Reflectors do not make you legal

On Oct 14, 11:24 pm, Chalo wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

The best headlights seem to be designed to meet German
standards. By comparison, it seems most headlights sold in the US are
crude. Especially, optically crude.

Sharp cutoffs and shaped beams make good sense for cars that are
pumping 110W or more into their headlights, but they make much less
sense for a 2W bike light. In this case, throwing a lot of the
available light into drivers' windshields and mirrors is a very good
idea.

That's *never* a good idea, unless you like sharing the road with blind
motorists.

I've been blinded before by some pretty wimpy headlights (I'm looking at
you, Ford.) yes, on low beam. I've also been momentarily blinded by
some cycle lights.

I don't think you fully grasp the implications of having only 2W of
light, spread broadly. Nobody's going to be blinded by that. A
tightly focused beam can be much more intense, but is unlikely to be
directed where you want it to be at any given moment.


I have recently upgraded from PB 1-watt to PB 2-watt. Very worthwhile
upgrade - both lights work remarkably like the pictures would lead you
to believe on PB's web site "light finder" thingie.

I am essentially blinded several times each morning by oncoming cars -
have to tip my head down and to the side to block them with my helmet
brim. I use by hand (oriented to include a commentary) to block high
beams.

On 10/15/2010 1:09 PM, Peter Cole wrote:
On 10/15/2010 1:56 PM, Bob Cooper wrote:
On Oct 15, 1:19 pm, Peter wrote:

It's a joke, son.

I know. But you still have to tell me what it means or why it's funny.

Did Forester teach an improper method for turning left on a four-lane
boulevard?

Bob "Born during the Truman Administration" Cooper

The techniques are OK, nothing earth shattering, but the "philosophy"
and the "politics" derived from it are nuts.[...]

Better than segregated, unequal, bicycle farcility (sic) ghettos!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 10/15/2010 1:16 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
[...]
Personally, when I am riding in the dark -- as opposed to dusk -- I
choose the brightest light possible[...]

This will produce a light bright enough to cause 3rd degree burns at a
distance of 100-km: http://www.vce.com/tsar/images/tsar_bomba.jpg.
All cyclists should have 5.4 septillion watt lights.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On Oct 15, 2:37*pm, Bob Cooper wrote:
On Oct 15, 2:16*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:

I use the most powerful light I can afford ...

But when is it enough?

I have a Nitto light mount that will fit all four of the DiNotte LED
lights that I own at the same time.

I have two lamps that run off my SON at the same time.

I have a NightSun system that has -- IIRC -- a 45-watt mode.

I can fit all of this stuff on my bike at the same time.

I can “afford” a full-scale auto lighting system and the battery to
power it.

And the trailer to pull the battery around in.

But when is it enough?

That is a really good question, and it depends on your night vision --
and what type of weather you ride in. I learn to live with what I can
afford -- which is currently a Niterider 700 Pro LED that I got on
sale for a great price from Nashbar. Frankly, car headlights are not
enough for me driving in the rain on a moonless night.

I am not at a point in my headlight purchases where I worry about
blinding on-coming traffic, but if there is some limit on light, it is
going to be based on regulations -- or common sense -- limiting output
to prevent harm to others. -- Jay Beattie.

On 2010-10-15, Tom Sherman ?_? wrote:
On 10/15/2010 1:16 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
[...]
Personally, when I am riding in the dark -- as opposed to dusk -- I
choose the brightest light possible[...]

This will produce a light bright enough to cause 3rd degree burns at a
distance of 100-km: http://www.vce.com/tsar/images/tsar_bomba.jpg.
All cyclists should have 5.4 septillion watt lights.

Yabbut you need a good strong trailer with suspension to haul it.

OTOH, you have enough leftover power to propel yourself forward quite
nicely.

--

Kristian Zoerhoff

On Oct 15, 7:24*am, Chalo wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

The best headlights seem to be designed to meet German
standards. *By comparison, it seems most headlights sold in the US are
crude. *Especially, optically crude.

Sharp cutoffs and shaped beams make good sense for cars that are
pumping 110W or more into their headlights, but they make much less
sense for a 2W bike light. *In this case, throwing a lot of the
available light into drivers' windshields and mirrors is a very good
idea.

That's *never* a good idea, unless you like sharing the road with blind
motorists.

I've been blinded before by some pretty wimpy headlights (I'm looking at
you, Ford.) *yes, on low beam. *I've also been momentarily blinded by
some cycle lights.

I don't think you fully grasp the implications of having only 2W of
light, spread broadly. *Nobody's going to be blinded by that. *A
tightly focused beam can be much more intense, but is unlikely to be
directed where you want it to be at any given moment.

Chalo

Exactly. I've complained several times that the narrow focus of the IQ
Fly and Cyo lights from BUMM achieve their intensity at the cost of
utility because the beam is too narrow and doesn't have enough spill
to see either the ditch or road signs. But Andreas whatsisface (the
Schmitt dynamo temple dog) came and delivered me a good kicking for
daring to speak the lese majeste of doubting BUMM, and the local BUMM
hangers-on cheered. (No doubt BUMM makes the best dynamo lights, but
that doesn't mean they are either above criticism or incapable of
approvement, and plenty of both).

Furthermore, a bike weaves naturally, especially if the operator has
slowed down because he's preparing to take evasive action. the bike
tilts as it weaves and the corner of that intensely focused light
sweeps through the car. It's only happened in circumstance where my
next action would have been to sweep the my lights (steady Cyo,
battery flasher) through the driver's compartment, but I would be
distressed if it happened involuntarily, say to a driver meeting
meeting on a narrow lane who has already slowed the better to control
his car to leave both of us space.

I must report one advantage though of flat-top lights. As the cyclist
arrives at a corner, the lights thrown on the banks or hedges looks
like car lights, and cars coming from the front slow down right
smartly. But I'd gladly sacrifice some of that intensity, which I
think has now reached a practical limit, for a little more visibility
to the side and on road signs.

Like you, Chalo, I liked those old round lights, among other reasons
for their superb contribution to spatially locating the cyclist.

Andre Jute
Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live -- Mark Twain

On Oct 15, 7:29*am, Chalo wrote:

Drivers are not forced to drive so incautiously that they'll be
suddenly surprised by something in the road that isn't illuminated for
them-- they freely choose to drive that way.

That's an illegal act already. Any road code I've ever read -- and
I've driven in over 160 countries -- started out from the principle
that the driver must drive in such a manner as not to endanger other
road users, for instance no faster than he has visibility to stop
before hitting something or someone.

Drivers must conduct themselves in such a way as to mitigate the risk
they unilaterally impose on others. *If they run into things they
can't see, just because those things were not advertising themselves
with lights, they have proven that they are unable to control their
vehicles and thus should be relieved of the privilege of operating
dangerous machinery.

Hallelujah.

Andre Jute
A little, a very little thought will suffice -- John Maynard Keynes

On Oct 15, 4:48*pm, David Scheidt wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

:more. *I'm convinced - by tests and long experience - that I am more
:noticeable at night than I am in daylight, with my absolutely ordinary
:lighting and reflectors.

You might be convinced, but it's not true.

Franki-boy reminds me of the Swiss motorist on whose tombstone is
engraved the brave encomium:
HE DIED FOR HIS RIGHT OF WAY

Lord love a duck.

Andre Jute
Lit up like a Christmas tree

On Oct 15, 5:15*pm, N8N wrote:

Some people are more sensitive to light/glare after dark, and I know
that I fall on the "more sensitive" side of the spectrum.

Yah, me too. Until recently all my spectacles had photochromatic
lenses but at my last test the very agreeable fellow at the opticians
had a set of RX frames with interchangeable wraparound lenses just
right for a cyclist,
https://shop.b-s.de/shop_html?ansich...&suchtext=8918
and one of the overframes that came with it is orange,
https://shop.b-s.de/shop_html?ansich...&suchtext=8918
which is pretty good at cutting the glare while increasing contrast.
I also got polarizing grey, and plain brown lenses, and am getting
yellow and clear lenses with a second frameset, on which I will report
when suitable conditions offer themselves.

Andre Jute
Find me lounging at Le Caff Poseur 'cos I got street cred

On Oct 15, 7:09*pm, Peter Cole wrote:
On 10/15/2010 1:56 PM, Bob Cooper wrote:

On Oct 15, 1:19 pm, Peter *wrote:

It's a joke, son.

I know. But you still have to tell me what it means or why it's funny.

Did Forester teach an improper method for turning left on a four-lane
boulevard?

Bob "Born during the Truman Administration" Cooper

The techniques are OK, nothing earth shattering, but the "philosophy"
and the "politics" derived from it are nuts.

If you can separate Forester's technique from his philosophy, you're a
better man that I, but apparently you don't want to. The rest of the
stuff is just what you'd get in a typical 50's "ride your bike!"
educational movie. Hardly original.

Gee, Colesy, you have a talent for picking fights with people who
agree with you. Bob listed the lights he uses well up in the thread.
He wasn't advocating what Forrester advocates, he was pointing out
that the man made his recommendation as a political political
statement, with the implication that therefore it is suspect. -- AJ