Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 12:50:27 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/11/2018 3:56 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 at 7:55:43 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-02-10 18:25, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:25:57 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/10/2018 4:03 PM, Joerg wrote:

Everyone installing a high-powered LED light on a bicycle, front or
rear, should walk towards their lit bike during daylight and then again
at night. If the light is annoying, do something about it.

I agree with this.

But I'd add, before buying high powered LED lights, check out any more
ordinary lights you have in a similar way. Have a friend ride your bike
as you observe. I've done this many times with friends.

Contrary to current myths, you do not need super-powerful lights to be
plenty visible. Any headlight that shows the road sufficiently will be
perfectly visible to motorists, and taillights need far, far less power
to make you safe.


I had plenty of opportunity to compare StVZO tail lights versus the over
there "illegal" lights such as PDW DangerZone or Radbot. HUGE difference
in visibility. This was as a motorist in Germany. Since I am also a
cyclist I paid particular attention to bicycle equipment because I
wanted to know. I also wanted to see if the purchase of some lights from
there would make sense since those wouldn't need electronics up front to
connect to the 8.4VDC power bus on my bicycles. My conclusion was that
it does not.

Where is "there"? Are you saying that the PDW light was no good and you need a 8.4VDC tail light?

At night, a watt or two is very conspicuous -- except in heavy rainstorms. The most conspicuous light I've every seen was this: https://tinyurl.com/yb5z9ep5 (minus the "beacon lights"). A woman with that jacket was riding east-west, and I was at a stop on a north-south street, and when my light hit her, I was practically blinded -- and it was only a 5-600 lumen light.

My wife doesn't ride a night nearly as often as I do. She's most likely
to do it when we're on vacations somewhere, as transportation to and
from a B&B or something similar.

But her "normal" (not just cycling) lightweight jacket is by Illuminite.
It seems to reflect light very well - not that I consider that
necessary. Our bikes have lights and reflectors that are perfectly fine.


--
- Frank Krygowski

I more than once said to runners and joggers that I, as a cyclist, rather have that they wear a reflective jacket then running around like a christmas tree.

Lou

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:33:47 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/11/2018 10:55 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-02-10 18:25, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:25:57 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/10/2018 4:03 PM, Joerg wrote:

Everyone installing a high-powered LED light on a bicycle, front or
rear, should walk towards their lit bike during daylight and then again
at night. If the light is annoying, do something about it.

I agree with this.

But I'd add, before buying high powered LED lights, check out any more
ordinary lights you have in a similar way. Have a friend ride your bike
as you observe. I've done this many times with friends.

Contrary to current myths, you do not need super-powerful lights to be
plenty visible. Any headlight that shows the road sufficiently will be
perfectly visible to motorists, and taillights need far, far less power
to make you safe.


I had plenty of opportunity to compare StVZO tail lights versus the over
there "illegal" lights such as PDW DangerZone or Radbot. HUGE difference
in visibility.
Joerg, I don't think anyone disagrees that super-bright, non-compliant,
glaring lights make you more visible. Using an aircraft landing light
would make you more visible. Using an emergency vehicle light bar
http://www.fleetsafety.com/federal-s...led-light-bar/
would make you more visible.

What many people are arguing is that your extremes are not necessary and
not even appropriate. They are detrimental to other road users,
including other cyclists, and their promotion constitutes more fear
mongering. You're being no smarter than the asses who always drive their
jacked-up pickups with high beams, light bars and fog lights glaring.
It's MFFY behavior.

A bicyclist does NOT need headlights as bright as those on a 75 mph car,
just as he does not need 10 gauge spokes, motorcycle-strength chains,
solid flat-proof tires or all the other extreme equipment you call for.


- Frank Krygowski

In the morning I see 20 or 25 bicycles in my "hood" every day and to
date I've yet to see a light turned on although nearly all of them
have a dynamo and head light mounted on the front wheel, and even with
the fleets of motorcycle taxi's and the kids going to school and all
the folks buying their daily provisions I've yet to see a bicycle
collide with anything.

How can this be" No lights and no collisions?
--
Cheers,

John B.

wrote:
On February 12, 2018 at 12:50:27 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/11/2018 3:56 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 at 7:55:43 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:25:57 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Contrary to current myths, you do not need super-powerful lights to be
plenty visible. Any headlight that shows the road sufficiently will be
perfectly visible to motorists, and taillights need far, far less power
to make you safe.


I had plenty of opportunity to compare StVZO tail lights versus the over
there "illegal" lights such as PDW DangerZone or Radbot. HUGE difference
in visibility. This was as a motorist in Germany. Since I am also a
cyclist I paid particular attention to bicycle equipment because I
wanted to know. I also wanted to see if the purchase of some lights from
there would make sense since those wouldn't need electronics up front to
connect to the 8.4VDC power bus on my bicycles. My conclusion was that
it does not.

Where is "there"? Are you saying that the PDW light was no good and you need a 8.4VDC tail light?

No, Joerg is claiming that ordinary StVZO tail lights that are visible from
500 meters in Europe are not good enough for his and fellow Californians'
impaired sense of vision, and why he feels tail lights that feature 5000 ft+
visibility are preferable. And he is trying to confuse what can actually be
powered by dynamo with what he "remembers" seeing, back then, on inspecified
cycles in traffic.

My wife doesn't ride a night nearly as often as I do. She's most likely
to do it when we're on vacations somewhere, as transportation to and
from a B&B or something similar.

But her "normal" (not just cycling) lightweight jacket is by Illuminite.
It seems to reflect light very well - not that I consider that
necessary. Our bikes have lights and reflectors that are perfectly fine.

Perfect. No, wait ... how come you suddenly forgot about risk compensation?
Make her wear a dark burka so she doesn't fall victim to reflector
overconfidence!

I more than once said to runners and joggers that I, as a cyclist, rather
have that they wear a reflective jacket than running around like a
christmas tree.

That's not sound advice because the ankle and knee area is what would first
be lit by low-beam traffic. So, next time, fat-shame joggers by telling
them those dark leggings don't work!

(And you should appreciate to still encounter some christmas tree joggers,
not just diversity-black colored trash bags.)

On 2/12/2018 5:00 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote:

No, Joerg is claiming that ordinary StVZO tail lights that are visible from
500 meters in Europe are not good enough for his and fellow Californians'
impaired sense of vision, and why he feels tail lights that feature 5000 ft+
visibility are preferable. And he is trying to confuse what can actually be
powered by dynamo with what he "remembers" seeing, back then, on inspecified
cycles in traffic.

The StVZO lights are woefully inadequate. Don't forget that you need one
that is visible in the daytime as well. You don't need a 1500 lumen tail
light, but many are ridiculously weak, 10 lumens, or even less.

One that looks reasonable is
https://www.lezyne.com/product-led-sport-laserdrive.php with flash
modes up to 250 lumens for daytime flash mode. But I don't see a way to
mount it to a rear rack.

On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 5:25:55 AM UTC-8, sms wrote:
On 2/12/2018 5:00 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote:

No, Joerg is claiming that ordinary StVZO tail lights that are visible from
500 meters in Europe are not good enough for his and fellow Californians'
impaired sense of vision, and why he feels tail lights that feature 5000 ft+
visibility are preferable. And he is trying to confuse what can actually be
powered by dynamo with what he "remembers" seeing, back then, on inspecified
cycles in traffic.

The StVZO lights are woefully inadequate. Don't forget that you need one
that is visible in the daytime as well. You don't need a 1500 lumen tail
light, but many are ridiculously weak, 10 lumens, or even less.

I don't know if I've seen a StVZO tail light, but I've see a lot that are invisible either by design or because of dying batteries and a lot that are too bright to ride behind at night. Most fall somewhere in between and are plentiful -- from PDW, Lesyne, L&M, etc. The chronically nervous sometimes have two or three tail lights, which is kind of humorous -- unless they're blinding. Again, in sunshine, I always see the jersey first. I ride up behind someone and notice the tail light when I'm five feet away. It's like a fashion accessory.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2018-02-11 12:56, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 at 7:55:43 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-02-10 18:25, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:25:57 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/10/2018 4:03 PM, Joerg wrote:

Everyone installing a high-powered LED light on a bicycle,
front or rear, should walk towards their lit bike during
daylight and then again at night. If the light is annoying,
do something about it.

I agree with this.

But I'd add, before buying high powered LED lights, check out
any more ordinary lights you have in a similar way. Have a
friend ride your bike as you observe. I've done this many times
with friends.

Contrary to current myths, you do not need super-powerful
lights to be plenty visible. Any headlight that shows the road
sufficiently will be perfectly visible to motorists, and
taillights need far, far less power to make you safe.


I had plenty of opportunity to compare StVZO tail lights versus the
over there "illegal" lights such as PDW DangerZone or Radbot. HUGE
difference in visibility. This was as a motorist in Germany. Since
I am also a cyclist I paid particular attention to bicycle
equipment because I wanted to know. I also wanted to see if the
purchase of some lights from there would make sense since those
wouldn't need electronics up front to connect to the 8.4VDC power
bus on my bicycles. My conclusion was that it does not.

Where is "there"?


Europe, in this case Germany. In the old days when I lived there I
preferred rear lights from the Netherlands though, more sturdy and
better lenses.


... Are you saying that the PDW light was no good and
you need a 8.4VDC tail light?


I returned the PDW light because of IMO shoddy quality. The LED was way
off center for the optics path of the lens and they wrote to me that
this is "normal". No kidding! The Chinese ones don't have that problem.

I don't need an 8.4V rear light but it has a major advantage: No
batteries that can run out. Especially since the design engineers of
most battery-operated rear lights weren't smart enough to include at
least a crude low-batt warning. 1-2-3 flashes at turn on or whatever, it
would be so simple.


At night, a watt or two is very conspicuous -- except in heavy
rainstorms.


1-2W in the rear with modern LEDs is definitely enough. Not in front
though if you want to see enough road for a fast night ride.


The most conspicuous light I've every seen was this:
https://tinyurl.com/yb5z9ep5 (minus the "beacon lights"). A woman
with that jacket was riding east-west, and I was at a stop on a
north-south street, and when my light hit her, I was practically
blinded -- and it was only a 5-600 lumen light.


I was not planning on spending $325 for a "tail light".


If you are really concerned about being seen, you should use high-viz
and reflectors, but I know that interferes with your super-gnarly
cotton outfits. During the day, I always see the high-viz before the
lights.


It interferes with my not wanting to sweat profusely. I ride in thin
cotton T-shirts even down to almost freezing. Else I sweat badly during
the first climb.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 8:25:55 AM UTC-5, sms wrote:
On 2/12/2018 5:00 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote:

No, Joerg is claiming that ordinary StVZO tail lights that are visible from
500 meters in Europe are not good enough for his and fellow Californians'
impaired sense of vision, and why he feels tail lights that feature 5000 ft+
visibility are preferable. And he is trying to confuse what can actually be
powered by dynamo with what he "remembers" seeing, back then, on inspecified
cycles in traffic.

The StVZO lights are woefully inadequate. Don't forget that you need one
that is visible in the daytime as well.

You need a daytime taillight exactly as much as you need a tall flippy flag.
In fact, the flippy flag is more visible under many circumstances.

Here you go:
http://www.parkerflags.com/Bicycle-Flags-Prodlist.html

You can't be too safe!

- Frank Krygowski

On 2018-02-12 00:13, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:33:47 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/11/2018 10:55 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-02-10 18:25, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:25:57 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/10/2018 4:03 PM, Joerg wrote:

Everyone installing a high-powered LED light on a bicycle, front or
rear, should walk towards their lit bike during daylight and then again
at night. If the light is annoying, do something about it.

I agree with this.

But I'd add, before buying high powered LED lights, check out any more
ordinary lights you have in a similar way. Have a friend ride your bike
as you observe. I've done this many times with friends.

Contrary to current myths, you do not need super-powerful lights to be
plenty visible. Any headlight that shows the road sufficiently will be
perfectly visible to motorists, and taillights need far, far less power
to make you safe.


I had plenty of opportunity to compare StVZO tail lights versus the over
there "illegal" lights such as PDW DangerZone or Radbot. HUGE difference
in visibility.
Joerg, I don't think anyone disagrees that super-bright, non-compliant,
glaring lights make you more visible. Using an aircraft landing light
would make you more visible. Using an emergency vehicle light bar
http://www.fleetsafety.com/federal-s...led-light-bar/
would make you more visible.

What many people are arguing is that your extremes are not necessary and
not even appropriate. They are detrimental to other road users,
including other cyclists, and their promotion constitutes more fear
mongering. You're being no smarter than the asses who always drive their
jacked-up pickups with high beams, light bars and fog lights glaring.
It's MFFY behavior.

A bicyclist does NOT need headlights as bright as those on a 75 mph car,
just as he does not need 10 gauge spokes, motorcycle-strength chains,
solid flat-proof tires or all the other extreme equipment you call for.


- Frank Krygowski

In the morning I see 20 or 25 bicycles in my "hood" every day and to
date I've yet to see a light turned on although nearly all of them
have a dynamo and head light mounted on the front wheel, and even with
the fleets of motorcycle taxi's and the kids going to school and all
the folks buying their daily provisions I've yet to see a bicycle
collide with anything.

How can this be" No lights and no collisions?


Can be summed up in one expression: Safety in numbers.

We don't have that in most of America. People are more lazy and
human-powered propelling is frowned upon as too stressful and too lowly.
So hardly anyone does it and car drivers do not anticipate a cyclist.
Most towns have mode shares between 0% and 1%. Classic example
yesterday. A driver in a parking lot pulled out, me full brakes, she was
sorry, nothing happened. She had clearly seen me because 8W into an LED
can't be missed. She probably just didn't know that cyclists can be a
lot faster in their approach than a pedestrian.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2/12/2018 7:20 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 5:25:55 AM UTC-8, sms wrote:
On 2/12/2018 5:00 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote:

No, Joerg is claiming that ordinary StVZO tail lights that are visible from
500 meters in Europe are not good enough for his and fellow Californians'
impaired sense of vision, and why he feels tail lights that feature 5000 ft+
visibility are preferable. And he is trying to confuse what can actually be
powered by dynamo with what he "remembers" seeing, back then, on inspecified
cycles in traffic.

The StVZO lights are woefully inadequate. Don't forget that you need one
that is visible in the daytime as well. You don't need a 1500 lumen tail
light, but many are ridiculously weak, 10 lumens, or even less.

I don't know if I've seen a StVZO tail light, but I've see a lot that are invisible either by design or because of dying batteries and a lot that are too bright to ride behind at night. Most fall somewhere in between and are plentiful -- from PDW, Lesyne, L&M, etc. The chronically nervous sometimes have two or three tail lights, which is kind of humorous -- unless they're blinding. Again, in sunshine, I always see the jersey first. I ride up behind someone and notice the tail light when I'm five feet away. It's like a fashion accessory.

"Seeing the jersey first" is great if you're riding with recreational
riders all wearing yellow or orange fluorescent jerseys. For
transportational cycling, which there's a lot of in my area, the riders
aren't typically wearing highly visible clothes like that.

The key to getting more people out on bicycles is to promote equipment
that allows them to ride to work or school in normal clothes, and
provide routes that make the ride practical.

If you've been to Palo Alto, the cross-town bicycle boulevard is
probably about the most usable infrastructure I've seen, and there is no
bicycle lane. It continues through Mountain View. We are working on a
bicycle boulevard system for Cupertino, and in the last election, the
two winners were both in favor of this, while the other three serious
candidates had no interest in bicycle infrastructure at all.

I have been trying to get a bicycle light giveaway going, even though
most riders could afford lights they don't get them. Especially bad is
students riding to school in the early morning when it's dark.

On 2018-02-11 10:15, sms wrote:
On 2/11/2018 10:02 AM, Joerg wrote:

That is how I used dynamos in the past and would like to do that
again. However, in the US it is hard to find a reasonably priced
complete front wheel with a hub dynamo and I don't want to spoke up my
own. So it'll have to be a bottle dynamo (rollers went the way of the
dinosuars) and then I'd like to try Frank's mode with an O-ring and
run it on the brake surface nstead of the tire.

If we were ever to move to dynamos in the U.S. it would require that
bicycle manufacturers have their dealers offer a dynamo wheel upgrade
and light on new bikes at a reasonable price. Spending $200 on a new
wheel and another $200 on a decent dynamo light is just not going to
happen for almost anyone. Yet the extra cost to a bicycle manufacturer
would be small, $50 max for a higher-end SP or Shimano dynamo plus a 200
lumen headlight and a tail light. The shop could mark it up to $100.


You are right, it's not going to happen in the US. Mostly because the
majority of riders sees their bikes as fitness training devices and not
as transportation for use at any time of the day or night.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/