#1
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
After getting caught in the rain today, in conditions where I'd normally put
my car headlamps on, I decided I ought to get my arse in gear and get some lights. Has anyone any idea how good the BS marked lights are? Ideally I'd like a decent wattage halogen front light or two, and some very bright LEDs at the back, perhaps something homebrew. The problem is that I can't seem to find many (any?) rechargeable lights with BS marks. I could run normal lights on rechargeables, but I understand that Halogens are fairly voltage sensitive, so running them on a couple of NiMH cells or worse, four will cause a voltage drop and a disproportionate drop in light. I suppose the other option is get a set of cheapo BS marked lights (anyone got any examples?) and get some seperate proper lighting for actually seeing with. Thinking along the lines of the Smart 10/2.4W twin lamp system, Cateye HL-RC230 twin lamp or ABS 10 or the RC220 single lamp for the front. Anyone got any experience of these? Is the top of the range Cateye rear lamp any good? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 20:27:34 +0100, Doki wrote:
Has anyone any idea how good the BS marked lights are? Ideally I'd like a decent wattage halogen front light or two, Well, those two are a contradiction immediately. The maximum wattage permitted for a halogen bulb in teh legal BS is a eye-searing (oh yes) 2.4W. If you go with 'plain' bulbs (I can't remember exactly how they describe them) you can go up to 3.6W, but that's probably less bright than teh 2.4W halogen. and some very bright LEDs at the back, perhaps something homebrew. Obviously, that won't be BS, because the BS requires a sample of production run to pass some tests. The problem is that I can't seem to find many (any?) rechargeable lights with BS marks. Any. I believe teh BS does not allow rechargeable lights, but I'm not sure if that's because they don't have teh performance or because teh BS explicitly outlaws them. The 'preformance' issue is that the BS does have a battery life requirement - and rechargeables generally have less energy in them than non-rechargeables. It might be an accidental banning - for example, the testing spec might require that the lights be fitted with batteries of spec xyz for teh testing, and rechargeables don't fall within xyz. I could run normal lights on rechargeables, but I understand that Halogens are fairly voltage sensitive, so running them on a couple of NiMH cells or worse, four will cause a voltage drop and a disproportionate drop in light. Not necesarily, 'cos the NiMH have a lower internal resistance than non-rechargeables - and teh effect will be more marked at higher current levels. Incidently, lights that comply with teh BS aren't necesarily legal - the law requires them to be a particular (now superseded) revision of teh BS. For example, teh few 'BS' LED rear lights may well be BS (though all teh ones I've seen aren't when used with teh supplied bracket), but they are no more legal than a non-BS LED. regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
In message , Doki
writes After getting caught in the rain today, in conditions where I'd normally put my car headlamps on, I decided I ought to get my arse in gear and get some lights. Personally I think this is a waste of time, unless you go for some serious wattage in the lights. Even then I've seen people riding around with Lumi's, Smarts etc. in the daytime, even in poorish light and it really seem to make no difference. In these sort of conditions I think good fluorescent gear is much more useful. But I take it you are also thinking of night time use as well. Has anyone any idea how good the BS marked lights are? Depends on what you want, I find a dynamo powered front lamp fine, though the output of the bulbs may not seem so high, with decent optics they put much more of the light where you want it. The typical MR16(?) bulbs in the rechgargeables send light out all over the place. Thinking along the lines of the Smart 10/2.4W twin lamp system, Cateye HL-RC230 twin lamp or ABS 10 or the RC220 single lamp for the front. Anyone got any experience of these? Is the top of the range Cateye rear lamp any good? SJSC are selling the smart set for about GBP 25.00 at the moment. For rear lights I like to use one of the German/Dutch rear led lights (B&M Toplight, Hella R whatever it is, Axa Optica) if they are up to a German /Dutch standard then they should be suitable for legal use here (lights to an equivalent standard are allowed) AIUI, BS standard LED lamps such as the Cateye AU100 (a good light) technically are still not legal lamps as the relevant BS hasn't been replaced in the legislation (TICBW). I usually supplement this with another LED or two, -- Chris French, Leeds |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
Ian Smith wrote: On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 20:27:34 +0100, Doki wrote: Has anyone any idea how good the BS marked lights are? Ideally I'd like a decent wattage halogen front light or two, Well, those two are a contradiction immediately. The maximum wattage permitted for a halogen bulb in teh legal BS is a eye-searing (oh yes) 2.4W. If you go with 'plain' bulbs (I can't remember exactly how they describe them) you can go up to 3.6W, but that's probably less bright than teh 2.4W halogen. Bloody hell. and some very bright LEDs at the back, perhaps something homebrew. Obviously, that won't be BS, because the BS requires a sample of production run to pass some tests. I know a homebrew light won't have a BS mark, I'd be using it in conjunction with something that does. The problem is that I can't seem to find many (any?) rechargeable lights with BS marks. Any. I believe teh BS does not allow rechargeable lights, but I'm not sure if that's because they don't have teh performance or because teh BS explicitly outlaws them. The 'preformance' issue is that the BS does have a battery life requirement - and rechargeables generally have less energy in them than non-rechargeables. It might be an accidental banning - for example, the testing spec might require that the lights be fitted with batteries of spec xyz for teh testing, and rechargeables don't fall within xyz. So it looks like I'm on the hunt for a pair of normal (ie ****e) BS marked battery powered lamps. Anyone know where to be looking? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
So it looks like I'm on the hunt for a pair of normal (ie ****e) BS marked
battery powered lamps. Anyone know where to be looking? Most of my local shops seem to have examples of their lights already opened that you can play with, so you can choose one that seems trustworthy. AC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
Chris Malcolm wrote:
The law in respect of bicycle lamps is such a dreadful mess of incompetent bureaucrats not understanding physics trying to help Every Unready to survive nasty foreign competition that I think it the moral duty of every responsible cyclist to ignore it. Provided they are happy to spend the rest of their lives fighting a claim of contributory negligence should they be hit, of course... However, if you do insist of being legal, note that it is legal in the UK to use a non-BS approved lamp if it has been approved by another EU nation. Correct. The Busch & Muller rear lights are a case in point. -- Guy === May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
Chris Malcolm wrote: The law in respect of bicycle lamps is such a dreadful mess of incompetent bureaucrats not understanding physics trying to help Every Unready to survive nasty foreign competition that I think it the moral duty of every responsible cyclist to ignore it. Provided they are happy to spend the rest of their lives fighting a claim of contributory negligence should they be hit, of course... Urban myth and/or scaremongering, unless you know better of course...surely there are enough real problems to worry about without making up new ones. James |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 20:27:34 +0100, "Doki"
wrote (more or less): After getting caught in the rain today, in conditions where I'd normally put my car headlamps on, I decided I ought to get my arse in gear and get some lights. Has anyone any idea how good the BS marked lights are? Ideally I'd like a decent wattage halogen front light or two, and some very bright LEDs at the back, perhaps something homebrew. Why not have the big Cateye BS-approved LED front lamp at the front? It really is quite bright, and so visible even in daylight. The problem is that I can't seem to find many (any?) rechargeable lights with BS marks. It takes 4 AA batteries, so you can use standard rechargables (NiCads or NiMHs) with it. I do agree with an earlier coment that fluorescent clothing is better in daylight - after all, it's brightness is powered by the Sun! Which has a bit more wattage than four AA batteries... Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
Provided they are happy to spend the rest of their lives fighting a claim of contributory negligence should they be hit, of course... James Annan wrote: Urban myth and/or scaremongering, unless you know better of course...surely there are enough real problems to worry about without making up new ones. In the case of Peter Longbottom he did not in fact spend the rest of his life fighting the case, since he was dead after the impact. The judge held him to be 50% to blame for his own demise because he used a non-BS (flashing) rear light. The DfT has figures which show flashing rear lights are four times as visible as steady ones. I advocate at least one legally approved light at each end of the bike because insurance companies employ lawyers. -- Guy === May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Lights
In message , James Annan
writes Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: Chris Malcolm wrote: The law in respect of bicycle lamps is such a dreadful mess of incompetent bureaucrats not understanding physics trying to help Every Unready to survive nasty foreign competition that I think it the moral duty of every responsible cyclist to ignore it. Provided they are happy to spend the rest of their lives fighting a claim of contributory negligence should they be hit, of course... Urban myth and/or scaremongering, unless you know better of course...surely there are enough real problems to worry about without making up new ones. I'm not aware of such a case regarding lack of BS lighting, however I think it is only a matter of time. There have been a number of cases of people insurance companies trying it on with the contributory negligence thing for cyclists involved in accidents not wearing helmets (successfully fought with the help of the CTC). Sooner or later one of them will twig the lighting thing, and with BS lights being a requirement, they would have a better chance of winning it. -- Chris French, Leeds |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I will treat red lights and stop signs like yield signs | Willy West | Social Issues | 8 | August 12th 04 05:06 PM |
Break lights turn lights and handle bar lights | Truepurple | Techniques | 30 | November 17th 03 04:02 AM |
Blue flashing lights.... | Luigi de Guzman | General | 9 | October 23rd 03 09:14 PM |
Lights | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 1 | October 23rd 03 01:25 PM |