Skip to main content

The Globe and Mail

Why aren't rear daytime running lights mandatory on cars?

rainy autobahn

Christian Müller/Getty Images/iStockphoto

Every time I drive in fog, I wonder why cars aren't equipped with mandatory rear daytime running lights (DRLs). It's mandatory for the front headlights, why not the rear? – Pat

A topic near and dear to my heart – mandatory DRLs are a significant and proven safety feature. But the way the regulation is written, and the fact they are not mandatory in the United States, has led to some sloppy practices – such as wiring them so they operate in conjunction with instrument panel lighting.

While this may be a simple step during the manufacturing process for vehicles destined for Canada, it leads to people driving around thinking their headlights are on because they see light from the dash and front of the vehicle.

Story continues below advertisement

The light from the front of the vehicle is only partial, but the big problem is that the tail lights are not on, making the vehicle invisible from the rear in low light conditions and after dark.

Opposition to mandatory rear lighting might involve unnecessary use of energy. But in the new world of LED lights (that use practically no power and have a long life expectancy), that argument carries no weight.

If you have questions about driving or car maintenance, please contact our experts at globedrive@globeandmail.com.

Follow us on Twitter @Globe_Drive.

Add us to your circles.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
As of December 20, 2017, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this resolved by the end of January 2018. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.