ernest breakfield wrote: > back to the point; since fog lights are additional light sources and > aimed lower than > headlights, fogs shouldn't cause any more "dazzle", and use of them does help > increase > conspicuity (especially those of a different color).
Regardless of where they're aimed, they still represent two more white-hot bulb filaments, which oncoming drivers have to look at. That was my point. Many fog lights are quite bright indeed; my J.C. Whitney catalog lists 55 watt models, which makes them as bright as a standard low-beam headlamp. I think having 220 watts of lights on is an excessive amount of glare if your goal is simply to make yourself visible. Even if they're aimed properly, the bulbs still create a very bright sight picture for oncoming drivers. While this isn't going to blind anyone during the day, it's unnecessary, and the same person will probably run them constantly at night as well, where it's much more troublesome. To make matters worse, some of these lights are tinted blue, which creates even more scattering and glare than a normal headlamp. > Actually, that's exactly what you said: > you wrote: > "I believe this is because it could cause confusion about whether your car is > in motion or > parked." > > did you mean to say something other than what you actually wrote? please > feel free to > clarify. > You're taking me out of context. That was part of a discussion about why some states have laws prohibiting such things. But you seem more interested in finding nits to pick than in debating the actual topic at hand.
