or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com - Page 7

post #91 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

>>> http://www.hostelshoppe.com/cgi-bin/...ory=1016481474
>>
>> Looks like the RealLITE to me, I got mine from Sheldon.

>
> It looks like it, but the RealLite says 18 LEDs, all facing
> toward the rear. the Mega Strobe apparently has 15 rear facing
> LEDs plus one LED on each side.


Exactly so. Here's a link to the distributor's image of the package
front -- the main photo is misleading, because it appears to show three
rows of six LEDs, whereas in fact there are three rows of five
rear-facing LEDs. The part stating "Side Firing For Side Safety" and the
image titled "Side Flashing Strobes" are both accurate:

http://www.cmi-befirst.com/catalogue/megabikestrobe.jpg

I've added another baker's dozen LEDs to my own _Mega Strobe_ [so it now
has thirty], and modded the circuit board slightly to compensate. I'll
upload photos, schematic diagram, and description soon, and post the URL.

--
"Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)
post #92 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:17:45 -0600, Tim McNamara
<timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

>scharf@hotmail.com (Steven Scharf) writes:
>
>> "David Damerell" <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
>> news:PPm*OEzyq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
>>
>>> First, the unsupported assertion that 3W isn't bright enough. You
>>> ever going to offer any proof there?

>>
>> As you are aware, I have provided numerous references regarding the
>> desirability of brighter lights from numerous informed sources. I
>> have included these on my web site. The assertion that good lights
>> are better for commuting is shared by many well-respected sources:
>>
>> Here they are again, since you didn't see them:

>
>Thanks for posting these. All I can say is that everyone is entitled
>to an opinion, and my experience with generator lights is at odds with
>the opinions you have chosen to believe. FWIW, opinions- which are
>what your links present- are not proofs.
>
>I find that I see better with my setup of a Schmidt SON and Lumotech
>Oval Plus lamp (which BTW includes a "standlight" which remains
>illuminated when stopped for several minutes, eliminating that
>problem) than I do with my NightRider 10W light, or my Cateye 5+10W
>two lamp system. My homemade MR11 35W 12V system put out more light
>than all those others combined, but required a huge battery to last
>longer than an hour- it also outweighed all those other systems
>combined. Indeed, since I ride brevets and such, battery lights
>present a problem in that they don't last 8 or more hours without
>spare batteries.
>
>Perhaps my night vision is better than yours, perhaps there are
>differences in ambient conditions (maybe St. Paul MN nights are not as
>dark as where you live?), or perhaps I just don't feel the need to
>turn night to day just to go for a bike ride. At any rate, I find my
>lighting setup fine for riding around town at night and for riding in
>rural southern Minnesota/northeastern Iowa on a dark night with no
>moon, even descending twisty roads at 40 mph. I think you might be
>confusing *your* lighting needs for *universal* lighting needs.
>Perhaps you should see your ophthamologist to make sure nothing is
>wrong with your eyes?
>
>If you haven't seen it, here's an interesting page:
>
>http://www.fa-technik.adfc.de/Kompon.../vergleich.htm


Dear Tim,

Nice page!

I like the "Gasentladungslampe Welsh-Allyn Solarc" at the
very bottom.

Thanks,

Carl Fogel
post #93 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> "Badger_South" <Badger@South.net> wrote in message
> news:eh7fo014cpavkirsqf2sp387jsf018r454@4ax.com...
>
>
>>Despite the 'argumentative' back and forth, I've found this thread very
>>informative. It's the debate that brings out the exquisite detail and I
>>thank all of you for your input, both sides.
>>
>>Perhaps one could define certain 'categories' of riding where certain
>>lighting systems come to the fore.

>
>
> This is subject to interpretation as well. I read one account that
> recommended against dynamo lights for multi-use paths and bicycle paths,
> because riders tend to not go fast enough for a dynamo light to reach full
> brightness. On the other hand, some may argue that you don't need much light
> on bike paths, something I have not found to be true on many of the paths
> around where I live, since they tend to be full of turns and hills.


The most commonly used German dynamos (B&M, Schmidt) have to produce
their full rated output at 6.2mph, which is not very fast at all.

Personally I find the only disadvantage of the dynamo is when making a
turn across the traffic (a right turn in the UK, a left turn in most
other places). Some lamps have standlights to keep some kind of light
on, but they're not especially bright. I've rarely found it to be a
problem as the road designers round here tend to use roundabouts rather
than conventional junctions.
post #94 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:32:35 GMT,
<DEOhd.15383$KJ6.7177@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Steven M.
Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

>So don't fall for the lie about
>"inefficient battery powered lights, there is absolutely nothing to back up
>that claim.


What does it cost the rest of us to dispose of your spent batteries?
--
zk
post #95 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Tue, 02 Nov 2004 05:13:59 GMT,
<rIEhd.1619$O11.339@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:

>Actually, the best 6V dynamo is the LightSpin, it's much more efficient than
>the SON, and it costs $130 (if you can find one to buy).


Sure, if you figure you're losing a watt to the SON all the time it's
off. Otherwise, let's see your test data.
--
zk
post #96 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> "Victor Kan" <victor@usenet.NO_UCEloopdrive.net> wrote in message
> news:CKLhd.41698$hr3.1319916@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
>
>>Is there a 3W halogen lamp with good focus characteristics that is
>>suitable for connection to a battery? If so, sounds like everyone will
>>be happy (at least us battery light users will get good light with much
>>longer run times than we're getting now with our inefficient 10W
>>systems, though neither of my 10W battery lights seems to do much
>>lighting up of trees--heck, I often wish they were less narrowly focused
>>so I'd get a little flood effect).

>
>
> Not sure which lamps you have, but the MR11 and MR16 lamps, which are
> commonly used in high end battery powered lights, are available in many
> different beam patterns. Often, on dual beam systems, you'll have one flood
> and one spot so you can select which lighting pattern is necessary in a
> specific situation. There is one available lamp head that is adjustable from
> narrow to flood, similar to Mag Lite flashlights. The MR16 is very
> efficient, the MR11 slightly less, due to the smaller reflector.


Perhaps it's time to discuss headlamp optics in more detail.

MR11 and MR16 lamp units are available in different "beam" widths, from
spot to flood, but the word "beam" is a bit misleading; the light comes
out in more of a fog than a beam. The faceted reflector is designed for
even illumination when pointed at an object to be displayed (such as a
statuary display, a painting, etc.). They want no sharp gradient in
light intensity, so the falloff of light intensity is very gradual at
the "beam" edges. For those who are mathematical, it's like a Poisson
(or "normal") distributon with a large standard deviation.

By contrast, items like flashlights have very "sharp" beams; almost all
light is concentrated in a very tight cone. The intensity gradient at
the beam edge is very sharp indeed. It's somewhat similar to having an
extremely small standard deviation - althought flashlights don't usually
give even illumination within their cone; they tend to hot spots and
cool spots.

BUT: Both flashlights and MR-series lamps are radially symmetric! That
means, if the dead center of the beam points squarely at a spot on a
wall, the brightness is the same all the way around a circle which is 5
degrees off center; or ten degrees off center. The light is "round."
(There's actually a very slight deviation due to the length of the
filament, but it's negligible.)

This is not optimum for headlights! There is NO other road vehicle
light that uses such a pattern! Instead, car lights, motorcycle lights,
moped lights, etc. ALL shape the beam so almost no light is wasted
upward; so the beam is directed into the travel lane, where it's needed;
and so the light gives an acceptable illumination gradient when it
shines onto a roadway that is nearly parallel with the beam direction.

Top quality bike headlamps are designed this way too. They shape the
beam into either a rectangle or a trapezoid, so the great majority of
the light goes to _exactly_ the right spot. As an example of their
sophistication: the better ones specify which edge must face up,
because even if it's a rectangular beam, they make the bottom part of
the rectangle a little dimmer, since it hits the road closer; they throw
more lumens into the top part, since it shines further down the road.

Comparing a 20-watt MR-16 bulb to this level of optical sophistication
is like comparing a scalpel to a heavy sharp rock. You can do
exploratory surgery (or see down the road) with either, I suppose, but
one is going to waste a lot more energy, and generally make a mess of
things.


In everything else regarding bicycling, the technology has developed
toward sophistication, toward lightness, toward efficiency and
precision. This is true of frame design, tires, spokes, and all other
components.

Only in the case of headlights do we have people seriously claiming that
"more is better, efficiency be damned" is the proper approach!


> If you look at the chart of efficiencies, the battery powered systems are
> far more efficient in terms of the amount of energy used per lumen,
> especially when you over-voltage. So don't fall for the lie about
> "inefficient battery powered lights, there is absolutely nothing to back up
> that claim.


Let's see: We'll suck energy out of the wall socket and store it in a
chemical tank; we'll remember to do this precisely correctly, or we'll
get stranded in the dark; and we'll waste most of the energy (or lumens)
by throwing them all over the forward half of creation. And we'll
replace our chemical tank every few years after it doesn't work any more.

I understand this works OK for lots of people; but it's just not my idea
of efficiency!


--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com.
Substitute cc dot ysu dot
edu]
post #97 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

David Damerell wrote:

> Again by someone who hasn't used them, evidently; I don't have to be
> much above walking pace to be well lit, and manifestly one doesn't
> need a headlight to travel down a multi-use path at walking speed!


IIRC, most dynamos reach near full output by about 6 MPH. This is probably
based on some universal standard or German TUV spec or something. At any rate
it makes sense. 6 MPH is about as slow as I ever go, even hauling groceries up
some of the 15% grades around here. Walking speed is about 4 MPH, and I rarely
see anyone riding bike path slower than the pedestrians.

Matt O.

..
post #98 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> Thank Sheldon we now have better dynamos, better optics, more
> efficient lamps, LED rear lights, lightweight bright white flashing
> front LEDs and automatic light-sensitive switches :-)


Let's put in a word for Andrew Muzi and Peter White too, who also have good
selections. But let's really thank the internet, which gives these small
businesses in small towns, th e opportunity to be heard.

Matt O.
post #99 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Zoot Katz wrote:

> Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:32:35 GMT,
> <DEOhd.15383$KJ6.7177@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "Steven M.
> Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>
>> So don't fall for the lie about
>> "inefficient battery powered lights, there is absolutely nothing to
>> back up that claim.

>
> What does it cost the rest of us to dispose of your spent batteries?


That's a good point! But rest assured, if disposed of properly, both NiMH and
lead-acid rechargeables are entirely and easily recycleable. Habitually using
disposables, OTOH, is not a good thing.

Matt O.
post #100 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
> "Victor Kan" <victor@usenet.NO_UCEloopdrive.net> wrote in message
> news:CKLhd.41698$hr3.1319916@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>> ...though neither of my 10W battery lights seems to do much
>>lighting up of trees--heck, I often wish they were less narrowly focused
>>so I'd get a little flood effect).


> Not sure which lamps you have, but the MR11 and MR16 lamps, which are
> commonly used in high end battery powered lights, are available in many
> different beam patterns.


My MR11 lamps are a VistaLite NiteStick with I think a kinda narrow beam
pattern and a Nite Rider head trip with what I'd consider a very narrow
pattern. Perhaps the latter is most appropriate for a head mounted
light? Both are the stock bulbs that came with the lights. If/when
they burn out, I don't know if I'll try something new, or just get the
same thing.

My MR16 lamp is a home brew with a Sylvania "Narrow Spot" 8 degree beam
pattern, the narrowest I could find locally. It's just about right for
my suburban commuting, I think.

--
I do not accept unsolicted commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.
post #101 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:48:13 -0500, <2uqko6F2csvtoU2@uni-berlin.de>,
"Matt O'Toole" <matt@deltanet.com> wrote:

>> What does it cost the rest of us to dispose of your spent batteries?

>
>That's a good point! But rest assured, if disposed of properly, both NiMH and
>lead-acid rechargeables are entirely and easily recycleable. Habitually using
>disposables, OTOH, is not a good thing.


Well, I was trying to play the moral high-ground trump card of a true
believer and lumen grinding zealot.

I started exchanging my "disposables" at Critical Mass rides where
recharged "disposables" are offered free.
--
zk
post #102 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:44:12 -0500, <2uqko6F2csvtoU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Matt
O'Toole" <matt@deltanet.com> wrote:

>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
>> Thank Sheldon we now have better dynamos, better optics, more
>> efficient lamps, LED rear lights, lightweight bright white flashing
>> front LEDs and automatic light-sensitive switches :-)

>
>Let's put in a word for Andrew Muzi and Peter White too, who also have good
>selections. But let's really thank the internet, which gives these small
>businesses in small towns, th e opportunity to be heard.
>

I believe "Thank Sheldon" was reference to his recently proposed
saintly status.

I was thinking that since cyclists gave society paved roads, pneumatic
tires and powered controlled flight, the Internet is the best thing
we've gotten in return.
--
zk
post #103 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Victor Kan wrote:

> My MR16 lamp is a home brew with a Sylvania "Narrow Spot" 8 degree
> beam pattern, the narrowest I could find locally. It's just about
> right for my suburban commuting, I think.


8 degree MR lamps are probably the best ones for general road riding. This is
what my Sunsport is. Because it's appropriately narrow, it works well with only
5W -- as well as most commercial 10W MR systems. Where did you get yours?
What's the 3 letter ID code?

Matt O.
post #104 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Victor Kan wrote:

>
> Is there a 3W halogen lamp with good focus characteristics that is
> suitable for connection to a battery? If so, sounds like everyone will
> be happy (at least us battery light users will get good light with much
> longer run times than we're getting now with our inefficient 10W
> systems, though neither of my 10W battery lights seems to do much
> lighting up of trees--heck, I often wish they were less narrowly focused
> so I'd get a little flood effect).


Reflectalite, at http://www.reflectalite.com/halogenpage.html has 10
watt halogen bulbs for 6 volt systems. (Vistalite 400-series headlamps
used these.) You can get either a "push-in" or a "screw cap" base.

If you put one of these into a standard generator headlight shell, it
_might_ be OK. The doubt is this: some types of plastic used to mold
the reflector may soften from the additional heat. I had that happen
with one experimental headlight.

I've got an old 3.5" diameter Union headlight that has a metal
reflector. I bought it used (cheap) and later found it had a 10 watt
bulb installed. One nice thing about it is that it has a rectangular
beam that's significantly wider than most generator headlights'
rectangles. That's a better use of extra lumens than shooting light
overhead, IMO.

6 volt bulbs have an advantage over 12 volt bulbs, in that they have
thicker and thus less fragile filaments.

But it seems silly for cyclists to be scrounging for old metal-reflector
lights and cobbling up headlight systems to use them to get a
well-focused beam. Some manufacturer ought to produce these. It's not
rocket science!

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
post #105 of 216

Re: Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> "Badger_South" <Badger@South.net> wrote in message
> news:eh7fo014cpavkirsqf2sp387jsf018r454@4ax.com...
>
>>Perhaps one could define certain 'categories' of riding where certain
>>lighting systems come to the fore.

>
>
> This is subject to interpretation as well. I read one account that
> recommended against dynamo lights for multi-use paths and bicycle paths,
> because riders tend to not go fast enough for a dynamo light to reach full
> brightness. On the other hand, some may argue that you don't need much light
> on bike paths, something I have not found to be true on many of the paths
> around where I live, since they tend to be full of turns and hills.


I had one generator, a Sanyo from the mid-1970s, that was a four-pole
design. It didn't give much light at speeds below 8 mph or so.

All the generators I've owned since have been 8 pole designs. They give
useful light at walking speed, and produce light appropriate to speed at
any speed from 4 mph to 18 mph, at least.


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling Equipment
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › Lighting--Update to http://bicyclelighting.com