Daytime running lights

[outlaw557]

Morning all,
I know this has been beaten to death but...Just purchased a 2002 minnie from US, yes I need DRL's It's on a Ford e450 Chassis. The wiring harrness I am sure will support the DRL modules I just can't seem to find the point in the harrness that they can be installed. Does anybody have any expeience with this particular model and year?
Thanks, Geo.

[ga traveler]

the fuse on my 99 f-53 is in the fuse panel under the hood. It says daytime running lights on the fuse box lid. I actually took out my fuse out after googleing DRL and finding the government did a study and concluded they did no good. They increase gas consumption. I am NOT trying to talk you out of it, I just feel the government nanny state would never reverse themselves on requiring them if they worked.

[W4RLR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ga traveler the fuse on my 99 f-53 is in the fuse panel under the hood. It says daytime running lights on the fuse box lid. I actually took out my fuse out after googleing DRL and finding the government did a study and concluded they did no good. They increase gas consumption. I am NOT trying to talk you out of it, I just feel the government nanny state would never reverse themselves on requiring them if they worked.

He doesn't have a choice. Daytime running lights are REQUIRED in Canada. I've not heard anything about the U.S. government reversing its views regarding DRLs, if anything, they are available in the U.S. if you are a fleet buyer.

[Sequim Guy]

On my '99 F-53 MH, the low beams are wired on all the time, no switch to turn off.
Also have 2 small lights mounted under front bumper that are on a switch.



Do you really think the drag on the alternator created by two lights, not all of the exterior lights, would really make any difference in mileage? It just seem to me the difference would be so small as to not even be noticed. IMHO

[macnkat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ga traveler the fuse on my 99 f-53 is in the fuse panel under the hood. It says daytime running lights on the fuse box lid. I actually took out my fuse out after googleing DRL and finding the government did a study and concluded they did no good. They increase gas consumption. I am NOT trying to talk you out of it, I just feel the government nanny state would never reverse themselves on requiring them if they worked.

Was that a dedicated fuse GA? My 2001 Bounder is on a 2000 chassis and I really hate the lights on all the time. It makes it difficult to flash trucks passing to let them know it's safe to change back. If all it takes is pulling a fuse I'll do that in the morning!

[ga traveler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by macnkat Was that a dedicated fuse GA? My 2001 Bounder is on a 2000 chassis and I really hate the lights on all the time. It makes it difficult to flash trucks passing to let them know it's safe to change back. If all it takes is pulling a fuse I'll do that in the morning!

I started to ignore this post, because I knew I would get all the nanny state
people screaming at me. In 2009 the federal government ruled that DRL's were using millions of gallons of gas a DAY. Mfg's can still install them, but a govt study showed they do no good. Instead of attacking me, I wish these people would google and wikipedia them. According to the U.S. government Drl's increase gas consumption up to 1/2 mile per gallon. Back to your question. Yes this is a dedicated fuse in the Ford plastic fuse box under the hood.

[ga traveler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sequim Guy On my '99 F-53 MH, the low beams are wired on all the time, no switch to turn off. Also have 2 small lights mounted under front bumper that are on a switch. Do you really think the drag on the alternator created by two lights, not all of the exterior lights, would really make any difference in mileage? It just seem to me the difference would be so small as to not even be noticed. IMHO

according to the U.S. Government they increase fuel consumption up to 1/2 mpg. This was not a switch, it was the drl fuse.

[450Donn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ga traveler I started to ignore this post, because I knew I would get all the nanny state people screaming at me. In 2009 the federal government ruled that DRL's were using millions of gallons of gas a DAY. Mfg's can still install them, but a govt study showed they do no good. Instead of attacking me, I wish these people would google and wikipedia them. According to the U.S. government Drl's increase gas consumption up to 1/2 mile per gallon. Back to your question. Yes this is a dedicated fuse in the Ford plastic fuse box under the hood.

How can that be?
Your alternator is spinning all the time,the battery is being charged all the time. Your comment makes no sense. Not everything posted on the internet is factual you know?
If you go back and re-read the Wikipedia story it is comparing a 200 watt full light system to 55 watts of LED's. In the US and Canada the requirement is front lights. So lets look at this a bit further. If you are running your headlight low beams at 70% power level ( common on a DRL system) that is 70% of 110 watts or about 77 watts. That translates into about 6-1/2 amps. Or about 1/10 of a typical alternators output. So, if your RV or truck is getting typically 10MPG towing and you loose 1/2 MPG as this study claims you would be loosing 5% fuel economy? Logic tells me that this is more false Government math. It just does not compute. The alternator is spinning all the time the motor is running. It is putting out voltage as long as it is spinning. The load on the motor does not change just because the battery load varies up or down. If you choose to accept this sort of false information and not have/use DRL/s, by all means be my guest. Personally when I bought my truck the first thing I did was have the dealer turn on the DRL feature for me. I have traveled extensively in Canada and northern climates in late fall/winter and the DRL feature is a life saver. When the sky is gray all day you can see oncoming vehicles further away. To me that is worth it. The only negative I see is that light bulbs may burn out faster. And so far that has not even proven out in my case.

[wa8yxm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ga traveler I started to ignore this post, because I knew I would get all the nanny state people screaming at me. In 2009 the federal government ruled that DRL's were using millions of gallons of gas a DAY.

Not attacking you.. I suspect you are in fact posting factual information as far as you know.

However many years ago I read several studies showing that DRL's DO, in fact, reduce accidents.. This is why they are required in Canada.

The follow up studies I've seen... Well, even I could see the flaws in them.

(I do know statics can be used to prove any side of an argument)

True story:

When the Federal Government came out with a "Motor Voter" law, that allows drivers to register to vote when they apply for or renew a driver's license.. The League of Women voters promptly sued Michigan because there was no "Great Increase in registered voters"

The federal law was patterned after Michigan's Motor Voter law which was put in place a good decade earlier and at that time.. We did, in fact, see the big increase.

The later studies I've seen, Like the League above, Fail to take into account what happened 10 years (or so) ago.

My personal observation. I can see a car with lights on way sooner than one running dark.

[Aguyfromcalg]

You may have to take it to a ford dealer to have your DRL working . My 2010 Coachmen also on a E450 which I bought in Alberta doesn't have DRL either.
I suspect that is because the RV manufactures buy incomplete and cut away chassis that don't need to comply with Canadian DRL requirements.
IMHO

[subford]

450Donn,

Not sure you understand how a alternator works. Nothing is free.

The alternator is like a motor running backwards. The more load you put on it the more torque it wants to turn against the engine rotation and yes it will use more fuel to keep it turning in the same rotation as the motor. If you put enough load on it the belt will start to slip on the alternators chive (pulley). Then the belt starts to smoke.

Yes I know on a Ford it is not called an alternator. Ford calls it an "AC generator".

[Akibase]

Yes they are required in Canada and I feel this is great. They sure do increase visibility. Somebody posted about the additional cost of running them. They were correct. It adds approximately $8.00 to the cost of running an average car in a given year. (this is US federal government information from testing conducted in 2007) Sounds like pretty cheap life insurance to me. When we travel in the US, we really see or maybe don't see the difference. This is one where I feel that Canada made the right move

[macnkat]

Oh yeah...safety third. Can you imagine how much safer we would all be if we wore helmets while driving? I actually wonder if they do any good at all with practically every car on the road using them they start to all blend together. It's amazing we all lived to be as old as we are without them.

[ga traveler]

[QUOTE=450Donn;994860]How can that be?
Your alternator is spinning all the time,the battery is being charged all the time. Your comment makes no sense. claims you would be loosing 5% fuel economy? Logic tells me that this is more false Government math. It just does not compute. The alternator is spinning all the time the motor is running. It is putting out voltage as long as it is spinning. The load on the motor does not change just because the battery load varies up or down. .......................... You must not have any electrical training. The higher the load you put on an alternator the harder it is to turn. It takes several horsepower to turn a alt. In the sixtys guys would take off the alt belt before a drag race to up their horsepower. I did not state 5% I said up to .5 miles per gallon. I am sure this was a small engine car.