A Cyclist wrote:
All this means that generally I can't drive safely at more than 45 mph on dipped lights on an unlit rural road, especially if there isn't a white line at the edge and the road markings are obscured by muck or worn away. Frequently I will be dazzled by an approaching vehicle for any of the reasons quoted above. Lighting defects seem to be routinely ignored except at MOT time.
I have to say I, as a fellow middle-aged spectacle wearer, suffer from exactly the same thing. On a quiet road where I can use main beams, no problem, but if there's a steady stream of cars coming the other way I really can't see much at all in front of me and like you feel I need to slow down to a maximum of 45-50 mph.
A few years ago a was doing a commute which involved about 15 miles of unlit SC A-road which I found quite stressful for this very reason. It is somewhat embarrassing to be driving at 20 mph or more less than the speed I know would be safe in the light.
I wouldn't like to say whether it is the 15-20% of badly adjusted headlamps that cause the problem, or the total amount of light even from well adjusted headlamps.
Quote:
Am I alone? I really can't see how other drivers can travel safely at 60-70 mph on dipped headlights in such conditions (sometimes with only the left-hand headlight working). I know that we do it, me included, on a dual carriageway on the assumption that if the vehicle in front hasn't hit anything lying in the road or parked on it then we won't either.
On a dual carriageway the oncoming traffic is much further to your right, so the dazzle problem is greatly diminished. Also, even at night, there's generally traffic ahead which also illuminates the road in front.