IQ-X vs Edelux II

On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 5:39:29 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
By golly, I AM the boss psychologist. On April 7th I wrote:
"**
Now watch the wretched Krygowski screech "Danger! Danger!" merely for wanting to see obstructions at night. There is no, repeat no, reason a bicyclist shouldn't wish for lamps at least the equivalent of those on a European (not American) motorcar. To argue contrarily, as Kreepy Krygo does, is to concede in advance that cyclist have less claim to the road -- and to safety -- than motorists.
***

And here the wretched Krygowski IS screeching "Danger! Danger!" This the same ******, the same Krygowski, who for each lamp Busch und Muller ever made claimed it was adequate for cyclists, and abused everyone who had their brains in gear and reported what their eyes could see, that the lamps were lethals. And here, below, and in other posts in this thread, the dumb cluck Krygowski does indeed concede that a cyclist doesn't have an innate right to cast the same light on the road as a motorist.

Just as i predicted.

Andre Jute
Thanks Franki-boy: you put a few bucks in my pocket from bets with my poker school, fellow professionals, that I can predict what you will say.


On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 3:48:24 PM UTC+1, 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.


--
- Frank Krygowski

I tried using those little very bright mini-flashlights with a handlebar mount. Well that was certainly a bad idea. I finally got a headlight that was much dimmer but had a wide enough focus that I could see the ground for several bike lengths. This allowed me to actually see where I was going on the dark streets.

On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 12:40:03 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/10/2019 3:15 AM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 21:16:18 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 4/8/2019 8:36 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Easier than that one can buy a duel beam bicycle lights ranging from a
bit over $100 to almost any price you want to pay - the Supernova M99
Pure - Dual Beam Bike Light goes for 265 BP - about US$ 346 and Amazon
has the Nitecore BR35 1800 Lumen Dual Beam OLED Display Rechargeable
Bicycle Headlight with Remote Switch, Mount - Includes Lumen Tactical
Adapter for a mere $122.95.

Dual, not duel.

One key thing to look for in bicycle lights is the optics. Many bicycle
lights lack proper optics because they're designed to meet StVZO
standards rather than being designed to properly illuminate the road
sufficiently far ahead, as well as things like street signs. You
definitely want some side and upward spill but not so much that it
blinds oncoming cyclists. It looks like the Nitecore did a very good job
of using proper optics for each beam.

And what is "sufficiently far ahead"? What I see is bicycles traveling
at about 20 - 25 kph, on the average. That is 12 - 15 MPH with
occasional chap whizzing by at 30 kph - 18 MPH.

I am aware that many folks can ride faster than that but can they
average a much higher for, say a 3 - 4 hour ride.

But lets call it 20 mph which is 29 FPS... ( That just happens to be
the length of my living room ) so how many living rooms do you need to
see ahead of you? Two or three? More, lets say 5 seconds, that is 146
feet, or 48 yards which is 4.9 living rooms. Good Lord! People can run
that distance in about 5 seconds and you on a 11 speed bicycle?

As I recently mentioned: During the evening ride I took about two or
three days ago, I noticed again that my B&M Eyc (StVZO) headlight
powered by my bottle dynamo was brightly lighting up stop signs, etc.
almost a quarter mile from me. (Google maps shows it as a bit over 0.2
miles.) That means my light rays traveled 0.4 miles from my headlight to
the sign and back to my eye and were _very_ noticeable. For a motorist
0.2 miles away, those light rays would be far more noticeable. I've
confirmed this with the help of friends and family.

Please note that the Eyc headlight is tiny, much smaller than a Cyo. The
Cyo does an even better job.

Scharf has promulgated this myth that StVZO lights are invisible, or
inadequate, or whatever. Maybe there are some bad ones, but certainly
not the ones I own.

As to John's question about seeing [the road] ahead of you: While it's
probably more subjective, this light has been fine for me at 25 mph
downhill. That's as fast as I ever ride at night. The concentration of
light into a bright band just below the cutoff sends that light way down
the road. Just as with your car's headlights.

It's not rocket science. Motor vehicle manufacturers figured all this
out many decades ago. The problem with bicycling is the plethora of tiny
semi-amateur manufacturers, the lack of logical lighting standards, and
the huge "Danger! Danger!" mentality of most bicyclists.


--
- Frank Krygowski

I remember old dynamo and/or battery lights that had a switch on top to go from high beam to low beam. Apparently such lights are now available with LEDs instead of incandescent bulbs. I don't know how bright they are. here's a link to one example.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Silver-...-/321150771101

Cheers

On 4/10/2019 11:50 AM, wrote:
On Monday, April 8, 2019 at 3:37:20 PM UTC-7, James wrote:
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.


One of my headlight assemblies had yellowed out so much that I wanted to replace it. If I went to Ford I would have to buy both assemblies at once and it would cost $400. I bought the driver's side for $68 and it was made in China. What a pain in the ass!. First of all, there were a couple of metal clips for holding the wiring assembly into a particular position. These had to be broken to remove. Then the headlamp holding assembly turned out to be different and they didn't tell you until I noticed that there was an extra "nut" installed. Removing it I discovered I had to pull the headlight off of the wiring plug in order to remove the stock "nut" and then install the new one. Finally got that to work. Then there is a large cone shaped mechanism that makes the headlight a water-tight seal. That did not assemble correctly because it appears that the depth of the hook is slightly different. Finally got the damn thing figured out and test it and the headlight had been damaged on the r
emoval-reinstallation process. I suppose they age harden the glass around the filament.

I drove up to the auto parts store and got a new headlight. Got home and installed it and now the turn signal didn't work - I had tested it when I tested the headlight and it was fine. So BACK up to the auto parts store and I bought a couple of new turn signal lights. These things, like the headlights, come in dozens of different sizes. Since they are all 12 VDC you'd think that they would have standardized them decades ago.

Back home, reassembled everything and since there were no more of those little harness clips I just placed the harness in about the correct position. All worked and it only took me 4 hours to do what a trained mechanic could have done in 30 minutes with Ford Parts for only 5 times what I paid.



Which is better, Chinese car lamp lenses or Chinese carbon
wheels?

p.s. Everything in life is a choice. Mine are under $10,
change in two minutes:
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/wag-h5006/overview/

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 22:00:14 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot

When I'm riding at night out in the country (which I do a lot) I like a light that lights the entire 2 lane road so that I can see critters such as skunks BEFORE I startle them. I also like to be able to see a fair distance down the road in case there's a critter on the road. I use 2 lights. One is a CygoLite Rover II which does an excellent job of lighting a 2 lane road plus the shoulders. The other light is a Magic Shine knockoff that illuminates the road quite a distance ahead of the bicycle. The MS knockoff is like a high beam light and has a beam pattern that SMS used to laud. He used to guerrilla market flashlights as the ideal bicycle lights. Remember all those posts he made about them being the cats meow?

For the record, I never Guerilla marketed flashlights. I would caution
you about believing anything Frank K. writes. About thirty years ago I
was selling complete lighting systems and giving away the plans for
free. It was a non-profit, though I didn't plan it that way.

The round beam of Magicshine and other round beam flashlights has some
definite advantages. One key thing is to properly aim the beam. The hot
spot, should be on the road, not in the eyes of oncoming traffic. The
wide beam pattern, the long distance they illuminate, and the top and
side spill are good things, not bad things! An StVZO compliant dynamo
light can't do this. And not everyone wants to spend hundreds of dollars
on a dynamo wheel and a high-end dynamo light. In fact very few people
want to spend that much.

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:39:58 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/10/2019 3:15 AM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 21:16:18 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 4/8/2019 8:36 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Easier than that one can buy a duel beam bicycle lights ranging from a
bit over $100 to almost any price you want to pay - the Supernova M99
Pure - Dual Beam Bike Light goes for 265 BP - about US$ 346 and Amazon
has the Nitecore BR35 1800 Lumen Dual Beam OLED Display Rechargeable
Bicycle Headlight with Remote Switch, Mount - Includes Lumen Tactical
Adapter for a mere $122.95.

Dual, not duel.

One key thing to look for in bicycle lights is the optics. Many bicycle
lights lack proper optics because they're designed to meet StVZO
standards rather than being designed to properly illuminate the road
sufficiently far ahead, as well as things like street signs. You
definitely want some side and upward spill but not so much that it
blinds oncoming cyclists. It looks like the Nitecore did a very good job
of using proper optics for each beam.

And what is "sufficiently far ahead"? What I see is bicycles traveling
at about 20 - 25 kph, on the average. That is 12 - 15 MPH with
occasional chap whizzing by at 30 kph - 18 MPH.

I am aware that many folks can ride faster than that but can they
average a much higher for, say a 3 - 4 hour ride.

But lets call it 20 mph which is 29 FPS... ( That just happens to be
the length of my living room ) so how many living rooms do you need to
see ahead of you? Two or three? More, lets say 5 seconds, that is 146
feet, or 48 yards which is 4.9 living rooms. Good Lord! People can run
that distance in about 5 seconds and you on a 11 speed bicycle?

As I recently mentioned: During the evening ride I took about two or
three days ago, I noticed again that my B&M Eyc (StVZO) headlight
powered by my bottle dynamo was brightly lighting up stop signs, etc.
almost a quarter mile from me. (Google maps shows it as a bit over 0.2
miles.) That means my light rays traveled 0.4 miles from my headlight to
the sign and back to my eye and were _very_ noticeable. For a motorist
0.2 miles away, those light rays would be far more noticeable. I've
confirmed this with the help of friends and family.

Please note that the Eyc headlight is tiny, much smaller than a Cyo. The
Cyo does an even better job.

Scharf has promulgated this myth that StVZO lights are invisible, or
inadequate, or whatever. Maybe there are some bad ones, but certainly
not the ones I own.

As to John's question about seeing [the road] ahead of you: While it's
probably more subjective, this light has been fine for me at 25 mph
downhill. That's as fast as I ever ride at night. The concentration of
light into a bright band just below the cutoff sends that light way down
the road. Just as with your car's headlights.

Well, a quarter of a mile is 1320 ft. and 20 miles per hour is 29
ft5/sec so your quarter mile lights illuminate a length of road that
it will take you 3/4 of a minute to travel..... is this necessary to
safely ride at night?

Or might it be called over kill?
--
cheers,

John B.

On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:21:48 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped
Well, a quarter of a mile is 1320 ft. and 20 miles per hour is 29
ft5/sec so your quarter mile lights illuminate a length of road that
it will take you 3/4 of a minute to travel..... is this necessary to
safely ride at night?

Or might it be called over kill?
--
cheers,

John B.

That depends on the bicyclsit's needs/wants. I like a light that has a lot of range and a wide beam so that I can see obstructions and/or critters on the road before I startle them. I've had many instances where I've seen skunks or racoons about to cross the road ahead of me. Hitting a 30 to 40 pound racoon at speed is not something i want to do nor do I want to startle a skunk. therefore my needs for bicycle lights are most likely different than someone who is riding mainly on brightly lit city streets. So far my needs/wants have been met by having one light with a broad beam (CygoLite Rover II has what they call cross-over technology) plus a Magic-Shine knockoff that I use as a high beam light.

Cheers

Sir Ridesalot wrote:

I remember old dynamo and/or battery lights that had a switch on top to
go from high beam to low beam.

Nope, that's a common misconception. In all instances of these antique
"dual" beam bicycle lamps you describe, I found there was only one reflector
optic for one bulb. The secondary beam was really a "walking beam" directly
illuminated by the upper bulb plus some interior reflection. That might not
have kept Johnny B. Slowbike and others from using it as a low beam, and
still is nice to have, but it was neither designed as a low beam, nor did it
display the layered characteristic of a shaped low beam. Please do feel
free to show me the rare exception, but this ...

Apparently such lights are now available
with LEDs instead of incandescent bulbs. I don't know how bright they
are. here's a link to one example.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Silver-...-/321150771101

.... I'm sorry, that's just an awful toy. You are better off buying a
slightly rusty original (or even a nice drinking glass if you enjoy the
glittery reflections,) than that junk.

On 4/10/2019 7:21 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:39:58 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/10/2019 3:15 AM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 21:16:18 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 4/8/2019 8:36 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Easier than that one can buy a duel beam bicycle lights ranging from a
bit over $100 to almost any price you want to pay - the Supernova M99
Pure - Dual Beam Bike Light goes for 265 BP - about US$ 346 and Amazon
has the Nitecore BR35 1800 Lumen Dual Beam OLED Display Rechargeable
Bicycle Headlight with Remote Switch, Mount - Includes Lumen Tactical
Adapter for a mere $122.95.

Dual, not duel.

One key thing to look for in bicycle lights is the optics. Many bicycle
lights lack proper optics because they're designed to meet StVZO
standards rather than being designed to properly illuminate the road
sufficiently far ahead, as well as things like street signs. You
definitely want some side and upward spill but not so much that it
blinds oncoming cyclists. It looks like the Nitecore did a very good job
of using proper optics for each beam.

And what is "sufficiently far ahead"? What I see is bicycles traveling
at about 20 - 25 kph, on the average. That is 12 - 15 MPH with
occasional chap whizzing by at 30 kph - 18 MPH.

I am aware that many folks can ride faster than that but can they
average a much higher for, say a 3 - 4 hour ride.

But lets call it 20 mph which is 29 FPS... ( That just happens to be
the length of my living room ) so how many living rooms do you need to
see ahead of you? Two or three? More, lets say 5 seconds, that is 146
feet, or 48 yards which is 4.9 living rooms. Good Lord! People can run
that distance in about 5 seconds and you on a 11 speed bicycle?

As I recently mentioned: During the evening ride I took about two or
three days ago, I noticed again that my B&M Eyc (StVZO) headlight
powered by my bottle dynamo was brightly lighting up stop signs, etc.
almost a quarter mile from me. (Google maps shows it as a bit over 0.2
miles.) That means my light rays traveled 0.4 miles from my headlight to
the sign and back to my eye and were _very_ noticeable. For a motorist
0.2 miles away, those light rays would be far more noticeable. I've
confirmed this with the help of friends and family.

Please note that the Eyc headlight is tiny, much smaller than a Cyo. The
Cyo does an even better job.

Scharf has promulgated this myth that StVZO lights are invisible, or
inadequate, or whatever. Maybe there are some bad ones, but certainly
not the ones I own.

As to John's question about seeing [the road] ahead of you: While it's
probably more subjective, this light has been fine for me at 25 mph
downhill. That's as fast as I ever ride at night. The concentration of
light into a bright band just below the cutoff sends that light way down
the road. Just as with your car's headlights.

Well, a quarter of a mile is 1320 ft. and 20 miles per hour is 29
ft5/sec so your quarter mile lights illuminate a length of road that
it will take you 3/4 of a minute to travel..... is this necessary to
safely ride at night?

Or might it be called over kill?

I've called it luxurious. It's the nutty California politician that's
been saying it's dangerously inadequate.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/10/2019 7:29 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:21:48 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped
Well, a quarter of a mile is 1320 ft. and 20 miles per hour is 29
ft5/sec so your quarter mile lights illuminate a length of road that
it will take you 3/4 of a minute to travel..... is this necessary to
safely ride at night?

Or might it be called over kill?
--
cheers,

John B.

That depends on the bicyclsit's needs/wants. I like a light that has a lot of range and a wide beam so that I can see obstructions and/or critters on the road before I startle them. I've had many instances where I've seen skunks or racoons about to cross the road ahead of me. Hitting a 30 to 40 pound racoon at speed is not something i want to do nor do I want to startle a skunk. therefore my needs for bicycle lights are most likely different than someone who is riding mainly on brightly lit city streets. So far my needs/wants have been met by having one light with a broad beam (CygoLite Rover II has what they call cross-over technology) plus a Magic-Shine knockoff that I use as a high beam light.

FWIW, I think beam width is where the ever-increasing lumen count should
be spent. Wasting half of the lumens (for road biking) by shining them
up into the skies, or into the eyes of other road users, is crazy.

A super-wide beam would show the skunks, raccoons, loose dogs, turtles,
frogs and whatever else might be interesting at the roadside. If the
extra-wide parts of the beam had a higher cutoff than the main part,
they would shine further into a sharp turn, which would sometimes be
beneficial. And if a motorist were racing up to a stop sign to your
right, it would do a bit more to gain his attention.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:23:22 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/10/2019 7:29 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:21:48 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped
Well, a quarter of a mile is 1320 ft. and 20 miles per hour is 29
ft5/sec so your quarter mile lights illuminate a length of road that
it will take you 3/4 of a minute to travel..... is this necessary to
safely ride at night?

Or might it be called over kill?
--
cheers,

John B.

That depends on the bicyclsit's needs/wants. I like a light that has a lot of range and a wide beam so that I can see obstructions and/or critters on the road before I startle them. I've had many instances where I've seen skunks or racoons about to cross the road ahead of me. Hitting a 30 to 40 pound racoon at speed is not something i want to do nor do I want to startle a skunk. therefore my needs for bicycle lights are most likely different than someone who is riding mainly on brightly lit city streets. So far my needs/wants have been met by having one light with a broad beam (CygoLite Rover II has what they call cross-over technology) plus a Magic-Shine knockoff that I use as a high beam light.

FWIW, I think beam width is where the ever-increasing lumen count should
be spent. Wasting half of the lumens (for road biking) by shining them
up into the skies, or into the eyes of other road users, is crazy.

While I do not doubt you at all but if one assumes a round spot light
like a LED 3.7 VDC flashlight (which some used to tout here if I
remember) if you illuminate the road than the light doesn't shine in a
cyclist's (unless of course the rider is prone, of course) eyes so it
would appear to me that someone who's light is flashing into the eyes
of other riders must have deliberately aimed the light up. At least my
handle bar mounted flashlight which is only very slightly depressed
from horizontal doesn't shine in other's eyes, whether autos or
cycles.

A super-wide beam would show the skunks, raccoons, loose dogs, turtles,
frogs and whatever else might be interesting at the roadside. If the
extra-wide parts of the beam had a higher cutoff than the main part,
they would shine further into a sharp turn, which would sometimes be
beneficial. And if a motorist were racing up to a stop sign to your
right, it would do a bit more to gain his attention.

Well, while I suppose that others are riding out with the skunks and
the badgers it has been nearly 70 years since I did that so I really
can no longer remember what that was like :-)

But from my very faint memory I don't remember too many skunks trying
to cross the road as from what little I know about skunks they aren't
really big travelers. Now deer, moose, etc., yes as they do get about
a bit.

If a motorist were racing up to a stop sign to your right I would
think that several side mounted flashing red lights and possible a
bright colored flag flying from a mast mounted on the rear of the bike
would be better then what is, in terms of road vehicle lights, a
pretty anemic light.

But what about someone rushing up from the left side?
--
cheers,

John B.