Lights for unlit country roads for newbie night rider.
Comments
-
Unfortunately you're slightly too late for the Rose bikes bargainrific Philips Saferide 80 - I spent an evening doing research, and then ended up ordering three of them - I haven't decided whether to sell one or two on or just keep all three - so far my experience is that they are excellent and well worth the thirty something quid I paid.
Most of the lights mentioned in the thread, although bright, are the equivalent of running a car on full beam - sure, you can see where you're going but anyone coming the other way is going to be blinded, with unpredictable consequences (ranging from simple annoyance to swerving across your path, or putting on their own high beams and blinding you in retaliation). If you point the lights down to avoid this, you get a great big bright spot a few meters ahead of you that ruins your night vision for when you are looking further up the road or to the side.
The beam on the Philips Saferide is shaped - it's like a car headlight on dipped beam - the light is brightest at the top of the beam, far down the road where you need it, but then has a hard cutoff to keep the light at car bonnet height, without blinding anyone. You get a lovely even illumination of the road, meaning potholes etc are easy to spot.
Bottom line is, light smarter, not 'brighter'. I suggest you look at lights that meet the German StVZO requirements (in the absence of the Philips Saferide the B&M Iq Premium seems a good alternative - http://www.rosebikes.co.uk/article/b--m ... aid:703598).0 -
TimothyW wrote:Most of the lights mentioned in the thread, although bright, are the equivalent of running a car on full beam - sure, you can see where you're going but anyone coming the other way is going to be blinded, with unpredictable consequences. If you point the lights down to avoid this, you get a great big bright spot a few meters ahead of you that ruins your night vision for when you are looking further up the road or to the side.
Remote switches....
You only blind oncoming traffic with these types of light if your the sort of idiot who runs them on full brightness and can't be bothered to take your hand off the bars to knock down the brightness to sensible levels when you see something approaching in the distance.
So, if it's for commuting, buy one with a remote switch, mount it near your thumb and dip the light when you see oncoming traffic, the same as motorbikes and car drivers are supposed to. Simples......0 -
That doesn't dip the beam though does it? Just makes it less bright (meaning you are less able to see... hardly ideal with something coming the other way is it?)0
-
TimothyW wrote:That doesn't dip the beam though does it? Just makes it less bright (meaning you are less able to see... hardly ideal with something coming the other way is it?)
The "something coming the other way" is usually dazzling you with their headlights so lack of light isn't the problem, just the opposite.0 -
Thanks for the input everyone. Bikeradar users never fail to amaze me, you guys/galls know bits about allsorts. I'll have a trawl through the links and recommendations and I'm sure I'll get what I need.0
-
Excellent advice and pretty much exactly what I was going to post until I saw you'd saved me the trouble.TimothyW wrote:Unfortunately you're slightly too late for the Rose bikes bargainrific Philips Saferide 80 - I spent an evening doing research, and then ended up ordering three of them - I haven't decided whether to sell one or two on or just keep all three - so far my experience is that they are excellent and well worth the thirty something quid I paid.
Most of the lights mentioned in the thread, although bright, are the equivalent of running a car on full beam - sure, you can see where you're going but anyone coming the other way is going to be blinded, with unpredictable consequences (ranging from simple annoyance to swerving across your path, or putting on their own high beams and blinding you in retaliation). If you point the lights down to avoid this, you get a great big bright spot a few meters ahead of you that ruins your night vision for when you are looking further up the road or to the side.
The beam on the Philips Saferide is shaped - it's like a car headlight on dipped beam - the light is brightest at the top of the beam, far down the road where you need it, but then has a hard cutoff to keep the light at car bonnet height, without blinding anyone. You get a lovely even illumination of the road, meaning potholes etc are easy to spot.
Bottom line is, light smarter, not 'brighter'. I suggest you look at lights that meet the German StVZO requirements (in the absence of the Philips Saferide the B&M Iq Premium seems a good alternative - http://www.rosebikes.co.uk/article/b--m ... aid:703598).
stay away from torches and over expensive stuff. Get a properly designed shaped beam - the two mentioned above would be my recommendations too. I use the Philips superb beam. A relatively short duration is the only flaw. The Busch and Muller aIQ premium is probably a better option if you'll want to be out much over an hour. I think it's good for at least 4-5 hrs.
Lights sold purely on the basis of lumen miss out the point IMO.0 -
Another brief word for Hope, a British company. I have their Vision 2 and R4 lights on front and District for the rear. The District is almost too bright - certainly not welcome when riding with others unless you volunteer to stick on the back of the group! Apart from the light quality, what strikes me is the build quality. I've had the Vision 2 and used for several years on daily commuting. Nothing has gone wrong and the original battery continues to perform. The R4 provides greater light output and is probably the one I would go for but it would have to be accompanied by the larger battery unit as is guzzles much more power than the 2.
Peter0 -
Some of the opinions on these "what bike light" threads just make me laugh. At the risk of winding a few people up here is my opinion. I live in the country and ride (and drive) on unlit roads all the time. I also design and build my own bike lights.
Do I want as much light as possible on the road to see defects and other potential dangers (e.g. deer, rabbits etc.)?
Yes, I do.
Am I bothered about dazzling oncoming drivers?
No, I am not and here is why.
The idea that any driver would veer TOWARDS an oncoming light which may have dazzled them is just ludicrous in my mind. The natural reaction is to steer AWAY from any potential danger (or brake) especially if your vision has been impaired. In forty years of driving and cycling I have never experienced (or heard of) anyone swerving ACROSS the road when dazzled by lights.
Car headlights are very powerful these days, especially xenon-bulbed headlights and the beams coming from them can verge on painful even when dipped. They are much more powerful than any puny XM-L-based lights we can put out.
Very often, car drivers coming the other way either forget (as do I sometimes) or deliberately don't dip their main beams so dealing with being dazzled by oncoming drivers is something all road users have to live with.
Now some clever trousers no doubt will try and make the point that the reason car drivers deliberately don't dip their headlights is because they are being dazzled by your bike light. Well fine, suits me, as long as I can see the road, that's all that worries me.
In my experience, when cycling on narrow country roads most (if not all) oncoming drivers slow right down and many stop because they have no idea what is actually coming towards them with such bright lights. I'm sure they must think that we are a tractor which is possibly going to scratch their precious. Personally, this is what I want to happen. They seem to have more respect for a bright light coming towards them than some puny EverReady bicycle light.
I appreciate that my position is going to wind some cyclists and drivers up alike but until the industry comes up with a decent dippable bike light that puts 1000 lumens on the road where I want it, then it ain't going to change any time soon. You might be of a different opinion.0 -
@hypster- all well and good (and selfish). Here's a couple of things I don't think you've addressed:
1. Other bike riders. The ONLY person that used to dazzle me on my 30+ mile RT Highland bike commute on almost entirely unlit roads was some tw@t with an over-bright bike light. I simply couldn't see where I was going. I could have had the brightest lights in the world but a 1000 lumens shone straight in your eyes is blinding.
2. Single track roads. If the cars or tractors or trucks are dazzled, they simply can't see where the passing spots are. It then becomes a zero-sum game where you inevitable end up in a confrontation because you are both needing to use the same bit of Tarmac. Even cars pulling over tend to switch their lights down to side lights up here to help the oncoming car.
And you just don't need that power (or, if you do, there's something wrong with your eyes). Plenty of wildlife, pot holes, ice patches, cowsh!t, rocks that need avoiding but I've never once felt the need for more that my AyUps can deliver.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0 -
One of the most terrifying bike rides I experienced was one or two winters back when my planning went awry on two counts:
1. The surprise visit to a friend in Ashwell surprised me when I got there from London and no-one was home!
2. Surprise Nr.2 came when some freak incident meant that the entire rail network was brought to a halt - no trains to London!
By that time it was freezing cold and dark. I had decent winter clothing on but lights were restricted to Lezynne button lights, roughly equivalent to a couple of candles! They certainly weren't throwing out enough light to illuminate any of the road ahead. Between street lights and on some of the unlit sections of road I was completely blinded by the lights of oncoming cars. They weren't doing anything wrong, simply a function of me having rubbish lights. And I think that's where you've got to be careful in deciding how powerful a front light to fit. For however many seconds after a car passes in the other direction, your pupils constrict and the sensitivity of your vision is greatly affected. A decent, powerful light will help overcome this contrast. Lights should not be pointed up towards drivers (honestly not sure how much glare/ light spill you get when focussed on the road ahead) but it is good self preservation to ensure you aren't temporarily without vision in these circumstances. I presume the cheaper Chinese imports have less sophisticated lenses and may be more prone to glare? Any stats on this would be helpful in deciding on which light to use on unlit roads.
I won't be repeating that error again - all rides from this time of year onwards are accompanied by one of my Hope lights with the battery fully charged!
Peter0 -
meanredspider wrote:@hypster- all well and good (and selfish). Here's a couple of things I don't think you've addressed:
1. Other bike riders. The ONLY person that used to dazzle me on my 30+ mile RT Highland bike commute on almost entirely unlit roads was some tw@t with an over-bright bike light. I simply couldn't see where I was going. I could have had the brightest lights in the world but a 1000 lumens shone straight in your eyes is blinding.
2. Single track roads. If the cars or tractors or trucks are dazzled, they simply can't see where the passing spots are. It then becomes a zero-sum game where you inevitable end up in a confrontation because you are both needing to use the same bit of Tarmac. Even cars pulling over tend to switch their lights down to side lights up here to help the oncoming car.
And you just don't need that power (or, if you do, there's something wrong with your eyes). Plenty of wildlife, pot holes, ice patches, cowsh!t, rocks that need avoiding but I've never once felt the need for more that my AyUps can deliver.
Just to answer your points:-
1) There are pratts in all walks of life. You admirably dipping your beams is not going to change their attitude or behaviour. Most are oblivious to what is decent behaviour. Also, as I said previously, it isn't always deliberate just carelessness.
2) In my experience oncoming vehicles do not just keep coming, especially on narrow roads because they are as much in fear of potentially damaging their own vehicle as much as any concern for you. There is a climb that we do 4 repeats on quite regularly which was already quite a narrow road but the council have put width restrictions in with four alternating passing places. Whenever we ride up there oncoming vehicles invariably stop dead and let us come even when they have the right of way because they are just not certain what is coming up. Your experiences on Scottish roads may be different.
As I also indicated previously, I have designed and built my own lights for a number of years now so I am aware of what goes into most lights these days. The big problem is the lack of suitable optics and reflectors to focus the beam and prevent spill from the LED. The optics are not designed for bike applications and therefore the biggest problem for oncoming drivers is the spill from the lights which can be very bright (as we all know).
That (for us) is a double whammy in fact because not all of the light that we are producing is actually going where we want it to go. If we did have a beam with the right pattern then we could probably get away with around 3-400 lumens and have illumination where we really need it which would also give a much better runtime with smaller and cheaper battery packs.
Ze Germans have legislation about bike light beams and the Philips Saferide lights were probably the first I think to really address the problem. I have a friend who also builds lights who has been trying to replicate that sort beam pattern with partial success. The problem seems to be so complex that Philips has now abandoned production of that light. The other lights from German companies like Busch & Muller are designed for commuter type use and are not really powerful enough for more spirited riding.
The big problem for any light designer such as Exposure, Hope etc. etc. is that if you fire the LED beam forwards the light will naturally spread out like a shotgun. The Philips Saferide used a reflector design like a headlight beam which fires the beam from the LED backwards into a suitably designed parabolic reflector so that the beam comes out parallel with less spill. This will take quite a bit of D&D and so is quite expensive.
My previous post might have seemed overly belligerent but I am not inured to the problems that overly-bright bike lights cause to oncoming vehicles. I am currently working on a light which uses Fresnel lenses to try and tightly focus the beam more and put more light where it is needed and be less obtrusive to oncoming drivers.
Prototypes indicate that one XM-L driving at around 1500mA give an acceptable light pattern enough to see up to 25mph on the road. That equates to around 600 lumens and a theoretical runtime of over 3 hours with a 5200mAh 18650 li-ion battery pack.
The biggest problem is the myriad of cheap, Chinese lights now on the market with the twin XM-L SolarStorm being typical. If someone can buy one of those for £30 why are they going to use anything else? That was what was probably being used by your friendly tw@t and even if he tried to angle it down, the spill from it was still blinding you.0 -
The problem on my commuting roads is, if the car or tractor just stops, I can't get past (without, at least, ending up in a ditch) - they are proper single track with passing places. The AyUps, at least, allow you to point one close to one.
The Philips light (I work for Philips - although the Female Beauty category - but registering my interest) is excellent I think (I've just bought the SafeRide from Rose like many on the Commuting forum). I think it gives plenty of the right light in the right place. It's a bit heavy for general roadie use.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0 -
Another take on the dazzling aspect of high spec lights:
My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
The dazzling of oncoming drivers I take very seriously, not only for courtesy but for my own safety (ie dazzled car driver coming towards me not knowing where he's headed).
Switching to medium or low doesn't really solve the issue, so after much deliberation I had a Eureka moment - just tilt the bloomin' light down when a car approaches.
It sounds simplistic but it solves the problem for car drivers and the Exposure bracket can be tightened to be perfectly solid in position but allow easy swivelling down to "dip" and back again - I've been doing this for a couple of years with no loosening at all. The "dipped" position (no need to switch to a lower power mode) allows very strong light but just on the road in front where I need it. Back to "full beam" position the centre of the beam is maybe 4 or 5 metres ahead but massive flood around this (including in drivers' eyes).
I should add that this will only be feasible in sparsely-populated areas - I can ride easily twenty miles on my back road routes and meet only one or two cars coming the other way.0 -
Bordersroadie wrote:My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
I don't remember what my AyUps put out but it's around 400 lumens and, even descending twisting single track roads at 40mph in the wet, I've never wished I had more. I think 1200 lumens is more than some car headlights put out on dipped. That level of light can't be needed on a bike.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0 -
hypster wrote:Some of the opinions on these "what bike light" threads just make me laugh. At the risk of winding a few people up here is my opinion. I live in the country and ride (and drive) on unlit roads all the time. I also design and build my own bike lights.
Do I want as much light as possible on the road to see defects and other potential dangers (e.g. deer, rabbits etc.)?
Yes, I do.
Am I bothered about dazzling oncoming drivers?
No, I am not and here is why.
The idea that any driver would veer TOWARDS an oncoming light which may have dazzled them is just ludicrous in my mind. The natural reaction is to steer AWAY from any potential danger (or brake) especially if your vision has been impaired. In forty years of driving and cycling I have never experienced (or heard of) anyone swerving ACROSS the road when dazzled by lights.
Car headlights are very powerful these days, especially xenon-bulbed headlights and the beams coming from them can verge on painful even when dipped. They are much more powerful than any puny XM-L-based lights we can put out.
Very often, car drivers coming the other way either forget (as do I sometimes) or deliberately don't dip their main beams so dealing with being dazzled by oncoming drivers is something all road users have to live with.
Now some clever trousers no doubt will try and make the point that the reason car drivers deliberately don't dip their headlights is because they are being dazzled by your bike light. Well fine, suits me, as long as I can see the road, that's all that worries me.
In my experience, when cycling on narrow country roads most (if not all) oncoming drivers slow right down and many stop because they have no idea what is actually coming towards them with such bright lights. I'm sure they must think that we are a tractor which is possibly going to scratch their precious. Personally, this is what I want to happen. They seem to have more respect for a bright light coming towards them than some puny EverReady bicycle light.
I appreciate that my position is going to wind some cyclists and drivers up alike but until the industry comes up with a decent dippable bike light that puts 1000 lumens on the road where I want it, then it ain't going to change any time soon. You might be of a different opinion.
Design and build it yourself?0 -
meanredspider wrote:Bordersroadie wrote:My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
I don't remember what my AyUps put out but it's around 400 lumens and, even descending twisting single track roads at 40mph in the wet, I've never wished I had more. I think 1200 lumens is more than some car headlights put out on dipped. That level of light can't be needed on a bike.
FYI a single modern car headlight can be anywhere between about 1000-3000 lumens (if it is a xenon halide arc bulb for instance). Obviously they usually have two so a double XM-L bike light on high might just be able to get close to one Aygo headlight but nowhere near a BMW M3 say on full chat.
Ay Up use Luxeon LEDs and they claim 700 lumens for their light on high. How powerful yours are may depend on age and what level you are running them at. I would be surprised if you find 400 lumens enough to ride by unless you are doing 10 mph which you obviously aren't. I also doubt that anyone would find a set of Ay Ups sufficient to descend single track road at 40 mph and see a pothole with enough time to react. All I can say is you must be wearing image intesifying goggles!
The Philips SafeRide is massive and probably one of the reasons for it's demise. My mate bought one and immediately sent it back for a refund.0 -
hypster wrote:Ay Up use Luxeon LEDs and they claim 700 lumens for their light on high. How powerful yours are may depend on age and what level you are running them at. I would be surprised if you find 400 lumens enough to ride by unless you are doing 10 mph which you obviously aren't. I also doubt that anyone would find a set of Ay Ups sufficient to descend single track road at 40 mph and see a pothole with enough time to react. All I can say is you must be wearing image intesifying goggles!
The Philips SafeRide is massive and probably one of the reasons for it's demise. My mate bought one and immediately sent it back for a refund.
My AyUps are 4 years old and they certainly weren't as much as 700 lumens at any point (the current spec may be). The guy who won the Strathpuffer the year I did it used AyUps - they can't be too shabby. And, yes, I've regularly used them at speed with no problems. I did London to Cambridge MoonRider in the tipping rain on roads I'd never been on and finished nearly an hour quicker than the next person (so I probably wasn't slow). Maybe my eyes are more sensitive than average - who knows (I certainly never used the HEDs on my Merc on full beam because I hated the reflected glare from signs). Seriously though, I've never once thought I needed brighter lights and ran my AyUps on lower setting except on the fast descents. But even if it's as much as 1000 lumens on a car headlight (I've read as little as 700) - you're sat in a 1tonne plus box travelling at up to 60mph (on single roads) with the glow of your dash diminishing your sensitivity and needing to light up a much greater width of road (with your two lights) - if that's enough, a bike that's slower, more responsive with a shorter breaking distance, can't need something similar.
Bikes are massive and incredibly heavy in NL and DK - I think that was the SafeRide's market.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0 -
So hypster's policy is basically, stuff the blinded car drivers as long as he has a super-bright light. Somewhat selfish, but also quite typical these days, sadly.
I'd rather do what I can to not blind oncoming drivers, regardless of whether or not they might appreciate it. A cut-off beam pattern like the legislated German/Dutch lights (and Exposure Strada) is a good idea, but in the meantime I'll keep swivelling my light into a non-blinding angle when cars approach, basically because I'm not a selfish git.
Oh, and I am quite old with not perfect eyesight so maybe fewer lumens is fine for other folks!
0 -
Mark me down as another who finds 400 lumens or thereabouts plenty of power for night time riding on lit and unlit roads.0
-
The thing is, you're looking at the wrong measurement. The market has been heavily driven for the last few years by quoting lumens figures on the implication that more lumens = better light. Wrong approach. It's similar to the way all cameras were sold on the basis of pixel count and phones were sold on the basis of small size (pre smart phones). There were some truely awful high resolution cameras and tiny phones.Bordersroadie wrote:Another take on the dazzling aspect of high spec lights:
My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
.....
What matters most with a headlight for a car, bike or anything else is uniformity and lux, not lumens.
Hotspots impair your nightvision and mean you need more light and will never be as comfortable with a tendency towards tunnel vision. Lumen figures tell you nothing about where how brightly lit the road surface is, just the total light generated. If it's being directed off into space or the field beside the road it does no one much good.
Does your experience include decent shaped beams or just conical torch-like beams of varying focus and power?
Has anyone got a figure for the lumens produced by car dip beams?
I doubt it's as high as many bike lights but I can happily drive at 100km/h with them. Why? Because they use the light appropriately. (and because cars have much better braking ability!)
I can also happily cycle at 40km/h on my bike with the Philips Saferide. Duration is the only flaw that bothers me with this light. It's a bit chunky but that's not too important in use.0 -
Do any of the dynamo lights 'cut the mustard'?
Im thinking of a new wheel built on an XT dynamo hub.
Lux, lumens, watts all a bit confusing..0 -
hypster wrote:Some of the opinions on these "what bike light" threads just make me laugh. At the risk of winding a few people up here is my opinion. I live in the country and ride (and drive) on unlit roads all the time. I also design and build my own bike lights.
Do I want as much light as possible on the road to see defects and other potential dangers (e.g. deer, rabbits etc.)?
Yes, I do.
Am I bothered about dazzling oncoming drivers?
No, I am not and here is why.
The idea that any driver would veer TOWARDS an oncoming light which may have dazzled them is just ludicrous in my mind. The natural reaction is to steer AWAY from any potential danger (or brake) especially if your vision has been impaired. In forty years of driving and cycling I have never experienced (or heard of) anyone swerving ACROSS the road when dazzled by lights.
Car headlights are very powerful these days, especially xenon-bulbed headlights and the beams coming from them can verge on painful even when dipped. They are much more powerful than any puny XM-L-based lights we can put out.
Very often, car drivers coming the other way either forget (as do I sometimes) or deliberately don't dip their main beams so dealing with being dazzled by oncoming drivers is something all road users have to live with.
Now some clever trousers no doubt will try and make the point that the reason car drivers deliberately don't dip their headlights is because they are being dazzled by your bike light. Well fine, suits me, as long as I can see the road, that's all that worries me.
In my experience, when cycling on narrow country roads most (if not all) oncoming drivers slow right down and many stop because they have no idea what is actually coming towards them with such bright lights. I'm sure they must think that we are a tractor which is possibly going to scratch their precious. Personally, this is what I want to happen. They seem to have more respect for a bright light coming towards them than some puny EverReady bicycle light.
I appreciate that my position is going to wind some cyclists and drivers up alike but until the industry comes up with a decent dippable bike light that puts 1000 lumens on the road where I want it, then it ain't going to change any time soon. You might be of a different opinion.
Agree.
I have one of the 'flood' lenses on order for my DX Light for a more rectangular effect thereby hopefully not wasting some light up in the trees/sky. Also have a solar storm for the quiet back lanes where it is imperative to see.Colnago C60 SRAM eTap, Colnago C40, Milani 107E, BMC Pro Machine, Trek Madone, Viner Gladius,
Bizango 29er0 -
Ai_1 wrote:
The thing is, you're looking at the wrong measurement. The market has been heavily driven for the last few years by quoting lumens figures on the implication that more lumens = better light. Wrong approach.Bordersroadie wrote:Another take on the dazzling aspect of high spec lights:
My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
.....
Wrong? Exposure, wrong? Naah.
In my (extensive) night riding experience, on wet, black, light-absorbing tarmac, going fast downhill, my Exposure Toro has sufficient light power (Lumens, lux, candle power, it's totally irrelevant you see) to ride safely. If I take it down to mid or low settings, it is insufficient.
They're my eyeballs, you don't know me, I'm pretty impressed that you know how much light I need to see by. :roll:0 -
Ai_1 wrote:I can also happily cycle at 40km/h on my bike with the Philips Saferide. Duration is the only flaw that bothers me with this light. It's a bit chunky but that's not too important in use.
I have a Philips Saferide and I absolutely hate it - the beam pattern is great, and although I still find its too weak, it does seem to give better illumination of the road than a torch of equivalent power. Also, I put it on the bars along with a Cateye Volt 1200 and it really does cut the light down really well (though the Volt was tolerable).
The thing I hate are the "artefacts", if that is the right term - the angles in the reflector result in something like lots of vertical and hortizontal bright bars in my peripheral vision. Completely does my head in and I stopped using it after a few rides. Is also way too heavy, too short lasting and ultimately a tad too weak for back roads. It is about 3-4 years old, so maybe newer versions are better - but basically its a commuter light IMHO.
I use a helmet torch (which I click on for twisty descents), a cree torch on low/medium and the Volt 1200, which I put a hand over if I can - usually ok, but when I haven't been able to I haven't been flashed by a car or had one swerve towards me.
This looks promising, but may a bit big - anyone seen or used one?
http://www.mcconveycycles.com/store/product/22539/Specialized-Flux-Expert-Headlight/0 -
Clearly you don't understand my post. Let me clarify.Bordersroadie wrote:Ai_1 wrote:
The thing is, you're looking at the wrong measurement. The market has been heavily driven for the last few years by quoting lumens figures on the implication that more lumens = better light. Wrong approach.Bordersroadie wrote:Another take on the dazzling aspect of high spec lights:
My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
.....
Wrong? Exposure, wrong? Naah.
In my (extensive) night riding experience, on wet, black, light-absorbing tarmac, going fast downhill, my Exposure Toro has sufficient light power (Lumens, lux, candle power, it's totally irrelevant you see) to ride safely. If I take it down to mid or low settings, it is insufficient.
They're my eyeballs, you don't know me, I'm pretty impressed that you know how much light I need to see by. :roll:
Lumens = measure of the "amount" of light generated
Lux = measure of light intensity
The lux meassurement is what dictates how brightly something is illuminated which is what matters when you're trying to see. The amount of lumens generated, the dispersal pattern and the distance to the illuminated surface all impact the lux achieved at that surface. The number of lumens required to provide comfortable vision when riding at night is dependent on these other factors.
I'm not telling you how much light you need, I'm telling you you're measuring it wrong.0 -
gbr236 wrote:Do any of the dynamo lights 'cut the mustard'?
Im thinking of a new wheel built on an XT dynamo hub.
Lux, lumens, watts all a bit confusing..
Yes! This will be my first winter on dynamo lighting but after a week of it I'm already a convert. I run an XT hub but I'd be sure to get the full 3V version rather than the cheaper 1.5V for powering the latest crop of LED lights.
The light I run is a B & M Luxos U. Expensive unless you buy from Germany but utterly brilliant. The beam pattern is the best I've known for the road and will adapt to your speed (more of a flood nearer the wheel at low speeds). It has a daylight running mode and can even charge USB devices.
I've used brighter lights (Lezyne, Magic Shine, ebay specials) but nothing lights the road so effectively as the B & M.0 -
Ai_1 wrote:
Clearly you don't understand my post. Let me clarify.Bordersroadie wrote:Ai_1 wrote:
The thing is, you're looking at the wrong measurement. The market has been heavily driven for the last few years by quoting lumens figures on the implication that more lumens = better light. Wrong approach.Bordersroadie wrote:Another take on the dazzling aspect of high spec lights:
My Exposure Toro packs 1200 lumens. All my night riding is unlit rural. On wet jet black roads where so much light is absorbed, I need every one of the lumens to ride swiftly safely, much less would not cut it in my experience.
.....
Wrong? Exposure, wrong? Naah.
In my (extensive) night riding experience, on wet, black, light-absorbing tarmac, going fast downhill, my Exposure Toro has sufficient light power (Lumens, lux, candle power, it's totally irrelevant you see) to ride safely. If I take it down to mid or low settings, it is insufficient.
They're my eyeballs, you don't know me, I'm pretty impressed that you know how much light I need to see by. :roll:
Lumens = measure of the "amount" of light generated
Lux = measure of light intensity
The lux meassurement is what dictates how brightly something is illuminated which is what matters when you're trying to see. The amount of lumens generated, the dispersal pattern and the distance to the illuminated surface all impact the lux achieved at that surface. The number of lumens required to provide comfortable vision when riding at night is dependent on these other factors.
I'm not telling you how much light you need, I'm telling you you're measuring it wrong.
This is getting a tad silly. Not only am I not measuring it wrong, I wasn't actually doing any measuring myself, I was just reading what it says on the side of the light, in the absence of any other information.
I wasn't bragging that my light has x number of lumens or that it is better than light a, b, or c. I was just saying that (on a wet night*) I wouldn't want a less powerful light for my own personal use with my own personal night vision. The fact that it happens to be a 1200 lumen figure is actually completely irrelevant. It could be quoting 1200 squilpaps for all I care, I was just recommending my light and using the unit of measurement quoted by the manufacturer.
The relevant point is that the Exposure Toro is highly recommended as it is completely 100% reliable, lightweight, beautifully made, self-contained with no external battery, extremely robust, has very long battery life, with brilliant UK after sales support, costs a bomb but is worth every penny. It also lights the road, for my eyes, extremely effectively, much moreso than its predecessor, the MkII (800 lumens quoted). I ride at night regularly, sometimes for longish distances, and I don't need to take a back-up light, that's how good it is.
I'm actually aware of the difference between lumens and lux (although thanks for the explanation anyway) and I'm fully aware that it's almost impossible to make an objective comparison of the real-world effectiveness of one light vs another simply by quoting figures like lumens, but if that is the only data quoted then that's all one can refer to in a discussion like this.
* on a dry night the reflected light from dry tarmac is almost like night and day compared to wet, so on dry roads I generally run the light at a lower setting which provides more than enough light. The great thing is having the power when you really need it, lumens, lux, whatever.0
