticable to the car.
I’ve driven a standard most of my life and only use the parking brake on steep hill starts. The only time I use it at a traffic light is if I need to rummage around the car and don’t want to leave my foot on the brake pedal. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone in the US use the parking brake at a traffic light with a manual transmission unless it was a very steep hill.
I live in NYC and only drive when I visit my parents in Maryland - but I still read the auto mags and attend shows. I thought running lights were becoming standard on some GM models, partly because a lot of GM’s production is in Canada where running lights make a difference (most of the U.S. is too far south to have the long twilights where the lights help).
Re driver’s tests in the US: Oh, they’re embarassingly easy. A high-school friend of mine moved from Louisiana, where she said that literally all you had to do was drive around the block.
New Jersey never requires retesting of vision! I was amazed (and a little nervous) when I found that out.
Most states never require retaking the road test - you just renew for life. It’s even true when you move; I only took the road test once, when I was a teenager. There’s now some moves to require retesting of the elderly, but it’s politically highly charged. There isn’t enough public transit in most places for elderly people to avoid becoming shut-ins if they lose their licenses. And boy, do they ever vote.
I should point out that I am the only slow driver in Canada, the rest of the people here drive like Mario Andretti.
The law here relates to automakers where all new cars have to have daytime running lights installed as well as a centre mounted rear brake light. Both of these features have shown themselves to reduce accidents. If your car is older you are not required to modify your vehicle by adding either of these features as there is no law that says you have to have your lights on during the day.
My Thunderbird is a good example, being built in '85 it did not come equipped with a centre mount brake light nor did it have daytime running lights. It cost me $25.00 to add these features primarily due to the cost of the aftermarket brake light. My car was equipped with a light sensor that will turn the lights on automatically when the light falls below a certain level. Simply covering the sensor with a small piece of electrical tape makes my car think it is always dark so the lights are always on. I can simply turn them off at the dash if I wish. I added a centre mount brake light to my van as well and am planning to install a daytime light kit soon.
In Canada we having parking brakes and I have never known anyone to use them for hill starts. My car is a standard and I have no trouble starting on hills. Many people shudder at the prospect of doing this and it is one of the hardest skills to aquire when learning to drive a standard.
I like the idea of having a seperate test to get licensed to drive a standard, most cars come equipped with automatic transmissions and there are many people who have never driven a car with a manual tranny.
I would like to say in my defense that I CAN do that… I like to think I can drive a stick really well (I’ve even been told I’m very good by other drivers). But why take a risk?
Using the hand break to prevent any potential roll back is much safer incase anything goes wrong. I dare say it’s better for the gear box, but I don’t know enough about it to say with certainty.
I should have made my quasi-sarcastic chest-thumping a little more obvious - re-reading my post, it was a bit strong. I don’t really believe that using the handbrake on hill starts is cheating - when I drove a vehicle that had a handbrake, I used it on steep hills. I definitely didn’t want to sound like I was putting down your driving technique, wooba - I sincerely apologize if it came off that way.
Since there are vehicles with manual tranny’s that don’t have handbrakes, it’s nice to have the confidence to live without one. I’ll certainly agree that the margin for error is greater when using the handbrake, and for that reason it should probably be regarded as preferable when the hill is sufficiently steep. Just what qualifies as “sufficiently steep”, I think, would vary with the skills and self-confidence of the driver.
[/slight hijack]