I just drove the 2023 Chevrolet Colorado, The Bowtie’s fresh new midsize truck aiming to take on the Toyota Tacoma, and while I’ll publish a full review soon, for now we need to talk about the headlight switch.
The vast majority of cars have their headlight switch in one of two locations: The left side of the steering wheel on the dashboard, or on a stalk mounted to the steering column. Here’s a look at the outgoing, 2022, Chevy Colorado’s headlight switch, which lets you turn the lights off, activate
This switch allows you to turn the headlights off, leave them in “auto,” turn on just the parking lights, or turn them on. Plus, a push in the center turns on the fog lights:
The second common headlight switch location is the column-mounted. This is where the Toyota Tacoma, the vehicle whose sales Chevy really wants to encroach upon with the new Colorado, has its lighting control stalk:
You twist the end of the stalk to turn the lights off and on, to turn on only the parking lights, to turn off the daytime running lights, to put the switch into auto mode, etc. You’re probably all familiar with this.
The new Chevrolet Colorado, as my co-driver at the first-drive event (and boss at A Girl’s Guide to Cars) Scott Reiss pointed out, forgoes these rather intuitive headlight switch concepts for something that especially truck customers might find a bit surprising:
That’s right. The headlight switch is part of the infotainment screen!
From the home screen, you press a lightbulb at the top, and that will open up the headlight “toolbar” (that’s what I’m calling it), which offers the following modes: off, auto, parking lights, on. The toolbar only remains in place for a few seconds after you press the little bulb icon, then it disappears. It’s worth noting that the high beams are actuated via the stalk mounted on the left side of the steering column, so that’s still fairly traditional:
Overall, it’s a rather peculiar headlight switch setup, but the lack of a physical switch isn’t specific to the new Colorado. I bet you can guess which other brand is doing it:
That’s right — Tesla’s headlight switch is also located in the infotainment display. I can’t off the top of my head think of other mainstream car brands with this setup, but I bet there are a few.
I spoke with a Chevrolet spokesperson about the brand’s decision to forego a physical headlight switch in favor of the touchscreen, and he told me it comes down to OTA, or over-the-air update capability. Per the spokesperson, allowing the infotainment system to actuate the headlights means Chevrolet has wireless access to the headlights, should the brand decide it wants to install some kind of update that affects the headlight function.
I don’t mean to suggest that Chevy is going to go in this silly direction, but it’s worth noting that Tesla’s “Holiday Mode” light show function was an over-the-air update:
I don’t see why one couldn’t have both a physical switch (perhaps a “fake” mechanical switch that works through the infotainment system, and is not an actual mechanical switch that directly actuates relays to send current to the lights) and OTA capability, but in any case, this is the route Chevy chose to take.
I don’t think it’s a massive deal given that most folks will keep their vehicle in “auto” mode 99 percent of the time, but at the same time, I think it’s going to receive more criticism in this application than it does in a Tesla. The Colorado is a truck, after all, and if you look at the transmission shifter (shown above) in the truck — an electronic, center tunnel-mounted shifter that mimics the look and feel of an old mechanical PRNDL — it’s clear GM understands that truck customers like chunky things, even if they’re not entirely logical (the shifter is a waste of space). It is worth noting that the electric park brake shown above represents a shift away from a chunky pedal or hand-actuated lever, but few folks use park brakes on automatic-equipped cars, anyway. Are most folks entirely onboard with “set and forget” automatic headlights? I’m not quite sure yet; I wouldn’t be surprised if Chevy sees a bit of backlash for the screen-accessed headlight “switch.”
Test Comment
Test Reply
Test reply 2
Test reply 3
Test reply
Eeeeeeeew.
I get that most people are probably going to keep it in “Auto” most of the time, but I hate it when common functions get buried on the touchscreen. Tunnels and other reasons to turn on your lights a bit early still exist in the year of our garbage 2023, folks.
To paraphrase Londo Mollari, “only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots puts a headlight switch in a touch screen”
The only ergonomic stupidity greater than this is Tesla’s touch screen gearshift.
I like the idea of making it more difficult to accidentally turn off your auto headlights. I don’t like this implementation. A switch that doesn’t stay in the off position so that you have to manually turn them off every time you want them off? Great. Putting more functions in infotainment? Not great.
This would be a deal breaker for me. I rarely use auto headlight functions on personal or rental vehicles. Prefer headlights on more often than the computers would. It took Honda 2 or 3 yrs to bring back the volume knob. This saved them $5 per vehicle. Someone got a raise for saving millions .
After reading everyone’s comments, I think I am the only person who never uses the auto setting on my headlights. To me, they never seem to turn on when I want them to, like early dusk or light rain or snow, so I never bother to use the auto setting.
I did have a frustrating newer Ford rental where the headlight setting defaulted to auto every time your turned on the vehicle. If you turned them off, it would reset to auto. This drove me nuts. If the vehicle was in the garage, I would be blinded each time I started the vehicle because the lights would turn on. I don’t mind vehicles having auto lights, but let me decide if I want to use them on auto or not.
I like them defaulting like that. I see too many people cruising with their DRLs, probably unaware that their actual lights are off. And I get annoyed when my car has been in for any sort of service and they leave the lights off when they are done instead of putting them back in auto.
But, these do turn on in all your scenarios. They even turn on when you turn on your windshield wipers..
Also, like my 06 Chevy, the auto headlights don’t turn on until you put it in drive.
Initially, I was a “no”, but the more I thought about it it was “why, not?”, especially if it resets/defaults to “auto” every time the car starts up. The number of clueless people driving around with semi-bright DRLs and their dashboards lit up, but with no tail or running lights, at all, is only increasing, and this seems like the perfect “fix”.
Initially, I was a “no”, but the more I thought about it it was “why, not?”, especially if it resets every time the car starts up. The number of clueless people driving around with semi-bright DRLs and their dashboard lit up, but with no tail or running lights, at all, is only increasing, and this seems like the perfect “fix”.
My initial reaction is “Oh, Hell No Ya Bastards”. And then I remember how I don’t even like the current stalk position of the brights and wish they’d put the switch back on the floor like it is in my ’71 deVille and ’66 Biscayne, while simultaneously realizing I’m also one of the “haven’t touched the light switch in my Volt or Spark for years now” people. So… whatever. At any rate, I’m now realizing that if I actually pull the trigger on a new EV Equinox or a Bolt next year, it’s something I’ll get to experience. It won’t likely be a deal breaker, but I’ll still likely mumble “oh, hell no ya bastards” the first time I have to access it on screen.
Auto headlights, lane keeping assist, auto emergency braking, back up cameras, adaptive cruise control — just take a fucking bus.
Oh no!!
I generally dislike touch screens in cars because you can’t operate them by feel. You have to take your eyes off the road to work them.
Two things. 1 – why don’t people in the US use the parking brake? Pretty much everywhere else in the world you would fail your drivers test if you didn’t use it. You are basically putting the entire weight of your vehicle on the transmission if you don’t.
Secondly – No JUST BLOODY NO. The light switch is something that you need to use often. Sometimes your ‘auto’ function just doesn’t work properly, or when you need it. Or its on when you don’t. Manual over-ride with switch. This shouldn’t be a thing. I’m no Tesla fan, but if you are going to have touch screen operated lights, then at least make it easy like Tesla does, not some dissappearing menu shown here.
I hate this rush to touch screen the things. Its about cost saving though, its cheaper to integrate a line of code into a touch screen that already exists than it is to install a switch, a switch costs money to make, code you do once.
It is easy to access, it’s in the top of the screen at all times.
The Tesla video is wrong as they are in the upper left of the screen which indicates if they are on, you tap and turn them on there or use voice command. If they are auto then is it really an issue?
I don’t buy the OTA argument – If the lights are left in ‘auto’ then OTA updates can still tweak the functions or control them entirely. If they are left on or off, then the driver doesn’t care for OTA updates. Given the number of sensors in the vehicles these days, a warning can go off if the headlights are left off at night.
This probably has more to do with eliminating cabling and switchgear.
Someone probably could come up with a CAN bus switch to sell as a 3rd party option?
This seems like yet another excuse for inattentive, unskilled drivers to drive in the rain without lights on. Daytime rain (or fog) often occurs where I live when it’s not dark enough to trigger auto headlights (so of course no taillights on either).
And I’m sure that Chevy spokesperson wasn’t about to say “Actually, we did this because we save 71¢ per truck by using a simpler switch. But ‘OTA’ makes it sound like we care about our customers after they drive off the lot.”
Hopefully they at least linked the wipers being on to turning on the headlights when they are in auto.
The climate controls look awful too. A bunch of identically sized and shaped buttons. No way to feel out which is the right one without looking.
I see lots of comments from people who say they never touch their headlight switch and leave it in auto. I can only assume that they live places where it never gets foggy or snows heavily. My car has automatic headlights, but I turn them on manually in those scenarios often enough that I still want a physical control. I also turn them off manually if I’m waiting somewhere with the car on but don’t need or want the headlights on.
If GM put the headlight switch on the left-hand stalk like the Japanese and Koreans do, it wouldn’t take up any extra space, and it would hardly cost them anything extra. I’ve never understood the dash mounted headlight switch when all other exterior lighting is controlled by that stalk.
Couldn’t agree more, there’s lot of folks who drive in situations where you turn their lights on and off, mainly because the auto switch isn’t smart enough to do it. I daily drive through mountain passes, which can be bright, dark, foggy, you name it, there is no way I’m taking my eyes off the road to punch on a screen I can’t feel going through a twisty, in the fog or dark.
So I can’t turn this truck’s headlights on and off if I’m wearing gloves? It’s a good thing that truck owners aren’t known for doing work that might require glove-wearing, and don’t live in cold climates in which one might wear gloves on a chilly morning.
Yes, there are videos showing that the screen still works with gloves.
Not the best idea, seems like more planned obsolescence to me
Planned obsolescence? How?
I mean, I think them removing a physical switch is dumb, but I don’t get how this is planned obsolescence.
Is there any chance that there will be an aftermarket option for physical lights?
It was an odd choice, but I also echo that I don’t often mess with my lights, but the fact that does bother me is that I don’t have easy access to the high beams. That is the feature I would want most as I transition from city to rural.
High beams are still stalk controlled
The whole thing had me so boggled I almost missed it, but the high beams are still on the stalk:
“It’s worth noting that the high beams are actuated via the stalk mounted on the left side of the steering column, so that’s still fairly traditional:”
I sort of think I don’t care much, as I leave the lights in “Auto” almost all of the time, but I also think that when I DO need to change the lights it’s for an unusual reason, and that’s a bad time to be looking down at a screen.
Why don’t you have easy access to high beams?
Initial reaction was that this is dumb, and putting everything in the infotainment sucks. But w/ auto mode, it’s probably not a big deal.
It’s not a big deal, some people are just scared of change.
Having driven GM’s since 2006 that all had auto headlights. I can say that I need to turn them on manually no more than 5 times a year.
I turn them off manually more often if I’m waiting with the car running and don’t want to annoy anyone with the headlights.
Bad take. Removing weight and points of failure is a good thing. Especially for something that’s automatic. For more likely, you’re going to hit the switch with your knee once and wonder why you can’t see at night. David I’m significantly older than you and somehow you’re the curmudgeon here
Cars and trucks are changing rapidly now. If you plan to do a “what they changed now, be mad!” article regularly, I’ll let myself out.
This is a terrible take!
Safety-criticial systems should ALWAYS be placed in a location that is easy to reach, minimizes the time that hands spend off of the wheel, has physical feedback, and can be entirely operated without the driver taking their eyes off the road.
Anything touchscreen-based easily breaks at LEAST two of those rules.
It is easily accessed, it’s always on the top left of the screen. Don’t be so dramatic.
How is that removing points of failure when even more features are now solely controlled through a single touch screen, something I would never trust for longterm reliability over a mechanical switch, especially where these stupid infotainment centers need frequent updates and resets, something an actual physical switch never does? Moreover, they have the highbeams on a stalk, so it’s not like they’ve eliminated or greatly simplified the mechanical switch that still controls indicators and highbeams. The whole OTA excuse is just nonsense as we don’t even have the kind of advanced adaptive lighting in the US that MIGHT be able to take advantage of software updates unless childish gimmick Tesla-style lighting effect stupidity is something of value to a lot of people, though I don’t think most of them are buying trucks.
What fails more often? Touchscreen infotainment screens, or a three position light switch?
My switch failed, my touch screen hasn’t yet. So….
Wait, what exactly was my take? I don’t think I said anything carmudgeony, did I?
On the contrary. You were too magnanimous.
I don’t really mind these being on a touchscreen, because they’re rarely used, and it’s a lot cheaper to handle this way.
However, they and other similar switch replacements should have their own dedicated touch screen separate from the “infotainment” system.
There should be an “infotainment system”, and a fully separate and independent “vehicle control system” (VCS) on its own dedicated screen, preferably with a static display instead of a menued interface. I don’t mind if the VCS functions are also accessible through the infotainment.
Hard disagree. Touchscreens have no haptic feedback, which means that the user needs to look at the screen. Any time that a person takes their eyes off of the road, it is a risk.
Headlights are inherently a safety system. And safety systems should never be designed with the “most people won’t need it” mindset
No haptic feedback? Are you serious? Nope, you’re over 20 years behind the times.
You can spec haptic feedback in any screen you like. Like that little pocket computer we call a phone.
By using multiple haptic motor devices and good programming, you can navigate a touch screen by feel. With good programming, a haptic enabled button on a touch screen can be even more recognizable than most physical buttons. The problem is that most interface designers and programmers don’t know what they’re doing.
Just because they don’t do it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t.
No offense because I honestly don’t know, what vehicles now in production have a feel to the screen? I haven’t been in that many recent vehicles, and I understand it can be done, but who is doing it? If none or few, then it seems to be a problem, regardless of if it’s possible.
I’d turn it off or not buy it if it had haptic feedback, that is awful stuff.
Have you ever used one such system “that is even more recognizable than physical buttons” ? Honest question (really), because I’ve never seen one of these in my life, and I work on the tech industry.