# Cruze DRL On or off?



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

Because the power to run the DRLs must be produced by the engine, which in turn requires burning additional fuel, high-power DRL systems increase CO2 emissions sufficiently to affect a country's compliance with the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gas emissions.

So, do you folks turn off your DRl to save energy? I do, but I am obsessed with mileage


----------



## Oh5V (Jan 4, 2011)

how do you figure it costs you gas mileage? i really am curious to hear this explanation...


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

Oh5V said:


> how do you figure it costs you gas mileage? i really am curious to hear this explanation...


Lights on = energy. Energy comes from fuel. Lights off = less fuel burned = better mileage. The work your alternator does costs money or fuel. If it did not, then the car companies would not be working on smaller, less energy consuming alternators. 

Think of it with a Volt. Every time you turn on DRL, you must replace the electrons used by DRl with more electrons. Electrons require power. that power comes from gasoline/attery. The Volts batteries require a source to fill the battery. DRL are an energy drag, no matter if the electrons come from the 120 volt socket in your garage or the motor in the car recharging the Volt's batteries.

Make sense???? There is no free lunch when it come to headlights. Just as when you turn on the lights in your home, power is used to light the lights. Power for the lights requires energy comes form coal, solar , gasoline, etc. If you don't believe that, then perpetual motion is something you believe in 

The Volt has been designed to look a every item that consumes electrons, from headlights, to A/C, to radio, to fans as a source that uses electrons. The Volt has been designed to reduce electron use. Many EV use LEDS for everything to reduce the electron load.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

1 HP = 746 electical watts

...so, the question is, how many watts do the DRL consume?


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

For that reason, low-power solutions are being encouraged[9] and headlamp-based systems are not allowed when DRLs become mandatory in Europe at the beginning of 2011. LEDs and low-power, high-efficacy, long-life light bulbs produce appropriate amounts of light for an effective DRL without significantly increasing fuel consumption or emissions. Fuel consumption reductions of up to 0.5 mpg may be found when comparing a 55 W DRL system to a 200 W DRL system


----------



## jaygeo1 (Nov 10, 2010)

*"Obsessed" for sure.............*

The power required to turn the alternator pulley the *extra *effort needed produce the amperage for the DRL's wouldn't show up in normal mpg calculations and passing one car on a 2-lane road would eat up the savings by not running the DRL's. I'm a firm believer that DRL's are an _effective safety system_ which outways any effect it has on mpg, ofcourse IMO.


----------



## Oh5V (Jan 4, 2011)

I understand the concept of electricity and alternators. I am honestly speechless though....

and as for EV, obviously you wanna conserve power... since the more available the further the range. VERY different than a gasoline powered vehicle.

I'm not getting into a discussion on lights costing fuel economy of any measurable level. I find that way too humorous.


----------



## Oh5V (Jan 4, 2011)

montgom626 said:


> Fuel consumption reductions of up to 0.5 mpg may be found when comparing a 55 W DRL system to a 200 W DRL system



show me this documentation.

and what cars have a 200w drl system, thatd be one bright ass drl...


and lets not take into account voltage regulators which limit the alt output when its not needed...


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

Oh5V said:


> I understand the concept of electricity and alternators. I am honestly speechless though....
> 
> and as for EV, obviously you wanna conserve power... since the more available the further the range. VERY different than a gasoline powered vehicle.
> 
> I'm not getting into a discussion on lights costing fuel economy of any measurable level. I find that way too humorous.


Fuel consumption reductions of up to 0.5 mpg may be found when comparing a 55 W DRL system to a 200 W DRL system 

This information was done using gasoline powered vehicles, not EV. Concept is the same, power is power. Does not matter i it comes from gas, diesel or electricity. Or coal


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...DRL are like "safety" signs.

...when there's only one or two around, they REALLY stand out and get your attention.

...but, when everybody uses them, they become optical "noise" and are soon ignored, just like acoustic "noise" and work areas having safety signs everywhere.

...samething as Deming's warning about too many "Quality" signs becoming eventually "ignored."


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...DRL are like "safety" signs.
> 
> ...when there's only one or two around, they REALLY stand out and get your attention.
> 
> ...


Dude, we must get together some day, as you are really tracking!!!!! You understand. 

PS I go to Phoenix once in awhile to see by Sister in law and brother.


----------



## jaygeo1 (Nov 10, 2010)

It's the other half of DRL's that I like* ALOT*....the headlights come on automatically. IMO, DRL's should be mandated to all US vehicles. (I think Canada has DRL's required) Far to often I see drivers forgetting to turn their headlights on at dawn and dusk.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

jaygeo1 said:


> It's the other half of DRL's that I like* ALOT*....the headlights come on automatically. IMO, DRL's should be mandated to all US vehicles. (I think Canada has DRL's required) Far to often I see drivers forgetting to turn their headlights on at dawn and dusk.


I think they should stop half the idiots from driving. Texting, talking, eating a burger (I love meat BTW) tuning the radio, changing lanes without a signal. tail gating. Running red lights. Cripes, half the folks are fools. 

No need for DRL is we got rid of the losers!


----------



## ALiCE (Jan 15, 2011)

montgom626 said:


> For that reason, low-power solutions are being encouraged[9] and headlamp-based systems are not allowed when DRLs become mandatory in Europe at the beginning of 2011. LEDs and low-power, high-efficacy, long-life light bulbs produce appropriate amounts of light for an effective DRL without significantly increasing fuel consumption or emissions. Fuel consumption reductions of up to 0.5 mpg may be found when comparing a 55 W DRL system to a 200 W DRL system


Actually, here's how Chevrolet decided to implement "DRL" on Cruze in Europe, for the models with light sensors:
Low beam is always on, including the tail lights. No LEDs, no reduced power, no nothing.

You can turn off the low beam (until the next engine start, after that the low beam is turned on again), but the position lights remain always on. I didn't loooked at tail lights.
Because they implemented that "feature", the light sensor is only used for dimming the dashboard lights .

Also "follow me home" doesn't work as it should (the lights should remain lit for a configured time after you remove the key, if it's dark outside) - Probably is too hard for Chevrolet programers to do something right.

Now, about the power consumption:
Low beam - 555W x 2
Position lights - 5W x 2
Tail lights - 10W x 2 (or 5W x 2, not sure)
Total: 130 or 140W. That means 0.17-0.19hp.
Translated into fuel economy, is probably less than the difference of runing with full or half-full tank.

Can it be good? (more visible) - YES.
Can it be bad? I don't find a reason for that.


----------



## robertbick (Jan 1, 2011)

montgom626 said:


> I think they should stop half the idiots from driving. Texting, talking, eating a burger (I love meat BTW) tuning the radio, changing lanes without a signal. tail gating. Running red lights. Cripes, half the folks are fools.
> 
> No need for DRL is we got rid of the losers!


I totally agree!!!


----------



## ALiCE (Jan 15, 2011)

That idiot MAY see YOUR lights and this CAN save YOUR life!
Isn't this enough?


----------



## SilverCruzer (Nov 30, 2010)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...DRL are like "safety" signs.
> 
> ...when there's only one or two around, they REALLY stand out and get your attention.
> 
> ...


I know and believe the concept you are explaining, but not sure it applies with DRL _all the time, especially when *looking* for a car_.
Example: When passing someone on a two laine hwy, the difference between seeing opposing traffic on time and not seeing could be DRL. Yes, subconciously you pay less attention if every car had DRL or was painted red, but when conciously looking in order to make a lane change, it helps.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

ALiCE said:


> That idiot MAY see YOUR lights and this CAN save YOUR life!
> Isn't this enough?


If I had proof DRL worked (none exists) then I might be swayed. If I lived in a Scandinavian country (proof it works) then of course I would embrace DRL.

How would you feel if the FEDS told you the only car color you could have would be white , since they have no proof it makes any difference but they believe it will? That would be the same level of proof they currently have for DRL. No black cars, or dark red , just white. No proof, just a "feeling" it would be better.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...could be the military backgrounds?


Army 22 years and counting.................


----------



## ALiCE (Jan 15, 2011)

montgom626 said:


> If I had proof DRL worked (none exists) then I might be swayed. If I lived in a Scandinavian country (proof it works) then of course I would embrace DRL.


I never said that having the lights on IS better. I said that it MAY be better, and certainly not WORSE.


----------



## Ninety8NeonACR (Dec 25, 2010)

I think DRLs are a good thing. I have always driven with my lights on. If it makes one car not pull in front of me and keeps me out of one accident in my lifetime it will probably outweigh any costs that having my lights on will incur. But I also think it would be safer to drive with the radio off and the windows open but I'm sure not going to do that.


----------



## Knightslugger (Jan 11, 2011)

let's not forget, the DRLs are powered using PWM, further reducing electrical load.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...*energy* and *money* are a LOT ALIKE...because _"...the best way..."_ to save either is to _"...not *expend*..."_ either!

...energy is being expended with PWM, just _not quite as much_ as with straight Direct Current (DC).

...it takes (some) energy to _control_ energy.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

Ninety8NeonACR said:


> I think DRLs are a good thing. I have always driven with my lights on. If it makes one car not pull in front of me and keeps me out of one accident in my lifetime it will probably outweigh any costs that having my lights on will incur. But I also think it would be safer to drive with the radio off and the windows open but I'm sure not going to do that.


Agreed.


----------



## CRUISE-CRUZE (Nov 8, 2010)

If I am going to worry about “*up to*” 0.5MPG more gas consumption because of DRL, I shouldn’t be worry about the brake tail lights?  So less braking from now! And no signal lights also! He he he!


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

CRUISE-CRUZE said:


> If I am going to worry about “*up to*” 0.5MPG more gas consumption because of DRL, I shouldn’t be worry about the brake tail lights?  So less braking from now! And no signal lights also! He he he!


Agreed. Who cares about 0.5 mpg?  I just find it amazing that something as seemingly innocuous as DRL could cost 1/2 mpg . Who would have guessed?


----------



## Knightslugger (Jan 11, 2011)

OTR Truckers care about .5MPG...


----------



## cerbomark (Dec 13, 2010)

This reminds me of a topic I have seen somewhere about driving around with 1/4 tank of fuel instead of full which in turn saves weight and then creates better MPGs.. Remember the more fuel efficient this country becomes the more OPEC will just raise prices to keep profits up. They produce less and make more cash.


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

...the following quote from the GM instruction to EPA testers seems appropriate here:

_"*Daytime Running Lights (DRL):*_

_*Daytime running must be disabled prior to fuel economy testing*. Please contact General Motors Compliance and Certification organization for instructions on how to disable the daytime running lights." document: 86.1844(d)(12)-BGMXV01.8011, Special Test Instructions._

[note: emphasis and color are mine]


----------



## cerbomark (Dec 13, 2010)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...the following quote from the GM instruction to EPA testers seems appropriate here:
> 
> _"*Daytime Running Lights (DRL):*_
> 
> ...


very interesting.....


----------



## ALiCE (Jan 15, 2011)

Can the user disable DRLs? If not, this is very spooky - the car should be tested with DRL on.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

ALiCE said:


> Can the user disable DRLs? If not, this is very spooky - the car should be tested with DRL on.


Yes, easy to do on cruze. Turn the headlight switch to left and off go the DRL.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...the following quote from the GM instruction to EPA testers seems appropriate here:
> 
> _"*Daytime Running Lights (DRL):*_
> 
> _*Daytime running must be disabled prior to fuel economy testing*. Please contact General Motors Compliance and Certification organization for instructions on how to disable the daytime running lights." document: 86.1844(d)(12)-BGMXV01.8011, Special Test Instructions._


Hmmmmmm, even the FEDS know that mileage drops with DRL


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

montgom626 said:


> Hmmmmmm, even the *FEDS* know that mileage drops with DRL


...actually, it's *GM* telling the FED testors that DRL's need to be off during mpg tests...which sorta implies the FED's don't know the difference!?!


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...actually, it's *GM* telling the FED testors that DRL's need to be off during mpg tests...which sorta implies the FED's don't know the difference!?!


FEDS don't know ?


----------



## 70AARCUDA (Nov 14, 2010)

ALiCE said:


> Can the user disable DRLs? If not, this is very spooky - the car should be tested with DRL on.


...apparently, EPA does not require it in USA, see page 28 of 35:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/datafiles/FOI_BGMXV01.8011_APPIPT1_R1.PDF

...and, here's an article about "headlights ON" and a Corvette:

http://mb-soft.com/public/headlite.html


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

*Another reason to not run DRL*

Today, after running at above legal speeds on the freeway, my radar detector screeched out a warning of police ahead. I quickly nailed the brakes and then realized again, another reason why I do not run DRL. A police officer can more easily see the dipping headlights!!! I nail the brakes, headlights dip and cop sees me braking hard because my headlights plunge to the pavement. No DRL, no headlights giving away my actions.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...and, here's an article about "headlights ON" and a Corvette:
> 
> Driving with your Headlights On


Most excellent article, dude.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

70AARCUDA said:


> ...apparently, EPA does not require it in USA, see page 28 of 35:
> 
> http://www.epa.gov/otaq/datafiles/FOI_BGMXV01.8011_APPIPT1_R1.PDF


Whew, seriously tough reading for a lightweight like me. My head hurts. I am going to watch some cartoons and relax my damaged brain


----------



## BustedCrank (Jan 16, 2011)

montgom626 said:


> Today, after running at above legal speeds on the freeway, my radar detector screeched out a warning of police ahead. I quickly nailed the brakes and then realized again, another reason why I do not run DRL. A police officer can more easily see the dipping headlights!!! I nail the brakes, headlights dip and cop sees me braking hard because my headlights plunge to the pavement. No DRL, no headlights giving away my actions.


Nice justification, love it


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

BustedCrank said:


> Nice justification, love it


I love DRL when needed. Use full headlights 2 lane roads in the country. BTW, I do not speed and in fact go slower than the posted limit on these death traps (2 lane country roads). I figure the time I lose going slower is an investment in not getting in an accident. The muss and fuss of a intravenous, cervical collar, CT scan, abdominal surgery, ER visit, casting of fractured bones, facial surgery, etc more than makes up for a wee bit of time lost in slower speed on the twisty 2 lane country roads. On the freeway , I fricking go for it!!!! I love the sensation of speed, and with the Cruze, the smooth and quiet ride is so nice along with me "banging" the tunes on the Pioneer with the USB stick. To heck with any loss of fuel mileage, as I am out to have fun. Speed is fun!!!!!!!!! I love the ride with my 1.4 Liter Turbo bringing on the torque at 3k RPM (yes, I know, 80 mph ). Combined with a quality radar detector (Passport 9500ix), life is good. 15 miles over the limit is one pricey ticket. My radar detector has paid for itself if you know what I mean . Next time, I am getting a Passport iQ.


----------



## SilverCruzer (Nov 30, 2010)

cerbomark said:


> This reminds me of a topic I have seen somewhere about driving around with 1/4 tank of fuel instead of full which in turn saves weight and then creates better MPGs.


I noticed in the owners mannual that the Eco version has a much smaller gas tank than the other trimlines. All part of the equation.


----------



## SilverCruzer (Nov 30, 2010)

...and, here's an article about "headlights ON" and a Corvette:

Driving with your Headlights On[/QUOTE]

Wow, I realize its just one guys experiment, but enlightening none the less. Now do the DLR's on a Cruze use the same power as regular head lights? 

Quote from article:

"But the headlights are just as bright on a small car, so they use just as much electricity, so they can still need engine power to generate it. In this case, the load on the engine might rise from 17 HP to 19, an increase of around 12%. So, for a sub-compact car, daytime driving with the lights on could increase gasoline usage (and cost) by around 12%, FOR the situation of driving at a constant 60 mph speed. The effect is actually even greater for slower car speeds!"


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

SilverCruzer said:


> I noticed in the owners mannual that the Eco version has a much smaller gas tank than the other trimlines. All part of the equation.


Now I have another reason not to offer anyone a ride. They ruin my mileage!


----------



## itsbmw (Feb 5, 2011)

So can DRL be disabled without having to flip the switch everytime I turn the car on or put it into gear? My 08 Grand Prix I had to turn off the headlights everytime I shifted the car into gear during the day time, to prevent killing my HID ballasts. My 9008 bulbs for my HIDs just shipped today so I need to know if this is possible, thank you.


----------



## Knightslugger (Jan 11, 2011)

Get a DRL Killer, *itsbmw*.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

itsbmw said:


> So can DRL be disabled without having to flip the switch everytime I turn the car on or put it into gear?


I kill mine every time I start it. IS there another way????


----------



## shawn672 (Oct 31, 2010)

isnt there a DRL fuse?


----------



## darkmeth (Jan 18, 2011)

There are a lot of Pro/Cons to this feature. One Con is that they decrease the effective life of aftermarket headlight bulbs. I for one would like to have the option to permanently disable it without having to manually switch them off every time I turn on the vehicle. This also means that I give up the auto headlight option by having to do this manually. Surely there's a way to disable the DRL feature in a vehicle "super-user" setting? Thanks


----------



## robertbick (Jan 1, 2011)

darkmeth said:


> Surely there's a way to disable the DRL feature in a vehicle "super-user" setting? Thanks


You need to start the car with the "root" key.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

darkmeth said:


> I for one would like to have the option to permanently disable it without having to manually switch them off every time I turn on the vehicle.


My tennis elbow is killing me from turning it off every time. Ouch  And then I have to remember! Cripes, the indignity of it all.


----------



## scaredpoet (Nov 29, 2010)

Just to add fuel to the fire:

This slide presentation (slide 22) points to the electric power steering as one of many MPG savings on the car. The EPS saves about 0.5MPG. Factor in the DRLs, and it's a wash.

It seems to me that there's a lot that's been done to make the car as fuel efficient as possible (especially the ECO version), that would outweigh the inefficiencies, like DRLs. And should we rip out the other stuff too? Like the OnStar, or the Infotainment system? Or Stabilitrak?




But anyway: I did the math. Assuming gas is $3.50 a gallon (which it isn't.... yet), and assuming I got a pessimistic 25 MPG average, .5 MPG decrease in that efficiency works out to about $.00152 extra cost every full fill-up (assuming a 15 gallon tank).

If you're getting 30MPG, a .5 MPG deficiency works out to even less: $.000131 per 15 gallon fill-up.

Fact is, even if I take the math into some REALLY dire figures... like, 20MPG average, and gas at $6.00 per gallon, _that's_ when I actually start to save _a whole penny_ in fuel fill-up costs by turning off the DRLs. 

Now to be sure, at the really dire figure, if you multiply the cost difference over 100,000 miles, it adds up to about $3.41... or a little over half a gallon of fuel.

So, at least for me, the idea of DRLs seriously making a dent at the pump is kinda blown out of the water for me. When gas starts hitting 5, 6, 7 dollars a gallon, then I might see it, and might consider turning them off.


----------



## scaredpoet (Nov 29, 2010)

...and then, I realized that my math is probably ALLlllll wrong. *smacks forehead*

Back to the drawing board....


----------



## Aeroscout977 (Nov 25, 2010)

montgom626 said:


> Today, after running at above legal speeds on the freeway, my radar detector screeched out a warning of police ahead. I quickly nailed the brakes and then realized again, another reason why I do not run DRL. A police officer can more easily see the dipping headlights!!! I nail the brakes, headlights dip and cop sees me braking hard because my headlights plunge to the pavement. No DRL, no headlights giving away my actions.


You are worried about DRLs and MPG but yet you are speeding enough to have to slam on the brakes to avoid a ticket. Irony at it's best.


----------



## montgom626 (Jan 16, 2011)

JDM-USDM Love said:


> You are worried about DRLs and MPG but yet you are speeding enough to have to slam on the brakes to avoid a ticket. Irony at it's best.


Ain't it great!


----------



## Aeroscout977 (Nov 25, 2010)

montgom626 said:


> Ain't it great!


Yeah it is


----------



## audiobahnman (Sep 2, 2011)

has anyone figured out a way to turn these drl's off yet?


----------



## cruzeman (Mar 13, 2011)

Turn knob to left ? Idk any other way


----------



## sciphi (Aug 26, 2011)

Mine are getting relocated to the front turn signals. The headlight-based ones will be disabled by my headlight harness. 

I like DRL. They're a nice insurance discount, and darned nice during the 250 cloudy days my region has every year.


----------



## A&J Cruzin (Aug 8, 2011)

if your that anal about conserving gas...and not hurting the planet with your evil car...then use your two legs for power..and park the car....and you can save the planet...i wonder what the dinosaurs would think about us worrying about the planet...as i remember...George Carlin had said once...the earth will shake us off like a bad cold..the planet isnt going anywhere...were the ones who will be leaving.


----------



## Aeroscout977 (Nov 25, 2010)

Patman said:


> I hate to say that was about the dumbest discussion I have ever heard!!!! Hopefully there will be no more like that ever again. I am sorry I took the time to read it! Can a moderator delete based on stupidity?


And you've contributed nothing to it....


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app


----------



## A&J Cruzin (Aug 8, 2011)

then again..using your two legs would require some people to exercise...so if you really have to drive..but your concerned about wasting gas by having your DRL on...then only drive during the day...keep the radio off...and your a/c too...heck the clock in the car would use energy...so you may as well take the whole thing out...and the DIC uses unneeded energy as well...sence you can look at the speedo to tell how fast your going..and the gas gage to see how much gas you have left...and you can use math to figure out what mpg's your getting...so you can save as much gas as you can...or just dont turn the motor on at all...hook the car up to a team of horses...and dont waste any gas...but then you would have to feed the horses..and then they would probably pass gas and have to poop...which creates methane...a known green house gas..so i guess that doesnt work either.....ugggh..i guess there really is no way around it then...


----------



## oolowrideoo (Mar 2, 2011)

montgom626 said:


> I kill mine every time I start it.


Same here...


----------

