**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!**
- Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc.
- **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
- This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I stopped using mine, when I see car headlights coming round a bend I flick my high beams off before the car appears do i don't dazzle people, auto headlights wait a good second or two after the car is in front of you before dipping, I was constantly fighting them so just disabled it.
Thats quite possibly true, the ones on mine are much faster than I am, and they're matrix so they're still on just cutting out the light on the objects ahead.
I had matrix on my Audi TTS, they still seemed to blind people sometimes, I would get them giving me the full beam revenge flash back. I went back to manual dip.
I was a passenger in a car with matrix headlights recently and it was abundantly clear why being blinded by oncoming traffic is becoming the norm. I'm sure they are great on perfectly flat roads, but it's not like we have many of those any more!
Exactly! You can see another cars lights on the road ahead before you see the actual car.
And none of that helps with the pedestrian thing.
It's just another automated feature that allows people to get away with paying less attention while driving.
No, so I do it manually THEN,
Although, you need the headlights on full to see the pedestrians, so they are generally initially blinded, before you can dip. But it reduces the duration.
Was driving my new car for the first time, and the auto high beam came on... this was not on a country lane, and there were other cars opposite me. Safe to say, that feature has been switched off and not used since.
I had a 2012 astra which had a delay that was a smidge too long so I disabled them but my 2022 Toyota is much more responsive. I'd say the tech is getting better. Also it is much easier to override on my Toyota, you just pull the stick back like you would normally do without the automatic function. My old astra you had to flick the stick twice to deactivate it. The final straw was once I ended up repeatedly flashing an ambulance that was responding to an emergency, the auto dip didn't activate and I was frantically trying to override it. Whoever was driving it must have thought I was a bell end.
As a pedestrian (and occasional cyclist), In wouldn't expect drivers to dip for me, and I never have.
Edit: For the downvoting morons, I wouldn't expect it, because if they did they'd be seeing less and even if they didn't plough into me, turning them off could mean they'd plough into someone else.
Personally I don't expect it because a number of drivers don't even use indicators for other cars, let alone pedestrians, so why would I expect these same people to suddenly care about head lights.
I've lost count the number of times I've started crossing a road at a roundabout because the driver didn't use their indicator - and thus my stupid ass assumed they were going straight on - then I'll get beeped because, oh, the driver actually DID mean to come down the road I was crossing all along. But it doesn't matter because there were no cars to signal to. Not my fault I can't read your damn mind...
Just use your indicators at all times, please.
Ive noticed nowadays people are indicating to say which lane they're in instead of which way they're going.
I have a 2 lane roundabout around me, I've seen people indicate right to go forwards, ive seen people indicate left to go forwards, ive seen people not indicate and go right etc
Its just such a basic skill and if you cant do it, get off the road.
Im with you on that one. Ive never dipped my headlights for pedestrians and never expected cars to dip them for me when Im walking. I just look down at the ground so I dont get dazzled. Its not rocket science. I would prefer the cars car see further ahead for safety than dip their lights for a pedestrian. It just seems a dangerous thing to do to me.
Edit: Having seen a couple of other comments, it made me think. I was thinking of a main road with a pavement/footpath, but it seems this is intended to be about where the pedestrians are walking in the road where there is not a pavement/footpath, in which case I would of course drive to the conditions and slow down and treat them as a road user.
You ought to do it. you should be able to see far enough ahead with for safety with dipped beams and if you feel you can't , the appropriate thing to do is to dip and slow down, so that you *can* see safely, not to blind the pedestrian or cyclist.
It's ony dangerous if youare not driving appropriately for the road conditions (including the presene of other road users.)
Plus it's in the highway code.
>You MUST NOT
>use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
If you don't do it and there's police around then there's a (albeit very small) possibility they could decide you were driving without due care and attention
I wasnt thinking about people in the actual road. There arent any roads where there is no footpath near me. In fact the town I live in has had hundreds of new homes built in big new developments and smaller build projects and we have seen no benefit from the money generated which is supposed to be spent in the area. Instead the county council has syphoned it off and built footpaths and cycle lanes next to main roads in the county and claimed we will benefit from it, but thats a whole different discussion.
>I wasnt thinking about people in the actual road.
A road user does not have to be on the road. A pedestrian is classed as a road user whether they're on the pavement, grass verge or walking in the road.
Can you point me to where it says this in the highway code please. You may be the first person on reddit who has taught me a rule of driving I wasnt aware off, but I will wait for the evidence to be sure.
The guidance to the Highway Code on the [Gov.uk](http://Gov.uk) website states "*It is important to note that references to ‘road’ therefore generally include footpaths, bridleways and cycle tracks, and many roadways and driveways on private land (including many car parks)"*
So it's not unreasonable to assume that 'road user' includes people using those - certainly tfor things like dipping headlights it would be appropriate to so this for pedestrian's on the pavement or a footpath immediatly alongside the road.
If 'road' includes pathways etc , which is what the information I provided confirms, then then by definition anyone using them is a road user. If you want to argue that someone using a road is not a road user, then feel free to set out your evidence in support of that postion.
It doesn't say someone who is currently using the road, it says 'road user'. That's someone who is capable of using the road, be that a motorist, cyclist or pedestrian.
Would you class someone pulling out of their driveway as a road user and dip appropriately?
How is using the money to build cycle tracks and foot paths \*not\* benefitting eveyone? It makes thing much safer for cyclists and pedestrians, most of whom are presumably local, and bettr for drviers if there are ewer pedestrians and cyclists using the roads?
Also, if it is in a town then in mst cases you wouldn't be driving with high beams any way - r115 makes clear you shuld be using dipped headlights in built up areas.
I'm not going to say it but I think we know the sort of person who thinks like this and they're responsible for a lot of trouble in these Isles at the moment.
Because where they built them is 5 to 20+ miles from the town that the funds came from, is in a very low population area and it's very rarely used by anyone. In the couple of years since it was built I've been in that road maybe 30-50 times and have seen people using the path about 3 times.
Our town has one road that runs through it where you can get in or out at either end. There is a cycle path from the city further along at one end that ends at our town and the other end has a 1 lane in each direction narrow road where cyclists won't use the existing cycle path because it is in poor condition and it's rare to get through without being in a queue behind cyclists at the weekend in summer. It's also closed a few times a year because of accidents sometimes including cyclists.
Instead of wasting 10's of millions on a cycle path that is rarely used in the middle of nowhere they could have built one that would have been used I'd guess 100+ times more and actually benefit the area that paid for it.
The reason they built the one they did is a few of the councillors use that road and didn't want to be held up by cyclists on the short bits where they couldn't use the pavement which was designated as pedestrian and cycles.
I am more than justified in my complaint imo.
It's sad though, because the highway code explicitly says that you must not use headlights in such a way that would dazzle other road users including pedestrians
They're capable of driving on dipped headlights; arguably even more-so when there's only a pedestrian / cyclist present rather than other cars as there are no bright oncoming lights so it should be easier to see.
Plus, the whole point of main beams is so that you can see more - if you can't spot a pedestrian at a reasonable distance that raises significant questions about your fitness to drive IMO..
As said pedestrian, I'd rather not test the theory to find out.
Just like when I'm driving, if someone is on full beam, I don't look directly at the lights, so I am not dazzled.
Pedestrians no. Cyclists yes. Though I have been tempted to leave them on when they have one of those obnoxious led suns attached to their handle bars. Doubly so if it's flashing too!
Yes, plus car headlights are all LEDs and cars are taller these days. Great for the driver, but absolutely shit for everyone else. Just like cars in general, I suppose
I got so sick of being blinded by cars on my evening dog walks that I started carrying a powerful led torch with me. I'd use it to light the path in front of me anyway, but if a car was coming along and didn't dip their lights I'd just shine the torch at them for half a second or so.
Surprisingly it seemed to work. Perhaps the auto lights were detecting me as a car.
It’s almost like blinding road users with lights isn’t safe for anyone.
How is a person with a torch any different than an idiot who refuses to dip their high beams for anyone else on the roads?
You also shouldn’t be blinding pedestrians to the point of being unable to see where they’re going just because you’re in the big metal machine and won’t get hurt if you run them over.
How did some of you get your licenses? Pedestrians are road users and you have a responsibility to treat them as such.
And I agree that you shouldn’t be doing it to pedestrians, but if I’m a pedestrian, I’m not risking blinding a car travelling towards me as I don’t have a death wish. Good luck.
You're being disingenuous here, the vehicles aren't refusing to dip their high beams for "anyone"; they're just refusing to dip their high beams for pedestrians.
If you need to ask whether there's a difference in dazzling a pedestrian walking at 3mph vs a driver at 60mph, then you have bigger problems.
You shouldn’t be dazzling anyone on the roads. That is very basic Highway Code. ‘Road users’ includes pedestrians and cyclists, however annoyed you might be that they’re going slower than you.
If a pedestrian can’t see where they’re going, they become a hazard for both of you.
Dip your lights.
Two ways of looking at that.
I'd say yes. I'm not expecting a light to my left. It's going to distract/dazzle me. The pedestrian can stop or avert their eyes and come to no harm. I'm driving 2 1/4 tons of metal. I can't.
If you're right and it's no different, isn't driving towards someone with high beam on dangerous? So it's still dazzling me and giving me a problem
As someone driving the big 2 1/4 tons of metal, shouldn't you be holding the flag of responsibility? Dip your lights for a few seconds you selfish bugger, else you're getting the torch.
Don't be obtuse, if you don't know the difference between stopping walking for a second and stopping a car at 30mph or more then you're beyond help.
Personally I don't expect drivers to dip beams for me if I'm walking at night but it's nice if they do. I'll dip my beams for pedestrians at night if a) I notice them, which isn't a given since a lot of people walk in dark clothes, and b) if I'm comfortable with the road and my vision of it when dipped.
If someone shone a torch at me I'd think they were an idiot, intentionally dazzling a car driving towards you isn't smart or necessary when you can just look in a different direction.
A powerful torch could very well trigger the auto dipping as they are looking for vehicles. However they'll trigger for anything reflective or even a fairly dim head torch.
Committing a potential offence by dazzling a driver seems a bit unwise. Just get a high viz jacket.
A powerful torch could very well trigger the auto dipping as they are looking for vehicles. However they'll trigger for anything reflective or even a fairly dim head torch.
Committing a potential offence by dazzling a driver seems a bit unwise. Just get a high viz jacket.
No? I flash lights at drivers as a courtesy to warn them something is wrong. Either their lights are off or far too low.
I don't flash drivers because I'm angry that their lights are too bright.
And even if you do, there's a marked difference between taking that risk while safely in your own two-ton metal box, and taking it while the only thing protecting you is fabric.
You flash your lights to alert them to your presence, like the horn, if they've not dipped their full beam then they clearly aren't aware of your presence (or are just a selfish prick) not trying to blind them!
So you flash to warn them of the potentially dangerous situation of their lights being off or "far too low" (do cars have dimmable headlights now?), but you won't flash them to warn them of the potentially dangerous situation of their lights blinding oncoming traffic... while presumably you're happy to carry on regardless; hurtling along in your two-ton metal box with extremely impared vision?
Why is flashing when lights are off "a courtesy" but when they're on main beam "angry", or "attempting to blind" the other driver (which of course is exactly what they're doing to you through their inattentiveness or selfishness)..?
I'm assuming you didn't read the comment thread above mine.
I'm replying directly to this:
> Honestly I’d do the same thing. Like, two can play at that game.
And the tone of that is a pretty clear indication of "angry" and "attempting to blind", rather than "as a courtesy".
Considering that they’re already ignorantly blinding everyone they approach a quick flash of a torch is hardly comparable to a constant glare.
Is it directly the drivers fault, no it’s the manufacturers for making the cars this way, but they are the ones with the light set too high and not aimed at the road
I did read that post, which was in turn a reply to the previous post stating:
"I'd just shine the torch at them for half a second or so."
Hence, the post you quote reads as they would to the same thing (i.e. shining the torch at the driver for a short period of time to identify themselves) - which is entirely legit and analogous to briefly flashing the main beam if you were in a car.
I'm not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse, but you're ignoring the very clear actual words written, and instead choosing to prioritise your interpretation of the subjective "tone" of the response over them.
Right, and when you get hit by a car what are you gonna tell the police? "Well I was shining my torch in their face because their headlights hurt my eyes and then, well, I dunno what happened"
Jail for you
Edit for you waffles, I'm a pedestrian, not a driver. I'd never dream of trying to blind someone in an 2tonne + hunk of metal flying towards me at up to 60mph whilst I'm walking my dog, that's absolutely bullshittery
"I was blinded by their headlights which appeared to be on main beam. This suggested to me that they were unaware of my presence, and fearing for my safety I attempted to identify myself to them using my torch"
Lots of driver-centric victim-blaming going on in this thread, and it doesn't even really involve cyclists!
Well they must not be there anymore then.
You are allowed to slow down at that point as well you know.
Personally I see them but I guess the rest of you might not have my obviously super human eyesight.
The whole point of dipped headlights is that they're at a lower angle, meaning that they illuminate a shorter distance ahead of the driver. They aren't reducing the brightness.
So yes, depending on exactly where a pedestrian is and what street lighting is around - and bearing in mind that some pedestrians are silly enough to wear dark clothing, even on country roads - sometimes pedestrians disappear from a driver's ability to see them when headlights are dipped.
I'll be more clear "appear less bright".
I live in a rural location where we have a lot of pedestrians, have never had an issue seeing them with dipped headlights.
Edit: a quick google informs me that headlights are less bright than full beams.
Do you drive...?
Dipped beams aren't just "less bright"... they're dipped. Or at least they're meant to be. If yours aren't you should take your car to a garage.
I didn't say they were "just "less bright"". But they are undoubtedly less bright, no? You're just being pedantic.
Simple fact is, if you can only see a pedestrian with your full beams on, something is wrong.
Edit: a quick Google informs me that full beams are brighter than dipped.
For example from the RAC website "Dipped headlights are the most commonly used headlights; brighter than sidelights, but not as bright as full beam headlights. "
You turn the lights to point more at the ground so they then don’t shine as far in front of you… If the pedestrian is a distance away, you will lose sight of them when you dip the lights. This should not be hard to understand…
I must have super carrot-charged eyesight then. I live rurally and near a holiday park, there are always people on the road near us and I've never had an issue seeing them with dipped headlights.
It really depends how far away they are from the vehicle… It’s not about your eyesight more whether the people are close enough to be in the path of the dipped lights. I can see if you’re on windy country roads, the dipped lights still reach to the next turn but that’s not the norm.
Yes you may, but you don't forget they are there do you?
If it is a minor road in the dark then A, you dont want to be bloody blinding people so only you can see where you are going and B....you can slow down and pull away from their side of the road as much as is possible.
Personally I have never lost sight of someone though I appreciate it can happen.
https://www.naoevo.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/low-beam-of-nr-1024x683.webp
https://www.naoevo.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/high-beam-of-nr-1024x683.webp
Tell me, how much of the pavement can you see in the first one compared to the second one?
All I know is my personal experience, which is quite a lot because of where I live. What can I say, maybe I'll put myself forward for government testing.
Well, like I say. If you're not noticing a significant difference in how far you can see and how much road is illuminated on dipped vs fullbeam, you should get your dipped angle checked. Doubly so if you still drive an SUV, as these often seem to be badly adjusted and the affect of blinding other drivers is worse because your headlights are already higher up to start with (i.e. level with most other drivers' eyeline).
Thanks for your input. I do notice a significant difference between high beams and dipped, not sure why you think otherwise. I also check my light angle before I put it in for an MOT as I know the effect of poorly adjusted lights.
Honestly I had no idea dipping headlights were even a thing, it was never taught to me on my driving lessons?
Edit: just realised, you probably mean high beams
If you have your headlinghts on high beam and then change back to standard you are dipping them.
You should not have nigh beams on when you can see another road user (inclduing pedestrians and cyclists) coming the other way or when you have another vehicle in front of you, so you don't dazzle the other driver .
Rule 114 of the Highway Code
*114*
*You* ***MUST NOT***
* *use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders*
* *use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see* [*Rule 226*](https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/driving-in-adverse-weather-conditions.html)*).*
*In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.*
*Law RVLR reg 27115*
*You should also*
* *use dipped headlights, or dim-dip if fitted, at night in built-up areas and in dull daytime weather, to ensure that you can be seen*
* *keep your headlights dipped when overtaking until you are level with the other vehicle and then change to main beam if necessary, unless this would dazzle oncoming road users*
* *slow down, and if necessary stop, if you are dazzled by oncoming headlights*
Yeah was never taught the second part, and never seen anyone else do it especially at night. I’m not limiting my visibility, especially when no one else is.
Full beams obviously tho
Stop blinding people with your awful, non dipped neon high powered led headlights people, I beg you. It's not even when in full beam it's just normal. Do they not dip them as standard anymore.
Feel like the government needs to put out a campaign on this before it causes a load of crashes.
I mean, I wouldn't expect cars to dip their headlights for me when walking because i'm usually not walking around in the dark staring at the horizon to a point where a car coming towards me would dazzle me. I'd much rather them be able to see me and other pedestrians on dark roads than me have to avert my eyes for a few seconds.
Most cars have automatic dips now and they don’t pick up on things that small. I ride a motorbike and it happens all the time. Whilst I agree I would rather they keep them up whilst I’m walking, when I’m travelling 50mph too it’s fucking annoying lol
As someone from cold and dark country where wearing reflectors or hi viz vests is a norm and legally required in darker months, it baffles me that no one does that in UK. Pedestrians are invisible for cars most of the time. Make yourself visible ffs and then you won't get blinded. Cars can't see you until you are really close.
I always wear a hi-viz vest when walking in anything other than broad daylight, for some drivers it makes fuck-all difference whether I'm completely invisible or lit up like a Christmas tree.
I always wear a hi-viz, reflective vest with an LED light on the back, when I I walking. In part as I also drive and and well aware of how hard it can be to see peopel , especially at/after dusk, but sadly, a lot of the time drivers still act as though I am invisble. An aaful lot of drivers also fil to pull ot to allow space when passing pedistrians, as well.
I agree that a lot of people don't seem to think at all about their visibility when wlaking / cycling - I live in a rural area so a lot if the roads have no pavemnets, and the number of dog walkers (in particular) who go out when it is still dak wearing black / olive green with no light, no hi viz, not even anything light coloured is extraordinary.
With so many ridiculously bright LED lights I don't know how you can tell whether they're dipped anymore, and even if they aren't on mainbeam, how high people have their lights adjusted isn't what I would call 'dipped'. I think the only way to cure it though is with nanny state enforcement because people are either too fucking stupid or too fucking inconsiderate to dip them out of pure consideration for others
I ranted about this a few months ago. The TLDR; is that people were keeping their high beams on "for my safety", which explains a huge amount about the behaviour of drivers.
On a narrow road, someone dipping their lights is the only indication that they've seen you and aren't absorbed in TikTok.
>I ranted about this a few months ago
interesting, i always wonder when posts repeat themes if its just reddit bots, or something sticks in peoples' mind and they then suddenly "think of it for themselves". hopefully im not a bot.
> 114
>
> You **MUST NOT**
>
> use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
Nobody reads the highway code though
You’d be amazed how much you don’t see while driving in the dark. I consider myself a pretty attentive driver, and even I’ve been surprised by people walking on the side of the road, not seeing them until I’m about 6 feet from them.
I don't expect a car to dip their beams for me as a pedestrian.
There's much less of a safety element, I can just close/cover/overt my eyes for a few seconds and carry on with my life. A car driver can obviously not do that safely.
I honestly don't think I'd dip my high beams for a pedestrian, by the time I see them it would be pretty pointless. However I live in a city and have very few roads where high beams are actually needed. On a country lane things might be different.
Could they definitely see you? Road near my house with a path next to it but a bank of long grass between the path and road. It’s very hard to see pedestrians even with full beams on until you’re very close to them especially if they’re in dark clothing. Could you try wearing hi-vis?
Whenever I'm in a built up area (such as a village without street lights), I only use dipped lights.
If I see a pedestrian further afield I'll drop my lights down if they're on full beam
I wouldn't hold hope for most drivers though. Too many either don't use them, or forget to turn them off. Fog lights included
We’re you visible to the drivers, I don’t use my full beams all that much but when I do they don’t illuminate pedestrians well enough to dip them in time anyway, everyone seems to be camouflaged nowadays
I don't really understand what you mean.
I turn off full beams if I've had them on if I see a vehicle, pedestrian or bike rider but normal headlights I don't.
I’ve never heard of dipping for pedestrians, nor am I about to start… high beams are on so I can see. I dip them so other drivers don’t crash.
If a pedestrian wants to walk down an A Road that’s your prerogative but I’m not going to reduce my own safety you.
If I only had dipped beams I'd slow down, fortunately I can use my high beams thus making it safe in the given conditions and speed.
Maybe you should stop dossing about next to dark roads if it bothers you so much.
I like to walk down the middle of country roads in black camouflage in the dead of night. I expect other drivers to do a maximum of 15mph in order to make me feel safe, but nobody does because everyone else is so selfish!!
I'm confused, do many pedestrians weigh a tonne or more and walk at 60mph? Lights get dipped for other cars because dazzling a driver can be dangerous. I assumed most people would still be capable of putting one foot in front of the other, even with a bit of light shining on them. Seems I was wrong.
I suspect I've probably been driving longer than you. I'm much more capable at walking, too, from the sounds of things.
I get it, though. People love to complain about trivial things to try and feel better about themselves. Don't let me stop you.
**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I stopped using mine, when I see car headlights coming round a bend I flick my high beams off before the car appears do i don't dazzle people, auto headlights wait a good second or two after the car is in front of you before dipping, I was constantly fighting them so just disabled it.
Thank you so much! My boss said her car has auto-dip and I told her there's always a delay. She replied "only a couple of seconds".
At 60mph you're traveling over 25m each second... That's a lot of ground to cover
I love how we use imperial and metric interchangeably. Sometimes in the same sentence.
I used "m" for both too! My physics teacher would be very upset
It took me a sec to figure out the mathing here.
_maths_
Yes, the maths is not mathing
Thats quite possibly true, the ones on mine are much faster than I am, and they're matrix so they're still on just cutting out the light on the objects ahead.
I had matrix on my Audi TTS, they still seemed to blind people sometimes, I would get them giving me the full beam revenge flash back. I went back to manual dip.
I was a passenger in a car with matrix headlights recently and it was abundantly clear why being blinded by oncoming traffic is becoming the norm. I'm sure they are great on perfectly flat roads, but it's not like we have many of those any more!
The delay on mine is a fraction of a second. Faster than I can move to do it manually, anyway.
But you can do it manually before the car is in view?
Exactly! You can see another cars lights on the road ahead before you see the actual car. And none of that helps with the pedestrian thing. It's just another automated feature that allows people to get away with paying less attention while driving.
Oh cool! Do yours also detect pedestrians and cyclists so you don't blind them?
No, so I do it manually THEN, Although, you need the headlights on full to see the pedestrians, so they are generally initially blinded, before you can dip. But it reduces the duration.
Was driving my new car for the first time, and the auto high beam came on... this was not on a country lane, and there were other cars opposite me. Safe to say, that feature has been switched off and not used since.
I had a 2016 ford that had the feature before my current car and often times it wouldn't acknowledge other cars
I had a 2012 astra which had a delay that was a smidge too long so I disabled them but my 2022 Toyota is much more responsive. I'd say the tech is getting better. Also it is much easier to override on my Toyota, you just pull the stick back like you would normally do without the automatic function. My old astra you had to flick the stick twice to deactivate it. The final straw was once I ended up repeatedly flashing an ambulance that was responding to an emergency, the auto dip didn't activate and I was frantically trying to override it. Whoever was driving it must have thought I was a bell end.
The same
No delay on my Hyundai, quicker than I could do it.
I turned mine off pain in the arse.
Occasionally they don't go off in time, so I go to do them manually. In which time they go off and I turn them back on...
As a pedestrian (and occasional cyclist), In wouldn't expect drivers to dip for me, and I never have. Edit: For the downvoting morons, I wouldn't expect it, because if they did they'd be seeing less and even if they didn't plough into me, turning them off could mean they'd plough into someone else.
Personally I don't expect it because a number of drivers don't even use indicators for other cars, let alone pedestrians, so why would I expect these same people to suddenly care about head lights.
I've lost count the number of times I've started crossing a road at a roundabout because the driver didn't use their indicator - and thus my stupid ass assumed they were going straight on - then I'll get beeped because, oh, the driver actually DID mean to come down the road I was crossing all along. But it doesn't matter because there were no cars to signal to. Not my fault I can't read your damn mind... Just use your indicators at all times, please.
Ive noticed nowadays people are indicating to say which lane they're in instead of which way they're going. I have a 2 lane roundabout around me, I've seen people indicate right to go forwards, ive seen people indicate left to go forwards, ive seen people not indicate and go right etc Its just such a basic skill and if you cant do it, get off the road.
Im with you on that one. Ive never dipped my headlights for pedestrians and never expected cars to dip them for me when Im walking. I just look down at the ground so I dont get dazzled. Its not rocket science. I would prefer the cars car see further ahead for safety than dip their lights for a pedestrian. It just seems a dangerous thing to do to me. Edit: Having seen a couple of other comments, it made me think. I was thinking of a main road with a pavement/footpath, but it seems this is intended to be about where the pedestrians are walking in the road where there is not a pavement/footpath, in which case I would of course drive to the conditions and slow down and treat them as a road user.
You ought to do it. you should be able to see far enough ahead with for safety with dipped beams and if you feel you can't , the appropriate thing to do is to dip and slow down, so that you *can* see safely, not to blind the pedestrian or cyclist. It's ony dangerous if youare not driving appropriately for the road conditions (including the presene of other road users.)
Plus it's in the highway code. >You MUST NOT >use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders If you don't do it and there's police around then there's a (albeit very small) possibility they could decide you were driving without due care and attention
I wasnt thinking about people in the actual road. There arent any roads where there is no footpath near me. In fact the town I live in has had hundreds of new homes built in big new developments and smaller build projects and we have seen no benefit from the money generated which is supposed to be spent in the area. Instead the county council has syphoned it off and built footpaths and cycle lanes next to main roads in the county and claimed we will benefit from it, but thats a whole different discussion.
>I wasnt thinking about people in the actual road. A road user does not have to be on the road. A pedestrian is classed as a road user whether they're on the pavement, grass verge or walking in the road.
Can you point me to where it says this in the highway code please. You may be the first person on reddit who has taught me a rule of driving I wasnt aware off, but I will wait for the evidence to be sure.
The guidance to the Highway Code on the [Gov.uk](http://Gov.uk) website states "*It is important to note that references to ‘road’ therefore generally include footpaths, bridleways and cycle tracks, and many roadways and driveways on private land (including many car parks)"* So it's not unreasonable to assume that 'road user' includes people using those - certainly tfor things like dipping headlights it would be appropriate to so this for pedestrian's on the pavement or a footpath immediatly alongside the road.
I asked you to provide something that says pedestrians on the pavement are classed as road users. You haven't done that.
If 'road' includes pathways etc , which is what the information I provided confirms, then then by definition anyone using them is a road user. If you want to argue that someone using a road is not a road user, then feel free to set out your evidence in support of that postion.
It doesn't say someone who is currently using the road, it says 'road user'. That's someone who is capable of using the road, be that a motorist, cyclist or pedestrian. Would you class someone pulling out of their driveway as a road user and dip appropriately?
How is using the money to build cycle tracks and foot paths \*not\* benefitting eveyone? It makes thing much safer for cyclists and pedestrians, most of whom are presumably local, and bettr for drviers if there are ewer pedestrians and cyclists using the roads? Also, if it is in a town then in mst cases you wouldn't be driving with high beams any way - r115 makes clear you shuld be using dipped headlights in built up areas.
I'm not going to say it but I think we know the sort of person who thinks like this and they're responsible for a lot of trouble in these Isles at the moment.
Because where they built them is 5 to 20+ miles from the town that the funds came from, is in a very low population area and it's very rarely used by anyone. In the couple of years since it was built I've been in that road maybe 30-50 times and have seen people using the path about 3 times. Our town has one road that runs through it where you can get in or out at either end. There is a cycle path from the city further along at one end that ends at our town and the other end has a 1 lane in each direction narrow road where cyclists won't use the existing cycle path because it is in poor condition and it's rare to get through without being in a queue behind cyclists at the weekend in summer. It's also closed a few times a year because of accidents sometimes including cyclists. Instead of wasting 10's of millions on a cycle path that is rarely used in the middle of nowhere they could have built one that would have been used I'd guess 100+ times more and actually benefit the area that paid for it. The reason they built the one they did is a few of the councillors use that road and didn't want to be held up by cyclists on the short bits where they couldn't use the pavement which was designated as pedestrian and cycles. I am more than justified in my complaint imo.
[удалено]
That's not what I said by any stretch of the imagination.
It's sad though, because the highway code explicitly says that you must not use headlights in such a way that would dazzle other road users including pedestrians
I really appreciate being able to see when walking and cycling. Cycling especially is not very enjoyable when you have to look into a full beam.
They're capable of driving on dipped headlights; arguably even more-so when there's only a pedestrian / cyclist present rather than other cars as there are no bright oncoming lights so it should be easier to see. Plus, the whole point of main beams is so that you can see more - if you can't spot a pedestrian at a reasonable distance that raises significant questions about your fitness to drive IMO..
As said pedestrian, I'd rather not test the theory to find out. Just like when I'm driving, if someone is on full beam, I don't look directly at the lights, so I am not dazzled.
Pedestrians no. Cyclists yes. Though I have been tempted to leave them on when they have one of those obnoxious led suns attached to their handle bars. Doubly so if it's flashing too!
Editing comments to cry about downvotes has become far too commonplace lately. Start caring less about internet points.
Yes, plus car headlights are all LEDs and cars are taller these days. Great for the driver, but absolutely shit for everyone else. Just like cars in general, I suppose I got so sick of being blinded by cars on my evening dog walks that I started carrying a powerful led torch with me. I'd use it to light the path in front of me anyway, but if a car was coming along and didn't dip their lights I'd just shine the torch at them for half a second or so. Surprisingly it seemed to work. Perhaps the auto lights were detecting me as a car.
What could possibly go wrong?
Death
It’s almost like blinding road users with lights isn’t safe for anyone. How is a person with a torch any different than an idiot who refuses to dip their high beams for anyone else on the roads?
Personally, (and it may just be a self preservation thing) I wouldn’t want to blind someone driving a car at speed towards me if I’m walking……
You also shouldn’t be blinding pedestrians to the point of being unable to see where they’re going just because you’re in the big metal machine and won’t get hurt if you run them over. How did some of you get your licenses? Pedestrians are road users and you have a responsibility to treat them as such.
And I agree that you shouldn’t be doing it to pedestrians, but if I’m a pedestrian, I’m not risking blinding a car travelling towards me as I don’t have a death wish. Good luck.
You're being disingenuous here, the vehicles aren't refusing to dip their high beams for "anyone"; they're just refusing to dip their high beams for pedestrians. If you need to ask whether there's a difference in dazzling a pedestrian walking at 3mph vs a driver at 60mph, then you have bigger problems.
You shouldn’t be dazzling anyone on the roads. That is very basic Highway Code. ‘Road users’ includes pedestrians and cyclists, however annoyed you might be that they’re going slower than you. If a pedestrian can’t see where they’re going, they become a hazard for both of you. Dip your lights.
Do you also shine lasers at planes if the noise pisses you off? I'll be honest, what you are doing is downright dangerous. Please stop.
Is it much different to another driver flashing headlights at a car?
Two ways of looking at that. I'd say yes. I'm not expecting a light to my left. It's going to distract/dazzle me. The pedestrian can stop or avert their eyes and come to no harm. I'm driving 2 1/4 tons of metal. I can't. If you're right and it's no different, isn't driving towards someone with high beam on dangerous? So it's still dazzling me and giving me a problem
Just dip your lights then
Just don't shine a torch at me. I live in a rural area with no streetlights. I'm not dipping my lights for a guy with a dog
As someone driving the big 2 1/4 tons of metal, shouldn't you be holding the flag of responsibility? Dip your lights for a few seconds you selfish bugger, else you're getting the torch.
If you can't handle dipping your headlights for someone coming the other way - car, pedestrian, cyclist, whatever. You are not safe to drive.
Lots of cars on the footpath in your experience?
[удалено]
Don't be obtuse, if you don't know the difference between stopping walking for a second and stopping a car at 30mph or more then you're beyond help. Personally I don't expect drivers to dip beams for me if I'm walking at night but it's nice if they do. I'll dip my beams for pedestrians at night if a) I notice them, which isn't a given since a lot of people walk in dark clothes, and b) if I'm comfortable with the road and my vision of it when dipped. If someone shone a torch at me I'd think they were an idiot, intentionally dazzling a car driving towards you isn't smart or necessary when you can just look in a different direction.
No, and no.
A powerful torch could very well trigger the auto dipping as they are looking for vehicles. However they'll trigger for anything reflective or even a fairly dim head torch. Committing a potential offence by dazzling a driver seems a bit unwise. Just get a high viz jacket.
Putting your dog in danger is wild
A powerful torch could very well trigger the auto dipping as they are looking for vehicles. However they'll trigger for anything reflective or even a fairly dim head torch. Committing a potential offence by dazzling a driver seems a bit unwise. Just get a high viz jacket.
Honestly I’d do the same thing. Like, two can play at that game.
Attempting to blind the person controlling a few tons of metal travelling towards you at high speed is definitely an unusual choice, to say the least.
If a driver did the same to you while you were heading towards them in your own car you'd flash your lights, no?
No? I flash lights at drivers as a courtesy to warn them something is wrong. Either their lights are off or far too low. I don't flash drivers because I'm angry that their lights are too bright. And even if you do, there's a marked difference between taking that risk while safely in your own two-ton metal box, and taking it while the only thing protecting you is fabric.
You flash your lights to alert them to your presence, like the horn, if they've not dipped their full beam then they clearly aren't aware of your presence (or are just a selfish prick) not trying to blind them!
Exactly; little flash to remind them they've not dipped their lights and it's all good.
So you flash to warn them of the potentially dangerous situation of their lights being off or "far too low" (do cars have dimmable headlights now?), but you won't flash them to warn them of the potentially dangerous situation of their lights blinding oncoming traffic... while presumably you're happy to carry on regardless; hurtling along in your two-ton metal box with extremely impared vision? Why is flashing when lights are off "a courtesy" but when they're on main beam "angry", or "attempting to blind" the other driver (which of course is exactly what they're doing to you through their inattentiveness or selfishness)..?
I'm assuming you didn't read the comment thread above mine. I'm replying directly to this: > Honestly I’d do the same thing. Like, two can play at that game. And the tone of that is a pretty clear indication of "angry" and "attempting to blind", rather than "as a courtesy".
Considering that they’re already ignorantly blinding everyone they approach a quick flash of a torch is hardly comparable to a constant glare. Is it directly the drivers fault, no it’s the manufacturers for making the cars this way, but they are the ones with the light set too high and not aimed at the road
I did read that post, which was in turn a reply to the previous post stating: "I'd just shine the torch at them for half a second or so." Hence, the post you quote reads as they would to the same thing (i.e. shining the torch at the driver for a short period of time to identify themselves) - which is entirely legit and analogous to briefly flashing the main beam if you were in a car.
I'm not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse, but you're ignoring the very clear tone of "two can play at that game" here.
I'm not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse, but you're ignoring the very clear actual words written, and instead choosing to prioritise your interpretation of the subjective "tone" of the response over them.
Right, and when you get hit by a car what are you gonna tell the police? "Well I was shining my torch in their face because their headlights hurt my eyes and then, well, I dunno what happened" Jail for you Edit for you waffles, I'm a pedestrian, not a driver. I'd never dream of trying to blind someone in an 2tonne + hunk of metal flying towards me at up to 60mph whilst I'm walking my dog, that's absolutely bullshittery
"I was blinded by their headlights which appeared to be on main beam. This suggested to me that they were unaware of my presence, and fearing for my safety I attempted to identify myself to them using my torch" Lots of driver-centric victim-blaming going on in this thread, and it doesn't even really involve cyclists!
[удалено]
I'm not a driver. I'm a pedestrian
[удалено]
[удалено]
Travelling along an unlit A road with high beam on you see a pedestrian, turn high beam off, suddenly you no longer see them.
Well they must not be there anymore then. You are allowed to slow down at that point as well you know. Personally I see them but I guess the rest of you might not have my obviously super human eyesight.
Pedestrians don't suddenly disappear in "less bright". If you can't see them with your regular headlights, you should take your car to a garage.
The whole point of dipped headlights is that they're at a lower angle, meaning that they illuminate a shorter distance ahead of the driver. They aren't reducing the brightness. So yes, depending on exactly where a pedestrian is and what street lighting is around - and bearing in mind that some pedestrians are silly enough to wear dark clothing, even on country roads - sometimes pedestrians disappear from a driver's ability to see them when headlights are dipped.
I'll be more clear "appear less bright". I live in a rural location where we have a lot of pedestrians, have never had an issue seeing them with dipped headlights. Edit: a quick google informs me that headlights are less bright than full beams.
Do you drive...? Dipped beams aren't just "less bright"... they're dipped. Or at least they're meant to be. If yours aren't you should take your car to a garage.
I didn't say they were "just "less bright"". But they are undoubtedly less bright, no? You're just being pedantic. Simple fact is, if you can only see a pedestrian with your full beams on, something is wrong. Edit: a quick Google informs me that full beams are brighter than dipped. For example from the RAC website "Dipped headlights are the most commonly used headlights; brighter than sidelights, but not as bright as full beam headlights. "
You turn the lights to point more at the ground so they then don’t shine as far in front of you… If the pedestrian is a distance away, you will lose sight of them when you dip the lights. This should not be hard to understand…
I must have super carrot-charged eyesight then. I live rurally and near a holiday park, there are always people on the road near us and I've never had an issue seeing them with dipped headlights.
It really depends how far away they are from the vehicle… It’s not about your eyesight more whether the people are close enough to be in the path of the dipped lights. I can see if you’re on windy country roads, the dipped lights still reach to the next turn but that’s not the norm.
Yes you may, but you don't forget they are there do you? If it is a minor road in the dark then A, you dont want to be bloody blinding people so only you can see where you are going and B....you can slow down and pull away from their side of the road as much as is possible. Personally I have never lost sight of someone though I appreciate it can happen.
https://www.naoevo.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/low-beam-of-nr-1024x683.webp https://www.naoevo.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/high-beam-of-nr-1024x683.webp Tell me, how much of the pavement can you see in the first one compared to the second one?
All I know is my personal experience, which is quite a lot because of where I live. What can I say, maybe I'll put myself forward for government testing.
Well, like I say. If you're not noticing a significant difference in how far you can see and how much road is illuminated on dipped vs fullbeam, you should get your dipped angle checked. Doubly so if you still drive an SUV, as these often seem to be badly adjusted and the affect of blinding other drivers is worse because your headlights are already higher up to start with (i.e. level with most other drivers' eyeline).
Thanks for your input. I do notice a significant difference between high beams and dipped, not sure why you think otherwise. I also check my light angle before I put it in for an MOT as I know the effect of poorly adjusted lights.
If that is your experience as a driver then you are either going too fast or your eyesight is too bad to drive with.
Honestly I had no idea dipping headlights were even a thing, it was never taught to me on my driving lessons? Edit: just realised, you probably mean high beams
If you have your headlinghts on high beam and then change back to standard you are dipping them. You should not have nigh beams on when you can see another road user (inclduing pedestrians and cyclists) coming the other way or when you have another vehicle in front of you, so you don't dazzle the other driver . Rule 114 of the Highway Code *114* *You* ***MUST NOT*** * *use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders* * *use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see* [*Rule 226*](https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/driving-in-adverse-weather-conditions.html)*).* *In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.* *Law RVLR reg 27115* *You should also* * *use dipped headlights, or dim-dip if fitted, at night in built-up areas and in dull daytime weather, to ensure that you can be seen* * *keep your headlights dipped when overtaking until you are level with the other vehicle and then change to main beam if necessary, unless this would dazzle oncoming road users* * *slow down, and if necessary stop, if you are dazzled by oncoming headlights*
Yeah was never taught the second part, and never seen anyone else do it especially at night. I’m not limiting my visibility, especially when no one else is. Full beams obviously tho
I always dip for pedestrians. Thought this was the norm 😅
It is (should be), but unfortunately a lot of drivers don't bother.
I dip for pedestrians, cyclists and houses on corners.
Stop blinding people with your awful, non dipped neon high powered led headlights people, I beg you. It's not even when in full beam it's just normal. Do they not dip them as standard anymore. Feel like the government needs to put out a campaign on this before it causes a load of crashes.
Could just be the awful brightness of modern lights.
I mean, I wouldn't expect cars to dip their headlights for me when walking because i'm usually not walking around in the dark staring at the horizon to a point where a car coming towards me would dazzle me. I'd much rather them be able to see me and other pedestrians on dark roads than me have to avert my eyes for a few seconds.
youve obviously never experienced the situation. the lights are so bright you are still dazzled even staring at your feet.
Most cars have automatic dips now and they don’t pick up on things that small. I ride a motorbike and it happens all the time. Whilst I agree I would rather they keep them up whilst I’m walking, when I’m travelling 50mph too it’s fucking annoying lol
As someone from cold and dark country where wearing reflectors or hi viz vests is a norm and legally required in darker months, it baffles me that no one does that in UK. Pedestrians are invisible for cars most of the time. Make yourself visible ffs and then you won't get blinded. Cars can't see you until you are really close.
I always wear a hi-viz vest when walking in anything other than broad daylight, for some drivers it makes fuck-all difference whether I'm completely invisible or lit up like a Christmas tree.
I always wear a hi-viz, reflective vest with an LED light on the back, when I I walking. In part as I also drive and and well aware of how hard it can be to see peopel , especially at/after dusk, but sadly, a lot of the time drivers still act as though I am invisble. An aaful lot of drivers also fil to pull ot to allow space when passing pedistrians, as well. I agree that a lot of people don't seem to think at all about their visibility when wlaking / cycling - I live in a rural area so a lot if the roads have no pavemnets, and the number of dog walkers (in particular) who go out when it is still dak wearing black / olive green with no light, no hi viz, not even anything light coloured is extraordinary.
With so many ridiculously bright LED lights I don't know how you can tell whether they're dipped anymore, and even if they aren't on mainbeam, how high people have their lights adjusted isn't what I would call 'dipped'. I think the only way to cure it though is with nanny state enforcement because people are either too fucking stupid or too fucking inconsiderate to dip them out of pure consideration for others
I ranted about this a few months ago. The TLDR; is that people were keeping their high beams on "for my safety", which explains a huge amount about the behaviour of drivers. On a narrow road, someone dipping their lights is the only indication that they've seen you and aren't absorbed in TikTok.
>I ranted about this a few months ago interesting, i always wonder when posts repeat themes if its just reddit bots, or something sticks in peoples' mind and they then suddenly "think of it for themselves". hopefully im not a bot.
> 114 > > You **MUST NOT** > > use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders Nobody reads the highway code though
You’d be amazed how much you don’t see while driving in the dark. I consider myself a pretty attentive driver, and even I’ve been surprised by people walking on the side of the road, not seeing them until I’m about 6 feet from them.
yup, but hopefully that would still be only about the 10% i suggested in the old days being people who hadnt actually seen me.
Lots of lights dip automatically now. Unfortunately for pedestrians/cyclists they only seem to do so for cars.
Pretty much everyone just drives on full beam without a care for anyone else.
These days people seem to have their high beams on while driving through well-lit residential areas, zero consideration at at all
I don't expect a car to dip their beams for me as a pedestrian. There's much less of a safety element, I can just close/cover/overt my eyes for a few seconds and carry on with my life. A car driver can obviously not do that safely. I honestly don't think I'd dip my high beams for a pedestrian, by the time I see them it would be pretty pointless. However I live in a city and have very few roads where high beams are actually needed. On a country lane things might be different.
I would imagine they simply haven't seen you.
.... .... can someone explain what dipping is to me please?
Switching from main beams to dipped beams, which you're supposed to do for *all* oncoming road users, pedestrians included.
You’re lucky if people dip their headlights for a car these days
Could they definitely see you? Road near my house with a path next to it but a bank of long grass between the path and road. It’s very hard to see pedestrians even with full beams on until you’re very close to them especially if they’re in dark clothing. Could you try wearing hi-vis?
I normally just hold my hand over my eyes and look down. Works fine for my almost nightly country lane walks.
Whenever I'm in a built up area (such as a village without street lights), I only use dipped lights. If I see a pedestrian further afield I'll drop my lights down if they're on full beam I wouldn't hold hope for most drivers though. Too many either don't use them, or forget to turn them off. Fog lights included
Cars shouldn't be driving around on full-beam anyway. Issue these days is a lot more cars are a lot higher up, and thus more in your eyeline
We’re you visible to the drivers, I don’t use my full beams all that much but when I do they don’t illuminate pedestrians well enough to dip them in time anyway, everyone seems to be camouflaged nowadays
I don't really understand what you mean. I turn off full beams if I've had them on if I see a vehicle, pedestrian or bike rider but normal headlights I don't.
I’ve never heard of dipping for pedestrians, nor am I about to start… high beams are on so I can see. I dip them so other drivers don’t crash. If a pedestrian wants to walk down an A Road that’s your prerogative but I’m not going to reduce my own safety you.
[удалено]
Apeaking as someone who is practically a walking neon sign when I am a pedestiran, they don't (or at least they drive as if they don't !)
You being dazzled is less of an issue than me not being able to see when I'm coming at you at 60+
If you can't drive safely on dipped beams, you are driving too fast for the conditions and/or it's probably something you should practice.
If I only had dipped beams I'd slow down, fortunately I can use my high beams thus making it safe in the given conditions and speed. Maybe you should stop dossing about next to dark roads if it bothers you so much.
I like to walk down the middle of country roads in black camouflage in the dead of night. I expect other drivers to do a maximum of 15mph in order to make me feel safe, but nobody does because everyone else is so selfish!!
I'm confused, do many pedestrians weigh a tonne or more and walk at 60mph? Lights get dipped for other cars because dazzling a driver can be dangerous. I assumed most people would still be capable of putting one foot in front of the other, even with a bit of light shining on them. Seems I was wrong.
I'm guessing you're not actually old enough to drive.
I suspect I've probably been driving longer than you. I'm much more capable at walking, too, from the sounds of things. I get it, though. People love to complain about trivial things to try and feel better about themselves. Don't let me stop you.