Comfort Package - Rain Sensor

[Lion Man]

Hi all,

I have the comfort package on my SB which includes the following items: -

"Comfort package. Includes light and rain sensors, acoustic glass with sunband, rear parking sensors, cruise control
and auto-dimming rear-view mirror"

On the top of page 61 of the manual it states: -

"You can switch the rain sensor on or off in the Drivers assist menu on vehicles with MMI*"

I have scrolled through all the menu's and cannot find access to the rain sensor. Can someone who also has this option advise me if they can turn on/off the sensor. I have not managed to operate my windscreen wipers with the rain sensor as yet.

Thanks in Advance.

 

[phil_w]

If its anything like the 8p - first notch on wiper stalk will be rain sensor mode with the speed dial adjusting sensitivity

 

[h5djr]

If its anything like the 8p - first notch on wiper stalk will be rain sensor mode with the speed dial adjusting sensitivity

Again, if it's anything like the 8P you will need it to be set on Maximum sensitivity for to work properly. If you switch it off you may find you have no intermittent wiping at all. Try moving the switch as far to the right as it go.

 

[Vertigo1]

Again, if it's anything like the 8P you will need it to be set on Maximum sensitivity for to work properly. If you switch it off you may find you have no intermittent wiping at all. Try moving the switch as far to the right as it go.

Nonsense, it works perfectly well on all the sensitivity settings, not just on maximum.

To the OP: With rain sensors, the first position on the wiper stalk enables sensor mode. This is the position that would enable standard intermittent if you didn't have sensors. The switch which would normally control the speed for intermittent now adjusts the sensitivity. Does this not work for you?

 

[h5djr]

Nonsense, it works perfectly well on all the sensitivity settings, not just on maximum.

To the OP: With rain sensors, the first position on the wiper stalk enables sensor mode. This is the position that would enable standard intermittent if you didn't have sensors. The switch which would normally control the speed for intermittent now adjusts the sensitivity. Does this not work for you?

Yours may well work on all settings. The version on the my 8P does not. On anything other than Maximum the screen has to soaked to the point where you cannot see through it before it will wipe. Perhaps they have adjusted the sensitivity on the 8V.

 

[Vertigo1]

I've had two 8Ps with rain sensors and both have been fine. I suggest you talk to the dealer about having yours recalibrated as there's obviously something wrong with it.

 

[phil_w]

Same here - last 2 8ps - minimum setting always left on and fine.

 

[h5djr]

I've had two 8Ps with rain sensors and both have been fine. I suggest you talk to the dealer about having yours recalibrated as there's obviously something wrong with it.

In that case there has been something wrong with all four of my 8Ps plus the 8P lone cars I've driven in the rain. Set fully to the right and it's OK. Anything less and they take a long time before they start to wipe. Given the choice I would prefer a fixed time interval intermittent but I do like the auto-lights, especially when I'm on holiday in Germany, Switzerland and Austria where there are a lot of tunnels and you are required by law to drive through them with dipped headlights on.

Personally I think all cars should have auto-lights as standard that the driver cannot switch off. Perhaps that would stop the silly situation in the UK where some drivers seem very reluctant to put their dipped headlights on. DRLs are a step in the right direction but still means the back of the car is in darkness. Perhaps the Scandinavian/US system of DRLs which in include some rear lights as well would help.

Lets hope it's raining when I have an 8V for the day and I can see if I think it's any better.

 

[Vertigo1]

That's very odd. I've had odd occasions when I've needed to up the sensitivity but generally they work fine. I leave mine on the second highest setting most of the time. I rarely need to switch it to maximum and will often reduce it down to the third setting in light drizzle when it's wiping too frequently.

I couldn't live without them now. My first 8P only had auto lights as wipers weren't available. When they bundled them together I fully expected the wipers to be useless but they work well enough that they're a boon. It's most helpful in light rain which varies as, before I had the auto wipers, you'd be constantly adjusting the intermittent speed or manually wiping the screen as required which was a pain.

 

[Gweneira]

I honestly haven't touched mine, they work just fine but I wouldn't know without looking what setting they are on. 1 week in and still discovering my car

 

[h5djr]

That's very odd. I've had odd occasions when I've needed to up the sensitivity but generally they work fine. I leave mine on the second highest setting most of the time. I rarely need to switch it to maximum and will often reduce it down to the third setting in light drizzle when it's wiping too frequently.

I couldn't live without them now. My first 8P only had auto lights as wipers weren't available. When they bundled them together I fully expected the wipers to be useless but they work well enough that they're a boon. It's most helpful in light rain which varies as, before I had the auto wipers, you'd be constantly adjusting the intermittent speed or manually wiping the screen as required which was a pain.

It can of course be a personal thing. Perhaps I prefer my screen to be wiped before it gets less water on it that you. It will certainly be interesting when I drive an new A3 to see if it's any different to my current one. I also use the 'flick wipe' quite a lot in very light rain. I tend to drive with my hands at the 'quarter to 3' positions so it's very easy to use.

 

[hittchy]

Menu -> Car -> Systems -> Driver Assist
In here you have the option for 'Rain Sensor' which you can switch on/off.

I agree in part with posters above - the sensitivity of the rain sensor seems to differ on different cars. My Mk5 Golf was rubbish to the point where I nearly didn't spec it on my A4. I was glad I did though, as the A4 was just left on auto for the three years of ownership - absolutely superb.

The A3 is still taking a bit of getting used to. I find I'm fiddling with it a lot and using the flick-wipe feature quite regularly. Maybe it's down to different screen size or even a different sensor on the windscreen - who knows. I just hope I can find a setting that works. Persevere with it for a few weeks.

I also have my lights set to 'late', but would love a 'late late' setting. I can't stand it when the lights come on in daylight. Anyone who can't see something the size of a car in broad daylight clearly shouldn't be on the road and should 'hang up their keys'. Leave dipped beam in daylight to the motorcycling world where it saves lives.

 

[mfspen]

Again, if it's anything like the 8P you will need it to be set on Maximum sensitivity for to work properly. If you switch it off you may find you have no intermittent wiping at all. Try moving the switch as far to the right as it go.

I have found that it works fine even on the lowest sensitivity setting. On my old 8P, it could be a bit unreliable - sometimes not wiping at all, and other times wiping too often. But the new system seems spot on.

 

[h5djr]

I also have my lights set to 'late', but would love a 'late late' setting. I can't stand it when the lights come on in daylight. Anyone who can't see something the size of a car in broad daylight clearly shouldn't be on the road and should 'hang up their keys'. Leave dipped beam in daylight to the motorcycling world where it saves lives.

'Broad daylight' is not the problem, but so many drivers seem extremely reluctant to put any lights on at any time even in pouring rain or when it starts to get dark. The purpose of DRLs is not really so that other drivers, whose eyesight should be up to a certain standard, can see the car, but more so that others, such as pedestrians can see an oncoming car more easily.

Many more lives would be saved if some motorcyclists learned how to ride properly and responsibly. And before you think I'm getting at motorcyclists I hold a full motorcycle licence myself.

When I was in Holland on a week's holiday last week I noticed than nearly all cars and lorries had some form of front lighting on all the time. If they had DRLs they were used, if not they used dipped headlights. I also saw a number of roadside posters encouraging drivers to drive in this way.

 

[Vertigo1]

Well DRLs are now a legal requirement on new cars and not permitted to be switched off. A good thing generally IMO.

As for automatic lights becoming mandatory and non-disableable (is that a word?), I think that could only be a good thing really. Especially when coupled with rain sensors as, like you said, the number of morons who are incapable of putting their lights on in heavy rain, particularly on motorways, is astonishing, so a compulsory system which does this automatically can only be a good thing.

 

[cemerson]

It's not just heavy rain - it's cars that don't put lights on even when there is no rain but lots of spray on the road that get me!

 

[hittchy]

On the contrary, I'd rather the status quo. When I see some clown with no lights / fog lights / no indicators / misted up windscreen or whatever it may be, it reminds me to take a wide berth and be on my guard. These are just an indication of the underlying incapacity to drive a car safely. The tip of the iceberg, so to speak. Rather than give them so many driver aids to mask these clear statements of incompetence, I'd much rather the law apply punitive sanctions to force them off the road. No lights... 3 points sir...

Mandatory eye tests carried out by the DSA for everyone over 60 would be a good start, and annually thereafter. There are still far too many older drivers who clearly haven't the eyesight or reactions to safely navigate today's roads. The rest of the population every 5 years.

 

[Vertigo1]

On the contrary, I'd rather the status quo. When I see some clown with no lights / fog lights / no indicators / misted up windscreen or whatever it may be, it reminds me to take a wide berth and be on my guard. These are just an indication of the underlying incapacity to drive a car safely. The tip of the iceberg, so to speak. Rather than give them so many driver aids to mask these clear statements of incompetence, I'd much rather the law apply punitive sanctions to force them off the road. No lights... 3 points sir...

Mandatory eye tests carried out by the DSA for everyone over 60 would be a good start, and annually thereafter. There are still far too many older drivers who clearly haven't the eyesight or reactions to safely navigate today's roads. The rest of the population every 5 years.

Kind of see your point. As for dishing out points for not having lights on - yeah that'll be the day. The police need to stop their obsession with speed cameras and start issuing points and fines to the incompetent drivers. Camp out on roundabouts and issue penalties to every muppet that cuts across the lanes for example!

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Driving licences should last 10 years, then you have to retake a full test. If you don't pass you lose your licence. You could take your test after 9 years, so you have a full year in which to pass it but, if you've not done so by the 10 year deadline, goodbye licence.

I can't see any downside to this. Safer roads, get rid of idiots who can't drive and more revenue for the government. The usual protest is that people who depend on their cars will lose them - well I can't say I give a toss. If you can't pass the test then you're dangerous and shouldn't be on the road, end of. Your "need" for a car doesn't entitle you to endanger others' lives. The other thing some people mention is cost - well one driving test every 10 years is hardly going to break the bank. Whilst lessons might cost a fair bit, if you need them to be safe again then tough **** - pay up or get off the roads!

End of rant

 

[h5djr]

The problem in the UK is that people are taught to pass the driving test rather than taught to drive.

In Germany in particular, you are taught to drive. You have to pass a written test about the rules of the roads and traffic signs etc. It is quite tough and 30% of new drivers fail it on the first attempt. You also have to have driving lessons which must be with Fahrschule or Driving School, not you Mum or Dad. The law sets minimum durations and mileage for each aspect of the driving instruction:
at least 225 minutes and 50 km per session on highways or country roads
at least 135 minutes on the Autobahn with each journey lasting at least 45 minutes
at leasts 90 minutes of driving in twilight or darkness, half of this must be on normal or country roads.

The whole thing can cost a beginner over £1000. Which is probably why standard of driving and lane discipline in particular are considerably better in Germany than they are in the UK.

 

[Vertigo1]

Indeed. And whilst many younger people claim otherwise, I'm afraid that the driving test has become far easier than it was back when I took mine. Sure there's more in it but it's easier to pass. I failed my first test on on incident of hesitation (not pulling out of a junction when I could have done so) and not looking in my rear view mirror enough. Those would be minors today. I'm often staggered at what people can get away with and yet still pass. Farcical.

 

[hittchy]

The problem in the UK is that people are taught to pass the driving test rather than taught to drive.

The problem in the UK is that everyone thinks they're the best driver in the world!

I'm not so sure about Germany. I seem to remember reading a few years back that UK roads are the safest in Europe (statistically) which would contradict this but I guess it depends how it's measured.

ABD - Safest Roads in Europe

If this government want to make impact on road deaths, they should concentrate on strategies at either end of the age profile for drivers.

 

[hittchy]

Indeed. And whilst many younger people claim otherwise, I'm afraid that the driving test has become far easier than it was back when I took mine.

I think a greater issue is the lack of follow up training. You're put in charge of a potentially deadly tool and thrown out into the big bad world. As with anything in life, the initial competence test only covers the basics. Then you're learning on the job. A better idea would be some kind of experience log you have to accrue with another qualified co-driver before being let out on your own. Curfews for the first year or so could also help young drivers.

I'm sure I made many errors after passing the car test which could have ended in tragedy but I'm sure most could have been avoided with more training.

 

[hittchy]

Kind of see your point. As for dishing out points for not having lights on - yeah that'll be the day. The police need to stop their obsession with speed cameras and start issuing points and fines to the incompetent drivers. Camp out on roundabouts and issue penalties to every muppet that cuts across the lanes for example!

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Driving licences should last 10 years, then you have to retake a full test. If you don't pass you lose your licence. You could take your test after 9 years, so you have a full year in which to pass it but, if you've not done so by the 10 year deadline, goodbye licence.

I can't see any downside to this. Safer roads, get rid of idiots who can't drive and more revenue for the government. The usual protest is that people who depend on their cars will lose them - well I can't say I give a toss. If you can't pass the test then you're dangerous and shouldn't be on the road, end of. Your "need" for a car doesn't entitle you to endanger others' lives. The other thing some people mention is cost - well one driving test every 10 years is hardly going to break the bank. Whilst lessons might cost a fair bit, if you need them to be safe again then tough **** - pay up or get off the roads!

End of rant

Well you've got my vote!

The drivers described are far more dangerous than a sales rep doing 85mph down an empty motorway... yet s/he is castigated as a criminal.

 

[Daveotto]

I think a greater issue is the lack of follow up training. You're put in charge of a potentially deadly tool and thrown out into the big bad world. As with anything in life, the initial competence test only covers the basics. Then you're learning on the job. A better idea would be some kind of experience log you have to accrue with another qualified co-driver before being let out on your own. Curfews for the first year or so could also help young drivers.

I'm sure I made many errors after passing the car test which could have ended in tragedy but I'm sure most could have been avoided with more training.

Totally agree about the experience log, which is what they do in France .....and when you see tv program's like "barely legal drivers" which actually reward bad new drivers with money towards a new car it makes my blood boil.......so much so I raised a formal complaint to the BBC but that's another story.

 

[h5djr]

In particular a new driver who has just passed their test and has never driven on a motorway up to now, is allowed to do so just the same as any other driver with no training what so ever.

To a degree I was in the same position because when I learned to drive and passed my test, motorways did not exist. But at least when I did first venture on to one, I already had a number of years driving experience.

 

[hittchy]

In particular a new driver who has just passed their test and has never driven on a motorway up to now, is allowed to do so just the same as any other driver with no training what so ever.

To a degree I was in the same position because when I learned to drive and passed my test, motorways did not exist. But at least when I did first venture on to one, I already had a number of years driving experience.

So very true. Motorways nowadays are a very different beast and I'm amazed that a 17 year old can venture onto one without any formal tuition. I certainly wouldn't allow my child to do it. Watching that barely legal drivers programme a few weeks ago, one girl stopped completely at the end of a busy slip road. Unbelievable!

 

[hittchy]

...so much so I raised a formal complaint to the BBC but that's another story.

Good on you. I watched the first and shouted so much the wife banned me from watching any others.

 

[Daveotto]

Good on you. I watched the first and shouted so much the wife banned me from watching any others.

can forward on the reply I got from BBC if you are interested

 

[hittchy]

can forward on the reply I got from BBC if you are interested

:icon_thumright: