Front Fog lights....
Discussion
OK, before you all jump down my thought and moan, I am not one of said people!
Will somebody please point me at the exact legislation that relates to front fog lights, as opposed to fog lights, high intesity rear fog lights, etc etc.
I can find NOTHING that even defines what a front fog light is, let alone it's use, all the stuff I can find reffers (either directly or by inference) to the rear ones.
My personal view is that if they are correctly fitted and adjusted (as headlights must be) they *cannot* possibly cause any hazzard different to running with headlights on.
thus why are BIB so keen to hand out tickets for this?
Considering in some contries, running lights are mandatory (as in be seen) what's the problem?
>>> Edited by scuffham on Friday 22 October 17:26
Will somebody please point me at the exact legislation that relates to front fog lights, as opposed to fog lights, high intesity rear fog lights, etc etc.
I can find NOTHING that even defines what a front fog light is, let alone it's use, all the stuff I can find reffers (either directly or by inference) to the rear ones.
My personal view is that if they are correctly fitted and adjusted (as headlights must be) they *cannot* possibly cause any hazzard different to running with headlights on.
thus why are BIB so keen to hand out tickets for this?
Considering in some contries, running lights are mandatory (as in be seen) what's the problem?
>>> Edited by scuffham on Friday 22 October 17:26
The offence isnt driving with foglights on its actually the offence of causing undue dazzle.
All that is needed to prove is that undue dazzle was caused on the officer giving the ticket. Can also be used for unbalanced headlamps.
Edit... there is an offence of front / rear foglamps unnecessarily.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Friday 22 October 17:53
All that is needed to prove is that undue dazzle was caused on the officer giving the ticket. Can also be used for unbalanced headlamps.
Edit... there is an offence of front / rear foglamps unnecessarily.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Friday 22 October 17:53
scuffham said:
Will somebody please point me at the exact legislation that relates to front fog lights, as opposed to fog lights, high intesity rear fog lights, etc etc.
I can find NOTHING that even defines what a front fog light is, let alone it's use, all the stuff I can find reffers (either directly or by inference) to the rear ones.
My personal view is that if they are correctly fitted and adjusted (as headlights must be) they *cannot* possibly cause any hazzard different to running with headlights on.
See Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations 1989
There is a contents which takes you to the relevant bits, but to get you started because this statutory instrument is a model of legislative clarity......NOT.
Within interpretations Part 1- section 3 you will find
"Front fog lamp" A lamp used to improve the illumination of the road in front of a motor vehicle in conditions of seriously reduced visibility.
You will also find definition of an optional lamp as
"Optional" In relation to a lamp, reflector, rear marking or device, means a lamp, reflector, rear marking or device with which a vehicle, its load or equipment is not required by these Regulations to be fitted.
Part II sections 18 & 20 tell you in detail where to look for details of which lamps are obligatory and which are optional, front fog lamps are optional.
So for front fogs turn to Schedule 6 and you find the requirements for fitting alignment colour etc. Note 3% downward alignment which is approximately twice the downward alignment angle (1.3%-2%) which applies to modern car dipped beams. See Schedule 4
Now as to use this is contained within [url]Part III Section 25|www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1989/Uksi_19891796_en_4.htm#(Tiii)25requirementaboutuseheadlampfrontfoglamp[/url] or try this link
Note that use of fog lights in conditions other than seriously reduced visibility is prohibited in Part III Section 27 in addition to the circumstances outlined by slider. (sorry slider can't be arsed with these login names with odd characters, hope no offence incurred.)
On face value it looks fairly simple but it gets into a minefield situation as discussed on other threads, the devil is in the detail. For example approval marks and mounting position come into it as to whether the lights are fog lights or could be interpreted as optional main / dip beam head lights.
Not enough information about the particular installation you are concerned about to be specific, but you will find more or less all the info you want here. The bit which is missing relates to EU type approval codes, and for the life of me I can't find the stuff to give you a specific answer right now.
Regarding your opinion that correctly mounted and aligned fog lights shouldn't give more dazzle than similar head lights, you may well be correct, it all depends.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 22 October 18:10
Whatever the actual legislation is the main reasons I object to people using front foglamps are:
1. High intensity bulbs give glare to oncoming drivers. Especially if those drivers wear spectacles as this, by the very nature, causes lights to be intensified to the wearer and increase dazzle just in the wearing.
2. The downward pointing beams reflect of the road surface, particularly in the wet, to cause extra dazzle to oncoming drivers.
3. Alot of drivers have poor night vision and confidence. Any extra light that detracts from their night vision is bad news.
As, has also been said, they also don't actually aid vision in normal conditions as the direction and spread of light for the driver is very poor even when compared to dip-beams.
1. High intensity bulbs give glare to oncoming drivers. Especially if those drivers wear spectacles as this, by the very nature, causes lights to be intensified to the wearer and increase dazzle just in the wearing.
2. The downward pointing beams reflect of the road surface, particularly in the wet, to cause extra dazzle to oncoming drivers.
3. Alot of drivers have poor night vision and confidence. Any extra light that detracts from their night vision is bad news.
As, has also been said, they also don't actually aid vision in normal conditions as the direction and spread of light for the driver is very poor even when compared to dip-beams.
So... if you had 10 head light rated lamp units, that would be legal?!!! I think I have just seen a good way of beating the system. All I need is the appropiate marks on the lamps, and i can do as I please - which is most of the time anyway, as no coppers around to tell me otherwise in this age of camerati infestation.
It doesnt really matter what the actual legislation is, nor does it matter if you are one of the very tiny minority who have actually bothered to think about it and experiment and have found that they have some limited value when driving country roads at night.
The bottom line is simple, if you drive around with your front fog lights on because you think it looks cool, you are a twat. Thats not point of view, its pure cold hard fact.
The bottom line is simple, if you drive around with your front fog lights on because you think it looks cool, you are a twat. Thats not point of view, its pure cold hard fact.
Flat in Fifth said:
So... if you had 10 head light rated lamp units, that would be legal?!!!
On dipped beam no it would be not be legal, not more than two allowed.
For main beam use no restriction on number.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Saturday 23 October 08:18
err - that's not true either...
there are quite a few cars with more then one pair of headlights fitted with both main and dip beam.
Just to put my point of view accross (and wait for the on-slaught of abuse) I happen to think that running front lights at all times is a *good* idea, (got this habbit from riding bikes around).
to my mind it's a clear marker that you are there, but like Volvo tryied to do with running lights, and the (now defunced) dim-dip rules.
This does not mean I advocate the use of rear ones in all conditions, this is VERY bad news, particularly in the wet when you become conditioned to seeing red, then miss peoples brake-lights.
Now, all this stuff about causing dazzeling, will you please explain how this is *any* different to running with dip beam headlights on (which is perfectly legal at all times)?
I know I am probably not going to win any friends here, but my view is that I would far rather be called a twat then have somebody pull-out infront of me.
This mourning into work I noticed another use for foglights...emergancy failed bulb lights. Oh my headlight is out, rather than fix it I'll just run with front fogs on all the time till the next service in 9months, and just for good measure I'll dazzle the elise driver with my rear fog light..(Yes you in the feista)
I would like to add as an elise driver which means I live very near the road the things that particularily piss me off are a) rear foglights b)Motorbikes running FULL beam in the day c) front foglights.
They are all roughly level with me and are a pain.
In fact come to think of it I am probebly the first to mention the problem of bikes running full beam all the time...WHY?
I would like to add as an elise driver which means I live very near the road the things that particularily piss me off are a) rear foglights b)Motorbikes running FULL beam in the day c) front foglights.
They are all roughly level with me and are a pain.
In fact come to think of it I am probebly the first to mention the problem of bikes running full beam all the time...WHY?
Streetcop said:
Also keeping your foot on the brake pedal whilst stationary at night (when you light up the drivers face behind you).......Undue Dazzle
Aye..knobheads....Apply your handbrake; take foot off brake pedal.
Street
I have never been bothered by people leaving their brakelights on in traffic.
Rear fogs however...
scuffham said:
So... if you had 10 head light rated lamp units, that would be legal?!!!
On dipped beam no it would be not be legal, not more than two allowed.
For main beam use no restriction on number.
err - that's not true either...
there are quite a few cars with more then one pair of headlights fitted with both main and dip beam.
I've provided you with what you requested, a link to the regulations,
NOW READ THEM! Fitted does not equal legal, OK?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mr Fish: Re M/bikes full beam in day light. Unfortunately you are not the first to mention this. For example, this is something that Toad of Toad Hall and I agreed to disagree over a long time go. I quite agree with you they are unnecessary and selfish.
As an aside I wonder if sometimes "unusually bright" m/bike headlamps are the result of grey "left hand drive" imports with unconverted dip beams. Maybe someone more knowledgable about bikes could comment.
FiF
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff