2007 S80 - turning off daylight running lights

Hi there,

does anyone know how to turn off the daylight running lights in a 2007
S80? My old S40 had instructions in the manual - the S80 only says to
have it done by a dealer....

Thanks,
Wolfgang.

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Forty Two <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> does anyone know how to turn off the daylight running lights in a 2007
> S80? My old S40 had instructions in the manual - the S80 only says to
> have it done by a dealer....
>
> Thanks,
> Wolfgang.

On my 1999 V70, there is a little screw in the corner of the light switch
housing - but more recent models don't have this - and it requires some of
the data in an on-board computer to be changed which, unfortunately, is a
dealer job.

I suspect that some dealers may be reluctant to help - even though they have
the technology - in case you subsequently have an accident, and the dealer
gets sued for removing a 'safety' feature. So you may need to insist. But,
unless you live in a country where *all* cars have to have daylight running
lights by law, you have a perfect right to have the bl**dy things switched
off. Apart from anything else, it will save you a fortune in replacement
light bulbs.
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...

> you have a perfect right to have the bl**dy things switched
> off. Apart from anything else, it will save you a fortune in replacement
> light bulbs.

Any data to back up this claim?

The reason I ask is that we have a 2001 V70 in which we leave our light
switch in the on position all the time. We got about 70,000 miles out
of our first headlamp capsule, and about 60,000 miles for a turn signal
lamp, at which point in each case we replaced the pair. That's all the
lamps we've replaced...

In the grand scheme of Volvo maintenance about $10-$20 for a pair of
lamps really isn't too much in trade for never having to think if it's
appropriate to turn on the lights. In my opinion...

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
(E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
>> you have a perfect right to have the bl**dy things switched
>> off. Apart from anything else, it will save you a fortune in
>> replacement light bulbs.
>
> Any data to back up this claim?
>
Which part - the right to switch them off, or the money saved?

The first part is fairly obvious. In any country where the majority of new
cars are legally supplied *without* daytime running lights, it's a 'no
brainer' that you can turn them off on cars which *are* supplied with them,
without legal consequence.

With regard to money saved, I have only anecdotal evidence from this NG,
where people have complained about repeated bulb failures (possibly only
relating to certain models but, IIRC, including the 850 -> 70 series, but
maybe not S80)

You will appreciate that I used a little poetic licence in referring to a
"fortune". <g>

What amazes me is the absence of the pro-running-light brigade who almost
invariably get exercised whenever I advocate turning them off!
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

Forty Two wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> does anyone know how to turn off the daylight running lights in a 2007
> S80? My old S40 had instructions in the manual - the S80 only says to
> have it done by a dealer....
>
> Thanks,
> Wolfgang.
You have bring the car in to the dealer they have to change a setting in
the CEM ( Central Electronic Module ) as for a charge it depends on the
servicing dealer
Glenn
Volvo Certified Technician
ASE Certified Technician

--
" Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new"
-- Albert Einstein

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> (E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >
> >> you have a perfect right to have the bl**dy things switched
> >> off. Apart from anything else, it will save you a fortune in
> >> replacement light bulbs.
> >
> > Any data to back up this claim?
> >
> Which part - the right to switch them off, or the money saved?

Well, the money saved was the part to which I replied...

> With regard to money saved, I have only anecdotal evidence from this NG,
> where people have complained about repeated bulb failures (possibly only
> relating to certain models but, IIRC, including the 850 -> 70 series, but
> maybe not S80)

I've got, as noted, a 2001 V70. The lighting has been exemplary. I
heard of an early run of V70s with lighting problems, it appears to have
been fixed by June 2001.

> You will appreciate that I used a little poetic licence in referring to a
> "fortune". <g>

Yeah, but my experience has been completely the opposite. I've spent
more on car wash soap than I've spent on replacement lamps. That's why
I'm curious about the need to turn off a safety feature to save money.

> What amazes me is the absence of the pro-running-light brigade who almost
> invariably get exercised whenever I advocate turning them off!

Oh, no, I'm not offended - knock yourself out! I persoanlly don't get
it - I can see no reason to make myself less visible, but I'm not you.
Though I hope I don't run into you in a period of low visibility because
you forgot to flip the switch... <g>

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
(E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> Yeah, but my experience has been completely the opposite. I've spent
> more on car wash soap than I've spent on replacement lamps. That's
> why I'm curious about the need to turn off a safety feature to save
> money.
>
The money saving bit was really a throw-away line. My real motivation for
turning them off is that it looks stupid to be driving around with your
lights on in broad daylight. I can understand the need in northern
Scandinavia, where it never gets light for a great chunk of the year - but
let's not impose that on the rest of the world.

If it was *that* much of a safety feature, wouldn't it be mandatory
*everywhere*?

Turning them off also makes a contribution - albeit small - towards saving
the planet. The electricity to power the lights has to be generated, causing
the engine to work a bit harder, resulting in slightly greater fuel
consumption and exhaust emissions. It's a small amount, but multiply it by
the many millions of vehicle miles covered, and it begins to add up.
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

"Roger Mills" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> (E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yeah, but my experience has been completely the opposite. I've spent
>> more on car wash soap than I've spent on replacement lamps. That's
>> why I'm curious about the need to turn off a safety feature to save
>> money.
>>
> The money saving bit was really a throw-away line. My real motivation for
> turning them off is that it looks stupid to be driving around with your
> lights on in broad daylight. I can understand the need in northern
> Scandinavia, where it never gets light for a great chunk of the year - but
> let's not impose that on the rest of the world.
>
> If it was *that* much of a safety feature, wouldn't it be mandatory
> *everywhere*?
>
> Turning them off also makes a contribution - albeit small - towards saving
> the planet. The electricity to power the lights has to be generated,
> causing the engine to work a bit harder, resulting in slightly greater
> fuel consumption and exhaust emissions. It's a small amount, but multiply
> it by the many millions of vehicle miles covered, and it begins to add up.
> --
> Cheers,
> Roger

Not to mention the global warming caused by the heat that is generated from
all those millions of light bulbs.

On Apr 4, 11:31 am, "Roger Mills" <watt.ty...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
>
> f...@gmail.com <f...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, but my experience has been completely the opposite. I've spent
> > more on car wash soap than I've spent on replacement lamps. That's
> > why I'm curious about the need to turn off a safety feature to save
> > money.
>
> The money saving bit was really a throw-away line. My real motivation for
> turning them off is that it looks stupid to be driving around with yourlightson in broad daylight.

Stupid? How so? Given to the number of jokes about it posted on the
Internet, is it any stupider than you look driving a Volvo in the
first place? After all, we are all clueless tree-hugging liberals and
Birkenstock-wearing soccer moms. I would posit that DRL detracts very
little from the image.

What looks stupid is the 50% or more GM vehicles with one DRL burnt
out. At least my lights are symmetrical.

> If it was *that* much of a safety feature, wouldn't it be mandatory
> *everywhere*?

Not everyone is as enlightened as Canadians...

> Turning them off also makes a contribution - albeit small - towards saving
> the planet. The electricity to power thelightshas to be generated, causing
> the engine to work a bit harder, resulting in slightly greater fuel
> consumption and exhaust emissions. It's a small amount, but multiply it by
> the many millions of vehicle miles covered, and it begins to add up.

Do you have any idea how small?

Here's a quiz: While driving your reasonably modern Volvo (new enough
to have DRL), which adds more to global warming - running your auto's
air conditioner, or shutting it off and putting the windows down?

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
(E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Apr 4, 11:31 am, "Roger Mills" <watt.ty...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
>
>> If it was *that* much of a safety feature, wouldn't it be mandatory
>> *everywhere*?
>
> Not everyone is as enlightened as Canadians...
>

Well we Brits are (with some justification) believed to be overly safety
conscious and risk adverse - but *we* don't require vehicles to be fitted
with daylight running lights.


>> Turning them off also makes a contribution - albeit small - towards
>> saving
>> the planet. The electricity to power thelightshas to be generated,
>> causing
>> the engine to work a bit harder, resulting in slightly greater fuel
>> consumption and exhaust emissions. It's a small amount, but multiply
>> it by
>> the many millions of vehicle miles covered, and it begins to add up.
>
> Do you have any idea how small?
>
No - do you? But it's finite.

> Here's a quiz: While driving your reasonably modern Volvo (new enough
> to have DRL), which adds more to global warming - running your auto's
> air conditioner, or shutting it off and putting the windows down?

The answer may not be as obvious as you think. Driving with the windows open
adds to the drag, and makes the engine work harder. I don't know which
effect is larger. Shutting off the aircon when you don't need it *is* a good
idea, though (but keeping the windows shut).
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!