IQ-X vs Edelux II

On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 6:10:18 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/12/2019 7:30 PM, sms wrote:

I think that to most riders, the key issue is that the light needs to
have the proper optics for the kind of riding that they do, and be of
sufficient brightness for the kind of riding that they do.

That's perfectly reasonable. What's not reasonable are your incessant
claims that lights must be used in all conditions, day or night;

Daylight running lamps has seemed eminently reasonable to Volvo for two generations now. I'm much more inclined to trust Volvo than a jerk called Frank Krygowski who cannot distinguish between his hatred of people and the policies they put forward, whose insensate hatreds drive his every pronunciamento.

that
lights that illuminate the roadway properly while not blinding others
are inadequate.

You must have a very low threshold for "illuminate the roadway properly", Franki-boy. The Cyo, which is the lamp with a shaped beam with universal distribution, is only as "adequate", if you have two of them, as a VW Beetle's lamps -- from the 6V era. Anyone who considers that an "adequate" amount of light on the road is a neanderthal and a moron besides.

And once more we note that you, Frank Krygowski, assume that while bicyclists must use lamps of the same illumination pattern as cars, we are not entitled to have the same number and strength of lamps as drivers. Again and again you're selling us out, Franki-boy, by stupidly losing the argument before it is even started, because your initial assumptions are wrongheaded and hostile to the majority of cyclists, to any but that very small group of cyclists who agree with you.

Oh, and that it's unsafe to ride without a light
specifically designed to spotlight tree branches five feet above the road..

Whyever not? When I'm sitting on my everyday bike, my head rises above a Range Rover. In the dark on the lanes, a low-lying branch can knock you off your bike or poke out an eye. Just because there are apparently no trees where you live, Franki-boy, or perhaps they're manicured with nail clippers, is zero reason to assume that the same conditions apply where everyone else lives. In fact, we've seen your self-centred tunnel vision so often that it makes much more sense automatically to assume precisely the opposite of what you claim. Your street corner isn't the world, sport.

I know that some people disparage having proper bicycle light optics
because they are so invested in dynamo lights which necessarily have to
focus their very limited light output to the patch of road directly in
front of the bicycle.

[That's not quite true, Mayor Scharf. What would be more correct would be to say: "Bicycle dynamos are so limited by German laws, which are ipso facto the determinants of available bicycle lamps in many countries, that the makers of lamps fed by such dynamos must choose a limited, distinct area to light, rather than the graduated light on all the areas of interest to cyclists that would truly be adequate and sufficient." Compare for instance the two versions of the first series Cyo, one of which lit up the far distance, the other lighting up the road nearer to the cyclist, neither with sufficient light to the sides and overhead.)

Back to the foam escaping Franki-boy's mouth

Bull****. My dynamo light illuminates road signs nearly a quarter mile
in front of me.

At the expense of other areas that a decent headlight would illuminate. That's why BUMM has two headlamps in the same line that do different things. There just isn't adequate illumination to light up all the required areas. If you cannot understand something that simple, Franki-boy, perhaps you should pontificate less and try to put your mind in gear more often.

What they apparently don't comprehend is that
these dynamo optics are, necessarily, a big compromise.

My best dynamo headlights produce the same sort of road illumination as
my car's headlights.

Then your car must have truly crap headlamps, even by the grossly inadequate standards of American car lamps. You should try the European standard car lamps; you will instantly see that they are very much superior. That's why so many Mercedes/BMW/Audi owners in the States retrofit the European lamps..

However for those of us that use our bicycles for commuting, as
"transportational cyclists" having good lights with proper optics is an
absolute necessity.

Good lights with proper optics are what I use.
See https://www.peterwhitecycles.com/headlights.php

The BUMMbuddies, like you, Franki-boy, have been referring us to Peter White's often-misleading site of years now as if it is some kind of Gospel. It isn't. Here's White's admission of publishing photographs that misled the gullible, including you Franki-boy, into believing some of his lamps have more output than is truly the case: From Peter White's website, URL given above by Franki-boy as a supposed final word:
"On November 4, 2013, I processed the images on this page to darken them. Previously, I had displayed images that exagerated the brightness of the brighter headlights, and made the dimmer lights darker. This happened because the camera's exposure settings were identical in all the photos, and that results in the brighter lights appearing to be brighter than they actually are, due to differences in how a digital camera records images and the way our human eyes work. So now the images are adjusted to compensate for this."
Doesn't sound any different to me than, say, Michael Mann "adjusting" tree ring data to create his infamous global warming "hockey stick", now widely known as an outright lie that even the IPCC doesn't try to defend any longer. (It's not that I doubt White's good faith, it's just that I've all along known as an uncontested professional fact that the camera lies, regardless of whose hands it is in.)

We need to see a good distance ahead.

Yes. As I said, my B&M Eyc and Cyos illuminate road signs nearly a
quarter mile away.

That must be an amazing BUMM Eyc, a cheap lamp for mass-produced mid-range bicycles. Or maybe Franki-boy has SUPERVISION! -- just like a SuperHERO. What I think is that Franki-boy shouldn't be allowed to express such dumb opinions without adult supervision.

We need to be
able to see street signs and low-hanging tree limbs.

Such a weird fixation on tree limbs! For me, it's not a jungle out there!

Two short sentences tell us why you will never be a "spokesman for bicycles", Franki-boy, as I forecast c10 years ago. You think your witless scorn is an argument; it isn't, it rolls off people with their minds in gear without leaving a mark, and every time leaves a bigger question mark over everything you say. The world is not your street corner, sport.

When I sit on my everyday bike my head rises higher than the roof of a Range Rover. I ride in lanes with many old trees; branches not already swept aside by big four-wheel-drives present a constant danger of being knocked off your bike, or having an eye poked out. It's entirely reasonable to want those branches lit before I hit them. Unlike you, Franki-boy, I assume others have problems both unique to their cycling environment, and in common with mine.

We want to have a
flashing or modulation mode for daytime riding because we believe that
global warming is real, believe that Earth isn't flat, and believe the
studies that show DRLs have a measurable benefit.

You're trolling Franki-boy, Scharfie. Shortly he'll tell us that of course the world is flat, because he cannot distinguish his hatred of you from the facts you present, which causes him reflexively to state the opposite of anything you say. For another data input on DRL, see my remarks about Volvo above.

[SNIPPED several more iterative, pointless Kreepy Krygo sneers at his betters -- the answers are more of the amazement expressed above}

- Frank Krygowski

What a narrow-minded fool this man Krygowski is. Thank the Lord that he's so constantly offensive, which has kept him from realising his dream of becoming "the spokesman for bicycles", Der Fuhrer of Bicycles. Imagine the damage this railroad-mind clown could do to cycling if he were given the slightest authority or encouragement.

Andre Jute
At least not stupid

On 4/13/2019 1:57 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 1:10:18 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/12/2019 7:30 PM, sms wrote:
Snipped
Note that even Frank went out and bought one of Barry
Beam's lights https://www.barrybeams.com/ after realizing that he
needed more than just a dynamo light in order to ride safely at night.

Such a blatant lie!

I bought it to only review it, having been given a discount for that
purpose. I've used it only to test it, on a maximum of four rides. It's
been sitting in a drawer since then. On every night ride since then I've
used my normal LED dynamo lights.

The Oculus light's for sale if someone else wants to try it. I'll
re-post my review if anyone's curious.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Yes, pleas repost that review.

Here you are, from 3/5/17

================================================== ===============

An excessively long Oculus headlight review:

Quick points: Construction seems very solid. Controls for brightness,
flash mode etc. are less than obvious but easily enough to master. The
mount probably needs improvement. The beam shape is better than most
high-powered lights with their circular beams, but not as good as an
StVZO light. It overcooks pavement close to the bike, has less “throw�
down the road than if it had (say) B&M optics, and it still produces
very significant glare, especially on the higher settings. The light is
VERY bright on level 5 (high), bright enough that most cyclists would
never need it - and should probably not use it!

Beam width is very good, lighting 20 feet of road at 60 feet distance.
However, the lateral cutoff is quite sharp. Despite the width, I was
turning into darkness on really sharp, slow turns, like into a narrow
dark driveway. I’d like more side spill.

By contrast, the vertical cutoff is, to my taste, inadequate. Are you
really afraid of low-hanging branches? If so, the Oculus should protect
you. At 60 feet, the beam shoots maybe 15 feet up into the air. Pulling
up to a T intersection with the beam oriented for best road
illumination., the headlight illuminated the 2nd story of a house about
100 feet away. The light does definitely glare at oncoming traffic. On
narrow lanes, motorists flashed their lights and slowed way down to pass me.

I think the Oculus has probably better optics and thus efficiency than
most battery lights of similar power. The main portion of its beam is
well shaped, much better than typical round beams. I can’t imagine many
needing anything brighter. I wish the mount were better, and I’d
prefer even better optics. Details are below.

---------------------------------------------

On the road: The light can be extremely bright. Of five levels, level
2 (default) is probably fine for most city riding on normally lit
streets. I tested mostly at level 3, and I very comfortably exceeded 25
mph at level 4. Level 5 seems useful only for bombing mountain downhill
roads. Shining onto a sunlit wall from a distance of five feet, level 5
illumination is at least as bright as the sun. And on level 5, one can
feel one’s hand getting warm when placed in front of the light.

Unlike the best lights, the optics do not decrease the beam intensity
close to the rider. That means the close portion of the road (10 feet
ahead) is “overcooked,� which I believe harms night vision. By
contrast, the top of the main portion of the beam is not as bright as it
could be. “Throw� down the road is less than it could be with better
optics. In the absence of street lights it lights the road (on level 3
or 4) at least 60 feet away, probably more; but better optics would
allow a smoother field of light and better overall vision with less
glare in others’ eyes.

And yes, this light does glare. On a dark low-traffic residential lane
18 feet wide, I leaned the bike against a mailbox and jogged down the
road to see what it looked like to oncoming drivers. On level 5 the
glare prevented seeing past the light at all.

And circumstances cooperated to confirm that. Just as I got back on the
bike and pedaled forward, two cars turned into this almost traffic-free
street. The slowed and slowed as they approached me, passing at perhaps
5 mph. At the last minute the lead driver flashed his lights at me.
I’m sure he could not see past the glare of the light. Later, on a
similarly narrow (18') residential street with the Oculus on level 3 or
4 (I forget which), another driver flashed his
lights then left them on. (This was just before I turned off that
street.) I feel sure the light irritated him. However, on a busier
four-lane suburban street with more street lights, I left the light on
high, level 5. Despite moderate traffic, nobody flashed their lights at
me. Perhaps the difference was the greater lateral separation allowed
by the four lanes.

All in all, I’d prefer a much more definite cutoff at the horizon. Yes,
any headlight needs some light above horizon, but this has too much,
IMO. I’d love less brightness close to the bike for a more uniform road
illumination. And I’d love to see the excess lumens directed to the
side instead of upward. In other words, I really would prefer a wide
StVZO beam. Having said that, the beam shape is a big improvement over
most high-powered lights, with their circular beams.

------------------------------------------------------

The optics are interesting in their design. There are three LEDs in a
two-above-one pattern. There’s a fresnel lens of vertical elements in
front of the LEDs to spread the beam laterally. At the very front is a
convex lens acting as a projector. But between the fresnel lens and the
projector lens there’s what seems to be a “light tunnel� - a slightly
venturi-shaped white tube of sorts, wrapping the top 270 degrees of the
beam. I suspect this functions to shape the beam to a degree.

Against a vertical wall, the beam pattern looks sort of like the image
of a fedora viewed from forward and above. That is, there’s a rectangle
or ellipse (the brim of the hat) capped with another elliptical lump
(the crown of the hat). On the road, this lights 20 feet of lane width
60 feet down the road. However, there is significant glare above the
horizon.

I tried to understand the optics. In particular, I was curious about
whether the bottom LED (of the two-above-one array) was responsible for
the upward portion of the beam, but I couldn’t be sure. If it were,
switching that LED on and off would give something like the low beam,
high beam arrangement of other vehicle lights.

--------------------------------------------------

Physical: The light is about 6" long, with a roughly elliptical cross
section about 1.5" wide x 1.75" high. The front lens is circular, 1.5"
diameter. The Oculus weighs about 8 ounces, or 210 grams. The plastic
frame of the light is in three separate parts: a clear bottom whose
forward portion surrounds the lens assembly, providing side visibility.
The top-front portion is heat conducting plastic. The large battery
cover is held in place by a small, thick O-ring on the bottom. (18mm
OD, 11mm ID). Unhooking the O-ring allows that cover to slide rearward
and off. I found it difficult to put the O-ring back on. I can imagine
losing it in the dark.

A single control button is molded at the back as part of the clear
plastic part of the frame, flexing on a “living hinge� to operate a
micro pushbutton on the internal circuit board. (The button does
not click.) Next to the button is a charging port for a 5mm DC
connector. It’s covered by a rubber plug labeled “5V� which is tethered
via a thin rubber leash hot-glued to the frame. The light comes with
two batteries, one 26650 (1" x 2.5") with 4500 mAh, the other NCR 18650B
(3/4" x 2.5") with 3400mAh.

--------------------------------------------------

Mounting: The mount is a very sturdy looking clear polycarbonate
“saddle� that sits atop one's handlebar, and the headlight mounts atop
it via a single central screw, allowing the lamp to pivot. A small
O-ring between mount and light provides enough friction to keep the lamp
pointed in the desired direction. The mount is intended to be clamped
by a simple velcro strap.

IMO, the velcro strap is the weakest part of the design. It’s inferior
to the screw-plus-toggle clamp that’s common on lights intended for
handlebar mounting. The polycarbonate “saddle� has no rubber coating
for traction. Instead, the light came with two 1" x 7" strips of
self-fusing silicone tape. The intent is to wrap this around handlebars
for traction, in the absence of handlebar tape. The light can, in
theory, also be mounted on a helmet by turning the “saddle�
sideways and threading the velcro through the helmet slots. I didn’t
try a helmet mount.

The bar mount precludes mounting on our bikes with handlebar bags. When
testing on my city bike with bare upright bars (sort of North Road
style), I had trouble finding a good placement. The first location I
wrapped with the silicone tape didn’t work, so I peeled it off - barely!
You don’t get much opportunity to re-use self-fusing tape! After
that, I switched to wrapping the bar with a strip of old inner tube. It
was adequate, but still not ideal. It was necessary to pull the velcro
as hard as I possibly could to get it tight enough to prevent slip.
(I’m sure the silicone is stickier, but the supply with the light is
limited. It would have to be cut off if you didn’t want
the tape to stay on your handlebar.) I still had to re-tilt the light
several times due to slippage, and I suspect this would be true even
with some smoother types of handlebar tape. Also, on my North Road
bars, I couldn’t find a way to omit side-to-side tilt of the light.
Subsequent tests were done with a mount I custom fabricated.

-------------------------------------------------

There is no owner’s manual yet. Online information is sparse, and
apparently still in development. A 2" x 3.5" card in the box says “ON:
CLICK 3 TIMES FAST. OFF: Press & hold in. Light dims & shuts.� ...and
so forth.

Three quick presses of the single button turns it on, at level 2 of 5.
Subsequent quick presses increase power level. Holding the button
decreases power level. Holding when on lowest power shuts it off.

Two quick presses followed by a long hold turns it on flash mode.
Subsequent clicks change the flash mode. I have no use for flash modes,
so I didn’t test them on the road, but all were marvelously irritating
indoors. The light is user programmable (for example, on/off
instructions, flash patterns and rates, etc.) I didn’t try this.

Charging is easy with the included 5V, 1.2A “wall wart� adapter, and an
LED changes color when charged. Supposedly, an internal LED turning
solid red solid tells you that 1/3 charge remains; Red blink means
“CHANGE QUICKLY.� But I didn’t see that. Instead, the headlight
blinked off then back on occasionally (every 10 seconds) when on high.
I was told this indicates a low battery. I’d greatly prefer some other
indication.

---------------------------------------------

I didn’t run the light long enough to thoroughly drain the battery, but
having two batteries should allow run time for a brevet or all-night
ride. Losing the difficult O-ring would be an annoyance, but not a
disaster; the light would stay closed.

Some aspects are charmingly home-brew. For example, the “+� and “-“
indications on both the batteries and the battery compartment are hand
written in magic marker. There’s a bit of cork jammed in one battery
contact to stiffen it up (and the website has replacement
instructions!). You definitely get the feeling you’re supporting a very
tiny company.

--------------------------------------------------

Will I keep it or not? I’m undecided. Since almost all my bikes have
other lights, most of them very good, I won’t get much use out of the
Oculus. It would probably be used only as a “loaner� and only for
people who were really afraid of riding at night.

Would others like it? If you’re getting sucked into the lumen wars,
or... um, make that: If your personal riding conditions mean you need a
really, really bright light to be “safe� ;-) and/or you’d like to
support a small, innovative American company, you might like this light.

--
- Frank Krygowski

================================================== ===============


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 8:50:17 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Snipped Review
--------------------------------------------------

Will I keep it or not? I’m undecided. Since almost all my bikes have
other lights, most of them very good, I won’t get much use out of the
Oculus. It would probably be used only as a “loaner� and only for
people who were really afraid of riding at night.

Would others like it? If you’re getting sucked into the lumen wars,
or... um, make that: If your personal riding conditions mean you need a
really, really bright light to be “safe� ;-) and/or you’d like to
support a small, innovative American company, you might like this light.

--
- Frank Krygowski

================================================== ===============


--
- Frank Krygowski

Thanks Frank.

Email coming.

Cheers

Am 14.04.2019 um 00:21 schrieb Andre Jute:
On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 6:10:18 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

That's perfectly reasonable. What's not reasonable are your incessant
claims that lights must be used in all conditions, day or night;

Daylight running lamps has seemed eminently reasonable to Volvo for two generations now.

Let's say that Volvo was forced by the Swedish government to provide
Daylight running lights (or do you have evidence that Volvo promoted
daylight running lights before the Swedish government made it mandatory?).

It might have been easier for engineering to sell a feature world-wide
that is mandatory in your home market as long as the additional costs
per unit are low.

On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 1:10:18 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/12/2019 7:30 PM, sms wrote:
Snipped
Note that even Frank went out and bought one of Barry
Beam's lights https://www.barrybeams.com/ after realizing that he
needed more than just a dynamo light in order to ride safely at night.

Such a blatant lie!

I bought it to only review it, having been given a discount for that
purpose. I've used it only to test it, on a maximum of four rides. It's
been sitting in a drawer since then. On every night ride since then I've
used my normal LED dynamo lights.

The Oculus light's for sale if someone else wants to try it. I'll
re-post my review if anyone's curious.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Hey there Frank. I emailed you with the email I have but it seems you might not have received it. Would you email me your email addy? Mine here on this group works.

Thanks and cheers

On 4/15/2019 1:52 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.04.2019 um 00:21 schrieb Andre Jute:
On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 6:10:18 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

That's perfectly reasonable. What's not reasonable are your incessant
claims that lights must be used in all conditions, day or night;

Daylight running lamps has seemed eminently reasonable to Volvo for
two generations now.

Let's say that Volvo was forced by the Swedish government to provide
Daylight running lights (or do you have evidence that Volvo promoted
daylight running lights before the Swedish government made it mandatory?).

It might have been easier for engineering to sell a feature world-wide
that is mandatory in your home market as long as the additional costs
per unit are low.

In the U.S., where DRLs are not mandatory, GM was advocating for making
them mandatory and making a big deal that their vehicles came with them.
Toyota had some years where they had DRLs that could not be turned off,
which was really annoying, and owners had to go to the dealer to have
their vehicle modified, or do it themselves. Doing it yourself enabled
you to add an on/off switch.

Ironically, while DRLs are very effective for cyclists, there are many
reasons why they are an annoyance on cars, especially when they cannot
be turned off.

The biggest issue I see is that drivers with DRL equipped vehicles often
forget to turn on their low beam headlights at night, in rain or fog,
and at dusk or dawn. This is especially dangerous because on most
vehicles the taillights do not come on until the low beams are turned
on--they don't come on with the DRLs and many drivers believe that in
rain or fog the DRLs are sufficient and fail to turn on their low beams
to activate their tail lights.

When it is dark, the lack of dashboard lights is an indicator that the
low beams and tail lights are not on, but in daytime conditions where
the low beams should be used there is no indication that the DRLs, not
the low beams, are on.

Another issue is that when a lot of cars and trucks have their lights on
in the daytime then motorcycles, which are required to have their
headlight on (at least in some states) don't stand out.

On 4/15/2019 7:47 AM, sms wrote:

snip

In the U.S., where DRLs are not mandatory, GM was advocating for making
them mandatory and making a big deal that their vehicles came with them.

snip

Here is the citation regarding GM:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2009-06-29/pdf/E9-15314.pdf
middle column, about a third of the way down.

On 15/04/2019 10:52, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.04.2019 um 00:21 schrieb Andre Jute:
On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 6:10:18 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

That's perfectly reasonable. What's not reasonable are your incessant
claims that lights must be used in all conditions, day or night;

Daylight running lamps has seemed eminently reasonable to Volvo for
two generations now.

Let's say that Volvo was forced by the Swedish government to provide
Daylight running lights (or do you have evidence that Volvo promoted
daylight running lights before the Swedish government made it mandatory?).

It might have been easier for engineering to sell a feature world-wide
that is mandatory in your home market as long as the additional costs
per unit are low.

No! That *can't* be the answer. Think of the [Andres] *children*

On Monday, April 15, 2019 at 9:52:39 AM UTC+1, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 14.04.2019 um 00:21 schrieb Andre Jute:
On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 6:10:18 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

That's perfectly reasonable. What's not reasonable are your incessant
claims that lights must be used in all conditions, day or night;

Daylight running lamps has seemed eminently reasonable to Volvo for two generations now.

Let's say that Volvo was forced by the Swedish government to provide
Daylight running lights (or do you have evidence that Volvo promoted
daylight running lights before the Swedish government made it mandatory?)..

I'm afraid I don't know the sequence here, and I can't now for the life of me remember whether the Volvo 444 and 522 which were quite common when I was a boy had DRL. I bought only one Volvo, the big bumper estate car, when my child was born, for his and his mother's safety -- it turned out to be a perfectly acceptable car once I positively relocated the rear axle and fitted 5.7 litres of Chevrolet V8, perhaps not sophisticated but solid as a rock and very restful for crossing France, from Cambridge in England to Juan les Pins on the Med overnight, the only way to travel with a baby. What I really hated about that car was the nanny-voice hectoring you to demand that you belt up; eventually I traced the wiring and ripped out the nanny's throat.

It might have been easier for engineering to sell a feature world-wide
that is mandatory in your home market as long as the additional costs
per unit are low.

Valid point.

Andre Jute
Brrr. Bring back Global Warming!

On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 07:47:53 -0700, sms
wrote:

Ironically, while DRLs are very effective for cyclists

Is there citable evidence for this assertion?