|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 10:36 PM |
Cheap lights using CR123 batteries | Tom Anderson | UK | 3 | January 18th 11 02:33 AM |
Rechargable Cells/batteries for Lights | Keiron Kinninmont | Techniques | 8 | December 25th 06 11:58 PM |
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 03:40 AM |