Alert: *NEW* & AMENDED NATIONAL ROAD RULES, FEEDBACK PLEASE

Originally Posted by Keepleft

* The UN Convention allows the use of front fog lights at night in clear conditions ONLY when driving on winding, mountainous roads.

This point makes so much sense. I think it should be adapted to Australian conditions where conditions that warrant the use of high beams can be complimented with using white fog lights. I;m guessing with kangaroos and even wombats being a hazard on straight stretches fog lights may make the difference between seeing and missing the obstacle.

An example of how fog lights have helped someone:

My brother drives a Pulsar SSS, and was driving home on the Camden Bypass.(old hume)

On the road was a concrete block about the size of a 51cm TV. As he had oncoming traffic he had his high beams off but lows and fog lights on. He saw the concrete block with the lows but it passed out the beam. He thought it was a garbage bag but as it went into view of the fog light, he shat his dacks and tried pulled into the emergency lane. he almost missed it but it hit the front right part of the front bar, smashed the empty area behind it (only had the windscreen reseviour there) shredded the front tyre and buckled the alloy rim.

If he didn't have his foglights he would have easily smashed the radiator, the support panel, fans, engine sump(at least, more likely the whole block ripped from the mounts, driveshafts ripped out... ie write-off

I'm all for driving with front foglights on, most cars there less intense/noticable than low beams so I cannot see why there would be a glare problem with it used in the country

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by BlackLS

This point makes so much sense. I think it should be adapted to Australian conditions where conditions that warrant the use of high beams can be complimented with using white fog lights. I;m guessing with kangaroos and even wombats being a hazard on straight stretches fog lights may make the difference between seeing and missing the obstacle.

The particular UN Convention allowance applies to the 1968 AND ON Convention and amendments. Australia contracted the 1949 Convention of same. Here, we agreed to be bound for road traffic uniformity and most International legal people say we remain duty bound to a degree in relation to new content.

State public service employees, well some of them at least, feel otherwise. I'll back the Convention, a Convention has real legal 'bite', a TREATY simply does not.


An example of how fog lights have helped someone:

My brother drives a Pulsar SSS, and was driving home on the Camden Bypass.(old hume)

On the road was a concrete block about the size of a 51cm TV. As he had oncoming traffic he had his high beams off but lows and fog lights on. He saw the concrete block with the lows but it passed out the beam. He thought it was a garbage bag but as it went into view of the fog light, he shat his dacks and tried pulled into the emergency lane. he almost missed it but it hit the front right part of the front bar, smashed the empty area behind it (only had the windscreen reseviour there) shredded the front tyre and buckled the alloy rim.

And this really proves that front fog lights, used in this manner at rural speed and zone will NOT help you avoid the object, fit improved bulbs, I'll suggest the Plus 50's OR add a set of dedicated driving lights IF the car doesn't have inboard driving lamp compartment standard.

And drive on high-beam rather than rely on fogs with their 10 -35 metre reach. At 100km/h your moving at 28 metres per second. Add to that a 1 second reaction time and reliance on front fogs will get you into trouble, fast sire. They are designed for hazardous weather conditions, be definition, your speed will be reduced through necessity to a speed-point where the front fogs will actually help you, if conditions are real bad, turn off low beam to reduce reflected glare. AND doing this means your indicators will show up clearer.

If he didn't have his foglights he would have easily smashed the radiator, the support panel, fans, engine sump(at least, more likely the whole block ripped from the mounts, driveshafts ripped out... ie write-off

I'm all for driving with front foglights on, most cars there less intense/noticable than low beams so I cannot see why there would be a glare problem with it used in the country

The new law will prevent this, front fog lights are NOT daytime running lamps, nor are they driving lights.

I agree they should be used on winding mountain roads, thinking VIC snowfields dam area.

In court I'd using the Convention.

[GT-E]

I expect that most bike riders will ignore the laws, they seem to ignore every other law and think they have some right to do what they please.
I have had several incidents with bikers and they seem to forget that I may have a dent, nut they can be dead.
You put laws in place to protect the bikers as weather traffic is moving or stationary it is still dangerous. It is not the bike rider who will cause an lane splitting accident, but the dozy drivers who change lanes and do not look.

[flappist]

Hey don't pick on bike riders...
If there were no motorbikes then there would be an even greater organ donor shortage.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by qwigybo

i work nightshift and when travelling the 100km's to work there are a lot of kangaroos in the bushland, fog lights are a very big help as they illuminate the sides of the roads more thus showing up the roos earlier

Cool if you want to see the roo just before he moves in front of you. If you want to see them earlier get a set of Cibie's.

Originally Posted by jabba

I don't see why front fog/ driving lights should not be aloud to be used all the time, If fitted correctly they should pose no problem to oncoming traffic (same can be said about normal headlights).

The problem is that I drive on the highway 11hrs a night 5-6 nights a week and if everyone thought like this I would have twice as many oncoming lights to look at every night.

Originally Posted by ZapXR6T

Best part I read is that they will be making Lane splitting illegal for motorbikes
Best thing they could do as it is a dangererous practice and should have been made illegal many years ago.

I dont have a problem with this. Most riders 'lane split' only at traffic lights. They get where their going quicker,without bothering me so no big deal.

Originally Posted by Stampy

I have ridden for many years ,but when im in a car and a p!ss week 250cc bike pulls up beside me and expects to take my lane ....FORGET IT, im quicker and it's my lane ,and even if you Merlin were there splitting my lane you would want to be watching the lights and be quick off the mark ,because I sure will ..
You have to earn my lane ,don't slow me down. Well thats the reason you split lane isn't it ,you hate to be slowed down by traffic ,so do I

This is the kind of dim witted "it's my lane so get out coz I wanna be first" attitude that causes more drama on the road than anything else I've ever seen.

Oh and 'Fog/Driving/Cornering/Whatever lights are more commonly known as ****er lights. A much more fitting name.

[AUIII XR8 MAN]

Originally Posted by deesun

If you think that useing your lights such as those on a BA gives you more time to react in clear conditions then thats B**lsh*t. The only extra time it would give you would be to stop and clean up the damage/carnage. Those lights and any other fog light only fill up the space between the front of the car and headlights.If you think you can react and stop in that distance then you are kidding yourself.

I think your the only one kidding yourself.
You would be surprise just how well if these light are aim correctly how they pick up things on the side of the road. If that extra react time comes from being able to move over & go around the object with hitting it or being on the brake ready for a quick stop. Then there corners & again they do help you see thing on the raod before your normal headlight do, you just got that extra time agian. Every second count when you need to react in a emergency. Sure their no real need for them in area that have plenty of street lighting, but just go for a drive into an area with out street lighting & you will see the big different between having them on & off.

[Big Mike]

A few more cents:
>4.9 - rule 62: People turning right accross a lane of traffic cannot ALWAYS assume that the opposing lane is red - For example if the light system fails, or the green arrow fails and no arrow is shown, or for whatever other reason the oncomming traffic aren't stopping, the turning driver should still within reason be resposible for giving way, rather than freely ASSUMING a situation. Oncomming emergency vehicles, etc. are another example.
What needs to be regulated and EDUCATED is the turning left with in island - where you are then merging right and must give-way. Almost nobody knows that law - except I guess the Vics who give way people turning left or something backwards I don't quite remember.
> I believed it had always been law in Australia to walk against the flow of traffic where two footpaths are available, for that very reason of being able to watch oncomming vehicles/push bikes etc. Perhaps it was only law in SA, or perhaps just something dad told me 'for my own good'.
> Carrying a child or animal on your lap? O.M.F.G. Are people really that stupid? OK I have seen the occasional small dog running about the car - and had the occasional drunk girlfriend running about the car - but a child on my lap? Dear god.
> "Keepleft" I certainly have always respected your views and bringing important issues into the light where they can be discussed but UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES are my low-set factory spread-beam driving lights of ANY hinderance to ANYONE by comparison to bright, painfully glaring 10-inch 150W lights bouncing around in a fibreglass bodykit of an old Lancer or WRX. Simillarly, the bright painfully glaring red beam like acid to my retinas of Korean or European cars in completely open areas or CBD. They, like high beams, need to be regulated. And the brightness of those massive SPOT-LIGHTS on the front need to be taken into consideration when wiring. Of all the cars I sold if a customer wanted a kit with big lights, I would have their relay wired to the high-beams, as opposed to the parkers like my 7-series BMW, all the sporty Magnas, and I'm sure MANY others with such driving aids as these driving lights and the cornering lights all the old Caddies etc. use to have, and I believe the EF Farimont>upwards had too.
Their specific purpose is to light up the ground directly infront, as I stated, and as others have stated. At crawling speeds in a car park or lost in suburban hell, they ARE all the road you're looking at - that 15 - 35M. With brighter headlights glaring off my windscreen I often CAN'T SEE for a second the road where my low-beams are pointing, and rely on the driving lights picking up the white line on the side of the road, and hoping I paid enough attention before at the imperfections/obstructions in the 10-15M of road I'm about to travel over. Just like cornering lights pick up the curb and driveway you're about to turn into - though I acknowledge at 250km/h that extra vision won't help my reaction times at low speeds it DOES help in a BIG way (as per concrete block story above); and in some instances where for a split second you guys are guessing, I can still see the side-marking line especially in the hills, etc.
These small factory lights are DRIVING LIGHTS, and perfectly legal, and I've NEVER found them annoying or hindering. Those stupid YELLOW lights in NSW are FOG LIGHTS and should definately only be used in bad whether - one can also buy white FOG LIGHTS with fitting instructions indicating they are to be wired in conjuction with high beams, and often say "for off-road use only" thus are illegal... And as for those SPOT LIGHTS you see eight of accross the bull bar 80'series Landcruisers - well theres lots of reasons that should be tackling the outback - as legislated in, umm, was it San Francisco?
And as for UN Conventions, etc., we in Australia DO have a unique selection of wildlife, and along with our climate/vast deserts/snow fields/etc. can't IN MY OPINION necessarily always abide by another country's set of rules as SOME things need to be specific to our setup.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Big Mike

A few more cents. I believed it had always been law in Australia to walk against the flow of traffic where two footpaths are available, for that very reason of being able to watch oncomming vehicles/push bikes etc. Perhaps it was only law in SA, or perhaps just something dad told me 'for my own good'.

I think you meant "where NO footpaths are available. this was a question (in NSW) when my son went for his learners a few years ago. Alos handy as you can see the number plate of the car about to run you over

Originally Posted by Big Mike

but UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES are my low-set factory spread-beam driving lights of ANY hinderance to ANYONE by comparison to bright, painfully glaring 10-inch 150W lights bouncing around in a fibreglass bodykit of an old Lancer or WRX.

Compared to driving lights, of course there not but like I said earlier, the more lights YOU have lit up on the fornt of your car the more I have to look at.

Originally Posted by Big Mike

These small factory lights are DRIVING LIGHTS, and perfectly legal, and I've NEVER found them annoying or hindering. Those stupid YELLOW lights in NSW are FOG LIGHTS and should definately only be used in bad whether - one can also buy white FOG LIGHTS with fitting instructions indicating they are to be wired in conjuction with high beams, and often say "for off-road use only" thus are illegal

Although technically you are 'driving' with them on thereby making them 'driving lights' they are really only suitable for finding small change that you dropped coming out of the pub.
And PLEASE show me the manufacturers instructions that says that Fog lights HAVE to be wired into the high beam system! Not only is this stupid but I think you'll find also Illegal. -probably has 'made in China' on the box.

If you want foglights -for driving in the fog- the ONLY way for them to be effective is to have other headlights/spotlights turned off. Probably why my old '78 Jag has them wired into the light switch. The only way the fogs can be turned on is by depressing the light switch to turn them on, this in turn automatically switches the headlights off.

[X ORSMXR]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

THAT is a current VIC allowance, THIS will CORRECT that, AND prohibit the use of white-optic AND selective yellow front fog lights in clear conditions, day or night.

I suspect we might (and I support this) get the 50 metre 'visibility maximum' rule for rear fog light use, as in Europe. Meaning these would not be used unless visibility is reduced to 50 metres or less. In England they stipulate 100 metres for both front and rear.

MISSING: Change to SPEED section to clarify the speed derestriciton sign in order to bring ARR into harmony with Australian Standard 1742.4 of 1999 and more importantly the UN Convention (UN) as the signs legal owner.

A High Court appeal on the horizon, maybe. Issue of National Metrology.

Folks DO take time out to read the changes and new rules, read carefully.

Mate you are wrong white light are fine it's just the yellow lights as was explained by a TMU officer

[Kingsley]

Our local mechanic here in town (NSW) was fined late last year for having the fog lights illuminated on a clear day (HSV Commodore ute). The fine was around $168 and I think a 1 point loss. When he asked how many others he's booked, he was told they have also fined people around this area for using them on a clear night, and in one instance, using the fog lights alone at night.
Apparently, as long as the wattage doesn't exceed 15watts, (equivelent to your parking lights) , that's the only time they can be illuminated during the day.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by ORSMXR

Mate you are wrong white light are fine it's just the yellow lights as was explained by a TMU officer

You forgot to mention what state you're in and what a TMU officer is.

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by ORSMXR

Spoke to a copper at a car show tonight in Vic and said as long as they are not yellow in color then you can use them ie: the spot lights on the AU and BA at anytime

You can probably drive down a freeway at 60 kph causing all sorts of traffic problems and technically still not be breaking the law. However, it doesn’t mean you’re not a total dickwit for doing it, though.

Originally Posted by qwigybo

I work nightshift and when travelling the 100km's for work, I know there are a lot of kangaroos in the bushland. Fog lights are a very big help as they illuminate the sides of the roads more thus showing up the roos earlier

They also do a terrific job of dazzling truck drivers or anyone else that sits three metres above the ground. If you can’t see without the use of ****er / Fag lights, buy a pair of glasses or better still, hand your licence in so the rest of us don’t have to put up with you. Smacks of the “I’m ok, f**k you, Jack” syndrome. How would you like it if I chose to adjust my low beam upward, so I can see better at night, but dazzling every other car driver on the road?

Sorry to sound a tad harsh, however, you could probably figure that I’m not a fan of ****er lights. :

Cheers, Danny

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

Here, you will see at Rule 217 a proposal for a NATIONAL prohibition on the use of FRONT fog lights in clear conditions, as WA and NSW have by way of seperate Regulations to the ARR.

Among many others, submissions close soon.

http://www.ntc.gov.au/filemedia/Repo...ISNov20051.pdf


Jeremy H. Pritchard
Mot Adv-NSW

After reading the article I noticed one glaring omission. Nowhere does it mention anything about changing the LEGAL distance for dipping headlights. I believe the (NSW) law states that if you are within 200metres of another vehicle you must dip your headlights.

Whooee! This might have been fine when we all ran crossply tyres and headlights barely reached 200mtrs. Why has this not been changed.

With modern lighting systems having a reflective range in excess of 2kms I've taught my kids that if you can see headlights or tailights your lights should be dipped.

Forget the 200mtr bit, by the time the enemy is that close their blinded!

[FordFan86]

What I'd like to see banned is those headlights that have a blue twingle to them. They are very, very distracting; to me atleast. Or is that just aftermarket? I'm not entirely sure because I've seen it on stocko 4wd family cars and such...

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

After reading the article I noticed one glaring omission. Nowhere does it mention anything about changing the LEGAL distance for dipping headlights. I believe the (NSW) law states that if you are within 200metres of another vehicle you must dip your headlights.

Whooee! This might have been fine when we all ran crossply tyres and headlights barely reached 200mtrs. Why has this not been changed.

With modern lighting systems having a reflective range in excess of 2kms I've taught my kids that if you can see headlights or tailights your lights should be dipped.

Forget the 200mtr bit, by the time the enemy is that close their blinded!

You’ve brought up a good point Roger. Another example of how the law hasn’t kept up with technology. These days a bloody Dolphin torch with a new battery will just about reach 200 metres.

Cheers, Danny

[deesun]

Originally Posted by AUIII XR8 MAN

I think your the only one kidding yourself.
You would be surprise just how well if these light are aim correctly how they pick up things on the side of the road. If that extra react time comes from being able to move over & go around the object with hitting it or being on the brake ready for a quick stop. Then there corners & again they do help you see thing on the raod before your normal headlight do, you just got that extra time agian. Every second count when you need to react in a emergency. Sure their no real need for them in area that have plenty of street lighting, but just go for a drive into an area with out street lighting & you will see the big different between having them on & off.

Judging from some of the responses around here AND the fact that it is illegal to use those front fog lights in clear conditions I think I know who,s kidding themselves.

ORSMXR Did you call KEEPLEFT wrong? : : : : : :

[deesun]

I thank KEEPLEFT for the chance for us to read and comment on the updated rules. I can see that in most cases they are just clarifying what the rule meant in the first place but just didn't draw a picture for some people. Some rules were slightly confusing and again they have been clarified. It is good we have a national set of road rules as so many more people drive further these days,but I also recognise the fact that some states have different circumstances so a different rule may need to be applied. These rules should be as close to the original as possible. Thanks again

[Deadman]

Originally Posted by merlin

So at present you must give way to someone running a red light!

I actually think (correct me if I am wrong) that ANY green light at an intersection means "proceed with caution when safe to do so" or something like that... Not actually "go". Which leads to interesting interpretations...

Anyhow, back on topic about the Fog Lights: I don't care as I don't drive with them on - but come on:

"which simply confuses drivers that are being approached."

No. I see a car with fog lights on and I simply see a car with 4 lights. Wow. The haze and confusion is dumbfounding...

[Deadman]

Originally Posted by Full Noise

You can probably drive down a freeway at 60 kph causing all sorts of traffic problems and technically still not be breaking the law.

Isn't driving on a 100 or 110km/h freeway at 60km/h breaking the law? No sarcasm or anything, but I thought there was a rule about travelling less than a certain % (or set number) speed on freeways...

And yes - Thankyou to Keepleft for the PDF link, much appreciated

[AUIII XR8 MAN]

Originally Posted by deesun

Judging from some of the responses around here AND the fact that it is illegal to use those front fog lights in clear conditions I think I know who,s kidding themselves.

Not all states.
Loolking who kidding themself now.

[Mark351]

Lane splitting is already illegal, according to an article in the paper I read. They are looking at actually enforcing the law.

[deesun]

Originally Posted by AUIII XR8 MAN

Not all states.
Loolking who kidding themself now.

It will be illegal in all states when these amendments come into effect. No kidding.

[Voodoo65]

When I had my BA XR6 in the country area's up here on the Sunshine coast I had them on all the time, it's mostly back roads around where I live. A lot of Roo's around, and being able to see the edge of the road better helps.....

Last year I drove to Sydney just came up to the approach to the bridge before North Sydney and was pulled over by a RBT at 1030 at night, the roads where wet but just at this present time it had stopped raining....

The Pol told to turn of the fog lights.... I said that is was inclement weather to which he replied "It's not now"....... I think he was then going to try and give me a ticket as he went to the front of the car (saw Qld plates) then came back in a huff gave me a breath test and told me that it was an offence to drive with them on..... unless it was Inclement Weather.

Brett

[xbgs351]

Will cars be allowed to lane split with bicycles?

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

After reading the article I noticed one glaring omission. Nowhere does it mention anything about changing the LEGAL distance for dipping headlights. I believe the (NSW) law states that if you are within 200metres of another vehicle you must dip your headlights.

Whooee! This might have been fine when we all ran crossply tyres and headlights barely reached 200mtrs. Why has this not been changed.

With modern lighting systems having a reflective range in excess of 2kms I've taught my kids that if you can see headlights or tailights your lights should be dipped.

Forget the 200mtr bit, by the time the enemy is that close their blinded!

NTC advise of some discussion on this between the jurisdictions. It is suggested perhaps 500 metres as the primary replacement.

But they require feedback on this. I would suggest this item as outlined be forwared to NTC per their request for feedback stating the preferred measure in metres. 'Or as flashed will apply' too, after a new metre rule.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Big Mike

A few more cents:

Items read snipped and noted.


> "Keepleft" I certainly have always respected your views and bringing important issues into the light where they can be discussed but UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES are my low-set factory spread-beam driving lights of ANY hinderance to ANYONE by comparison to bright, painfully glaring 10-inch 150W lights bouncing around in a fibreglass bodykit of an old Lancer or WRX.

I accept that, most people would, naturally. . .


Simillarly, the bright painfully glaring red beam like acid to my retinas of Korean or European cars in completely open areas or CBD. They, like high beams, need to be regulated.

Rear fog lights arrive to us as ADR52, This is Australia's adoption of UN/ECE38. It is my view they should have been 'mandatory' at inital implementation of ADR52 to help avoid the confusion by having some cars with them, and some not. AND of course to aid in the prevention of crashes under low visibility conditions, conditions not seen in cities ort towns usually.

REAR fog lights ARE Regulated by Australian Road Rule 217. This is adopted into all jurisdiction. In my view,- what is missing is the European Union additional 'behavioural' rule (mentioned along with the usual hazardous weather conditions causing etc) which restricts their use to 50 metres or less visibility. UK had this set at 100 metres.

The Australian Road Rules govern allowance and behaviour.


And the brightness of those massive SPOT-LIGHTS on the front need to be taken into consideration when wiring. Of all the cars I sold if a customer wanted a kit with big lights, I would have their relay wired to the high-beams, as opposed to the parkers like my 7-series BMW, all the sporty Magnas, and I'm sure MANY others with such driving aids as these driving lights and the cornering lights all the old Caddies etc. use to have, and I believe the EF Farimont>upwards had too.

Issues of terminology here:-
A driving light is wired to operate ONLY when the high-beam switch is activated.

A front fog light is wired to operate on park (position), low and high-beam. Since in heavy fog when flashing your high-beam we don't wan't the front fog to extinguish.

These are matters of ADR and the National Vehicle Standards. Actual usage as mentioned comes under ARR.


Their specific purpose is to light up the ground directly infront, as I stated, and as others have stated. At crawling speeds in a car park or lost in suburban hell, they ARE all the road you're looking at - that 15 - 35M.

Directly in front is an appropriate description - even allowing for a front fog lights flat beam shaped spread, that said, use of a front fog light in relation to a car park is *could* be appropriate, though not legal under the new prohibition as it stands.

Now, when it comes to driving at speed, let me make this front fog light perform to 50 metres instead of the typical 35.

At 100km/h you are outdriving the front fog lights effective forward range. Remember here, you are at 28 metres per second. You must take into account a .7 - 1.5 second reaction time followed by stopping, or avoidance action.


With brighter headlights glaring off my windscreen

Your own, or oncoming?

I often CAN'T SEE for a second the road where my low-beams are pointing,

I'd be looking at a headlight upgrade, or a change to PLUS 50 marketed bulbs.

and rely on the driving lights picking up the white line on the side of the road,

Fog lights, sire, fog lights, since it is the fog lights fan shaped 'spread-beam' that is designed to pick up the road edge.

and hoping I paid enough attention before at the imperfections/obstructions in the 10-15M of road I'm about to travel over.

Remember, effective range versus speed per metres a second.

Just like cornering lights pick up the curb and driveway you're about to turn into -

A design rule problem here, the things (cornering lights) will activate at 180km/h for example at night when you indicate to change lanes, or overtake. The lead driver, or approaching traffic sees this 21 watt beam of light shooting towards them. We should seek a change to remove the function where speed <<40km/h.


though I acknowledge at 250km/h that extra vision won't help my reaction times, at low speeds it DOES help in a BIG way (as per concrete block story above); and in some instances where for a split second you guys are guessing, I can still see the side-marking line especially in the hills, etc.

Right, We shall remind the NTC to allow use on winding mountainous roads per UN Convetion 1968, and perhaps a domestic allowance in undercover car parks day or night.

These small factory lights are DRIVING LIGHTS, and perfectly legal,

Mate they are *not* driving lights. If you buy (or purchase a new vehicle) a driving light it will bear COMPLIANCE markings.

Here, you look closely for the letter "R", example "HR" meaning "Halogen Driving Light", or "HR-P" meaning Halogen Driving Light, Plastic lens. Similarly, a cars factory supplied driving light must bear the same markings.

IF the lamp has NO such markings, then the lamp will likely not comply with any Standard and is best treated as a driving lamp. A very mild exception for some AUS made head/tail lamp units, but these must still comply for the function.

The marking under the FMVSS108 North American market for driving light is "Y", example SAE-Y-98. Here, for front fog, its "F".

The lights you refer will be enforced by police and transport inspectors on the basis of the markings on the lens.

A front fog light will bear the letter "B". Example "02B". This is Codespeak for front fog light.


and I've NEVER found them annoying or hindering.

A Compliant front fog light, properly mounted and wired should not cause undue glare in itself, but they are desiged for specific weather conditions and are not daytime runnling lamps or normal low beam.

A COMPLIANT front fog light bearing the proper E Mark will CEASE TO COMPLY IF the lamp has been fitted with a bulb of higher than 55 watts on a 12 volt system. A FRONT FOG LAMP CERTIFICATION is granted at that wattage, for a 12 volt system only. 24 Volt vehicles will use 75 watts.

So, *never* put in a higher than allowed wattage replacement bulb. That said an E marked Arctic Blue or Plus 30 or 50 variety can be used as an upgrade.

Those stupid YELLOW lights in NSW are FOG LIGHTS and should definately only be used in bad whether

Some Auto Acessory shops sell yellow lamps purporting to be front fog lights. In the past one particular lamp offered as such was fitted with H3, 12v 100 watt bulbs. The Importer reduced the wattage to 12v 55watts. That reduces glare a little, but the lamp is NOT A COMPLIANT front fog light. It totally lacks front fog light beam characterestics AND the wiring diagram tells you to wire it into the high-beam active. These were in fact old French Regulation driving lights sold in places like New Caledonia as such



- one can also buy white FOG LIGHTS with fitting instructions indicating they are to be wired in conjuction with high beams, and often say "for off-road use only" thus are illegal

OFTEN packaging by Australian Importers gets 'it all wrong'. WHAT MATTERS is the E MARK as listed above. This is the only TRUE MEANS of ascertaining a lights real design function. You can ignore much of the packaging you see around the shops.

Example, Supercheap sell what they offer as "Driving Light yellow lens, or Driving Light blue lens. NOW, here, the lamp you will see bears "02B" - The B for front fog light! So front fog light it is.

SOMETIMES a lamp will bear both "B" and R", Codespeak markings for front fog and driving lamp. Here, the lamp can be wired for each purpose, it is up to you to decide if the lamp looks 'adequate enough' for either function. I generally avoid such units, though COMBINATION units with seperate compartments are 'okay' as an alternative to seperate lamps.


... And as for those SPOT LIGHTS you see eight of accross the bull bar 80'series Landcruisers - well theres lots of reasons that should be tackling the outback - as legislated in, umm, was it San Francisco?

I have NO concerns with largish driving lights, E marked or not, in Australia so often fitted to bullbars or lamp racks and the like, provided that the drivers vision is not restricted by the physical mounting.

REASON: As USE of the lamps must comply with ARR's, this is appropriate, given Australia's large distances, it is here Inspectors can show some leeway, but not with the mis-use of front fog lights.


And as for UN Conventions, etc., we in Australia DO have a unique selection of wildlife, and along with our climate/vast deserts/snow fields/etc. can't IN MY OPINION necessarily always abide by another country's set of rules as SOME things need to be specific to our setup.

The UN CONVENTION is not created by one single party. It was created by nations who have mountains much higher than us, have far worse driving conditions insofar weather etc and so on, by nations that have wildlife like deer and the like, Australia was part of this implementation process, something State public servants often forget, and it is binding on the States and Territories, try though they might sometimes try and weasel out of it so they can go it alone in the big world.

It HARMONISES many of rules you drive by today without even knowing it, it harmonises International Road Traffic, Road Signs and Signals, the latter relating to indicating etc and so on.

If anything, Australia would be better advised to sign the 1968 Convention (current) but remains bind by much of its Content.

[deesun]

thank you KEEPLEFT are you blue in the face yet?

[Big Mike]

OK well yelling at my response on every occasion you corrected my terminology, like I didn't "get it" after the first correction etc., serves little purpose as written text differs from live conversation by ones inability to elapse back in time and remove noted repeats of said mislabelling of technology. I stand corrected, thankyou.

However, my opinion that the misalignment of a careless road users' headlights pointing directly at my eyes is more dangerous or distracting than another road users' properly adjusted headlights being supported by a pair of properly adjusted factory fog lights lighting up 30 - 50 whatever metres in front of them still stands. I AM a road user, and I HAVE been "blinded" by cars with low-beam headlights pointing any-which-way, same as by pricks who leave their high-beams on, or miraculously forget to turn them off until I've flashed them twice or thrice. Also by spot lights, which to my thinking include large rectangular after-market lights bolted into the bumper, but never by what you have categorized as fog lights and I had assumed were driving lights (whereby they are used for normal night driving, including inclemant whether, but not specifically bright or coloured to pierce through fog).

And as for the cornering lights, I see your point having them mounted on the front of a car; the cars I had more in mind have lights mounted in the fender, pointing towards the curb, ground, etc., though I can't think of a modern example right now. The point I make is you are reffering to a 21W incandescent globe, which by its nature is housed in a spread-beam design, thus NOT projected towards an oncomming driver, as it is not a projector lens, nor are they unidirectional LEDs - its just a little 21W globe and assits the driver with highlighting the area s/he is about to cover. Though useless at 100km/h, indeed travelling faster than you can react over its short span, it serves no hinderance as a low-aimed spread beam light, of a mighty 21 W, I can not possibly forsee "blinding" an oncomming driver - especially as they're only a few inches below high-powered headlights I challenge anyone to see, through the two circles of natural glare on your own windscreen these fog/cornering lamps on a car approaching at 100 km/h.

Of FAR more concern to me, is poorly adjusted lights. Regardless if they've been upgraded or not, if using Xion H.I.D.s or plus 50s, etc., even standard modern lights can cause severe anguish for a few seconds if they are pointing into the oncomming lane. I reffer specifically to a number of CE Lancers, VR/S Commodores, and one of the local AU taxis here I see regularly, though I'm sure no car is immune to being misaligned through poor maintenance or 'minor' bumps and shunts. I realise policing such an issue is impossible, and having a police officer defect my car because he didn't like where my lights are aimed is completely stupid, however I stand strongly convinced that legislating against the use of 'fog lights' at night per-sé serves absolutely no benefit to any member of the transport system, and serves only to hinder those drivers who can benefit in some situations from a small circle of light on the road directly in front of the car.

[Group C]

On the subject of lane splitting...
Firstly, I do have a bike licence, and I did have a bike for a while, but I'll admit that I haven't been on one for a few years now.
Anyway, I have NEVER lane split. Yes, NEVER.
Reason is simple. I had my first car (my pride and joy that I saved my pennies for when I was a part-time working 15-16 yo to afford, then built it up from scratch with my old man. Wasn't much, but it was mine.) DAMAGED by a scum-bag doing a lane split.
He got too close, ripped the mirror off the door (ruining the paint and the door skin in the process), and then because his balance was off from hitting the mirror, proceded to scrape the handbars down the RH front guard, ruining that paint and denting it also.
Now this would be just another 'accident', but you can imagine how I felt when the rider, because he was small enough to fit between the cars, just kept on going like nothing had happened.
That's why I have/never will lane split. I know how it feels to be on the receiving end of a split gone wrong, and I'd never forgive myself for damaging someone else's pride and joy, even when I had stopped to exchange details.

I just thought this might be something that others who ride may want to think about, as I hadn't read of this scenario elsewhere in this thread.

And if it EVER was to happen again to my car, or the wife's, god help the rider and his bike...

[zetec]

Originally Posted by flappist

YES..... finally a road rule that has an actual sensible purpose.

In clear conditions there is enough bright light without any extra.

Of course the "look at me" brigade will burr up a bit........

Holden sales will halve overnight.

I fully support this.

I also fully support the rule too, couldn't be sooner. Let's just hope Police actually enforce it.