entry level lights to see by

awwwww turn the bars into windshields

On Jan 9, 6:33*pm, Phil W Lee wrote:
SMS considered Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:13:04
-0800 the perfect time to write:

The issue is that there are not really any good 12V non-air horns for
bicycles that emit at least 115dB. The Airzound is one manual air horn
that works well, but it was much more expensive since I already had a
12V lighting system. The other thing that works well for commuting is
the air powered boat horns. Since you don't need to use the horn all
that much, the fact that the cartridges are disposable is not that big a
deal.

If you have 12v available, any motor vehicle scrapyard can supply a
large and inexpensive choice of suitable horns.
Just use a small battery as storage for the current they draw, which
would be far higher than any bicycle dynamo system could provide.
But if you can drive a 12v air horn, you already knew that part.

It would be fun to see SMS's rig in action, if he actually uses what
he advocates. Very bright, unfocused lights flashing away in the
daytime. Super bright strobe flashing away in the rear. Flag
sticking out to the side of his bike. Super-loud horn at the
ready... So many defenses against such terrible danger!

I'm reminded of a person SMS probably admires, and who seems to admire
Scharf - the person who is probably the most prominent advocate of
mandatory helmets for _all_ cyclists, no personal choice allowed.
Apparently he also believes that riding a bike is astonishingly
hazardous. As one might expect, that attitude extends to his
philosophy of lighting. Here are excepts, from his website:

=======================================

For headlights I use a car light. Nothing makes a driver respond
quicker...

For tail lights I started with two leg lights, showing red to the rear
and white to the front. ...I still use one sometimes as an
identifier...

I added yellow blinkers, starting with a 7 inch barricade light. Those
are ideal for bikes...Their only disadvantage is the size and weight,
but if you are still hung up on that you just have not ridden enough
at night.

After the barricade light I added smaller yellow blinkers...

Beginning about 1990 I added the now-standard red LED blinkers...

I have replaced the incandescent blinking Far Out Flasher on my helmet
with an Innova 24/7 led blinker...

I got a sample at Interbike of a single yellow led that screws onto a
shraeder valve and goes around. It uses hearing aid batteries. Another
one introduced in 2002 has flashier led blinkers, but they are
smaller. Either model adds to rotating weight right at the rim and
uses an expensive battery. Saw another good idea at Interbike--a
string of LED's that you weave around the spoke nipples...

I also like to "layer" my tail lights, with one at the level of the
wheel axle, one under the saddle, and one on the helmet...

In 2010 the battery powering my car light failed once again and I
bought a new Magicshine system...I use two of them...

For reflectors I use the hottest 3M product I can lay my hands on to
add reflectivity to pedals, shoes, cranks (flashes as the cranks go
around), panniers, clothing, helmet, anywhere else...

Flags are great for daytime. I use two on my recumbent. One has a
blinking white strobe light on the top of the shaft...

=============================================

There you have it. SAFETY!!! All it takes is two flags, about six or
seven lights and maybe a dozen reflectors.

Oops. I forgot about the horn. ;-)

- Frank Krygowski

On Jan 9, 11:15*pm, Helmut Springer wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Oehler not only comments freely on competitive products, he
pretends to be unbiased, conducting tests published in German
magazines,

He publishes test scenario, parameters and resulting data for
everyone to base his own conclusions on those, a common practise for
engineers.

Oehler publishes his tests of competitive products in consumer
magazines as supposedly unbiased tests. He is not and cannot be
unbiased; that's his living at stake there. Professional engineers do
not behave like this. If a Philips engineer conducted a test, which
was then published in a Dutch magazine, lauding his own products over
everyone else's, in the terms that Oehler does, Oehler would be the
first to scream "Foul!" If a Philips engineer published a gloating
photo of a broken Edelux, Oehler would be the first to screech that it
was unprofessional behaviour.

You might now agree on the test scenario,

Your attempt to redirect the argument from the principle of avoiding
conflicts of interest to the minutiae of Oehler's test is a debating
trick unworthy of you. Whether Oehler's test is good, bad or
indifferent is irrelevant; the fact is that Oehler as an employee of
one of the manufacturers of the goods tested should not be involved in
those tests at all. It is also particularly damning that none but the
products of Oehler's employer and their suppliers have ever come out
on top.

the general
view in Germany tends to see them as plausible.

Yes, I'm aware that German hobbyist magazines have far lower standards
than those in Anglophone nations; the excuse always given is that they
are so much smaller that they cannot afford independent tests, and
Oehler already has the test equipment. That's the same brand of limply
complaisant garbage as your apologia above for Oehler's constant
knocking of his competitors. Furthermore, those magazines see
themselves as the promoters of German industry rather than independent
commentators. It's a form of xenophobia and industrial nationalism.

Tell us then, Andreas, does an Edelux not break if you drop it?

The context is fixed mount vs. easily detachable. *The drawback of
the latter is the higher risk to drop it while putting it on/off.

Really? Oehler didn't make that clear. In any event, it doesn't excuse
the way he posts a sample of one as if it condemns a competitor's
entire line. It doesn't excuse his tone, it doesn't excuse posting
about a competitive product, period.

Now that you've explained the context, it raises a further question
about Oehler's behaviour. Is he ignorant of the fact that the Philips
Safe Ride range includes several fixed mounts (if he isn't ignorant of
the fact, an unbiased observer would have mentioned it) or is he being
malicious in not mentioning it?

--
Best regards
helmut springer * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * panta rhei

I admire your loyalty to your friend but you're attempting to defend
the indefensible.

Good luck.

Andre Jute
"A example of one is meaningless." -- Phil W Lee

On Jan 9, 11:49*pm, Phil W Lee wrote:
Andre Jute considered Wed, 9 Jan 2013 13:05:06
-0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:









On Jan 9, 4:03*pm, Andreas Oehler wrote:
Sun, 06 Jan 2013 07:33:47 -0800, sms:

On 12/29/2012 5:59 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

snip

The advantage of Dan' lights is that they are easily transferred to different bikes.

That's one of many advantages over the Philips Saferide:

1. Easily transferable
2. Far less expensive
3. Greater light output
4. Strobe mode
5. Usable as a repair light
6. Widely available

Drawbacks: Falling from the handlebar to the concretet floor one time -
the front cover breaks. The edge of the front cover blinds the user.
See:http://velo.dyndns.eU/bilder/philips...://velo.dyndns...

Andreas

I love the partisanship of Andreas Oehler, who is an employee of
Schmidt Maschinenbau, the makers of the Edelux, built with parts
sourced from Busch & Muller; if BUMM cuts them off, they're dead in
the water. Who will believe Oehler will ever tell us the truth about
BUMM lamps? Oehler not only comments freely on competitive products,
he pretends to be unbiased, conducting tests published in German
magazines, which of course always finds his own product (Edelux) and
the products of his component suppliers (Busch & Muller) superior to
everyone else's product. If a British or American writer had the
impertinence -- actually the goddamn cheek -- to commit such acts of
blatantly compromised conflicts of interest, he'd be shouted down by
everyone on RBT, and if he were an engineer, as Oehler is, is seems
quite likely his professional body would direct him to more
appropriate behaviour on pain of penalties.

Tell us then, Andreas, does an Edelux not break if you drop it? You
use limp plastic lenses, then, the kind that deforms rather than
shatters?

How do you intend to drop it, when it's bolted solidly to the bike?

crap about using household appliances as bicycle lights snipped



As a publicist, dear Andre, you should to stick to the pub.
Every time I've seen you in action, you've had precisely the opposite
effect to your intention.

IFTFY.

I'm not trying to sell you anything, Phil, or even to persuade you of
anything; I don't care what you think, only that you do think. I
disseminate information as a matter of noblesse oblige, because I'm
convinced that a large middle class guarantees my liberties and
privileges. Since the greatest of those liberties is free speech, I
take a special interest in journalistic standards, which Andreas
Oehler routinely breaches. Oehler IS trying to sell you something, and
you resent being told you're falling for it. Natural human reaction, I
suppose. Don't worry, I won't hold it against you.

Andre Jute

On 1/9/2013 3:15 PM, Helmut Springer wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Oehler not only comments freely on competitive products, he
pretends to be unbiased, conducting tests published in German
magazines,

He publishes test scenario, parameters and resulting data for
everyone to base his own conclusions on those, a common practise for
engineers. You might now agree on the test scenario, the general
view in Germany tends to see them as plausible.


Tell us then, Andreas, does an Edelux not break if you drop it?

The context is fixed mount vs. easily detachable. The drawback of
the latter is the higher risk to drop it while putting it on/off.

That may be true, but I think that it's the $200 Edelux that I'd most
want to detach and take with me when leaving the bike somewhere.

Andre Jute:
On Jan 9, 11:15 pm, Helmut Springer wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Oehler not only comments freely on competitive products, he
pretends to be unbiased, conducting tests published in German
magazines,

Uncomfortable because his first name resembles Jute's?

He publishes test scenario, parameters and resulting data for
everyone to base his own conclusions on those, a common practise for
engineers.

Oehler publishes his tests of competitive products in consumer
magazines as supposedly unbiased tests. He is not and cannot be
unbiased; that's his living at stake there. Professional engineers do

Can't you make a double effort to respect split personalities?
(Who, apart from some incredibly naive cyclists, would believe that,
after working hours, his views are entirely unbiased, even if he does?)
So what? Especially with the open ward of r.b.t characters around, why
hold the guy to a higher standard than, say, some clueless "strobe
expert?"

not behave like this. If a Philips engineer conducted a test, which
was then published in a Dutch magazine, lauding his own products over
everyone else's, in the terms that Oehler does, Oehler would be the
first to scream "Foul!" If a Philips engineer published a gloating
photo of a broken Edelux, Oehler would be the first to screech that it
was unprofessional behaviour.

How do you know? Go ahead, invite the engineers from competing firms
over. Can't wait to hear their takes on the issues, unfiltered by
corporate law and PR droids. Let's learn all about optics shrunk-to-fit
a marketing scheme, and their answers when asked about miniscule screw
sizes, or fork mounts breaking.

Andre Jute wrote:
He publishes test scenario, parameters and resulting data for
everyone to base his own conclusions on those, a common practise
for engineers.

Oehler publishes his tests of competitive products in consumer
magazines as supposedly unbiased tests.

Obviously those magazines are fine to put their name and reputation
behind that claim, besides several co-authors on some articles.
Common practise.


If a Philips engineer conducted a test, which was then published
in a Dutch magazine, lauding his own products over everyone
else's, in the terms that Oehler does, Oehler would be the first
to scream "Foul!"

You start from the assumption of manipulation, and then of course
can't come to any other result.

The German market is important and those publications run in highly
visible magazines. One would assume that biased tests would trigger
reactions from discriminated competitors towards the magazine's
editors. Especially from competitors that command significant
higher advertising budgets than Schmidt. I've seen comments on the
offered conclusions, but I've never seen negative comments on the
published data/pictures allowing everyone to come to their own
conclusions.


If a Philips engineer published a gloating photo of a broken
Edelux, Oehler would be the first to screech that it was
unprofessional behaviour.

Based on past experience I assume he would inquiry about the
accident leading to that damage, comment on the failure and note if
there was a possible repair.

A fact isn't unprofessional. Trying to base claims on facts which
are not supporting them is unprofessional.


Your attempt to redirect the argument from the principle of
avoiding conflicts of interest to the minutiae of Oehler's test
is a debating trick unworthy of you. Whether Oehler's test is
good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant; the fact is that Oehler as
an employee of one of the manufacturers of the goods tested should
not be involved in those tests at all.

You didn't get one of the major principles of science: an experiment
counts regardless of the experimenter. Either it's well documented
and the results are reproducible, or not.


Yes, I'm aware that German hobbyist magazines have far lower
standards than those in Anglophone nations; the excuse always
given is that they are so much smaller that they cannot afford
independent tests, and Oehler already has the test equipment.
That's the same brand of limply complaisant garbage as your
apologia above for Oehler's constant knocking of his competitors.
Furthermore, those magazines see themselves as the promoters of
German industry rather than independent commentators. It's a form
of xenophobia and industrial nationalism.

You're venturing into conspiracy theory, have fun!


--
Best regards
helmut springer panta rhei

Andre Jute wrote:
I admire your loyalty to your friend but you're attempting to
defend the indefensible.

On a sidenote I doubt Andreas would necessarily call me a friend.
But based on a lot of discussions and disputes I do feel inclined to
acknowledge his adherence to professional standards, yes.

--
Best regards
helmut springer panta rhei

On Jan 10, 2:48*am, sms wrote:
On 1/9/2013 3:15 PM, Helmut Springer wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:
Oehler not only comments freely on competitive products, he
pretends to be unbiased, conducting tests published in German
magazines,

He publishes test scenario, parameters and resulting data for
everyone to base his own conclusions on those, a common practise for
engineers. *You might now agree on the test scenario, the general
view in Germany tends to see them as plausible.

Tell us then, Andreas, does an Edelux not break if you drop it?

The context is fixed mount vs. easily detachable. *The drawback of
the latter is the higher risk to drop it while putting it on/off.

That may be true, but I think that it's the $200 Edelux that I'd most
want to detach and take with me when leaving the bike somewhere.

Quite so, Scharfie. But a problem immediately arises. The closest
easily removable lamp to an Edelux is a BUMM Ixon Speed, same optics,
around the same elevated (read "exclusive", understand "exclusionary")
price. But the definitive authority Andreas Oehler -- if we believe
Helmut Springer's interpretation, and why should we not? -- says the
BUMM Ixus is an inferior lamp because it is more easily dropped.

Personally, I rate lamps by their contribution to my comfort and
security on the bicycle, not by how they temp thieves or wriggle
through the fingers of the cackhanded.

On the Oehler-Scharf Continuum then, the Cyo/Fly/Edelux/Ixus Mutual
Admiration Lamps ($90-astronomical) are out as too mean of beam or too
much attracted to the hard concrete, and only the self-contained LED
MR16 ($6-10) survives as difficult to drop or steal, and, above all,
throwing enough light in the right places not to be described as
incompetently designed.

Lamps as cheap as the MR16 are not much of a choice for those who're
making a life's work up upholding BIcycling for the Euro-Elite,
defining their worth as cyclists by recognizable brand names (NOT
Taiwanese or Japanese, and DEFINITELY NOT Chinese) that they own.

Makes one proud to be associated with such a bunch of self-confessed
fashion victims.

Andre Jute

On 1/10/2013 6:00 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

Lamps as cheap as the MR16 are not much of a choice for those who're
making a life's work up upholding BIcycling for the Euro-Elite,
defining their worth as cyclists by recognizable brand names (NOT
Taiwanese or Japanese, and DEFINITELY NOT Chinese) that they own.

You could use one-way bolts to hold the MR16 onto the bike, but if
someone really wants to steal it then it's not a big deal, at $10 or so.
It's quite ironic that one of the best dynamo lights in terms of optics
and beam shape is also the least expensive by far.

But not everyone has the mechanical skills or willingness to build
something an enclosure and mount for an MR16. For those people I
recommend this lamp
http://dx.com/p/3w-3-led-270-lumen-waterproof-flood-light-projection-warm-white-lamp-12v-47572.
It's a bit more expensive at $24.50, but it's less effort (you'd still
have to solder and heat shrink wires onto the short cable out of the
lamp). At least it's all sealed and waterproof.

For battery powered lights I prefer the "grab and go" type of mount,
though I'll deal with a no-tools attachment system if necessary. For my
spousal unit who isn't going to want to fiddle with latches, clips,
rubber spacers, wing nuts, or Velcro, either the light has to be
permanently attached or "grab and go." Since her route is such that
dynamo lighting is not sufficient, she has to use battery powered
lights. I wasn't satisfied with any of the plastic and rubber handlebar
mounts so I built one using Maglite ASXCAT6 Clips (plastic, but very
strong plastic) http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000056BMV and a Driftmaster
1 Inch Rail Li'l Pro 215-B
http://www.driftmaster.com/files/roundrail.gif, and a short piece of
aluminum flat bar. http://nordicgroup.us/s78/images/IMG_0303.JPG.

At Interbike, in talking to bicycle lighting companies, their task is
convincing customers to spend $150-300 on a battery powered lighting
system versus using an LED flashlight and handlebar mount (and there
were many handlebar mounts for flashlights at the show as well). There
were no high end dynamo lighting companies at the show, other than a few
hub manufacturers that have some dynamo hubs as part of their product
line. A couple of high end manufacturers had bicycles with dynamo
lights, i.e. Tern, which had one of the new dynamo hubs that has a
clutch so you can disconnect the dynamo when not needed to reduce drag.
They also had the Biologic Joule 3 which is 73% efficient, beating the
Schmidt hub significantly, unless the 66% efficiency for the Schmidt hub
has improved since the last test I could find. The Joule 3 isn't cheap
though, it's $150 as an aftermarket part. That's still significantly
cheaper than the Schmidt hub though.