2007 S80 - turning off daylight running lights

[Forty Two]

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.

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

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!

 

[Guest]

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...

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

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!

 

[Glenn Klein]

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

 

[Guest]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

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>

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

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!

 

[Allen]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

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.

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

 

[fishplate]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,



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?

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

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.

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!

 

[Michael Pardee]

Oh no! Not only the endless DRL thread, but the endless A/C vs. windows
thread. A double whammy.

Mike

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

Oh no! Not only the endless DRL thread, but the endless A/C vs.
windows thread. A double whammy.

Mike

Well, you're getting two for the price of one. Beat that for value! <g>
--
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!

 

[fishplate]

No - do you?
Yep.

But it's finite.

Indeed it is. But is it significant?

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

Yep.

Go on, then - tell us!

Indeed it is. But is it significant?

Quite possibly. Here in the UK, there's quite a lot of publicity aimed at
getting people to turn off wallwart-type mobile phone chargers and the like
when not needed on the basis that - taken collectively - they could account
for a whole power station. A similar argument could be applied to DRLs.
--
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!

 

[Guest]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,


Go on, then - tell us!

That's my point - most people throw out all kind of arguments against
these things, but cannot provide any evidence. But, geek that I am,
I've done the work for you. The numbers aren't informative by
themselves, but it's the equivalent of a tire underinflated by 2 psi, or
maybe not washing your car for a year.

Quite possibly. Here in the UK, there's quite a lot of publicity aimed at
getting people to turn off wallwart-type mobile phone chargers and the like
when not needed on the basis that - taken collectively - they could account
for a whole power station. A similar argument could be applied to DRLs.

Yes, it could. Let me ask you, though - what are the safety issues
involved in not keeping your wall wart plugged in?

My route to work is through the countryside, where small lanes enter the
roadway at inconvenient places. There are trees lining both sides for a
good part of the trip. This morning, I was headed to work in the '91
245, which also has the lights on all the time. As I came around a
curve, I noticed a car quickly stopping short of entering the
roadway...it appeared that, had he not seen my headlights through the
trees, he might very well have pulled out in front of me, as there was
no line of sight for him around the curve.

Now, how minscule an amount of CO2 emissions is worth me having to test
my airbags?

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

Yes, it could. Let me ask you, though - what are the safety issues
involved in not keeping your wall wart plugged in?

Possibly the opposite of what you think - in extremis, they could constitute
a fire risk if they *are* left on. My wife often leaves her mobile phone
charger plugged in and switched on - with the phone not connected to it. How
could it possibly be *unsafe* to switch it off?

My route to work is through the countryside, where small lanes enter
the roadway at inconvenient places. There are trees lining both sides
for a good part of the trip. This morning, I was headed to work in
the '91 245, which also has the lights on all the time. As I came
around a curve, I noticed a car quickly stopping short of entering the
roadway...it appeared that, had he not seen my headlights through the
trees, he might very well have pulled out in front of me, as there was
no line of sight for him around the curve.

Now, how minscule an amount of CO2 emissions is worth me having to
test my airbags?

There are obviously occasions when poor visibility or difficult lighting
conditions make it sensible to turn your lights on. But that doesn't mean
that you need to have them on all the time.
--
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!

 

[Guest]

Possibly the opposite of what you think - in extremis, they could constitute
a fire risk if they *are* left on. My wife often leaves her mobile phone
charger plugged in and switched on - with the phone not connected to it. How
could it possibly be *unsafe* to switch it off?

Not my point - I am saying that in general your phone charger is not a
safety feature. Certainly not like increased visibility. Of course,
you will think of some obscure reason that has a one-in-a-million chance
of being in that category. for that, I commend your ingenuity.

There are obviously occasions when poor visibility or difficult lighting
conditions make it sensible to turn your lights on. But that doesn't mean
that you need to have them on all the time.

How can I know for certain that I am visible? Why not take chance out
of the equation?

Roger, turn your lights off if you wish. Be as contrary as you like. I
can think of a thousand reasons to keep my lights off -- none of them
are worth my life. On my cars without DRL, I turn them on each and
every time I start the car. It's just plain common sense - certainly
where I live - to take every opportunity to make the mouth-breathers
aware of my occupying the roadway. I expect that on your tiny island,
where you drive the only car and spend most of your time high up in your
ivory tower, the other guy does not merit consideration. So be it...

Cheers, mate.

 

[Roger Mills]

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,

Not my point - I am saying that in general your phone charger is not a
safety feature. Certainly not like increased visibility. Of course,
you will think of some obscure reason that has a one-in-a-million
chance of being in that category. for that, I commend your ingenuity.

But we were actually talking about the energy and emissions aspect of not
using DRL's - it was you who introduced safety in relation to wall warts.

Roger, turn your lights off if you wish. I expect that on
your tiny island, where you drive the only car and spend most of your
time high up in your ivory tower, the other guy does not merit
consideration. So be it...

I wish! Actually, you may have unwittingly hit the nail on the head. On my
'tiny' island - which has umpteen million vehicles on relatively little
road, the roads are so crowded that you're never more than about 10 yards
away from the nearest vehicle. That's probably why we don't need DRL's -
'cos you can't help but see nearby vehicles - with or without lights!
--
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!