OT: Eye test for drivers license

Memorizing the test is called 'cheating'. Can you also memorize the traffic and pedestrians along your driving route?

In texas, the first 4 lines are F A I L

You mean like the standard Snellen chart? No. The countertop gadgets you peer into are Snellen type charts for 20/40 vision (or whatever minimum acuity requirement your state imposes) collimated to appear at infinity. Since the Snellen letter sequences are standard and well-known, and since unlike the optometric exam you have an incentive to cheat, different letter sequences are used, or perhaps road signs or some other figure.

Here? Never!

Good.

E FP TOZ LPED PECFD

that's all I can do from memory but I'm sure google has it. Note: When you're in second grade, going to the nurse's office with your class for a "test", it's not unheard of that you'd memorize the other kids' response to the eye chart, so you don't fail the test. Also note that this can delay you getting glasses for several years. BTDT.

Wal-Mart around here has an optical department with said chart. There ya go. Stand on the line and see what you can see.

Well, if you need glasses, please don't drive without 'em. I've seen enough crashes for other reasons, I'd hate to contribute to another.

In article , Dave Hinz wrote: :On 4 Jul 2006 12:15:38 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: :> OK, I know this is waaay off topic but....... : :Here? Never! : :> In order to renew a Texas drivers license one has to pass an 'eye :> test'. : :Good. : :> Is the eye test chart a 'standard' format? :> And, if so, what is the name of the standard or, better still, what is :> the sequence of the first 4 lines? : :E :FP :TOZ :LPED :PECFD : :that's all I can do from memory but I'm sure google has it. Note: When :you're in second grade, going to the nurse's office with your class for :a "test", it's not unheard of that you'd memorize the other kids' :response to the eye chart, so you don't fail the test. Also note that :this can delay you getting glasses for several years. BTDT.

At one rather cursory eye exam I was asked, "What's the last line you can read on that chart?" I let my gaze drift to the bottom of the chart and casually replied, "Printed in USA."

Thanks for your helpful reply, Dave, I appreciate it.

Kind regards.

Lewis.

Dave H> > OK, I know this is waaay off topic but.......

On 4 Jul 2006 12:15:38 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm, " snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com" quickly quoth:

Here is the entire list from my chart on my wall, Lewis.

Enjoy!

E XCESS IVEDRIN KINGIMP SOUSEMODER ATION

I have seen accidents where the driver was not wearing glasses, and wanted people to lie and say that he was. No one did.

If you have a serious accident and the insurance company finds out that you cheated on your license exam, they may not cover the claim.

Dan

Dave H> Well, if you need glasses, please don't drive without 'em. I've seen

Yes. Please note that I quite carefully crafted my response.

Then why are so many ugly people still driving?

A couple "tricks" to help pass the test...

1. DO NOT try to take the test when you are tired, hung over, have a cold, etc. Any of these will make your vision a little worse.

1. Schedule the test for early in the day. Your eyes work best when they're not tired.

2. Do not use glasses from the time you get up until you take the test. Your eyes will accomodate to the glasses and it will take up to a couple hours for them to re-adjust.

I got stuck with a glasses restriction even though my eye doctor told me I did not need glasses for driving. I took the test late in the day, I had a cold that was making my eyes runny and I wore my glasses when I drove down to take the test... Oops... True, most of us can see better with them and I had been in the habit of wearing them to drive for several years. But, for obvious reasons, it is better not having the restriction on one's license...

Jerry

I'm sorry, but "not getting stuck with a restriction" is the WRONG way to look at this.

If you need the damm things, wear 'em.

Are you never going to drive late in the day, &/or with a cold, &/or after having worn your glasses for some hours?

Better for us that your licence is endorsed.

I can't help but think that if you are marginal in regards to your vision, we're all safer if you're wearing glasses to drive.

What reasons would that be, I wonder? If you need 'em, you need 'em.

You guys obviously don't read very well. First, I pointed out that my optometrist, based on far more sophisticated testing than the state's little screening test, stated that my vision met the legal requirements for driving without my glasses. Second, I also said that, because I could see better with them, I was in the habit of wearing them to drive, even though I was not legally required to do so. (Under California law, one's vision must be at least 20/40.)

Hence, as we get older, most of us spend some years in this "borderline" area where we don't necessarily need glasses to drive; it is just better if we wear them. But, once the restriction is on the license, one cannot drive without them. Period. Now, that means that, if you break or lose your glasses, or simply don't have them with you, you don't drive. Which is fine if you actually need them. But it can be a real PITA if the restriction gets placed on the license unnecessarily.

Jerry

;-) Thank Yew! Thank Yew Verry Much!

Try memorizing this one.....

Jerry Foster wrote in article ...

Well, I've worn glasses for 52 years, and I am reading exactly what you wrote....

In my state, an eye doctor's report will preclude the necessity of an eye test at DMV.

In my case, my eye doctor certifies that with glasses, my vision is corrected to the legal requirements.

Sounds a bit contradictory here.

By your own admission, you see better when driving WITH glasses than without. If I am sharing the road with you, I would just as soon have you wearing your glasses, thank you!

If you actually DO see better with glasses, why in hell would you want to have - or worse still, exercise the option of driving without them....with impaired, not-as-good vision?

First of all, that would only apply should you be stopped by the police. You can drive without glasses forever - if you do not attract the attention of law enforcement. So could I, but THAT would be stupid!

Of course, if you see better WITH glasses than WITHOUT, you are more likely to not see something, and draw the attention of law enforcement for some sort of boneheaded move.

I could suggest keeping a $2.98 cent pair of bargain store "reading" glasses in your car to slip on should you ever get stopped, but that would over ride my concern that you actually SHOULD be wearing your glasses when you drive since - by your own admission above - you DO see better driving WITH your glasses.

I got my license at 16, and am now 59.

I have never forgotten my glasses - since without them I am 20/200.

I have never broken them in the course of driving.

I carry spare glasses when I am any distance from home - without a "backup" driver.

Sounds as though your vanity is taking precedence over your common sense.

Wear the glasses!! The entire world will be better off for it.

If one wishes to be technical, I can fly an airplane or drive a car without glasses--my vision meets the legal limits. I sure as hell don't _want_ to though. But I remember what 20/15 was like. If your vision has never been that good then you may not realize just how _bad_ 20/40 really _is_.

I'm surprised no one in this thoughtful group has mentioned that the vision "improvement" provided by lenses is quite selective and not without costs. While wearing lenses would make it easier to read the union label on the bumper sticker of the car ahead of me, I have never come close to being in an accident as a result of mis-reading a bumper sticker, or even a road sign.

The one time in the last twenty years that I came very close to a very serious accident, I was saved only by instantaneous knowledge from extreme peripheral vision that it was safe to jerk my van into the next lane. Had I been wearing glasses, that transition from straight-ahead vision to far peripheral vision would have been more difficult and taken longer, and I probably wouldn't have trusted my first "instinct".

Effective vision is more than just straight-ahead acuity, but acuity is generally all the optometrist measures.

Loren