Whats the best rear LED light out there.

[PeteSig]

"John Tserkezis" wrote:

> Dorfus Dippintush wrote:
>
>> Western Australian Regulations 2002.
>
> Isn't there requirements for reflectors on the wheels and pedals as well?
>
> I read up on the rules when I was out at Perth a couple of months ago. I
> thought it was odd they _required_ reflectors on the pedals, because I
> only use cleats, and NONE of my cleats have provision for reflectors. In
> fact, no cleats I've ever seen have provision for reflectors.
> This would almost completely outlaw use of cleats at night.
>
> Odder still was the requirement to have the handlebars no higher than the
> seat by a small amount. I guessed this was to outlaw dragster style
> bikes, but who in the rules committee hates dragsters that much they want
> to effectively ban them??

I believe these requirements, and others, are part of the Australian
Standard for pedal bicycles, governing requirements for manufacture and
sale. Not a law that affects riders.

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

 

[John Tserkezis]

PeteSig wrote:

> I believe these requirements, and others, are part of the Australian
> Standard for pedal bicycles, governing requirements for manufacture and
> sale. Not a law that affects riders.

That sounds like the front-brakes rule within NSW. That is, to legally sell
a new bicycle in NSW, it needs to have a functioning front brake. I've seen
imported bikes (even children's tricycles) that have had front brake
retrofitted (even though it looks very knobbled) due to the law.

Once it's second hand, or if you import it yourself, the front brake rule
doesn't apply.


That said, I read the perth rule by first looking at the bike path
pamphlets, where they have some very basic rules, and supply a web site (some
wa.gov.au site) for more bike rules. That's where I found them.

There was nothing mentioned about sale of new bikes, it appeared to be a set
of road rules for bicycles in general. (can't remember the url now).

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Duncan]

On Oct 8, 7:08 am, Duncan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 7, 9:32 pm, "PeteSig" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > So you reckon any rider riding 20ft away from you is riding too close? 3W of
> > Luxeon LED would easily blind a rider 50 meteres behind you! Glad you're so
> > considerate of other riders... Sheesh!
>
> They're mounted without lenses... I can look at them from 20ft at
> night without getting blinded

and moreover...

I have 3x1W in parallel driven at 750mA total. Typical luminous flux =
0.7x44x3 = 92lm.
(0.7 is the derating factor when driving at 250mA instead of 350mA)
I have no lenses attached; lambertian spread.

The dinotte rear light mentioned elsewhere in this thread is 120lm at
max setting.. and I'm pretty sure it has a lens to focus that down
somewhat.

 

[Resound]

"John Tserkezis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dorfus Dippintush wrote:
>
>> Western Australian Regulations 2002.
>
> Isn't there requirements for reflectors on the wheels and pedals as well?
>
> I read up on the rules when I was out at Perth a couple of months ago. I
> thought it was odd they _required_ reflectors on the pedals, because I
> only use cleats, and NONE of my cleats have provision for reflectors. In
> fact, no cleats I've ever seen have provision for reflectors.
> This would almost completely outlaw use of cleats at night.

Do they actually have to be on the pedals? My pedals don't have reflectors,
but my shoes certainly have reflective patches on them which would be
functionally equivalent.

 

[Dorfus Dippintush]

Resound wrote:
> "John Tserkezis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Dorfus Dippintush wrote:
>>
>>> Western Australian Regulations 2002.
>> Isn't there requirements for reflectors on the wheels and pedals as well?
>>
>> I read up on the rules when I was out at Perth a couple of months ago. I
>> thought it was odd they _required_ reflectors on the pedals, because I
>> only use cleats, and NONE of my cleats have provision for reflectors. In
>> fact, no cleats I've ever seen have provision for reflectors.
>> This would almost completely outlaw use of cleats at night.
>
> Do they actually have to be on the pedals? My pedals don't have reflectors,
> but my shoes certainly have reflective patches on them which would be
> functionally equivalent.
>
>

http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/statutes/regs.nsf/AllinOne?OpenForm&Seq=1





11. Reflector

(1) A bicycle must have affixed at all times a reflector that will
effectively reflect red light when illuminated by the headlight of a
vehicle approaching from the rear and that reflector must ¾

(a) comply with the requirements specified in rule 102(1)(a) and (2) of
the Vehicle Standards and have a reflective area of not less than the
area of a circle of 38 mm diameter;

(b) be mounted on the rear part of the bicycle at a height that is not
less than 330 mm nor more than 1 m; and

(c) be mounted vertically and facing to the rear in such a manner that
the light reflected from the headlight of a vehicle approaching from the
rear is clearly visible to the driver of that vehicle.

(2) The reflector required by subregulation (1) may be in the form of a
reflecting lens fitted to the rear lamp.

(3) If a bicycle is being ridden between sunset and sunrise, it must
have affixed, to each wheel, 2 yellow side reflectors complying with the
requirements for reflectors in Australian Standard AS 1927-1998 (Pedal
Bicycles ¾ Safety Requirements) and Australian Standard AS 2142-1978
(Specification for Reflectors for Pedal Bicycles).

(4) If a bicycle is being ridden between sunset and sunrise, it must
have affixed, to both sides of each pedal, yellow pedal reflectors
complying with the requirements for reflectors in Australian Standard AS
2142-1978 (Specification for Reflectors for Pedal Bicycles).

(5) A bicycle must not have affixed a reflector capable of reflecting
red light in the forward direction.

 

[PeteSig]

"Dorfus Dippintush" wrote:
>
> http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/statutes/regs.nsf/AllinOne?OpenForm&Seq=1
>
>
>
>
>
> 11. Reflector
>
> (1) A bicycle must have affixed at all times a reflector that will

<snip>

> (3) If a bicycle is being ridden between sunset and sunrise, it must have
> affixed, to each wheel, 2 yellow side reflectors complying with the
> requirements for reflectors in Australian Standard AS 1927-1998 (Pedal
> Bicycles ¾ Safety Requirements) and Australian Standard AS 2142-1978
> (Specification for Reflectors for Pedal Bicycles).
>
> (4) If a bicycle is being ridden between sunset and sunrise, it must have
> affixed, to both sides of each pedal, yellow pedal reflectors complying
> with the requirements for reflectors in Australian Standard AS 2142-1978
> (Specification for Reflectors for Pedal Bicycles).

Well so much for tne National Road Rules and standardisation of the road
rules!!

No such rule exists in the Victorian Road rules.

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

 

[John Tserkezis]

Resound wrote:

> Do they actually have to be on the pedals? My pedals don't have reflectors,
> but my shoes certainly have reflective patches on them which would be
> functionally equivalent.

I read that bit twice to be sure. (That is, I read it but didn't believe
anyone could have so few brain cells and still managed to pass this as a legal
requirement.

The reflectors have to be on the pedals.

Again, I was assured by an ex cop that this was one of the many that were
(sensibly) not enforced.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[John Tserkezis]

Dorfus Dippintush wrote:

> 11. Reflector

That's the one I was looking at, thanks for posting.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Zebee Johnstone]

In aus.bicycle on Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:44:29 +0800
Dorfus Dippintush <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> (4) If a bicycle is being ridden between sunset and sunrise, it must
> have affixed, to both sides of each pedal, yellow pedal reflectors
> complying with the requirements for reflectors in Australian Standard AS
> 2142-1978 (Specification for Reflectors for Pedal Bicycles).

I could fit reflectors. Dunno it would be much use....

Which is annoying in a way, because the eyecatching motion of pedal
reflectors is a good safety measure. I have some reflecting tape on
the cranks but I dunno it's the same.

Zebee

 

[Ray]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected]lid says...
> Ray wrote:
>
> > I always thought it was to only way to get half decent intensity in the
> > very early days of LED lights.
>
> > The LEDs can typically handle a much higher peak current than average,
> > thus a high intensity flash was how they approached the problem.
>
> The cost of the extra circuitry outweighs the benefit of extra brightness.
> It's only used (warranted) for special purposes.
> Looking at the cost of the cheaper bike lights now, cheaper is by far better
> than efficiency.
>
> The major contributor to this reason is the battery life. 50% duty cycle
> means about double the battery life.
>

Yes but when these flashers first came out almost 20 years ago, the
LED's of the time were quite weak in comparism to what you buy now.

Certainly the modern light will be more efficient by flashing, but I
think you will also find the light's peak brightness is also higher when
flashing as opposed to continuous mode.
If they pulse more current than steady state, efficiency is diminished.

At the end of the day, the flasher does help distinguish the bike from
the dross of red at night, which can be of benefit.

Ray

 

[Zebee Johnstone]

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:54:12 +1000
Ray <[email protected]> wrote:
> At the end of the day, the flasher does help distinguish the bike from
> the dross of red at night, which can be of benefit.

Moving is always good. Attracts attention.

But too bright is bad, causes people to look away.

I really dislike people with high mounted bright flashing front
lights. Especially on slow flash...

Zebee

 

[John Tserkezis]

Ray wrote:

> Yes but when these flashers first came out almost 20 years ago, the
> LED's of the time were quite weak in comparism to what you buy now.

Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about.

> Certainly the modern light will be more efficient by flashing, but I
> think you will also find the light's peak brightness is also higher when
> flashing as opposed to continuous mode.

They're all the same (older and more modern leds), so that is largely
irrelevant.

Sigh, I'm going to have to explain it anyway:

This higher efficiency by flashing is a misnomer. It's not the flash that's
doing the job. The higher peak currents are what do it. Unfortunately, if
you run at a higher peak current enough to see a difference, the die will
overheat, reduce efficiency because of that, and reduce life or burn out.
So what is done, is, it's flashed at a duty cycle that takes the equivalent
of the amount of maximum recommended _average_ power, but you actually have a
high peak power (only while it's on of course).
The result is the _average_ led brightness is a bit more than it would have
been with the same otherwise _steady_state_ power delivered to it.
And by "flashed" I mean at high rates, several hundred Hz, where it appears
steady to the human eye, not twice per second like bloody bike lights.



What *IS* plausible, is if this technique is used doubly, that is, pulse at
a high rate for half a second (the "on" phase), then completely off for
another half second (the "off" phase).

I *REALLY* don't see cheap Chinese **** doing this though. I've checked one
of the highest priced bike (rear) lights I could find in a shop, a cateye
TL-LD600 (second highest brightest in the cateye range). It doesn't pulse, it
gains its brightness by higher energy, higher efficiency leds, and lenses.
If a relatively high ticket price item doesn't do it, then you're not going
to convince me that the cheaper ones do either.

> If they pulse more current than steady state, efficiency is diminished.

As above, only if you let it heat up enough, If you keep to the maximum
_average_ energy, you'll have the slightly higher efficiency (due to high peak
currents) and still enjoy a reasonable life.

> At the end of the day, the flasher does help distinguish the bike from
> the dross of red at night, which can be of benefit.

I don't dispute this.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Ray]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected]lid says...
> Ray wrote:
>
> > Yes but when these flashers first came out almost 20 years ago, the
> > LED's of the time were quite weak in comparism to what you buy now.
>
> Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about.
>

Yes it does, I am explaining why I believe we had flashing LED lights in
the first instance! Sheesh!

I simply disagree with your original assertion the flashing was to do
with saving power.
I assert it was to increase the peak brightness.
Lets say 0.2 seconds of high current, then a short spell to let the die
cool down. Average power delivered evens out, ie heating, but the LED
when it is on IS brighter.
Lets just agree to disagree. And being a TO myself for well over 20
years I do have some idea and don't need the lecture.

When the LED's came out, they replaced incandecents which do chew the
batteries. So the LED in the first place already was more efficient, but
a bit dull.

Modern LED's can easily get brightness without the high current, and
thus a 50% duty cycle at low frequency can now also save power, and
indeed this is advertised with the products.

Regardless, the flashing has stuck over time and become synonymous with
bicycle tail lights.

 

[crb]

On Oct 7, 11:49 am, Dorfus Dippintush
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> In my personal experience the most visible and effective rear light is a
> flashing white light that has had the white LEDs removed and replaced
> with blue LEDs. That is the most visible and effective light.
>
> Dorfus

My understanding is that the human eye is not very sensitive to the
blue end of the spectrum.
A red light of equivalent power should look brighter than a blue one.

My choice for a bright rear light would be a Cateye TL-LD1000 or TL-
LD600
http://www.cateye.com/en/product_detail/280
http://www.cateye.com/en/product_detail/267

$90 and $50 respectively from Cecil Walker.

 

[Dorfus Dippintush]

crb wrote:
> On Oct 7, 11:49 am, Dorfus Dippintush
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In my personal experience the most visible and effective rear light is a
>> flashing white light that has had the white LEDs removed and replaced
>> with blue LEDs. That is the most visible and effective light.
>>
>> Dorfus
>
> My understanding is that the human eye is not very sensitive to the
> blue end of the spectrum.
> A red light of equivalent power should look brighter than a blue one.
>
> My choice for a bright rear light would be a Cateye TL-LD1000 or TL-
> LD600
> http://www.cateye.com/en/product_detail/280
> http://www.cateye.com/en/product_detail/267
>
> $90 and $50 respectively from Cecil Walker.
>

The blue lights are more effective for getting traffic to drive more
carefully near cyclists.

 

[Travis]

On Oct 11, 8:46 am, crb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 7, 11:49 am, Dorfus Dippintush
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In my personal experience the most visible and effective rear light is a
> > flashing white light that has had the white LEDs removed and replaced
> > with blue LEDs. That is the most visible and effective light.
>
> > Dorfus
>
> My understanding is that the human eye is not very sensitive to the
> blue end of the spectrum.

However a red light doesn't resemble a policeman at all and thus
trigger a driver's instincts to slow right down...

I think that is what Dorfus is getting at actually.

Travis

 

[Dorfus Dippintush]

Travis wrote:
> On Oct 11, 8:46 am, crb <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Oct 7, 11:49 am, Dorfus Dippintush
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> In my personal experience the most visible and effective rear light is a
>>> flashing white light that has had the white LEDs removed and replaced
>>> with blue LEDs. That is the most visible and effective light.
>>> Dorfus
>> My understanding is that the human eye is not very sensitive to the
>> blue end of the spectrum.
>
> However a red light doesn't resemble a policeman at all and thus
> trigger a driver's instincts to slow right down...
>
> I think that is what Dorfus is getting at actually.
>
> Travis
>


Thank you!