A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

New B&M 100lux headlight.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 5th 17, 04:19 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,603
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:47:49 PM UTC-5, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 08:33:32 -0800, sms
wrote:
On 12/3/2017 5:21 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 16:56:24 -0800, sms
wrote:
On 12/3/2017 4:28 PM, Oculus Lights wrote:
On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 2:34:34 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
https://www.bike24.com/p2144878.html

-- JS

Is there a power rating? 100 lux at 10 meters, as the STVZO test
requires, is exceedingly bright. I'm hesitant to state they "must"
be drawing at least so much power, but my gut feeling is that its
in a range that a single LED can't handle. Anyone can rate a light
without stating the distance. My single LED 325 lumen measures 33
lux at 10, 500+ lumen measures 50 lux, and the best of the others
on the market, such as Supernova's 205 lm that's standard equipment
on many e-bikes, measure 25 lux at 10 meters, at most.

It's not all that new, and it's not very well rated. The complaints
I saw are a) the beam shape is too narrow, and b) the standlight is
inadequate. Neither is surprising. Dynamo lights make trade-offs,
and one major one is concentrating the limited available output into
a narrow beam, which is a big compromise in terms of safety, both in
seeing and being seen. The second is that the standlight is
necessarily fairly weak because the internal battery or super-cap
can't provide enough power.

The only suitable dynamo light for use in the U.S., in a dynamo-only
configuration, remains the Supernova E3 Triple 2. It has a proper
beam, and is not StVZO compliant for on-road use in countries where
StVZO compliance is mandatory.

Have you even looked at beam pictures?


Yes. The criticism was valid.

Here is what the review stated:

"The beam is too narrow

In focussing all the output from the LED directly ahead to hit that
magical 100 lux figure, B&M have made something akin to a laser… If
it’s outside a narrow degree arc from the front, it’s going to be near
invisible.

Two examples. Take a standard lane-in-each-direction road, in complete
darkness. If you’re cycling in the centre of the left-hand lane with
the IQ-X, you may not see a road joining on your right as almost no
light will reach the opposite verge. Or, take a winding single-lane
road. As you lean the bike to take a right-hand bend, the right side
of the beam dips too, and you cycle into complete darkness.

I’ve often praised the way German light manufacturers make the best
use of every photon by focussing the output into useful areas. With
the IQ-X, B&M have gone too far."

from
https://www.darkerside.org/2017/02/bm-iq-x-dynamo-headlight-review/


Interesting review, thank you for that. Not sure that the photo mimics
how the human eye sees at night (always a problem with this sort of
thing).

Well, in any event there are wider beams if you wish. Scroll down to
the eDelux II/B&M Premium CYO/etc.:

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/headlights.php

Scroll further down to the Schmidt eDelux, which is what I have on my
bike now (eDelux II on the way as we speak for my other bike). I find
the eDelux quite adequate for in town and rural night riding. Heck, I
have ridden dusk to dawn with B&M halogen lights and been quite happy
with them- used them for 300k, 400k, 600k and 1200k brevets on roads (my
eyes are now 15 years older and don't see quite as well by those lights
as they used to).

Not bright enough and you don't see well enough; too bright and you
don't see well either because near objects are too bright and interfere
with dark adaptation. Too narrow causes the same sort of problem. The
top of the beam should be brighter than the bottom. Some scatter to the
sides is helpful, scatter above the horizon is not (I notice even my new
Subaru has a sharp upper cutoff to the headlight beams). It's easy to
get into thinking that brighter is always better, in which case one will
ultimately ride only during the day in full sun.


And even then there are those who believethat you MUST use super-bright flashing lights in the daytime.

What I like to see on a website is an image of the ACTUAL BEAM PATTERN on the road not a wall.

Cheers
Ads
  #22  
Old December 5th 17, 06:40 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,718
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 20:19:24 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

What I like to see on a website is an image of the ACTUAL BEAM PATTERN on the road not a wall.
Cheers


It's difficult to see variations in brightness on the roadway, where
everything on the road, trees, sidewalk, cars, dirt, concrete,
asphalt, street signs, and such, reflect light by varying amounts. For
example, if the road was made from a glass mirror, you would see
nothing because all the light would be reflected in the forward
direction and none would be reflected back towards the rider. Vertical
objects, like people and trees, appear brighter because more light is
reflected. So, if you want a "realistic" test, you end up measuring
reflectivity, not illumination.

Peter White's photos seem to be close to the way you are asking. The
problem is that it is difficult to see the variations in intensity. If
I accentuate the difference in light intensity using pseudo color
proportional to the (reflected) light intensity, I get a more
interesting picture. You can more easily see the hot spot(s),
pattern, beam width, and side lighting, like this:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/Front-Light-False-Color/index.html
Each (pseudo) color has a corresponding lux (brightness) value (which
I didn't bother trying to calculate). All the photos on the page are
of the same headlight and were derived from the color photo on Peter
White's web site. (Ignore pseudo-color-01.jpg, which is a duplicate
of one of the others).

Unfortunately, I've done nothing with this beyond the initial
tinkering. If any one is interested in how this was done, I'll dig
out the info and post it.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #23  
Old December 5th 17, 12:52 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,792
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On 12/4/2017 10:47 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 08:33:32 -0800, sms
wrote:
On 12/3/2017 5:21 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 16:56:24 -0800, sms
wrote:
On 12/3/2017 4:28 PM, Oculus Lights wrote:
On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 2:34:34 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
https://www.bike24.com/p2144878.html

-- JS

Is there a power rating? 100 lux at 10 meters, as the STVZO test
requires, is exceedingly bright. I'm hesitant to state they "must"
be drawing at least so much power, but my gut feeling is that its
in a range that a single LED can't handle. Anyone can rate a light
without stating the distance. My single LED 325 lumen measures 33
lux at 10, 500+ lumen measures 50 lux, and the best of the others
on the market, such as Supernova's 205 lm that's standard equipment
on many e-bikes, measure 25 lux at 10 meters, at most.

It's not all that new, and it's not very well rated. The complaints
I saw are a) the beam shape is too narrow, and b) the standlight is
inadequate. Neither is surprising. Dynamo lights make trade-offs,
and one major one is concentrating the limited available output into
a narrow beam, which is a big compromise in terms of safety, both in
seeing and being seen. The second is that the standlight is
necessarily fairly weak because the internal battery or super-cap
can't provide enough power.

The only suitable dynamo light for use in the U.S., in a dynamo-only
configuration, remains the Supernova E3 Triple 2. It has a proper
beam, and is not StVZO compliant for on-road use in countries where
StVZO compliance is mandatory.

Have you even looked at beam pictures?


Yes. The criticism was valid.

Here is what the review stated:

"The beam is too narrow

In focussing all the output from the LED directly ahead to hit that
magical 100 lux figure, B&M have made something akin to a laser… If
it’s outside a narrow degree arc from the front, it’s going to be near
invisible.

Two examples. Take a standard lane-in-each-direction road, in complete
darkness. If you’re cycling in the centre of the left-hand lane with
the IQ-X, you may not see a road joining on your right as almost no
light will reach the opposite verge. Or, take a winding single-lane
road. As you lean the bike to take a right-hand bend, the right side
of the beam dips too, and you cycle into complete darkness.

I’ve often praised the way German light manufacturers make the best
use of every photon by focussing the output into useful areas. With
the IQ-X, B&M have gone too far."

from
https://www.darkerside.org/2017/02/bm-iq-x-dynamo-headlight-review/


Interesting review, thank you for that. Not sure that the photo mimics
how the human eye sees at night (always a problem with this sort of
thing).

Well, in any event there are wider beams if you wish. Scroll down to
the eDelux II/B&M Premium CYO/etc.:

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/headlights.php

Scroll further down to the Schmidt eDelux, which is what I have on my
bike now (eDelux II on the way as we speak for my other bike). I find
the eDelux quite adequate for in town and rural night riding. Heck, I
have ridden dusk to dawn with B&M halogen lights and been quite happy
with them- used them for 300k, 400k, 600k and 1200k brevets on roads (my
eyes are now 15 years older and don't see quite as well by those lights
as they used to).

Not bright enough and you don't see well enough; too bright and you
don't see well either because near objects are too bright and interfere
with dark adaptation. Too narrow causes the same sort of problem. The
top of the beam should be brighter than the bottom. Some scatter to the
sides is helpful, scatter above the horizon is not (I notice even my new
Subaru has a sharp upper cutoff to the headlight beams). It's easy to
get into thinking that brighter is always better, in which case one will
ultimately ride only during the day in full sun.


I did a short (15 mile) night ride with a friend last night. Usually I
take my utility bike, set up with Shimano hub dyno and B&M IQ Premium,
but last night I used a different bike with an old Union dyno and a B&M
Eyc. My friend had some lower end battery headlight.

He ended up shutting off his headlight on the bike trail portion of the
ride. He was worried about his battery running out, and the Eyc beam was
perfectly fine for both of us at speeds up to the 20 mph we hit on the
downhills.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #24  
Old December 5th 17, 05:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,993
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 1:40:39 AM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 20:19:24 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

What I like to see on a website is an image of the ACTUAL BEAM PATTERN on the road not a wall.
Cheers


It's difficult to see variations in brightness on the roadway, where
everything on the road, trees, sidewalk, cars, dirt, concrete,
asphalt, street signs, and such, reflect light by varying amounts. For
example, if the road was made from a glass mirror, you would see
nothing because all the light would be reflected in the forward
direction and none would be reflected back towards the rider. Vertical
objects, like people and trees, appear brighter because more light is
reflected. So, if you want a "realistic" test, you end up measuring
reflectivity, not illumination.

Peter White's photos seem to be close to the way you are asking. The
problem is that it is difficult to see the variations in intensity. If
I accentuate the difference in light intensity using pseudo color
proportional to the (reflected) light intensity, I get a more
interesting picture. You can more easily see the hot spot(s),
pattern, beam width, and side lighting, like this:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/Front-Light-False-Color/index.html
Each (pseudo) color has a corresponding lux (brightness) value (which
I didn't bother trying to calculate). All the photos on the page are
of the same headlight and were derived from the color photo on Peter
White's web site. (Ignore pseudo-color-01.jpg, which is a duplicate
of one of the others).

Unfortunately, I've done nothing with this beyond the initial
tinkering. If any one is interested in how this was done, I'll dig
out the info and post it.


There certainly is difficulty with beam shots. It's tough to accurately
represent what a person sees with their naked eye. And I suppose it's
possible that people's night vision varies, so a beam shot that looks "right"
to one person may look wrong to another. I imagine most people posting those
images are trying their best, but I'll bet that their camera settings are
mostly by guess and by golly.

Even the split-screen comparison web pages suffer from this difficulty.
They can show if one light is brighter than another, but it's hard to tell
how bright is bright enough. I think they tend to push a "brighter is
always better" attitude.

I've decided that Peter White's photos do the job for me. I've bought
several headlamps from him, and ISTM that the lights performed as I expected
they would.

And I appreciate your effort with the false color conversions, but personally,
I find them hard to interpret. They can tell me how even the beam is, but I'd
still have to guess at whether it's even or bright enough for me - or too
too bright.

- Frank Krygowski
  #25  
Old December 5th 17, 07:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tosspot[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,137
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On 03/12/17 22:35, Andre Jute wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 10:39:17 AM UTC, Tosspot wrote:
On 03/12/17 05:02, Oculus Lights wrote:
On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 2:34:34 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
https://www.bike24.com/p2144878.html

-- JS

B&M plays the lux only racket. But their lights are poor
lumens/lux ratio. Lux only says the intensity at the brightest
point anywhere in the beam. No mention if this is STVZO or not.
Best guess is that it isn't.


https://www.bumm.de claim it is StVZO compliant.


You guessed wrong, Barry. I would be exceedingly surprised to
discover that any BUMM lamp is not StVZO compliant. That is BUMM's
USP or unique selling point and has always been. It is precisely this
StVZO compliance that makes their lamps inferior to yours in output
and superior to yours in beam shaping.


Who the **** is Barry?

Andre Jute Bodgit Please, even from traders, please!



  #26  
Old December 5th 17, 09:32 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,603
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 7:58:23 PM UTC, Tosspot wrote:
On 03/12/17 22:35, Andre Jute wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 10:39:17 AM UTC, Tosspot wrote:
On 03/12/17 05:02, Oculus Lights wrote:
On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 2:34:34 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
https://www.bike24.com/p2144878.html

-- JS

B&M plays the lux only racket. But their lights are poor
lumens/lux ratio. Lux only says the intensity at the brightest
point anywhere in the beam. No mention if this is STVZO or not.
Best guess is that it isn't.

https://www.bumm.de claim it is StVZO compliant.


You guessed wrong, Barry. I would be exceedingly surprised to
discover that any BUMM lamp is not StVZO compliant. That is BUMM's
USP or unique selling point and has always been. It is precisely this
StVZO compliance that makes their lamps inferior to yours in output
and superior to yours in beam shaping.


Who the **** is Barry?


That's what everyone is asking.

Andre Jute Bodgit Please, even from traders, please!


My bodger, from WW2, doubles as a bayonet.

Andre Jute
I did own a grey flannel suit once. It was an ironic statement.
  #27  
Old December 5th 17, 11:24 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tim McNamara
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,788
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 20:19:24 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:
On Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:47:49 PM UTC-5, Tim McNamara wrote:


snip

Not bright enough and you don't see well enough; too bright and you
don't see well either because near objects are too bright and
interfere with dark adaptation. Too narrow causes the same sort of
problem. The top of the beam should be brighter than the bottom.
Some scatter to the sides is helpful, scatter above the horizon is
not (I notice even my new Subaru has a sharp upper cutoff to the
headlight beams). It's easy to get into thinking that brighter is
always better, in which case one will ultimately ride only during the
day in full sun.


And even then there are those who believethat you MUST use
super-bright flashing lights in the daytime.


I'm not that overcautious, but I get the notion given the complete
obliviousness of about 1/4 of the car driving population. They're
looking at their phones, eating lunch, drunk, stoned, whatever.
Anything but responsible behind the wheel. What puzzles me are the
folks who only use a flashing light as a headlight in full darkness.
WTF is up with that?

What I like to see on a website is an image of the ACTUAL BEAM PATTERN
on the road not a wall.


Hence my reference of Peter White's page of beam photos. There are some
other collections of beam photos out there on the interwebs. The
challenge is setting the camera so that it sees approximately what the
human eye does, not making the beam falsely bright or falsely weak.
  #28  
Old December 5th 17, 11:36 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tim McNamara
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,788
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 07:52:30 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

snip

I did a short (15 mile) night ride with a friend last night. Usually I
take my utility bike, set up with Shimano hub dyno and B&M IQ Premium,
but last night I used a different bike with an old Union dyno and a
B&M Eyc. My friend had some lower end battery headlight.

He ended up shutting off his headlight on the bike trail portion of
the ride. He was worried about his battery running out, and the Eyc
beam was perfectly fine for both of us at speeds up to the 20 mph we
hit on the downhills.


When I attempted PBP in 2003, using a B&M halogen light with 3W bulb,
there were a lot of folks with battery lights (usually badly mounted on
handlebars and pointing right in front of the wheel) and lots of folks
with dynamos. Some of the battery folks did the same, there was really
plenty of light in a pack of 40 riders with headlights that if 10 of
them were turned off visibility was still good.
  #29  
Old December 5th 17, 11:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,156
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On 12/5/2017 11:58 AM, Tosspot wrote:
On 03/12/17 22:35, Andre Jute wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 10:39:17 AM UTC, Tosspot wrote:
On 03/12/17 05:02, Oculus Lights wrote:
On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 2:34:34 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
https://www.bike24.com/p2144878.html

-- JS

B&M plays the lux only racket.* But their lights are poor
lumens/lux ratio.* Lux only says the intensity at the brightest
point anywhere in the beam.* No mention if this is STVZO or not.
Best guess is that it isn't.

https://www.bumm.de claim it is StVZO compliant.


You guessed wrong, Barry. I would be exceedingly surprised to
discover that any BUMM lamp is not StVZO compliant. That is BUMM's
USP or unique selling point and has always been. It is precisely this
StVZO compliance that makes their lamps inferior to yours in output
and superior to yours in beam shaping.


Who the **** is Barry?


Barry manufactures the Oculus light, a very nice battery powered,
self-contained, 1800 lumen battery powered light, and now there is a
3000 lumen model. Very well designed beam that doesn't suffer from the
limitations of most dynamo lights.

Oculus Lights
https://www.oculuslights.net

  #30  
Old December 6th 17, 05:35 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,692
Default New B&M 100lux headlight.

On 04/12/17 11:28, Oculus Lights wrote:
On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 2:34:34 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
https://www.bike24.com/p2144878.html



Is there a power rating?


One can safely assume it will work with any normal 6V/3W dynamo.

100 lux at 10 meters, as the STVZO test requires, is exceedingly
bright. I'm hesitant to state they "must" be drawing at least so
much power, but my gut feeling is that its in a range that a single
LED can't handle.


Depends on how the light is focused.

Anyone can rate a light without stating the distance. My single LED
325 lumen measures 33 lux at 10, 500+ lumen measures 50 lux, and the
best of the others on the market, such as Supernova's 205 lm that's
standard equipment on many e-bikes, measure 25 lux at 10 meters, at
most.


My B&M IQTec Premium is rated at 80lux. It also works with a 6V/3W dynamo.

The light is focused to a very bright band just before the cut off, so
that you can aim the light well in to the distance and achieve a
relatively even illumination of the road surface over the entire distance.

If yours is only reaching 33 lux, it is less well focused and more of a
flood light.

See images here.
http://www.bentrideronline.com/messa...d.php?t=131473

--
JS
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The last headlight you will ever need somebody[_2_] Techniques 115 April 28th 14 02:12 AM
Headlight Tom $herman (-_-) Techniques 16 August 17th 12 03:43 AM
FS: L&M ARC HID headlight Zach Marketplace 0 February 13th 08 07:25 PM
LED Headlight HughMann Australia 12 August 30th 06 11:51 AM
Headlight Bruni Techniques 8 August 31st 03 06:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.