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

Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old February 15th 18, 02:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2/14/2018 11:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:30:19 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 12:55:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/14/2018 5:08 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:43:14 -0800, sms
wrote:

On 2/13/2018 1:10 PM, jbeattie wrote:

When it comes to DRLs, correlation is about all we have. I haven't seen a single study where are driver claimed he or she saw a bicyclist and avoided an accident during daylight hours because of a light.

LOL, you're sounding like the people that think that there are entities
running around funding every possible double-blind study. They are very
good at trying to promote doubt with every study that proves something
that doesn't fit their agenda.

It's not just the Odense study on DRLs, it's also all the studies on
motorcycle headlights, both steady and modulated.

You don't view a study that was 100% financed and supported by
Reelight that. strangely enough, proved that using the Reelight magnet
powered light was Good! Good! Good! is just a tiny bit suspect?

Probably not as it supports YOUR assertions that bright lights make
Bikes safe. But I suspect that you never actually read the study, did
you? After all Reelight seems to be strangely reticent in announcing
the power of their lights. They only describe it as " a smart little
bike light with bright clear illumination".

But One does wonder how powerful a tiny little one LED lamp powered
by a magnet attached to the spokes really is?

Strange that someone who advocates large powerful bicycle lights would
be a proponent of such a tiny little light.

It's also laughable that Scharf (AKA "sms") has spent years telling us
that dynamo lights are totally inadequate. But he sings the praises of a
tiny light that blinks on only when a spoke magnet passes its little
pickup coil.


Ah but Scharf has become a politician, and everyone knows about
politicians....
--
Cheers,

John B.



Now, now. Steven should be congratulated for his public service. More people need to be involved in public service. However, I still think DRLs in sunny California are dopey.

-- Jay Beattie.


Well, there's Garibaldi and then there's Hugo Chavez.

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


Ads
  #152  
Old February 15th 18, 05:13 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2/15/2018 6:37 AM, sms wrote:
On 2/14/2018 9:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Now, now.Â* Steven should be congratulated for his public service.
More people need to be involved in public service. However, I still
think DRLs in sunny California are dopey.


It's in sunny areas where they are most necessary. In non-sunny areas
people are already using lights in the daytime.

And of course the necessary brightness of a DRL, which is used solely as
a "being seen" light, is much lower than what is needed to see the road
at night. You can learn more at
https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/daytime_running_lights/. Of course
we will soon see claims that this is all self-interest by Trek, whose
sole aim is to sell more lights.


:-) You link to a Trek ADVERTISEMENT, then try to claim that Trek isn't
just trying to sell more lights?

Stephen, you're an amazing piece of work!

If Trek officials were just charitably working to make cycling better,
they'd be spending money to lobby for stricter enforcement of motorist
behavior regarding bicyclists. They'd be spending money on motorist
training and educations via drivers' schools, billboards, public service
announcements and other media. They'd fund "Bikes may use full lane"
signs across America. They'd pay for cycling education in the schools.
They'd fight against infrastructure that tucks bicyclists into the less
visible edge of the road.

Instead they're exacerbating the latest deluded bicyclist fear so they
can sell nice, profitable talismans. And rubbing their hands in glee
over posts like yours.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #153  
Old February 15th 18, 06:35 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2018-02-15 03:37, sms wrote:
On 2/14/2018 9:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Now, now. Steven should be congratulated for his public service.
More people need to be involved in public service. However, I still
think DRLs in sunny California are dopey.


It's in sunny areas where they are most necessary. In non-sunny areas
people are already using lights in the daytime.

And of course the necessary brightness of a DRL, which is used solely as
a "being seen" light, is much lower than what is needed to see the road
at night. You can learn more at
https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/daytime_running_lights/.



For me this is fact. I have noticed a significant drop in the number of
drivers not seeing me or seeing me too late, for example when pulling
out of lots or parking spaces. Even when opening driver side doors
(though I ride outside the door zone). All motorcycles in the US have
mandatory DRL and there is are reasons for that.

A side benefit is that bright daytime lighting causes many wrong
direction cyclists to hightail it out of the bike lane, thinking
something fast is coming at them. Which it is.


... Of course
we will soon see claims that this is all self-interest by Trek, whose
sole aim is to sell more lights.



Everybody should know that such articles aren't very suited to foster
sales of their own products but lights in general. The usual reaction
with many brand name lights is "Now WHAT do those cost?!" and then
people scope out Amazon, Walmart, Newegg, EBay and others. Just like I did.

I even found that no-name lights can be of better quality than name
brand lights that cost a lot more (not Trek though, I never had any of
theirs).

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
  #154  
Old February 15th 18, 09:16 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2/15/2018 9:35 AM, Joerg wrote:

snip
Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* ... Of course
we will soon see claims that this is all self-interest by Trek, whose
sole aim is to sell more lights.



Everybody should know that such articles aren't very suited to foster
sales of their own products but lights in general.


True. But it's a convenient excuse to dismiss the findings of such
article. Even though Trek is not a major supplier of bicycle lights, you
can already predict the narrative that will spew forth. You saw it
already with the Odense study.

The usual reaction
with many brand name lights is "Now WHAT do those cost?!" and then
people scope out Amazon, Walmart, Newegg, EBay and others. Just like I did.


I don't think that people are quite as price sensitive as you may think.
People do research by reading reviews, then buy whatever suits them.
Unfortunately most shops aren't interested in stocking a very wide
selection. I looked for my Lezyne lights at local stores. One store
carried some Lezyne products, but not what I wanted.

I even found that no-name lights can be of better quality than name
brand lights that cost a lot more (not Trek though, I never had any of
theirs).


Yes, sometimes. But the no-name lights often come with batteries whose
capacity bear no relation to what's printed on them.

  #155  
Old February 15th 18, 10:01 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On Thursday, February 15, 2018 at 9:34:55 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-02-15 03:37, sms wrote:
On 2/14/2018 9:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Now, now. Steven should be congratulated for his public service.
More people need to be involved in public service. However, I still
think DRLs in sunny California are dopey.


It's in sunny areas where they are most necessary. In non-sunny areas
people are already using lights in the daytime.

And of course the necessary brightness of a DRL, which is used solely as
a "being seen" light, is much lower than what is needed to see the road
at night. You can learn more at
https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/daytime_running_lights/.



For me this is fact. I have noticed a significant drop in the number of
drivers not seeing me or seeing me too late, for example when pulling
out of lots or parking spaces. Even when opening driver side doors
(though I ride outside the door zone). All motorcycles in the US have
mandatory DRL and there is are reasons for that.

A side benefit is that bright daytime lighting causes many wrong
direction cyclists to hightail it out of the bike lane, thinking
something fast is coming at them. Which it is.


You live in a relatively isolated area with few other cyclists, at least from what I can tell about Cameron Park. Try commuting on a two-way cycle track with dozens or hundreds of cyclists -- all with retina burning, round-beam mega-lights riding towards you . . . at night. It's blinding, and what is worse, it is harder to pin-point the cyclist. Also, how many daylight wrong-way cyclists do you encounter? Is there some epidemic requiring you to punish them with your blinding light. I see wrong-way cyclists and they don't give a sh**. A bunch of homeless dudes or DUII cyclists. I yell at them, and they don't even flinch. It's like the Walking Dead.

-- Jay Beattie.


  #156  
Old February 15th 18, 11:30 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2/15/2018 1:01 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

You live in a relatively isolated area with few other cyclists, at least from what I can tell about Cameron Park. Try commuting on a two-way cycle track with dozens or hundreds of cyclists -- all with retina burning, round-beam mega-lights riding towards you . . . at night. It's blinding, and what is worse, it is harder to pin-point the cyclist. Also, how many daylight wrong-way cyclists do you encounter? Is there some epidemic requiring you to punish them with your blinding light. I see wrong-way cyclists and they don't give a sh**. A bunch of homeless dudes or DUII cyclists. I yell at them, and they don't even flinch. It's like the Walking Dead.


I was in a recent meeting and we were discussing a new multi-use path
along a drainage ditch, not even a creek. I asked about lighting for
night use. I was told that the water district doesn't like lighting on
creeks because they are riparian zones, though in the case we were
discussing it was not even a creek.

I've occasionally experienced the problem of bright lights of opposing
traffic on MUPs, but since people are buying lights that are usable on
unlit paths, they need pretty powerful lights. What would be good would
be an auto-dimming feature, when opposing traffic is encountered, though
even most vehicles have no such thing for their high-beam lights.

You would not want to be on these paths with inadequate lighting, but it
would be nice if people would be courteous and either dim their lights
or aim them slightly downward.
  #157  
Old February 16th 18, 12:05 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2/15/2018 5:30 PM, sms wrote:
On 2/15/2018 1:01 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

You live in a relatively isolated area with few other cyclists, at
least from what I can tell about Cameron Park. Try commuting on a
two-way cycle track with dozens or hundreds of cyclists -- all with
retina burning, round-beam mega-lights riding towards you . . . at
night.Â* It's blinding, and what is worse, it is harder to pin-point
the cyclist.Â* Also, how many daylight wrong-way cyclists do you
encounter?Â* Is there some epidemic requiring you to punish them with
your blinding light. I see wrong-way cyclists and they don't give a
sh**. A bunch of homeless dudes or DUII cyclists. I yell at them, and
they don't even flinch.Â* It's like the Walking Dead.


I was in a recent meeting and we were discussing a new multi-use path
along a drainage ditch, not even a creek. I asked about lighting for
night use. I was told that the water district doesn't like lighting on
creeks because they are riparian zones, though in the case we were
discussing it was not even a creek.

I've occasionally experienced the problem of bright lights of opposing
traffic on MUPs, but since people are buying lights that are usable on
unlit paths, they need pretty powerful lights. What would be good would
be an auto-dimming feature, when opposing traffic is encountered, though
even most vehicles have no such thing for their high-beam lights.

You would not want to be on these paths with inadequate lighting, but it
would be nice if people would be courteous and either dim their lights
or aim them slightly downward.


That's a sweet sentiment. But your "it would be nice" is completely
insufficient to counter your constant cry for retina burning lights. You
endlessly disparage the beam designs that are designed to efficiently
show the riding surface, and thus avoid blinding other users. You've
claimed that only blinding beams are suitable - for example, to reduce
the mythical risk of head injury (or decapitation?) from tree branches
above the roads. (!) Such nonsense!

More on the lights usable on unlit paths: One friend of mine calls me to
do a night ride a local rail trail once per month. My dyno driven StVZO
headlamp is not only perfectly suitable, it does a far better job than
the light he uses when he rides alone. My beam absolutely beats his,
hands down.

In other words, you don't need a blinding beam on a dark path. And
tilting that sort of headlight down gives far worse visibility than a
properly designed beam. You don't need a blinding beam on a
bi-directional cycle track. Jay has nicely described the detriments. You
don't need a blinding beam on the road. That's why cars, trucks and
motorcycles have properly designed low beams, and only inconsiderate
assholes refuse to use them.

Don't be an inconsiderate asshole.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #158  
Old February 16th 18, 12:37 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On 2/15/2018 5:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/15/2018 5:30 PM, sms wrote:
On 2/15/2018 1:01 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

You live in a relatively isolated area with few other
cyclists, at least from what I can tell about Cameron
Park. Try commuting on a two-way cycle track with dozens
or hundreds of cyclists -- all with retina burning,
round-beam mega-lights riding towards you . . . at
night. It's blinding, and what is worse, it is harder
to pin-point the cyclist. Also, how many daylight
wrong-way cyclists do you encounter? Is there some
epidemic requiring you to punish them with your blinding
light. I see wrong-way cyclists and they don't give a
sh**. A bunch of homeless dudes or DUII cyclists. I yell
at them, and they don't even flinch. It's like the
Walking Dead.


I was in a recent meeting and we were discussing a new
multi-use path along a drainage ditch, not even a creek. I
asked about lighting for night use. I was told that the
water district doesn't like lighting on creeks because
they are riparian zones, though in the case we were
discussing it was not even a creek.

I've occasionally experienced the problem of bright lights
of opposing traffic on MUPs, but since people are buying
lights that are usable on unlit paths, they need pretty
powerful lights. What would be good would be an
auto-dimming feature, when opposing traffic is
encountered, though even most vehicles have no such thing
for their high-beam lights.

You would not want to be on these paths with inadequate
lighting, but it would be nice if people would be
courteous and either dim their lights or aim them slightly
downward.


That's a sweet sentiment. But your "it would be nice" is
completely insufficient to counter your constant cry for
retina burning lights. You endlessly disparage the beam
designs that are designed to efficiently show the riding
surface, and thus avoid blinding other users. You've claimed
that only blinding beams are suitable - for example, to
reduce the mythical risk of head injury (or decapitation?)
from tree branches above the roads. (!) Such nonsense!

More on the lights usable on unlit paths: One friend of mine
calls me to do a night ride a local rail trail once per
month. My dyno driven StVZO headlamp is not only perfectly
suitable, it does a far better job than the light he uses
when he rides alone. My beam absolutely beats his, hands down.

In other words, you don't need a blinding beam on a dark
path. And tilting that sort of headlight down gives far
worse visibility than a properly designed beam. You don't
need a blinding beam on a bi-directional cycle track. Jay
has nicely described the detriments. You don't need a
blinding beam on the road. That's why cars, trucks and
motorcycles have properly designed low beams, and only
inconsiderate assholes refuse to use them.

Don't be an inconsiderate asshole.


Well, aesthetically, you wouldn't want unsightly bicycle
lights spoiling the view:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/g...er-photographs

There oughta be a law!

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


  #159  
Old February 16th 18, 08:06 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On Thu, 15 Feb 2018 03:37:49 -0800, sms
wrote:

On 2/14/2018 9:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Now, now. Steven should be congratulated for his public service. More people need to be involved in public service. However, I still think DRLs in sunny California are dopey.


It's in sunny areas where they are most necessary. In non-sunny areas
people are already using lights in the daytime.

And of course the necessary brightness of a DRL, which is used solely as
a "being seen" light, is much lower than what is needed to see the road
at night. You can learn more at
https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/daytime_running_lights/. Of course
we will soon see claims that this is all self-interest by Trek, whose
sole aim is to sell more lights.


Ah, you are saying that Trek spent somewhere in the neighborhood of
$10,000 to make a short video and then displayed it on the Internet
solely as a public service with no expectation of any return on their
investment?

https://onemarketmedia.com/2010/03/0...duction-costs/

You are joking? Right?
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #160  
Old February 16th 18, 08:13 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Battery Replacement on Lights with Internal Li-Ion Batteries

On Thu, 15 Feb 2018 07:57:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/14/2018 11:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:30:19 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 12:55:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/14/2018 5:08 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:43:14 -0800, sms
wrote:

On 2/13/2018 1:10 PM, jbeattie wrote:

When it comes to DRLs, correlation is about all we have. I haven't seen a single study where are driver claimed he or she saw a bicyclist and avoided an accident during daylight hours because of a light.

LOL, you're sounding like the people that think that there are entities
running around funding every possible double-blind study. They are very
good at trying to promote doubt with every study that proves something
that doesn't fit their agenda.

It's not just the Odense study on DRLs, it's also all the studies on
motorcycle headlights, both steady and modulated.

You don't view a study that was 100% financed and supported by
Reelight that. strangely enough, proved that using the Reelight magnet
powered light was Good! Good! Good! is just a tiny bit suspect?

Probably not as it supports YOUR assertions that bright lights make
Bikes safe. But I suspect that you never actually read the study, did
you? After all Reelight seems to be strangely reticent in announcing
the power of their lights. They only describe it as " a smart little
bike light with bright clear illumination".

But One does wonder how powerful a tiny little one LED lamp powered
by a magnet attached to the spokes really is?

Strange that someone who advocates large powerful bicycle lights would
be a proponent of such a tiny little light.

It's also laughable that Scharf (AKA "sms") has spent years telling us
that dynamo lights are totally inadequate. But he sings the praises of a
tiny light that blinks on only when a spoke magnet passes its little
pickup coil.

Ah but Scharf has become a politician, and everyone knows about
politicians....
--
Cheers,

John B.



Now, now. Steven should be congratulated for his public service. More people need to be involved in public service. However, I still think DRLs in sunny California are dopey.

-- Jay Beattie.


Well, there's Garibaldi and then there's Hugo Chavez.


Was Garibaldi selling bicycle lights?
--
Cheers,

John B.

 




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
Dynamo Lights viz Battery Lights in snow qand slush? Sir Ridesalot Techniques 6 March 4th 15 11:36 PM
Cheap lights using CR123 batteries Tom Anderson UK 3 January 18th 11 03:33 AM
Rechargable Cells/batteries for Lights Keiron Kinninmont Techniques 8 December 26th 06 12:58 AM
Lights without batteries? Steve Watkin UK 9 May 16th 06 10:04 PM
Rechargeable batteries with LED lights David Ward Techniques 8 March 17th 05 04:40 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:20 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.