Lezyne Deca Drive 1500XXL Report

On 2/21/2017 4:10 PM, James wrote:


With my very expensive, weak and much to harsh bright-dark border
vertically StVZO light, I've been mistaken for someone riding a
motorcycle, more than once.

I can also ride in the middle of a 2 lane road and see past the edge of
the road on both sides.

The anti-StVZO propaganda on this forum astounds me!

It's true that the regulation does not mandate super-bright lights.
IOW, a light that's relatively dim by modern standards can fit StVZO
requirement.

OTOH, there's nothing to prevent a luxurious amount of light from an
StVZO-compliant headlamp. I feel that's what I get from my best Busch &
Mueller headlamp. The lumen count isn't super-high, but it doesn't need
to be. The light is engineered to put the lumens where they need to go.

What do the anti-StVZO crew do when driving cars or motorcycles? Are
they among the jerks that mount lots of cheap auxiliary lights and
refuse to dim them for oncoming vehicles?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/21/2017 4:14 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-02-21 12:39, Duane wrote:
On 21/02/2017 3:24 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-02-21 11:46, jbeattie wrote:

[...]

Another odd problem with high lumen lights is that they are easily
confused with somewhat more distant car lights.


That's just the purpose :-)


What? To have the guy at the intersection think you're a car a block
away an pull out in front of you?


No, the opposite happens. They stop when I am still far away, thinking I
would be there in just a few seconds.


I've been blinded a few times recently with some cyclist coming at me on
a dark bike path with lights like that. Just as rude as the idiots in
cars with their high beams on quiet neighborhood streets.


As I said, I made sure my lights do not blind. It is rather simple.

You set the bicycle into a lane of a long wide driveway or a quiet
residential street. Then a car 50ft or so behind that. Both with the
lights turned on. Now you pedal or drive in the oncoming direction. Then
again from the other direction to watch the rear lights. I want the
"light vision experience" to be about the same. No less and no more.

Ok, my rear lights are a little brighter than on motor vehicles but not
by much. Not as much as a brake light.

I found that I am noticed much earlier this way, the "Sorry, I didn't
see you" situations are greatly diminished and motorists give me more
clearance when passing. Objectives accomplished, I'd say.

I've never gotten a SMIDSY event while riding at night. Even with my
old-style StVZO compliant dynamo-powered halogen headlights, motorists
wait far longer at night compared to daytime before crossing my path.
Those same lights got spontaneous compliments from motorists and
pedestrians; and the LED versions I now use are much brighter.

I think this is yet another version of "safety inflation." It doesn't
matter if something is perfectly safe; if someone can pretend without
evidence that a newer product is "safer," they automatically brand the
old product "dangerous" even if it has always performed just fine.

Of course, unlike Joerg, I've never had to use my headlamp to cook a
mountain lion.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 23:08:01 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/21/2017 4:14 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-02-21 12:39, Duane wrote:
On 21/02/2017 3:24 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-02-21 11:46, jbeattie wrote:

[...]

Another odd problem with high lumen lights is that they are easily
confused with somewhat more distant car lights.


That's just the purpose :-)


What? To have the guy at the intersection think you're a car a block
away an pull out in front of you?


No, the opposite happens. They stop when I am still far away, thinking I
would be there in just a few seconds.


I've been blinded a few times recently with some cyclist coming at me on
a dark bike path with lights like that. Just as rude as the idiots in
cars with their high beams on quiet neighborhood streets.


As I said, I made sure my lights do not blind. It is rather simple.

You set the bicycle into a lane of a long wide driveway or a quiet
residential street. Then a car 50ft or so behind that. Both with the
lights turned on. Now you pedal or drive in the oncoming direction. Then
again from the other direction to watch the rear lights. I want the
"light vision experience" to be about the same. No less and no more.

Ok, my rear lights are a little brighter than on motor vehicles but not
by much. Not as much as a brake light.

I found that I am noticed much earlier this way, the "Sorry, I didn't
see you" situations are greatly diminished and motorists give me more
clearance when passing. Objectives accomplished, I'd say.

I've never gotten a SMIDSY event while riding at night. Even with my
old-style StVZO compliant dynamo-powered halogen headlights, motorists
wait far longer at night compared to daytime before crossing my path.
Those same lights got spontaneous compliments from motorists and
pedestrians; and the LED versions I now use are much brighter.

I think this is yet another version of "safety inflation." It doesn't
matter if something is perfectly safe; if someone can pretend without
evidence that a newer product is "safer," they automatically brand the
old product "dangerous" even if it has always performed just fine.

Of course, unlike Joerg, I've never had to use my headlamp to cook a
mountain lion.

Many years ago I rode a bike back and forth to work. It was fitted
with what was apparently state of the art lights at the time. Bottle
generator and incandescent head light, reflector rear. Strange as it
might seem, I never had an accident or incident with that rig.

Now, from what I read, I would need a super, duper, gigawhoiset light
to feel safe. I am beginning to think that as dangerous as bicycles
are that perhaps, like guns, they should be banned.

Of course there is an alternate viewpoint...

As Bobby had it:
Wee, sleekit, cowran, tim'rous beastie,
O, what a panic's in thy breastie!

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 10:48:21 -0800, sms
wrote:

The StVZO bicycle lighting standard was written by non-cyclists and
was designed to force cyclists to subject themselves to increased
danger by requiring the use of sub-optimal bicycle lighting systems.

Is there an "optimal" bicycle lighting system for you, Steven? After
all these years of reading your writings on this topic, I have become
convinced you would not be satisfied with a 1000W light that had 180
degree coverage. You are always on to the brighter and brighter light,
requiring tedious battery management and either filling up landfills or
dealing with recharging.

I find my Schmidt eDelux and SON dynamo hub work quite well. Did a 1
1/4 hour ride in the dark on Saturday (60 degrees in February, jeepers)
and quite enjoyed it- seeing just fine on bike lanes, city streets,
off-street trails. Proper optics and proper location are important. If
your lights are mounted on your handlebars or your helmet, you are
reducing their effectiveness. The light needs to be low- about the top
of the wheel or a few inches lower is best IME. You get better contrast
on the road surface and a longer pool of light (of course, for that to
work well you need cycling optimized optics that make the top of the
beam brighter than the bottom, so that the far end of the light pool is
bright and the near end doesn't impair your night vision).

With 1400 lumens try using a fork mount n aim beam onto the ground poss at a use able averge speed/reaction time distance. be reasonable in that viewing road surface the all else with scattered light. Works best in dark.

Scattered light from hi lumens.

Prob effective but not solving JB's problem. JB refuses the yellow lens/baseball cap solution, as commented.

I bought a jeep bumper boat anchor 7000 lumen fir an under n behind front bumper fog assembly flanked by 2 Hella fogs.

Duznut work ! Reflected light lights owls, illegals hiding in the bushes ...and fog. 1+7000=0

Maybe adjust upwards tweak tweak. .. eventually blinding JB.

Gonna try a cut jug pipe prob deform.

How's the rain ? Yawl gonna buy new shoes ?

Too much power, focus where intended

Pyre on the Pacheco ?

On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 10:10:51 PM UTC+1, James wrote:
On 22/02/17 07:39, Duane wrote:
On 21/02/2017 3:24 PM, Joerg wrote:


The mistake that most cyclists and manufacturers make is to use a pointy
beam. The beam needs to be broadened horizontally just like car
headlights do that. Unfortunately there are only two ways to accomplish
this.

1. Buy a StVZO light. Very expensive, weak in light output, much too
harsh bright-dark border vertically.

2. Buy a sturdy 1000+ lumen light and an after-market diffusor lens. The
latter costs five bucks and works great.

I chose solution #2.


Another odd problem with high lumen lights is that they are easily
confused with somewhat more distant car lights.


That's just the purpose :-)


What? To have the guy at the intersection think you're a car a block
away an pull out in front of you?

I've been blinded a few times recently with some cyclist coming at me on
a dark bike path with lights like that. Just as rude as the idiots in
cars with their high beams on quiet neighborhood streets.

snip

With my very expensive, weak and much to harsh bright-dark border
vertically StVZO light, I've been mistaken for someone riding a
motorcycle, more than once.

I can also ride in the middle of a 2 lane road and see past the edge of
the road on both sides.

--
JS

Exactly and beside that I survived another dark season without getting hit. I must be doing something wrong.


Lou

On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 8:03:01 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/21/2017 4:10 PM, James wrote:


With my very expensive, weak and much to harsh bright-dark border
vertically StVZO light, I've been mistaken for someone riding a
motorcycle, more than once.

I can also ride in the middle of a 2 lane road and see past the edge of
the road on both sides.

The anti-StVZO propaganda on this forum astounds me!

It's true that the regulation does not mandate super-bright lights.
IOW, a light that's relatively dim by modern standards can fit StVZO
requirement.

OTOH, there's nothing to prevent a luxurious amount of light from an
StVZO-compliant headlamp. I feel that's what I get from my best Busch &
Mueller headlamp. The lumen count isn't super-high, but it doesn't need
to be. The light is engineered to put the lumens where they need to go.

What do the anti-StVZO crew do when driving cars or motorcycles? Are
they among the jerks that mount lots of cheap auxiliary lights and
refuse to dim them for oncoming vehicles?


I think the StVZO cut-off is too extreme for riding in a hilly environment or even a rolling MUP with pedestrians. Total light output from my LUXOS B is not enough on trail sections and in the rain. BUT, that does not mean that I need a 2000 lumen search light for road riding. I haven't tried the Barry Beam light and have no idea whether it is any good, but the idea of a less radical cut-off and more output seems like a nice compromise. A better shaped beam for urban environments is certainly needed.

Lots of light and spew also have their place on the road under some circumstances and certainly on trail sections and in rainstorms, so having a high beam would be optimal -- but probably asking too much from compact optics. Bicyclists would also have to turn off the high beam when passing other cyclists, which is probably asking for too much. My high beam is my L&M Urban that I use as a low-output pulsing front "flash" but that I can pop up to 800 lumens for short trail sections. It's a nice supplement to the LUXOS B. BTW, the LUXOS is a nice light on a dry clear evening with its wide, moody light spread with the art deco beam pattern (like the Chrysler building). It's useless on a rainy night, but most lights are.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2/22/2017 1:04 AM, wrote:

Exactly and beside that I survived another dark season without getting hit. I must be doing something wrong.

Yes, you're not living in the U.S..

On 2/22/2017 7:15 AM, jbeattie wrote:

I think the StVZO cut-off is too extreme for riding in a hilly environment or even a rolling MUP with pedestrians. Total light output from my LUXOS B is not enough on trail sections and in the rain. BUT, that does not mean that I need a 2000 lumen search light for road riding. I haven't tried the Barry Beam light and have no idea whether it is any good, but the idea of a less radical cut-off and more output seems like a nice compromise. A better shaped beam for urban environments is certainly needed.

Lots of light and spew also have their place on the road under some circumstances and certainly on trail sections and in rainstorms, so having a high beam would be optimal -- but probably asking too much from compact optics. Bicyclists would also have to turn off the high beam when passing other cyclists, which is probably asking for too much. My high beam is my L&M Urban that I use as a low-output pulsing front "flash" but that I can pop up to 800 lumens for short trail sections. It's a nice supplement to the LUXOS B. BTW, the LUXOS is a nice light on a dry clear evening with its wide, moody light spread with the art deco beam pattern (like the Chrysler building). It's useless on a rainy night, but most lights are.

StVZO was obviously not written for many areas in the U.S.. It expects
well lit streets, drivers that behave reasonably well, and a level of
traffic law enforcement that does not exist in the U.S.. From my
recollection, the German cities I visited were pretty flat, but I did
not visit all the cities.