R
R Brickston
Guest
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 16:01:51 GMT, Bill Baka <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> Gooserider wrote:
>>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>>
>>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>>> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>
>> "Insane" is a good word.
>>
>> Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment. A $130 taillight
>> bright enough to blind drivers makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
>> thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
>> armor.
>>
>> Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
>> negatives eclipse the slight gain.
>>
>> If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
>> taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
>> enough?
>>
>> I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
>> standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
>> taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>>
>> Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>I looked at the web site and all the products and pictures and any tail
>light that throws a noticeable beam on the ground to the rear would
>probably get me a fix-it ticket from the California Highway Patrol.
>They don't really appreciate that much light in the rear and do like to
>find excuses to right some outright silly fix-it tickets.
>I do like their line though.
>Bill Baka
You would probably get a ticket for RWB, Riding While Baka.
>[email protected] wrote:
>> Gooserider wrote:
>>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>>
>>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>>> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>
>> "Insane" is a good word.
>>
>> Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment. A $130 taillight
>> bright enough to blind drivers makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
>> thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
>> armor.
>>
>> Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
>> negatives eclipse the slight gain.
>>
>> If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
>> taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
>> enough?
>>
>> I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
>> standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
>> taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>>
>> Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>I looked at the web site and all the products and pictures and any tail
>light that throws a noticeable beam on the ground to the rear would
>probably get me a fix-it ticket from the California Highway Patrol.
>They don't really appreciate that much light in the rear and do like to
>find excuses to right some outright silly fix-it tickets.
>I do like their line though.
>Bill Baka
You would probably get a ticket for RWB, Riding While Baka.