|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
Greens wrote:
"Peter Cole" wrote in message . .. Greens wrote: Conclusion: I'm going to blame my crappy headlight. It's only good for roads on which there are no cars and no gravel patches or surprises like pot holes and large dead animals. Shoulders have a lot of crap on them. Much easier to see in the day. I may have to get a much brighter light or face the effects of crash at 20 mph which can break bones or get your run over. The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light. It gives false confidence. It has surprising weaknesses that can lead to disaster. There are "seeing" lights and "be seen" lights. The best rule of thumb is "never outride your lights". Sounds like you either had a "be seen" light where you needed a "seeing" light, or you were riding 20mph with a 10mph light. Again, should it be left up to the individual cyclist to think of when a "be seen" light or "seeing" light is necessary? Individuals don't have time to test things extensively. They have to trust merchants and manufacturers. Those parties are only interested in making profits. The solution is regulation. Perhaps. But I think what you mean is *more* regulation. Currently, bicycle lighting seems covered on a state-by-state basis. My state (MA) requires a headlight visible from 500', a taillight (or reflector) visible from 600', and pedal or ankle reflectors visible from 600' (where the 600' implies lit from normal low beams). That's it. There's no requirement for the amount of road illumination. Whether you ride or not, you're using a public road. Certain safety requirements need to be met because everyone faces the same oncoming vehicles and road hazards. It doesn't matter how cheap their vehicle is. Do you think that pedestrians and cyclists should be exempt from safety requirements? That's how it is now. You can walk, children can walk on the side of high speed traffic without any lights or reflectors. Is that how you want things to be? I'd rather not broaden the question to include walkers. It's not how I'd send my kids out, and I'll leave it at that. As for lights, the law seems to be aimed at protecting cyclists from being hit by motorists, not for protecting cyclists from road hazards. I'm no expert, but I believe some countries do have more demanding requirements for lights. I guess that would be a good thing, or at least to have a minimum spec for manufacturers to certify to, whether it was required or not. This is the sort of issue a bike shop is there to help with. Most shops stock a variety of lights and have the expertise to help you select. If you buy mail-order or discount house, you're on your own, which is true for a lot of other things besides lights. Of course there are resources like this group, there are usually several threads on lights around this time of the year (don't forget the archives). As I said before, the cardinal rule is: never outride your lights. People's night vision varies, weather varies, ambient light varies, etc. Sometimes you just don't have enough light for the conditions and you have to adjust your speed accordingly. I might also add that shoulders are a pretty bad place to ride, particularly at night. I usually try to observe the "debris line", which marks the edge of the area swept by car tires. I ride just to the left of it (US). If there's a paved shoulder and a fog line painted to mark the lane edge, I may use it if it's clean, but that's a tough call, especially at night -- it's not guaranteed to be clean -- crap in the travel lane usually gets flattened or swept aside, not true on the shoulder. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
On Sep 25, 11:11 am, "Greens" wrote:
"Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" wrote in oglegroups.com... Greens wrote: At the risk of sounding obsessed with safety, I will describe an incident this evening while riding downhill on a road I've only been on once before. Please note; I'd rather this didn't turn into a discussion about me or my obsessions, rather I'd prefer it if other night riders shared their tales of near disaster and disaster not averted. This would be in the interest of educating the night riding public in avoiding problems. It was dark, clear night and I was using my Cateye EL 300 headlight with new batteries. I was going downhill on the shoulder of a well maintened road. Cars were few. All of a sudden I noticed something just ahead. It looked like white rocks. I thought about ten rocks, each a half inch to an inch in diameter. It was too late to do anything else. I ran right into them and to my surprise I found my front wheel on my mountain bike sliding sideways about six inches. Just as I was about to go down, I cleared the rocks. A little shaken, I made note of a house with lights on either side of the garage door lit so that I might drive back and look the thing over in better light. The rider passing before me hadn't noticed anything. I noticed a colorful barrel marking some recent work in the middle of the shoulder not too much further along. There I swerved around the barrel into the traffic lanes rather than hit the barrel. I drove back and found the garage and it's lights. Drove along slowly and found.... a graveled entrance to... who knows and who cares? The gravel covered the whole shoulder for about the width of a driveway. How is it that I didn't spot this sooner? Why didn't the previous rider have trouble with this? My guess is a car had been coming and I kept my head down to avoid being blinded. This cuts down my visibility to about 25 feet. Going downhill at maybe 18 or 20mph that doesn't leave a lot of time to do evasive manuvers, but also if the oncoming car was timed just right, he might have gone by just before I got to the gravel when I was adjusting to my low light LED. Conclusion: I'm going to blame my crappy headlight. It's only good for roads on which there are no cars and no gravel patches or surprises like pot holes and large dead animals. Shoulders have a lot of crap on them. Much easier to see in the day. I may have to get a much brighter light or face the effects of crash at 20 mph which can break bones or get your run over. The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light. It gives false confidence. It has surprising weaknesses that can lead to disaster. Absolutely..take NO responsibility for yourself, blame Cateye-Huh??? Look at how bright the light is and ride accordingly...If you take a road bike with 20mm tires onto a MTB trail and then crash, are ya gonna blame the tire maker? If you want a brighter light, buy a brighter light and be prepared to pay more for it. No such thing as a free lunch. Have you had a near disaster while riding at night? Post your experience and conclusion. Riding downhill at the speed I was going was a reasonable speed. The cars were few and 99.999% of the road was smooth. Am I supposed to ride at 10mph the whole 7 miles just in case there is a patch of gravel? Seems unlikely anyone would be that cautious. That's why I blame the light and Cateye for not testing the light extensively in actual use. A little night use of the light by responsible evaluators would quickly turn up it's weaknesses and dangers but cateye and the people selling them are only interested in capturing the cheapskate market who wants to ride at night. They know that most people won't buy a $400 light for a few nights of riding and they know that those same people will spend $40 towards the same purpose if they're adequately assured (bull****ted) that it is safe so they put the light on the market even though they know the light is an inadequate piece of crap. If someone gets hurt and actually has the ballls to go to court, they know that cyclists have a reputation for being odd and that bicycles aren't seen as legitimate road vehicles in court. The light won't be held to the same standards of safety that a light on a licensed motor vehicle.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "capturing the cheapskate market who wants to ride at night." You wouldn't happen to be part of this cheapskate market, would you Greens? At some point, the individual has to take some responsibility. If the light is good for 10mph, that's what you ride at. In town with well-lit streets, that light is probably fine for doing the primary job of a light in that situation, namely making other traffic aware of the cyclist. Smokey |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
wrote in message ps.com... On Sep 25, 6:11 pm, "Greens" wrote: Riding downhill at the speed I was going was a reasonable speed. The cars were few and 99.999% of the road was smooth. Am I supposed to ride at 10mph the whole 7 miles just in case there is a patch of gravel? Yes. If the light only lights up far enough to see stuff in time to react at 10mph, that what you have to do. Seems unlikely anyone would be that cautious. That's why I blame the light and Cateye for not testing the light extensively in actual use. A little night use of the light by responsible evaluators would quickly turn up it's weaknesses and dangers but cateye and the people selling them are only interested in capturing the cheapskate market who wants to ride at night. They know that most people won't buy a $400 light for a few nights of riding and they know that those same people will spend $40 towards the same purpose if they're adequately assured (bull****ted) that it is safe so they put the light on the market even though they know the light is an inadequate piece of crap. If someone gets hurt and actually has the ballls to go to court, they know that cyclists have a reputation for being odd and that bicycles aren't seen as legitimate road vehicles in court. The light won't be held to the same standards of safety that a light on a licensed motor vehicle. I think yuo a reading WAY more into this than there is. Products of all sorts come in a variety of quality and utlity levels. You can buy cheap-o screwdrivers that barely work one time, or you can get top- notch stuff. Sometimes the cheap one is all you need, sometimes it's not. Same with everything else. Joseph You can buy cheap crap like that THESE DAYS, but you couldn't do that 40 years ago when there were real hardware stores, Sonny. See years ago, you'd go to the hardware store and there'd be the owner there and he wouldn't sell you a piece of **** without telling you it was a piece of **** that nobody in their right mind would want to own. He'd be looking out for you and for himself. His store was small not like home depot and lowes. There was no room for carrying cheap **** and the attitude back then was that tools were a serious thing that shouldn't be crap. The new attitude is "If they'll buy it, **** it, we'll sell it to them. Build a bigger store and parking lot. Fire all the guys with experience. Hire a bunch of ex hamburger flippers that don't know anything and sell any ****ing thing. Get out of the advice business unless it's to give bad advice like buy on our easy payment plan or buy our service contract for our **** product that won't last." LOL rant over |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 25, 11:11 am, "Greens" wrote: "Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" wrote in oglegroups.com... Greens wrote: At the risk of sounding obsessed with safety, I will describe an incident this evening while riding downhill on a road I've only been on once before. Please note; I'd rather this didn't turn into a discussion about me or my obsessions, rather I'd prefer it if other night riders shared their tales of near disaster and disaster not averted. This would be in the interest of educating the night riding public in avoiding problems. It was dark, clear night and I was using my Cateye EL 300 headlight with new batteries. I was going downhill on the shoulder of a well maintened road. Cars were few. All of a sudden I noticed something just ahead. It looked like white rocks. I thought about ten rocks, each a half inch to an inch in diameter. It was too late to do anything else. I ran right into them and to my surprise I found my front wheel on my mountain bike sliding sideways about six inches. Just as I was about to go down, I cleared the rocks. A little shaken, I made note of a house with lights on either side of the garage door lit so that I might drive back and look the thing over in better light. The rider passing before me hadn't noticed anything. I noticed a colorful barrel marking some recent work in the middle of the shoulder not too much further along. There I swerved around the barrel into the traffic lanes rather than hit the barrel. I drove back and found the garage and it's lights. Drove along slowly and found.... a graveled entrance to... who knows and who cares? The gravel covered the whole shoulder for about the width of a driveway. How is it that I didn't spot this sooner? Why didn't the previous rider have trouble with this? My guess is a car had been coming and I kept my head down to avoid being blinded. This cuts down my visibility to about 25 feet. Going downhill at maybe 18 or 20mph that doesn't leave a lot of time to do evasive manuvers, but also if the oncoming car was timed just right, he might have gone by just before I got to the gravel when I was adjusting to my low light LED. Conclusion: I'm going to blame my crappy headlight. It's only good for roads on which there are no cars and no gravel patches or surprises like pot holes and large dead animals. Shoulders have a lot of crap on them. Much easier to see in the day. I may have to get a much brighter light or face the effects of crash at 20 mph which can break bones or get your run over. The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light. It gives false confidence. It has surprising weaknesses that can lead to disaster. Absolutely..take NO responsibility for yourself, blame Cateye-Huh??? Look at how bright the light is and ride accordingly...If you take a road bike with 20mm tires onto a MTB trail and then crash, are ya gonna blame the tire maker? If you want a brighter light, buy a brighter light and be prepared to pay more for it. No such thing as a free lunch. Have you had a near disaster while riding at night? Post your experience and conclusion. Riding downhill at the speed I was going was a reasonable speed. The cars were few and 99.999% of the road was smooth. Am I supposed to ride at 10mph the whole 7 miles just in case there is a patch of gravel? Seems unlikely anyone would be that cautious. That's why I blame the light and Cateye for not testing the light extensively in actual use. A little night use of the light by responsible evaluators would quickly turn up it's weaknesses and dangers but cateye and the people selling them are only interested in capturing the cheapskate market who wants to ride at night. They know that most people won't buy a $400 light for a few nights of riding and they know that those same people will spend $40 towards the same purpose if they're adequately assured (bull****ted) that it is safe so they put the light on the market even though they know the light is an inadequate piece of crap. If someone gets hurt and actually has the ballls to go to court, they know that cyclists have a reputation for being odd and that bicycles aren't seen as legitimate road vehicles in court. The light won't be held to the same standards of safety that a light on a licensed motor vehicle.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "capturing the cheapskate market who wants to ride at night." You wouldn't happen to be part of this cheapskate market, would you Greens? At some point, the individual has to take some responsibility. If the light is good for 10mph, that's what you ride at. In town with well-lit streets, that light is probably fine for doing the primary job of a light in that situation, namely making other traffic aware of the cyclist. Smokey Yea. I love the cheap stuff, but that's because the value of the expensive stuff isn't sold. They don't push wise choices. They push easy, cheap, this is what you want, who gives a **** what you need, marketing. Cheap stuff, if it causes serious injury, is not cheap. How much is treatment for a broken arm compared to $500 for a good light? It's nothing. Avoiding the pain and inconvenience of a broken arm is worth $500. Avoiding the huge hospital and doctor bills is worth even more. But how do they sell the lights? Look in the catalogs. They tell you this light is one of the brightest LED's available from the geniuses at Cateye. I called Performance up and the technician told me those cheap lights are "safety lights". They're there for you to be seen not to see. This isn't clearly spelled out in the ads. The idea that giving you false confidence in a cheap light is "safety" is perverse. If anything they're luring you into a dangerous practice so they can make a few measly bucks that they do on cheap lights. As it turns out, the light isn't even that good for being seen. Cars see something, but they don't know what it is. It looks like a flashlight. It could be snowmobile or ATV. Mostly I think they're wondering, "What the hell is he doing on the road at night? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
"Wayne" wrote in message oups.com... On Sep 25, 11:19 am, "Greens" wrote: "Peter Cole" wrote in message . .. Greens wrote: Conclusion: I'm going to blame my crappy headlight. It's only good for roads on which there are no cars and no gravel patches or surprises like pot holes and large dead animals. Shoulders have a lot of crap on them. Much easier to see in the day. I may have to get a much brighter light or face the effects of crash at 20 mph which can break bones or get your run over. The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light. It gives false confidence. It has surprising weaknesses that can lead to disaster. There are "seeing" lights and "be seen" lights. The best rule of thumb is "never outride your lights". Sounds like you either had a "be seen" light where you needed a "seeing" light, or you were riding 20mph with a 10mph light. Again, should it be left up to the individual cyclist to think of when a "be seen" light or "seeing" light is necessary? Individuals don't have time to test things extensively. They have to trust merchants and manufacturers. Those parties are only interested in making profits. The solution is regulation. Whether you ride or not, you're using a public road. Certain safety requirements need to be met because everyone faces the same oncoming vehicles and road hazards. It doesn't matter how cheap their vehicle is. Do you think that pedestrians and cyclists should be exempt from safety requirements? That's how it is now. You can walk, children can walk on the side of high speed traffic without any lights or reflectors. Is that how you want things to be? I pass a commuter on his bike to a fast food place each morning. He travels slowly down a well lit road and he rides an inexpensive old cruiser. He uses one of those cheap battery lights and it serves the vital purpose of making him highly visible. If your proposed regulation permitted only the sale of powerful lights that would cost him about a weeks pay, this guy just would probably just ride without one. Cheap lights are better than no lights. Wayne Not if they cops told him he couldn't ride on the road at night without a light. In New York it's the law. I don't know if it's enforced. I saw kids riding around at night last night with no reflectors or lights of any kind just like kids always have. They made some sarcastic comments as we went by too. "Nice lights". Yea? How do you like my mace, you fricken delinquents, lol? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
"Peter Cole" wrote in message . .. Greens wrote: "Peter Cole" wrote in message . .. Greens wrote: Conclusion: I'm going to blame my crappy headlight. It's only good for roads on which there are no cars and no gravel patches or surprises like pot holes and large dead animals. Shoulders have a lot of crap on them. Much easier to see in the day. I may have to get a much brighter light or face the effects of crash at 20 mph which can break bones or get your run over. The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light. It gives false confidence. It has surprising weaknesses that can lead to disaster. There are "seeing" lights and "be seen" lights. The best rule of thumb is "never outride your lights". Sounds like you either had a "be seen" light where you needed a "seeing" light, or you were riding 20mph with a 10mph light. Again, should it be left up to the individual cyclist to think of when a "be seen" light or "seeing" light is necessary? Individuals don't have time to test things extensively. They have to trust merchants and manufacturers. Those parties are only interested in making profits. The solution is regulation. Perhaps. But I think what you mean is *more* regulation. Currently, bicycle lighting seems covered on a state-by-state basis. My state (MA) requires a headlight visible from 500', a taillight (or reflector) visible from 600', and pedal or ankle reflectors visible from 600' (where the 600' implies lit from normal low beams). That's it. There's no requirement for the amount of road illumination. Whether you ride or not, you're using a public road. Certain safety requirements need to be met because everyone faces the same oncoming vehicles and road hazards. It doesn't matter how cheap their vehicle is. Do you think that pedestrians and cyclists should be exempt from safety requirements? That's how it is now. You can walk, children can walk on the side of high speed traffic without any lights or reflectors. Is that how you want things to be? I'd rather not broaden the question to include walkers. It's not how I'd send my kids out, and I'll leave it at that. As for lights, the law seems to be aimed at protecting cyclists from being hit by motorists, not for protecting cyclists from road hazards. I'm no expert, but I believe some countries do have more demanding requirements for lights. I guess that would be a good thing, or at least to have a minimum spec for manufacturers to certify to, whether it was required or not. This is the sort of issue a bike shop is there to help with. Most shops stock a variety of lights and have the expertise to help you select. If you buy mail-order or discount house, you're on your own, which is true for a lot of other things besides lights. Of course there are resources like this group, there are usually several threads on lights around this time of the year (don't forget the archives). As I said before, the cardinal rule is: never outride your lights. People's night vision varies, weather varies, ambient light varies, etc. Sometimes you just don't have enough light for the conditions and you have to adjust your speed accordingly. I might also add that shoulders are a pretty bad place to ride, particularly at night. I usually try to observe the "debris line", which marks the edge of the area swept by car tires. I ride just to the left of it (US). If there's a paved shoulder and a fog line painted to mark the lane edge, I may use it if it's clean, but that's a tough call, especially at night -- it's not guaranteed to be clean -- crap in the travel lane usually gets flattened or swept aside, not true on the shoulder. I agree with most of what you said. I don't agree that discount houses should be allowed to sell any old junk when it comes to safety. Regulation can see to it that they don't. Lots of cyclists are very pro freedom and anti regulation. What could be cooler than to be against stupid regulations? The thing is there are reasons for rules and uniformity. You can't drive as fast as you want with a car. You can't just duct tape flashlights on your car. Why should that sort of thing be allowed with bicycles? You're using public roads with all kinds of vehicles. An unconscious cyclist laying in the middle of the road because of unseen road debris is a hazard to all the cars and bikes on the road as well as to himself (or at least he was a hazard to himself). It's just false to say they can't control what people put on their bicycles for lighting. What they really mean is they're too lazy to bother with them. The attitude is "go kill yourself if you want. We don't care. We can't be bothered to set up standards." |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
"Crescentius Vespasianus" wrote in message ... Buy the equipment you need for safe night bike riding. The one time I had to do some hospital time from a day time bike crash cost me $1000, and the insurance company $5000 more. So that's the benchmark I use. So if you compare it to that, batteries and lights and some reflector gear is really quite cheap. Buy a good handlebar light, a helmet mounted light and you are business. The el-300 doesn't cut it, the el-500 is the best of the cheap cateye lights. The helmet mounted princeton tec EOS is pretty good for road, and you point the beam right in front, when blinded by car high beams. Put a couple good rear lights on the back, and put some ankle reflectors on, and you'll be seen by cars. Most rear lights, I've seen do a pretty good job, even the cheap ones. But I use rechargeable batteries in them, to make them as bright as possible. The best rear light you can buy is naturally useless, with dead or dying batteries. I prefer night riding to day riding, but you have to have the right stuff. I'm agree with you completely. I use two tail lights so they're redundant. If one goes out, I might not know it, but at least I've got the second light. I've rigged one tail light to the back of my helmet so that it's up higher and can be seen further away and through higher SUV windows. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
Greens wrote:
Conclusion: I'm going to blame my crappy headlight -snip- The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light -snip- I don't agree that discount houses should be allowed to sell any old junk when it comes to safety. Regulation can see to it that they don't. -snip- The attitude is "go kill yourself if you want. We don't care. We can't be bothered to set up standards." Sounds good to me. Is there a problem? -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Hazards of night cycling
Greens wrote:
The industry, if it had any scruples, shouldn't even sell a weak light. It gives false confidence. It has surprising weaknesses that can lead to disaster. The issue of crappy lights being legal lights for bicycles is indeed a problem. It gives people a false sense of security when they mount a toy light to their handlebars. Those lights are good for "being seen" and being legal, but they are not for very dark areas, or riding at a relatively quick pace. If you want to ride 15-20 mph at night in very dark places, get some good lights. There are a lot of new lighting products on the market and you can get started for well under $100 with a powerful battery powered headlight with a proper beam that illuminates not only sufficiently far ahead, but off to the sides as well. For around town, you can get some dynamo lights, but they aren't powerful enough for the type of cycling where you had your little incident, except for perhaps the new Solidlight 1203D. Look into some of the new Cree LED flashlights as well. This is a relatively inexpensive alternative to lights like the DiNotte (still not as cheap as a CatEye EL300). Simply type "Bicycle Lighting" into the Google Search box, then click "I'm Feeling Lucky." You'll be taken to the pre-eminent web site for bicycle lighting in the world. This site will show you how to set up lighting that enables you to ride more safely at night. Steve "http://bicyclelighting.com" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Anyone see the cycling movie last night? | Treadly | Australia | 6 | June 13th 06 12:05 AM |
Using cycling glasses at night. | Drinky | UK | 10 | November 21st 05 11:19 PM |
Cycling night on BBC 4 | Steph Peters | UK | 4 | July 2nd 05 12:23 PM |
What's the deal with NIGHT cycling? | Astro-Geek | General | 7 | August 16th 04 02:23 PM |
cycling night on bbc 4 | flembo | UK | 18 | July 31st 04 02:32 PM |