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

IQ-X vs Edelux II



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 8th 19, 09:01 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.


snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.

"Many years ago" if you wanted decent lighting you were stuck with
building your own bicycle lights, generally with MR11 or MR16 lamps, or
buying some low-volume, very expensive, lights, often HID. That all
changed when there were LEDs with sufficient output to be usable as
bicycle lights, and with Chinese manufacturers getting their act
together in terms of quality of design and manufacturing.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.
Ads
  #12  
Old April 8th 19, 03:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On 4/8/2019 4:01 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.


snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.


The "Danger! Danger!" Safety Inflation contingent defines "most
effective in terms of illumination and safety" to be something like
this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RU...ature=youtu.be
Their standard is simple: As long as something brighter exists, nothing
else is safe enough.

"sms" AKA Scharf seems to fantasize that the German government enacted
design requirements in an effort to kill cyclists. But instead, the
StVZO requirements are intended to give cyclists adequate visibility and
road illumination without blinding others. Of course, those with either
"Danger! Danger!" paranoia or MFFY attitudes don't care about that.

Also, notice the very obvious "hot spot" directly in front of that
cyclist at about 0.33 in that video. That's what you get with headlights
with kindergarten optics, which means pretty much anything not
qualifying for StVZO. The hot spot tends to blind the cyclist using the
light. Your eyes adjust for the intense brightness of that spot, thus
are stopped down too far to see into the relatively darker areas beyond.

Properly designed road vehicle optics are very similar for bicycles,
cars, trucks or motorcycles. The portion of the beam pointing downward
should be dimmer since it illuminates the road very close to the
operator and has less distance to travel. Portions of the beam pointed
further forward should gradually increase in brightness, and the portion
pointing furthest down the road should be brightest. Above that should
be a cutoff, sending enough light to be seen by, but not so much as to
glare in others' eyes. The result of this is very uniform road
illumination, easiest on the eyes and best for showing road obstacles.

And ANY headlight beam that adequately illuminates the road is EASILY
visible to other road users. "I gotta blind people to be seen" is just
stupid.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


The main root cause for Cyo lacking a modulated mode is that only one
nutty California politician thinks it needs one.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #13  
Old April 8th 19, 04:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 7:48:24 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/8/2019 4:01 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.


snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.


The "Danger! Danger!" Safety Inflation contingent defines "most
effective in terms of illumination and safety" to be something like
this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RU...ature=youtu.be
Their standard is simple: As long as something brighter exists, nothing
else is safe enough.

"sms" AKA Scharf seems to fantasize that the German government enacted
design requirements in an effort to kill cyclists. But instead, the
StVZO requirements are intended to give cyclists adequate visibility and
road illumination without blinding others. Of course, those with either
"Danger! Danger!" paranoia or MFFY attitudes don't care about that.

Also, notice the very obvious "hot spot" directly in front of that
cyclist at about 0.33 in that video. That's what you get with headlights
with kindergarten optics, which means pretty much anything not
qualifying for StVZO. The hot spot tends to blind the cyclist using the
light. Your eyes adjust for the intense brightness of that spot, thus
are stopped down too far to see into the relatively darker areas beyond.

Properly designed road vehicle optics are very similar for bicycles,
cars, trucks or motorcycles. The portion of the beam pointing downward
should be dimmer since it illuminates the road very close to the
operator and has less distance to travel. Portions of the beam pointed
further forward should gradually increase in brightness, and the portion
pointing furthest down the road should be brightest. Above that should
be a cutoff, sending enough light to be seen by, but not so much as to
glare in others' eyes. The result of this is very uniform road
illumination, easiest on the eyes and best for showing road obstacles.

And ANY headlight beam that adequately illuminates the road is EASILY
visible to other road users. "I gotta blind people to be seen" is just
stupid.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


The main root cause for Cyo lacking a modulated mode is that only one
nutty California politician thinks it needs one.


It's not nutty at all. Cars have high beams which, of course, do not have cut-off. Hard beam cut off is a bad thing in undulating terrain with no ambient light sources, and reaching down to tilt up your StVZO light and tilt it down doesn't make a lot of sense. There are a lot of places I would like a high beam and a lot of places where high beams should be outlawed, just like for motorists on the road. Moreover, a low lumen flasher is also a good idea for differentiating bicycles from other light sources, particularly in an urban environment with lots of light sources. Flashers certainly aren't for illumination, although some people seem to think so. I use my little Nashbar flasher for overcast and rain, like this morning.

-- Jay Beattie.
  #14  
Old April 8th 19, 06:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On 4/8/2019 11:55 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 7:48:24 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/8/2019 4:01 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.

snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.


The "Danger! Danger!" Safety Inflation contingent defines "most
effective in terms of illumination and safety" to be something like
this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RU...ature=youtu.be
Their standard is simple: As long as something brighter exists, nothing
else is safe enough.

"sms" AKA Scharf seems to fantasize that the German government enacted
design requirements in an effort to kill cyclists. But instead, the
StVZO requirements are intended to give cyclists adequate visibility and
road illumination without blinding others. Of course, those with either
"Danger! Danger!" paranoia or MFFY attitudes don't care about that.

Also, notice the very obvious "hot spot" directly in front of that
cyclist at about 0.33 in that video. That's what you get with headlights
with kindergarten optics, which means pretty much anything not
qualifying for StVZO. The hot spot tends to blind the cyclist using the
light. Your eyes adjust for the intense brightness of that spot, thus
are stopped down too far to see into the relatively darker areas beyond.

Properly designed road vehicle optics are very similar for bicycles,
cars, trucks or motorcycles. The portion of the beam pointing downward
should be dimmer since it illuminates the road very close to the
operator and has less distance to travel. Portions of the beam pointed
further forward should gradually increase in brightness, and the portion
pointing furthest down the road should be brightest. Above that should
be a cutoff, sending enough light to be seen by, but not so much as to
glare in others' eyes. The result of this is very uniform road
illumination, easiest on the eyes and best for showing road obstacles.

And ANY headlight beam that adequately illuminates the road is EASILY
visible to other road users. "I gotta blind people to be seen" is just
stupid.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


The main root cause for Cyo lacking a modulated mode is that only one
nutty California politician thinks it needs one.


It's not nutty at all. Cars have high beams which, of course, do not have cut-off. Hard beam cut off is a bad thing in undulating terrain with no ambient light sources, and reaching down to tilt up your StVZO light and tilt it down doesn't make a lot of sense. There are a lot of places I would like a high beam and a lot of places where high beams should be outlawed, just like for motorists on the road. Moreover, a low lumen flasher is also a good idea for differentiating bicycles from other light sources, particularly in an urban environment with lots of light sources. Flashers certainly aren't for illumination, although some people seem to think so. I use my little Nashbar flasher for overcast and rain, like this morning.


Parse the sentence again, please. The adjective "nutty" applied to one
California politician. I stand by that evaluation.

Regarding the rest: I don't doubt that there are a few - very few -
situations where a road bicyclist could really use a beam with no
cutoff. But in my experience, those are few enough that I deal with them
by tilting the light manually. It's rare and no big deal. As LEDs get
even better, and _if_ people wake up to the problems that you've noted
with blinding lights, perhaps bike lights will someday have low beams
and high beams. But personally, I think that would be exactly as useful
as bike turn signals with auto-cancellation.

As for differentiating between a bicycle and some other road vehicle:
With my headlight, I don't see any particular value. Why would a night
cyclist want to signal to oncoming traffic that he's "just" a bicycle?
So they would be more likely to cut across your path? As I've said, I
have nighttime motorists ahead of me waiting overly long times for me to
pass. I have no problem with that behavior.

And actually, I think by far the strongest visual characteristic of most
nighttime cyclists is the image of pedal reflectors - not that it
matters much. IME if a bicyclist rides prominently in the lane, he is
plenty visible, with the only daytime exceptions being dense fog or
absolutely pouring rain. If a cyclist uses legal lights at night, he is
plenty visible.

Front flashers, especially in daytime, are just part of the leading edge
of bicycling safety inflation. Only "hi-viz" vests are more extreme.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #15  
Old April 8th 19, 07:04 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Roger Merriman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.


snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.

"Many years ago" if you wanted decent lighting you were stuck with
building your own bicycle lights, generally with MR11 or MR16 lamps, or
buying some low-volume, very expensive, lights, often HID. That all
changed when there were LEDs with sufficient output to be usable as
bicycle lights, and with Chinese manufacturers getting their act
together in terms of quality of design and manufacturing.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


Apparently not, https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/stvzo-lights
though apparently the full beam is for off road only.

Though I have a Strada from the same lot, which though not, StVZO doing the
walking around the bike in the night, at low/dip is friendly, and is good
enough to be seen, and also as it’s not too dark see by. Full chat is not
friendly but very good to see by, only reaches its limit off road.

Roger Merriman

  #16  
Old April 8th 19, 09:38 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 11:04:44 AM UTC-7, Roger Merriman wrote:
sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.


snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.

"Many years ago" if you wanted decent lighting you were stuck with
building your own bicycle lights, generally with MR11 or MR16 lamps, or
buying some low-volume, very expensive, lights, often HID. That all
changed when there were LEDs with sufficient output to be usable as
bicycle lights, and with Chinese manufacturers getting their act
together in terms of quality of design and manufacturing.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


Apparently not, https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/stvzo-lights
though apparently the full beam is for off road only.

Though I have a Strada from the same lot, which though not, StVZO doing the
walking around the bike in the night, at low/dip is friendly, and is good
enough to be seen, and also as it’s not too dark see by. Full chat is not
friendly but very good to see by, only reaches its limit off road.

Roger Merriman


Ay Chihuahua! 300 GBP! https://exposurelights.com/products/...ghts/strada-sb Their dyno light is not cheap either, but it does have a nice stand light. No high/low/flasher, etc. Seems like pretty straightforward dyno-tech.

-- Jay Beattie.




  #17  
Old April 8th 19, 11:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,153
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On 9/4/19 1:55 am, jbeattie wrote:


It's not nutty at all. Cars have high beams which, of course, do not
have cut-off. Hard beam cut off is a bad thing in undulating terrain
with no ambient light sources, and reaching down to tilt up your
StVZO light and tilt it down doesn't make a lot of sense. There are
a lot of places I would like a high beam and a lot of places where
high beams should be outlawed, just like for motorists on the road.


Yes, there are times a high beam light would be handy, though not
perhaps essential. I can drive my car at night on unlit roads without
using high beam lights. I just drive slower. Sometimes I have to dip
my high beam lights on approach to corners and such where there are
highly reflective signs. I find the reflected light dazzles me.

--
JS

  #18  
Old April 8th 19, 11:38 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:48:20 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/8/2019 4:01 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.


snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.


The "Danger! Danger!" Safety Inflation contingent defines "most
effective in terms of illumination and safety" to be something like
this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RU...ature=youtu.be
Their standard is simple: As long as something brighter exists, nothing
else is safe enough.

"sms" AKA Scharf seems to fantasize that the German government enacted
design requirements in an effort to kill cyclists. But instead, the
StVZO requirements are intended to give cyclists adequate visibility and
road illumination without blinding others. Of course, those with either
"Danger! Danger!" paranoia or MFFY attitudes don't care about that.

Also, notice the very obvious "hot spot" directly in front of that
cyclist at about 0.33 in that video. That's what you get with headlights
with kindergarten optics, which means pretty much anything not
qualifying for StVZO. The hot spot tends to blind the cyclist using the
light. Your eyes adjust for the intense brightness of that spot, thus
are stopped down too far to see into the relatively darker areas beyond.

Properly designed road vehicle optics are very similar for bicycles,
cars, trucks or motorcycles. The portion of the beam pointing downward
should be dimmer since it illuminates the road very close to the
operator and has less distance to travel. Portions of the beam pointed
further forward should gradually increase in brightness, and the portion
pointing furthest down the road should be brightest. Above that should
be a cutoff, sending enough light to be seen by, but not so much as to
glare in others' eyes. The result of this is very uniform road
illumination, easiest on the eyes and best for showing road obstacles.

And ANY headlight beam that adequately illuminates the road is EASILY
visible to other road users. "I gotta blind people to be seen" is just
stupid.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


The main root cause for Cyo lacking a modulated mode is that only one
nutty California politician thinks it needs one.


Given that high/low beam lights have been installed on Autos since
1915 - some hundred plus years ago - the design can no longer be
considered "rocket science". It seems illogical, at best, to believe
that they couldn't be installed on bicycles and one can only assume
that the failure to do so and the resultant complaints of "blinding
lights" on bicycles is simply a matter of sloth on the part of light
makers or ignorance on the part of politicians for not demanding such
minimal design specifications for legal bicycle lighting.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #19  
Old April 8th 19, 11:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 13:28:22 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/8/2019 11:55 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 7:48:24 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/8/2019 4:01 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.

snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.

The "Danger! Danger!" Safety Inflation contingent defines "most
effective in terms of illumination and safety" to be something like
this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RU...ature=youtu.be
Their standard is simple: As long as something brighter exists, nothing
else is safe enough.

"sms" AKA Scharf seems to fantasize that the German government enacted
design requirements in an effort to kill cyclists. But instead, the
StVZO requirements are intended to give cyclists adequate visibility and
road illumination without blinding others. Of course, those with either
"Danger! Danger!" paranoia or MFFY attitudes don't care about that.

Also, notice the very obvious "hot spot" directly in front of that
cyclist at about 0.33 in that video. That's what you get with headlights
with kindergarten optics, which means pretty much anything not
qualifying for StVZO. The hot spot tends to blind the cyclist using the
light. Your eyes adjust for the intense brightness of that spot, thus
are stopped down too far to see into the relatively darker areas beyond.

Properly designed road vehicle optics are very similar for bicycles,
cars, trucks or motorcycles. The portion of the beam pointing downward
should be dimmer since it illuminates the road very close to the
operator and has less distance to travel. Portions of the beam pointed
further forward should gradually increase in brightness, and the portion
pointing furthest down the road should be brightest. Above that should
be a cutoff, sending enough light to be seen by, but not so much as to
glare in others' eyes. The result of this is very uniform road
illumination, easiest on the eyes and best for showing road obstacles.

And ANY headlight beam that adequately illuminates the road is EASILY
visible to other road users. "I gotta blind people to be seen" is just
stupid.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.

The main root cause for Cyo lacking a modulated mode is that only one
nutty California politician thinks it needs one.


It's not nutty at all. Cars have high beams which, of course, do not have cut-off. Hard beam cut off is a bad thing in undulating terrain with no ambient light sources, and reaching down to tilt up your StVZO light and tilt it down doesn't make a lot of sense. There are a lot of places I would like a high beam and a lot of places where high beams should be outlawed, just like for motorists on the road. Moreover, a low lumen flasher is also a good idea for differentiating bicycles from other light sources, particularly in an urban environment with lots of light sources. Flashers certainly aren't for illumination, although some people seem to think so. I use my little Nashbar flasher for overcast and rain, like this morning.


Parse the sentence again, please. The adjective "nutty" applied to one
California politician. I stand by that evaluation.

Regarding the rest: I don't doubt that there are a few - very few -
situations where a road bicyclist could really use a beam with no
cutoff. But in my experience, those are few enough that I deal with them
by tilting the light manually. It's rare and no big deal. As LEDs get
even better, and _if_ people wake up to the problems that you've noted
with blinding lights, perhaps bike lights will someday have low beams
and high beams. But personally, I think that would be exactly as useful
as bike turn signals with auto-cancellation.

As for differentiating between a bicycle and some other road vehicle:
With my headlight, I don't see any particular value. Why would a night
cyclist want to signal to oncoming traffic that he's "just" a bicycle?
So they would be more likely to cut across your path? As I've said, I
have nighttime motorists ahead of me waiting overly long times for me to
pass. I have no problem with that behavior.

And actually, I think by far the strongest visual characteristic of most
nighttime cyclists is the image of pedal reflectors - not that it
matters much. IME if a bicyclist rides prominently in the lane, he is
plenty visible, with the only daytime exceptions being dense fog or
absolutely pouring rain. If a cyclist uses legal lights at night, he is
plenty visible.

Front flashers, especially in daytime, are just part of the leading edge
of bicycling safety inflation. Only "hi-viz" vests are more extreme.



Why in the world shouldn't bicycle lights have a high and low beam?
After all mankind has quite obviously known to engineer such a complex
devise for a hundred years or more and my 1948 Royal Enfield 350cc
motorcycle certainly had high-low beam lights. Why not bicycles?

I suppose it is because bicycles are intended to be light in weight
and simple in operation but after all, a high-low beam light is only
as complex as a simple two position thumb operated switch. Certainly
lighter and not as complex as hydraulic brakes.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #20  
Old April 9th 19, 12:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Roger Merriman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default IQ-X vs Edelux II

jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 11:04:44 AM UTC-7, Roger Merriman wrote:
sms wrote:
On 4/7/2019 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:

snip

In my opinion, the Cyo is the first barely* adequate bicycle lamp by
any manufacturer with universal distribution. Leaving aside the matter
of the top cutoff, the Cyo is still inferior the MR11 and MR16 lamps I
built to Scharfie's plans (a public service to cyclists) lo! these
many years ago.

snip

Remember that the Cyo was designed to be StVZO legal, it wasn't designed
to be the most effective in terms of illumination and safety.

"Many years ago" if you wanted decent lighting you were stuck with
building your own bicycle lights, generally with MR11 or MR16 lamps, or
buying some low-volume, very expensive, lights, often HID. That all
changed when there were LEDs with sufficient output to be usable as
bicycle lights, and with Chinese manufacturers getting their act
together in terms of quality of design and manufacturing.

The Cyo lacks a modulated mode, presumably because in many countries
such a mode would not be legal.


Apparently not, https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/stvzo-lights
though apparently the full beam is for off road only.

Though I have a Strada from the same lot, which though not, StVZO doing the
walking around the bike in the night, at low/dip is friendly, and is good
enough to be seen, and also as it’s not too dark see by. Full chat is not
friendly but very good to see by, only reaches its limit off road.

Roger Merriman


Ay Chihuahua! 300 GBP!
https://exposurelights.com/products/...ghts/strada-sb Their dyno light is not
cheap either, but it does have a nice stand light. No high/low/flasher,
etc. Seems like pretty straightforward dyno-tech.

-- Jay Beattie.






I have the baby, one (Strada) which is about a £100 give or take, which
like the big brother above, runs in has high/medium/low/flash modes, you
can also program modes should you wish which I don’t! It comes with a
remote so you can easily flick between modes, high to low if you spot
another bike etc, or boost it.

The Dynamo doesn’t seem to get terribly good reviews, expensive way of
getting your lumens its 800, and not StVZO so neither traditional dynamo
light nor going to lure folks away from big battery powered MTB lights.

But someone must be buying them!

Roger Merriman

 




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
Edelux II at low speeds and walking. Lou Holtman[_7_] Techniques 10 December 24th 14 04:03 AM
Reduced rear standlight time with Edelux Danny Colyer UK 3 January 14th 09 07:21 PM
Edelux - Wow! Danny Colyer UK 10 November 25th 08 10:05 PM
Solidlight 1203D or Edelux? none UK 5 May 27th 08 06:03 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.