View Single Post
  #120  
Old April 4th 21, 05:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Eyc headlight problem

On 4/4/2021 10:34 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, April 4, 2021 at 6:45:00 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/3/2021 8:13 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, April 3, 2021 at 4:32:13 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/3/2021 12:57 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:


I think it was Jay Beattie who suggested the 800 lumen number. I
merely stole it from him. I agree that 800 lumens probably too much.
However, if such a high power dynamo product ever arrives on the
market, there will surely be a lumens war among vendors to see who can
advertise the largest number. At that time, 800 lumens will reserved
for purists and regulatory agencies.
Yep, safety inflation is real.

Since when is being able to see "safety inflation"? Let's go for a night ride sometime, you and your bottle dyno and light, and me and my whatever light I chose.

Fine. We'll do it around here, where the people I have ridden night
rides with all have had lights far less capable than those I use.
Somehow they think they can see with theirs. But they tell me they see
better with mine.

Here's the problem, Jay. "Seeing" is not a binary condition. One can see
better or not as well, depending on various factors - and lumen count is
only one of those factors. It's silly to claim a certain number of
lumens is necessary for everybody. (It's even sillier to claim a certain
number of Watts is necessary, as some others do.)

And demanding ever-increasing numbers _is_ safety inflation. Were you
riding at night ten years ago? 20 years ago? Were you really using 800
lumens then?
On flat roads and the bike path through South Waterfront I can get by with a little flea-watt flasher or a clip on flashlight from 1968 -- or my old Wonder Light. But that is not where I do (or did pre DST) most of my riding. Everything involves a descent, often on old broken concrete roads. I've done those on dyno only, and its inadequate except at a creeping pace.

Yes, I get that. You ride single track through forests, you climb stairs
carrying your bike, you have immensely steep hills and get off and walk,
you have to duck under twigs. I'm not denying that you're a hero.

But claiming or accepting that you're a hero comes with acknowledging
that most others are not!

You keep ignoring that I've said many times that dyno systems are not
what's best for off-road stuff. Could you please acknowledge that I've
said that, and move on? Then maybe we could restrict our discussion to
the conditions in which almost all cyclists actually ride.

Almost all bicyclists - even regular commuters - ride much more normal
routes and surfaces. They don't climb 20% grades on forest paths. They
don't need 800 lumens to see. They don't go blind with 750 lumens, or
even 75. Many of them actually use "flea watt" lights. Perhaps instead
of yelling at me, you should be yelling at them? "GET 800 LUMENS!!"


I'm not yelling at you although I do get tired of the incessant "safety inflation" rant when people buy something that makes it easier for them to ride -- and the implied or overt put-down of anyone who does not ride like you or use your equipment. Oh, and the incessant stories of the unique old guy with [fill in the blank old technology] who beat the uppity racer. Hey, I know a racer who rode a 24 hour race and kicked everybody's ass -- including old bearded guys with dynos.
And I don't know what type of riding most people do, and it really doesn't matter. I know what I do, and I know that my riding is not unique. Unlike you, I am not prescribing a light for anyone but me.


Hmm. ISTR you repeatedly telling us how steep, narrow, rough and wet
your riding is. You contrast that with "flatlanders" riding at a slow pace.

You repeatedly refer to your Luxos as a "mood light" and talk about how
bad it is. You extend that to my light, and say you can't believe that
others around here say mine is really good.

But you're still not acting elitist and not disapproving of anyone
else's choice? OK.

(I'll save most of my remarks on safety inflation for a separate response.)

And the deal with an 800 lumen light (which is not terribly bright)...


Really? How long has _that_ statement been true? To what are you comparing?

Personally, I don't care if someone wants more light that a dyno produces, so long as it is pointed down, and the output is reduced in shared facilities.


There actually are reasons people choose not to point their 800 lumen
lights down. Most or all headlights with that output have kindergarten
optics - a round fog of light with a bright spot in the middle. Riders
aim the bright spot down the road for "throw," to see in the distance.

If they even think about aiming it down away from an oncoming rider's
eyes, they find the hot spot is then much brighter on the pavement in
front of them, causing their pupils to contract. They see less well and
don't like that. And the fog of light above the spot can still be
dazzling to oncomers.

This could be fixed. First, as with car headlights, proper optics light
the road evenly with no hot spots and far less upward glare. And it's no
great technological trick to have a properly shaped and cut-off low
beam, while using the simple light for a high beam for when nobody's
around and you're doing gnarly descents through thickets of trees, or
whatever.

But it would require a company capable of at least high school (vs.
kindergarten) optic skills, AND a public smart enough to understand the
problem; or better, a government that understands the problem and makes
appropriate rules.

In this forum, we have an electrical engineer who portrays kindergarten
round beams as superior to properly designed ones. That indicates the
public is unlikely to get smart. And regarding the governement - well,
"FREEDOM!" ... to blind others. "MFFY."

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home