DynoHubs: What light bulbs/LED emitters?

On Mar 15, 7:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote yet another
of his ever-expanding tirades of insults. In the interest of brevity,
I'll respond to only a few points:

wrote:


Here in the US, the twinkling or flashing LED taillight has become the
nighttime signature of a cyclist (or at least, the subset that bothers
with lights at all). This has nothing much to do with driver
attitudes.

Who said it did, Krygo?

It was silly of you to challenge me on that paragraph, Andre. The
point of the paragraph was that I disagreed with Andreas on the issue
of flashing lights. You should have simply agreed with me.
Unfortunately, your bile overwhelmed you again. Calm down.

I agree with Andreas: rotationally symmetric beams on a road vehicle
are, at best, crude and ham-fisted. Their popularity with certain
unsophisticated consumers doesn't change that fact.

Yawn. True to your dishonest form, Krygowski, you've cut away the part
of my letter which makes clear that what Andreas is doing is saying:
These lights made by BUMM are good enough for Germans, so they should
be good enough for you, and me saying, Bull****.

I'm sorry if my trimming for brevity confuses you. I thought there
was only one poster here who couldn't understand that standard
practice.

However, while you have complained about others putting words in your
mouth, you seem to be doing the same regarding Andreas. His question
and suggestion were much more gentle than your distorted claim. The
original was:

"Why can millions of people ride [safely] with dynamo light sets in
central
Europe but you can't? Maybe your behaviour or your risk perception
should
be altered." [I think I've properly corrected his original "save",
in brackets.]

And indeed, it is a valid question. It's not uncommon for people in a
non-bicycling culture to have exaggerated ideas of bicycling danger,
and to contend that only extraordinary equipment can make one safe.
Perhaps you do need to revise your cycling behavior, if it's really
risky, or revise your perceptions, if they're really so fearful. It's
not that bad out there.

You simply don't need as much light going up into the sky as you need
downward onto the road; it's a waste. That should be obvious to
anyone.

Another straw man argument. Remember, I've built those lights, and
used bought ones?

As have I. And I've ridden with others who used them. And we've
examined their strengths and weaknesses. A workshop on bike lights
can be very educational.

I know that you point them downwards and most of the
light goes where it is wanted, in an oval on the road, with some
spilling onto the close hedge beside the road for orientation.

Here's the problem with that strategy: The symmetrical beam of a non-
road-specific light (like an MR-16 or MR-11) is brightest at its
center. If you tilt the lamp to prevent shooting lumens at the stars,
you've got an overly bright patch of pavement close to the front of
your bike. This affects your night vision, in effect burning out much
of your peripheral vision. Furthermore, the beam doesn't penetrate
very far down the road, because the part that's left pointed down the
road is relatively dim.

Again, for road work you need moderate beam intensity closer to the
vehicle, since the distances, angles and visual requirements are all
not very extreme; you can make use of higher beam intensity close to
the horizon, to allow you to see further down the road; and you need
much, much less beam intensity above the horizon, since the light
hitting drivers' eyes comes direct from your lamp. It's very visible
to them without requiring much power.

Some trials with different equipment, with the help of some friends,
should make all that clear.

To put a finer point on it, it's better to have more
intensity closer to the horizon, to shine further down the road, and a
bit less to shine directly in front of the bike.

I want both and I get it, and enough of it with battery lights.

And that's fine. I prefer generator lights because there is no hassle
about tending or replacing or charging or remembering batteries. My
bike is always ready to ride at night, at a moment's notice. I also
find the reliability is significantly higher in other ways.

However, I've long been amazed that optics are excellent in most
generator headlamps; optics are very good to excellent in many low-end
bike headlamps powered by disposable cells; but optics are almost
always junk in the pricey rechargeable bike lights. The design
philosophy seems to be "We got us a good battery, so it doesn't matter
where the light goes; we'll just pump out a lot of it." It's a
caveman approach to design.

If I were to go back to battery powered lights, I think I'd still use
a generator headlamp and power it with a battery. (In fact, I have
one friend who has used that strategy.)

The point about the best and most expensive of those dynohub lights is
that none of them put out enough light. Let me repeat that: there is
no dynohub light that puts out enough light for any but the most
undemanding circumstances, like riding on the sidewalk or perhaps on
quiet, lit streets

Absolutely false. Nearly half the American RUSA contingent in the
last Paris-Brest-Paris competition used dynamo lights. And a post-
ride survey showed they were more satisfied with their lights than the
battery-powered group. See http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/BQPBPEquipsurvey.pdf

I think most would agree Paris-Brest-Paris is a bit more extreme than
sidewalk riding.

You see an example
by shining your car's or motorcycle's headlamp at a wall.

I don't have a car or a motorcycle, Krygo, and haven't since 1992. I'm
a responsible world citizen. Are you?

:-) Were you a "responsible world citizen" when you drove your car 70
mph on a very narrow country lane, as you bragged? Or did the
authorities decide to make a responsible citizen out of you by
removing your operator's license for that offense?

In any case, you must be on speaking terms with _someone_ who owns a
modern car or motorcycle. Ask them to shine the headlights at a wall
for you. Note the efficient shape of the beam, the cutoff above the
horizon, the brighter intensity near the horizon.

In any event, what is the relevance of car lights to bicycle lights?

The relevance is that car lights, and motorcycle lights, and even
moped and scooter lights, are designed to illuminate the road
efficiently without blinding other road users. Good quality bike
lights should do the same. In fact, given the practical necessity for
efficiency on a bike, they should pay even more attention to optics.
Pumping out unfocused mega-lumens (at cost of battery size, weight and
life) is like using 1/8" diameter spokes made of mild steel. It's
primitive and inefficient.


...you're talking crap ...

Crap.

...dickhead...

... Shove it up your ass, sonny.

You're an idiot and a fool...

... crap...

... poor dumb wannabe

... son of a bitch, aren't you...

... butt out...

Andre, many of use know your style is to try to "win" by being
unbearably obnoxious. When we stop responding to you, as I will now,
it's not because your intellect has triumphed. It's because your
verbal diarrhea is too ugly to bother with.

- Frank Krygowski

On Mar 15, 6:48*pm, franky krygowski shatters another irony meter:

Krygo babble snipped for brevity


(Written to Andre Jute)


*When we stop responding to you, as I will now,
it's not because your intellect has triumphed. *It's because your
verbal diarrhea is too ugly to bother with.



Good Gawd, Franky!!! You really are totally lacking even a semblance
of self-awareness, aren't you?

wrote:

When we stop responding to you, as I will now,
it's not because your intellect has triumphed. It's because your
verbal diarrhea is too ugly to bother with.

Run, rabbit, run.

Below is Krygo's post in full for students of irony. One has to wonder
how long since there has been a mirror in Krygo's house: ten years
since he split the last one? I don't suppose Krygo can even spell
"intellectual dishonesty".

Andre Jute
Darwin's little helper

On Mar 16, 12:48*am, wrote:
On Mar 15, 7:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote yet another
of his ever-expanding tirades of insults. *In the interest of brevity,
I'll respond to only a few points:

wrote:

Here in the US, the twinkling or flashing LED taillight has become the
nighttime signature of a cyclist (or at least, the subset that bothers
with lights at all). *This has nothing much to do with driver
attitudes.

Who said it did, Krygo?

It was silly of you to challenge me on that paragraph, Andre. *The
point of the paragraph was that I disagreed with Andreas on the issue
of flashing lights. *You should have simply agreed with me.
Unfortunately, your bile overwhelmed you again. *Calm down.

I agree with Andreas: rotationally symmetric beams on a road vehicle
are, at best, crude and ham-fisted. *Their popularity with certain
unsophisticated consumers doesn't change that fact.

Yawn. True to your dishonest form, Krygowski, you've cut away the part
of my letter which makes clear that what Andreas is doing is saying:
These lights made by BUMM are good enough for Germans, so they should
be good enough for you, and me saying, Bull****.

I'm sorry if my trimming for brevity confuses you. *I thought there
was only one poster here who couldn't understand that standard
practice.

However, while you have complained about others putting words in your
mouth, you seem to be doing the same regarding Andreas. *His question
and suggestion were much more gentle than your distorted claim. *The
original was:

"Why can millions of people ride [safely] with dynamo light sets in
central
Europe but you can't? Maybe your behaviour or your risk perception
should
be altered." * *[I think I've properly corrected his original "save",
in brackets.]

And indeed, it is a valid question. *It's not uncommon for people in a
non-bicycling culture to have exaggerated ideas of bicycling danger,
and to contend that only extraordinary equipment can make one safe.
Perhaps you do need to revise your cycling behavior, *if it's really
risky, or revise your perceptions, if they're really so fearful. *It's
not that bad out there.

You simply don't need as much light going up into the sky as you need
downward onto the road; it's a waste. *That should be obvious to
anyone.

Another straw man argument. Remember, I've built those lights, and
used bought ones?

As have I. *And I've ridden with others who used them. *And we've
examined their strengths and weaknesses. *A workshop on bike lights
can be very educational.

I know that you point them downwards and most of the
light goes where it is wanted, in an oval on the road, with some
spilling onto the close hedge beside the road for orientation.

Here's the problem with that strategy: *The symmetrical beam of a non-
road-specific light (like an MR-16 or MR-11) is brightest at its
center. *If you tilt the lamp to prevent shooting lumens at the stars,
you've got an overly bright patch of pavement close to the front of
your bike. *This affects your night vision, in effect burning out much
of your peripheral vision. *Furthermore, the beam doesn't penetrate
very far down the road, because the part that's left pointed down the
road is relatively dim.

Again, for road work you need moderate beam intensity closer to the
vehicle, since the distances, angles and visual requirements are all
not very extreme; you can make use of higher beam intensity close to
the horizon, to allow you to see further down the road; and you need
much, much less beam intensity above the horizon, since the light
hitting drivers' eyes comes direct from your lamp. *It's very visible
to them without requiring much power.

Some trials with different equipment, with the help of some friends,
should make all that clear.

To put a finer point on it, it's better to have more
intensity closer to the horizon, to shine further down the road, and a
bit less to shine directly in front of the bike.

I want both and I get it, and enough of it with battery lights.

And that's fine. *I prefer generator lights because there is no hassle
about tending or replacing or charging or remembering batteries. *My
bike is always ready to ride at night, at a moment's notice. *I also
find the reliability is significantly higher in other ways.

However, I've long been amazed that optics are excellent in most
generator headlamps; optics are very good to excellent in many low-end
bike headlamps powered by disposable cells; but optics are almost
always junk in the pricey rechargeable bike lights. *The design
philosophy seems to be "We got us a good battery, so it doesn't matter
where the light goes; we'll just pump out a lot of it." *It's a
caveman approach to design.

If I were to go back to battery powered lights, I think I'd still use
a generator headlamp and power it with a battery. *(In fact, I have
one friend who has used that strategy.)

The point about the best and most expensive of those dynohub lights is
that none of them put out enough light. Let me repeat that: there is
no dynohub light that puts out enough light for any but the most
undemanding circumstances, like riding on the sidewalk or perhaps on
quiet, lit streets

Absolutely false. *Nearly half the American RUSA contingent in the
last Paris-Brest-Paris competition used dynamo lights. *And a post-
ride survey showed they were more satisfied with their lights than the
battery-powered group. *Seehttp://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/BQPBPEquipsurvey.pdf

I think most would agree Paris-Brest-Paris is a bit more extreme than
sidewalk riding.

You see an example
by shining your car's or motorcycle's headlamp at a wall.

I don't have a car or a motorcycle, Krygo, and haven't since 1992. I'm
a responsible world citizen. Are you?

:-) *Were you a "responsible world citizen" when you drove your car 70
mph on a very narrow country lane, as you bragged? *Or did the
authorities decide to make a responsible citizen out of you by
removing your operator's license for that offense?

In any case, you must be on speaking terms with _someone_ who owns a
modern car or motorcycle. *Ask them to shine the headlights at a wall
for you. *Note the efficient shape of the beam, the cutoff above the
horizon, the brighter intensity near the horizon.

In any event, what is the relevance of car lights to bicycle lights?

The relevance is that car lights, and motorcycle lights, and even
moped and scooter lights, are designed to illuminate the road
efficiently without blinding other road users. *Good quality bike
lights should do the same. *In fact, given the practical necessity for
efficiency on a bike, they should pay even more attention to optics.
Pumping out unfocused mega-lumens (at cost of battery size, weight and
life) is like using 1/8" diameter spokes made of mild steel. *It's
primitive and inefficient.



...you're talking crap ...

Crap.

...dickhead...

... Shove it up your ass, sonny.

*You're an idiot and a fool...

... crap...

... poor dumb wannabe

... son of a bitch, aren't you...

... butt out...

Andre, many of use know your style is to try to "win" by being
unbearably obnoxious. *When we stop responding to you, as I will now,
it's not because your intellect has triumphed. *It's because your
verbal diarrhea is too ugly to bother with.

- Frank Krygowski

In article
,
wrote:

On Mar 15, 7:24 pm, Andre Jute wrote yet another
of his ever-expanding tirades of insults. In the interest of
brevity, I'll respond to only a few points:

A good idea.

The point about the best and most expensive of those dynohub lights
is that none of them put out enough light. Let me repeat that:
there is no dynohub light that puts out enough light for any but
the most undemanding circumstances, like riding on the sidewalk or
perhaps on quiet, lit streets

I see you suffer from the same misunderstanding as another poster here.

Absolutely false. Nearly half the American RUSA contingent in the
last Paris-Brest-Paris competition used dynamo lights. And a post-
ride survey showed they were more satisfied with their lights than
the battery-powered group. See
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/BQPBPEquipsurvey.pdf

I think most would agree Paris-Brest-Paris is a bit more extreme than
sidewalk riding.

It is, and Andre is just plain wrong yet again.

On Mar 15, 2:09 pm, wrote:


With one exception, I've never been in a place where a legally lit
cyclist is not sufficiently conspicuous. I've satisfied myself
literally hundreds of times that I'm even more visible at night than I
am in daytime.

WTF?!?

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:19:47 -0700 (PDT), Dan O
wrote:

On Mar 15, 2:09 pm, wrote:


With one exception, I've never been in a place where a legally lit
cyclist is not sufficiently conspicuous. I've satisfied myself
literally hundreds of times that I'm even more visible at night than I
am in daytime.

WTF?!?

Dear Dan,

I expect that Frank's point is that at night even a small light is
noticeable at a much greater distance than a larger ordinary object in
daylight.

Your computer screen probably has a small green power light that you
scarcely notice when the room is lit. Turn the lights off and notice
how visible even that tiny light becomes.

The contrast between a light and the dark background catches the eye.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Per :
And that's fine. I prefer generator lights because there is no hassle
about tending or replacing or charging or remembering batteries. My
bike is always ready to ride at night, at a moment's notice. I also
find the reliability is significantly higher in other ways.

What are you currently using for headlight/tail light?

Also, is it just tolerance for varying voltages that makes lights
electrically generator-specific?

--
PeteCresswell

On Mar 16, 9:54 am, "(PeteCresswell)" wrote:
Per :

And that's fine. I prefer generator lights because there is no hassle
about tending or replacing or charging or remembering batteries. My
bike is always ready to ride at night, at a moment's notice. I also
find the reliability is significantly higher in other ways.

What are you currently using for headlight/tail light?

Let's see: On the two bikes I use most often at night, I've got Basta
Ellipsoid headlamps. Another bike has a Union headlamp. (I don't know
the model number - it's about 2.5" diameter, with an unusually convex
front lens.) My wife's bike has a Soubitez headlamp. There's also
the headlamp from a FER 2002 generator, and there's a tiny (maybe 1.5"
dia?) headlamp that's part of the Union "block" generator on a seldom-
used folding bike. These lights move around a bit from bike to bike,
depending on season, vacation trips, etc., and I've got others stored
in a drawer.

All these have halogen bulbs. Most are 2.4 watt, but overdriven by
virtue of having no generator taillight. One has a 3 watt bulb, but I
don't see much difference.

I like best the optics of that old Soubitez lamp, followed by the FER,
but I ride much more with the Bastas. The Union lamps are, I think,
not as good optically.

Usually I rely on LED blinky taillights powered by AA or AAA cells,
but my commuting bike also has a generator taillight. This too was
chosen for optics (improved over a previous tiny no-lens version), but
I can't tell you the brand. All bikes have various reflectors, but
nothing unusual.

Also, is it just tolerance for varying voltages that makes lights
electrically generator-specific?

I don't think that has much to do with it at all. Generator headlamps
are (almost always) separate units from the power source. If you use
a battery to pump 6 volts DC into a generator headlamp, it works just
fine, IME. But there are a couple uncertainties.

First, I've noticed that many of my 6V 2.4W halogen generator bulbs
have microscopic AC waveform icons stamped into the threaded base.
(Recall, bike generators are AC devices.) I don't know what could be
special about the bulbs for AC. Perhaps Andreas could tell us? But
again, I know they work with AC or DC. (Light Emitting Diodes are a
different matter, of course.)

Second uncertainty: If you decide to use a battery to power the good
optics of a generator lamp, you may be tempted to put in a more
powerful bulb. If you do, some lamps may have their plastic
reflectors damaged by the extra heat. It would depend, I suppose, on
the particular plastic they used for the reflector. I had that
problem way back when I hot rodded some non-generator handlebar-
mounted lamps. In that case, I cured it by using some silicone rubber
as thermal insulation between the bulb base and the reflector, taking
care to get the filament positioned properly at the focal point.

I've got an ancient Union generator headlamp with a metal reflector.
If I were to play around with battery power again, I'd use it.

- Frank Krygowski

In article
,
Dan O wrote:

On Mar 15, 2:09 pm, wrote:


With one exception, I've never been in a place where a legally lit
cyclist is not sufficiently conspicuous. I've satisfied myself
literally hundreds of times that I'm even more visible at night
than I am in daytime.

WTF?!?

WTF do you mean "WTF?!?" A bicyclist at night with a headlight and
taillight is more conspicuous than a cyclist riding during the day. Way
more contrast between a bright light and a dark background.

On Mar 16, 7:27*am, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:19:47 -0700 (PDT), Dan O
wrote:

On Mar 15, 2:09 pm, wrote:

With one exception, I've never been in a place where a legally lit
cyclist is not sufficiently conspicuous. *I've satisfied myself
literally hundreds of times that I'm even more visible at night than I
am in daytime.

WTF?!?

Dear Dan,

I expect that Frank's point is that at night even a small light is
noticeable at a much greater distance than a larger ordinary object in
daylight.

Crap. A bicyclist on a proper (Dutch city) bike is a block over six
feet high by two feet wide right out in the middle of the lane. That's
as high as a Range Rover (actually, from my bike I look *down* on
Range Rovers) and a third as wide, visible from a very long way in
daylight. A twee little light in the dark is not visible at the same
distance and, in any event, at night mere visibility is worthless: the
light must be noticed and serve as identification and warning within a
reasonable stopping distance for a car. The best Dutch and German
taillights don't do that. These notes assume total darkness. The
position gets much worse in the presence of streetlights and store
lights and infinitely worse in the presence of moving car lights. Thus
the necessity for a strong light, for substantial light cast to the
side, for a flashing light.

Your computer screen probably has a small green power light that you
scarcely notice when the room is lit. Turn the lights off and notice
how visible even that tiny light becomes.

Intelligent people don't look for some twee little light to tell if
their computer is switched on. They can see the huge, throbbing screen
is shining. That is what first attracts the eyes. There should be a
lesson even for you, dear Carl, in your own example.

The contrast between a light and the dark background catches the eye.

Of course it does, if the light is strong enough to reach the
necessary distance, and still more if the light flashes. The question
is whether the lights Andreas was defending, which are Dutch and
German taillights of the BUMM type (which is the point on which Krygo
jumped in), reach far enough for a driver to notice and if necessary
to stop from a reasonable speed, and I say that they don't, even under
the ideal condition of total darkness. In lit areas and in traffic
they will be noticed only by drivers expecting cyclists and
consciously looking out for them. Those conditions don't apply where
the majority of RBTers ride. The advice given by the Krygo-Fogel gang
is therefore dangerous to life and limb.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

So nice to hear from you, dear Carl. But a word to wise, eh? If you
actually intend a comedy act, get a new scriptwriter. Right now you're
making ludicrous claims and being laughed out of court.

Andre Jute
Author of "The True Thoughts of Chairman Mao"