On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 07:27:23 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-09-16 23:17, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 07:46:10 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-09-15 19:48, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 13:01:59 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-09-15 12:43, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/15/2017 2:43 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-09-15 11:15, Frank Krygowski wrote:


[...]

... This system is permanently mounted on the
bike, just like the corresponding components on a car. It's ready at the
flick of a switch and it's extremely reliable, requiring not even
tending to batteries.


How does it keep the lights at full brightness during a long uphill
slog? Like some of these sections:

https://ridewithgps.com/routes/5041564

The variation in brightess from, say, 6 mph to 20+ mph isn't really that
great. But more important, when a person is riding uphill slowly, they
don't need to see 1/4 mile ahead. Having a headlight that's slightly
dimmer uphill is no disadvantage.


Until the soused redneck in his dilapidated pickup truck comes tearing
along and doesn't see you in time.

But why should a "red neck" driving a pickup be soused?
any more than a bicyclist?

After all:
https://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2...eaths/?mcubz=1
Some 21 percent of autopsies for New York City bicyclists who died
within three hours of their accidents detected alcohol in the body,
according to a Department of Health and Mental Hygiene study that
examined fatal bicycling accidents in New York City from 1996 to 2005.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/pe...facts/bicycles
Among bicyclists ages 16 and older who were killed in 2015, 23 percent
had blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) at or above 0.08 percent.
http://www.bhsi.org/alcohol.htm
Blood alcohol levels were estimated from medical records, visits to
crash sites and testing of 342 passing bicyclists for breath alcohol.
At the .08 grams/deciliter level, legally drunk in most states, the
odds of a fatal or serious injury rose by 2,000 per cent. The risk
rose as alcohol rose, beginning at a 600 per cent increase if the
blood level was only .02 grams/deciliter, equivalent to one drink. The
.08 level is typically associated with four to five drinks.

Sounds like it isn't the Redneck we have to look out for it is the
drunken bicyclist.


Drunken cyclists are a problem, especially since many people resort to a
bicycle after losing their license due to DUI and then they don't really
know how to handle a bicycle in traffic.

However, I can't remember any of the hit-from-behind or
hit-from-the-front fatal accidents here reported as being caused by a
drunken cyclists. They were caused by drunken motorists, reckless ones,
aggressive ones and people fleeing from police or a crime scene in a car.

No matter, Frank can lament all day long, I know for a fact that since I
have bright lights front and back the number of close calls has
substantially dropped. So as far as lighting is concerned, mission
accomplished.

And that is largely "your problem". You have a preconceived notion and
rather then research the question to see if you can discover the truth
of the matter you simply argue from a position of ignorance. Akin to
arguing that 1 + 1 is not 2... because you don't want it to be.

You put on super bright lights and the number of close calls has
substantially dropped. And you know this.


Yes, I know this.

A divine revelation! On the Road to Damascus, one assumes?


Can you document it? Say 10 close calls a day before the bright lights
and only one since you installed them? Or "you just know that it is
so".


I have no GoPro and also no nee to document. I know what I experienced
and that's good enough for me. If you don't believe me, fine.

I see. YOU KNOW! With no evidence what so ever you just KNOW!

What is next? "The Second Coming will be next Wednesday at 12:30"?


I find it interesting that after reading all the blather here I did
make a test of it. First a week riding with no lights at all and then
a second week riding with, not one but two, bright lights on the
handle bars and two (count them), TWO of the brightest blinking red
lights I could buy on the rear.

My findings? There was no difference at all, None!


Thailand != USA

Ah! You mean that in the U.S. all those timid folks in autos are
terrified of bright lights and run away when they see one while in
Thailand those primitive folks aren't afraid at all?



And note that I was making a deliberate test of the value of lighting,
writing notes in a little book, counting on my fingers, etc.

And I might add that this was riding in Bangkok city traffic which is
usually rated as the first, or second most, chaotic traffic in the
world.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/20/auto...ies/index.html
Notice that the only U.S. city mentioned is Los Angeles which is rated
14th out of 15.


There are huge differences between countries. For example, in France it
was (is?) popular to drive around town at night with just the position
lights on, no low beam. Worked. Because drivers pay attention and are
use to this. Here in the US the attention of drivers has majorly changed
with the advent of smart phones. That's just how it is.


I can only assume that you are unique. That all the danger in the
universe is collectively hanging over your head.


No, I am simply using common sense. Better light = seen better. Every
traffic safety expert. Some self-proclaimed ones, however, ...

I seem to remember something you wrote that implied that the faster
one rode the safer one was, but I think Frank contested that thesis.
--
Cheers,

John B.