HEADLIGHTS.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 31 July 1926, Page 14

HEADLIGHTS.

SHOULD THEY BE DIMMED?

AUSTRALIAN OPINION ON THE MATTER.

Courtesy among motorists lias often been stressed before in these columns (says the Sydney Sun), and in every instance driving formula which keeps us within certain safety bounds is well observed, but there is an occasion when we exceed ourselves and apply an unwritten law which does not altogether seem necessary. Take, for instance, the popular practice of: dimming headlights. Some time ago discussion raged around this practice, and motoring authorities agreed that it would be better not to dim, and would be far safer to face severe headlights than attempt to dim while approaching a car. No doubt there is a lot to be said in both directions, but, after all, only experience. will give you an idea of which practice is the safer. There have certainly been accidents caused by people passing behind a car which temporarily -blinded the driver coming in the opposite direction, and caused him to run down the pedestrian before he could properly regain his normal vision.

To have driven where there is no dimming will give you quite a different outlook on the subject, and you will find that the non-dimming practice is easily the better.

There are equally as many dangers in dimming as' there are to be encountered when passing cars with glaring headlights. Two cars suddenly approaching, both temporarily losing their lights, may collide, run off the road, or fail to see another vehicle. With headlights on all the time, a driver can see even if headlights are severe. The great mistake made by many drivers is that they look at the headlights of the car approaching and are temporarily blinded. A good driver will never look at the headlights of the other car. Ho keeps his vision within the rays of light, on the edge of it, and has no trouble in pnssing the other car within a safe distance.

In some countries there are penalties for dimming, and to many motorists the practice is unknown. This in itself is a good argument, showing that dimming is not altogether necessary. Many motorists tell you that they are opposed to dimming, but do so as a token of courtesy for the driver who dims first.

You will often see two cars pass without dimming, and apparently both drivers are satisfied that there is no necessity for the practice. Often when dimming at, say, a distance of 40 yards, one has to pass over the road without the necessary flood of light which will show up dangerous holes in the road.

Both ears have the same experience, and if travelling at all fast the bumps that are encountered in the dark make the passing of the cars particularly hazardous.

Courtesy on the road is a good thing, and it is pleasing to note that our motorists are becoming accustomed to giving signals, and allowing for their fellow-drivers.

It is really courtesy and force of habit which causes motorists to dim so frequently, and it remains for everybody, wherever possible, to try driving without dimming. Even in instances where there are severe headlights, in your opinion, your own lights, if full on, are just as severe when looked into, and have the same effect on the other driver.

It is all a matter of judgment in passing ears in the night. The main thing is to ignore the severity of headlights, only looking on the edge of the flood of light. By doing this you will have no difficulty in passing any car, and after getting out of the habit of dimming you will readily appreciate the difference.

It is not intended to suggest that motorists should not dim. There is no law one way or the other on the subject, and it remains for the motorist to arrive at his own conclusion; and, where courtesy is not involved, he lias a chance of learning that there is really no necessity for dimming.