The regulation states that starting in September 2021, new vehicles sold in Canada must have ONE of the following:
- tail lights that come on automatically with daytime running lights
- headlights, tail lights, and side marker lights that turn on automatically in the dark
- a dashboard that stays dark to alert the driver to turn on the lights

So if your car thinks it's light enough outside to not trigger your automatic headlights then your taillights will not turn on.

A smart driver would realize it's harder to be seen in certain conditions and turn them on manually but honestly what percent of drivers out there would clue into this, 1%?

Both my Mitsubishi vehicles (2017 and 2018) have a setting that turns on both headlights and taillights when it gets dark. I just leave it on that setting. So convenient. DRL are on at other times. I see so many Outlanders out there that don’t have their headlights on in total darkness. Stupid drivers who have no idea how shit works. It’s like those people with high end vehicles talking on their phones because they have no fucking idea how to pair their phones.

Not only that, there is a group of people who for some stupid reason are vehemently against auto headlights.

I'm part of a few FB car groups/forums, and the number of (mostly Americans) that bitch that the DRL's and/or headlights now come on automatically somehow infringe on their freedom to operate their lights as they wish.

my dad took my car to the shop to change the oil and i guess they tested the headlights and all that. when i got it back it took me a little bit to realize that the headlights werent on before i started driving. i think it easily could have just started the car and brainlessly started driving without the headlights on. i think all cars should not only have sensors to detect when its dim out but also should start beeping or chiming to alert the driver that they did not turn the lights on.

My Audi definitely does let me know if the headlights are off when I start driving (put the gear in D) if I had it turned off for some reason. It chimes and beeps and displays a message.

once a year when it gets foggy i have to reteach my ma how to turn low beams on to enable fog lights

And you're just relieved its not an error or code of some sort :fullofwin:

That just happened to me... My wife was driving around for half her commute when she realized her headlights weren't on.

Earlier that morning, I took her car in for an oil change and normally I have it the headlights set on auto and even taped the stalk into into that position so it stays on auto mode. I noticed the tape was now out of position like it's been ripped and stuck back on. The tech must have did that...

^ I think it's cause on most cars when it's on auto and you turn the car off, the headlights stay on until you lock the car... so that's super annoying in a shop environment

mankind at the height of technology. we're figuring out headlights?

Lots to figure out...........

On/off was too hard.

If they can design sensors not to forget your kid in the backseat, which is how far we've fallen as society; they can certainly make the taillights at least turn on automatically at night!

What they should have is sensors to tell you when your brake lights are burnt out.

They used to — my CB Accord has it in the instrument cluster. A “lamp” light telling me my LED bulbs are improper.

https://i.imgur.com/IHuONXK.jpg

My 30 year old car has its own separate panel above the rearview.

back in the day you were taught to also turn on your lights when you used your windshield wipers. pretty sure it was a bylaw too.

road test is too easy and covers only a fraction of what was in the book

i bet a lot of people when they feel ABS kicking in wouldn't even keep their foot depressed

and everyone should retest at license renewal, i for the life of me can hardly remember which way to turn wheels parallel parked on a hill ..curb no curb?!

My 93 Camry had that, then they stopped doing it.

Probably because back in the 90s the appropriate fix for a CEL or SRS light was a small piece of electrical tape, lol

Should your brakes fail, the car needs to roll into the curb instead of out on the street (or into the car in front / behind you). So whichever way that needs to make it happen is the direction your wheels should be turned towards.

I wish the MoT would offer a higher tier of entirely optional driver licence where you'd need to pass a whole bunch of defensive and high performance driving in exchange for lower insurance rates. Make it real and non-trivial to include accident avoidance manoeuvers, low traction driving techniques (like driving on slush / ice sort of thing) so that people can actually learn how to drive, and make re-testing mandatory every few years -- every 2? 3? years? -- so that the skills continue to stay sharp.

Of course, something like that would never happen... :twirleye:

Yea because everyone thinks they are a “good” driver and the backlog for that test would be years

They should have licenses that have horsepower restrictions based on experience, accident history, etc.

That would put SR, Lambo of Vancouver, Ferrari, etc. out of business here lol

Well... if the program is done properly, they'll find out very quickly that they are a lousy driver.

Even when it is something as simple as traction management -- every year when there is packed snow covering the streets, I'd see idiots gunning their throttle, and wondering why their car isn't moving. FailFish

A testing fee would obviously be required to prevent people from abusing the tests. If you have to pay money to get tested, and you fail every single time you take the test, you're gonna very quickly either find a way to improve and pass the test, or you give up altogether and stick to your crappy licence with the higher insurance costs.

Driving is a privilege, not a right, and not everybody is cut out to be a competent driver. It's no different than how not everyone is cut out to be a competent cook. If there are fewer crappy drivers on the road, it's a win for everyone involved.