Why not generator lights?

[Frank Krygowski]

Matt O'Toole wrote:
> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
>
>>Argh, I get so tired of the exaggerations, "stadium lights,"
>
>
> That's a Cateye trade name for their HIDs, not hyperbole from this forum.

Right. I would have thought everybody knew that!


--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com.
Substitute cc dot ysu dot
edu]

 

[Matt O'Toole]

Frank Krygowski wrote:
> Matt O'Toole wrote:
>> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Argh, I get so tired of the exaggerations, "stadium lights,"
>>
>>
>> That's a Cateye trade name for their HIDs, not hyperbole from this
>> forum.
>
> Right. I would have thought everybody knew that!

Especially the world's greatest expert...

Matt O.

 

[[email protected]]

A Muzi wrote:
> > "Frank Krygowski" <[email protected]> > Joe, I don't
feel
> > frantic at all. And I already ride using good
> >>sets of "quartz-halogen" lights. Don't confuse bulb technology
with power
> >>source!
>
> Joe Haggadah wrote:
> > Sorry, I must have misread the thread. I thought you
> > were using a generator lightset with a 2.4W or
> > 3W headlight, which everyone agrees is not sufficient
> > for nighttime city riding.
> > What is the good set of lights that you are using now?
>
> Uh, Joe, you should get out more.
>
> If you actually ride a bicyle at night once in a while,
> you'll pass cyclists who overwhelmingly use 2.4W systems.
>
> Sure there are some measly white blinkies. You'll see a
> duct-taped flashlight now and again. There are more 10, 20,
> 40W units every year. But 2.4W halogen battery/dynamo
> lights together are on the bulk of night riding bicycles
> which have lights ( "none whatsoever" being another popular
> format).

Maybe in Wisconsin night riders use the little 2.4 Watt bulbs. But not
in Kansas City during the 1998-2000 time period. We had up to about 50
people on many of the evening group rides through the winter. No one
had generator lights. A few did try the 2.4 Watt Cateye battery setup.
They were ineffective. The NiteRider type 10, 15, 20 Watt setups were
the lights of choice.

 

[Patrick Lamb]

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 22:39:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>The good set of lights I use now is a quartz* halogen bulb, 2.4W or 3W,
> driven by a generator. And everyone who has ever commented on it has
>agreed it's perfectly sufficient for nighttime city riding. This
>includes both those making spontaneous comments on my lights, and those
>taking part in organized night-riding workshops for my bike club.
>
>* Actually, I can't be positive about the "quartz" part. Some halogen
>bulbs use quartz envelopes and some don't. But AFAIK there's no
>practical difference in the amount of light emanated.

My understanding (from about 20 years ago, when they first were coming
out), is that iodine (the preferred halogen) will etch common
borosilicate glass. Fused quartz was the cheapest glass that would
contain iodine at the working temperature of a lamp. So the odds are
pretty good that yours is a _quartz_ halogen bulb.

Pat

Email address works as is.

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

[email protected] wrote:
> A Muzi wrote:

>>Uh, Joe, you should get out more.
>>
>>If you actually ride a bicyle at night once in a while,
>>you'll pass cyclists who overwhelmingly use 2.4W systems.
>>

> Maybe in Wisconsin night riders use the little 2.4 Watt bulbs. But not
> in Kansas City during the 1998-2000 time period. We had up to about 50
> people on many of the evening group rides through the winter. No one
> had generator lights. A few did try the 2.4 Watt Cateye battery setup.
> They were ineffective. The NiteRider type 10, 15, 20 Watt setups were
> the lights of choice.

I think that's what the Andrew was referring to were the low cost 2.4W
battery powered lights that are typically sold in drugstores and
hardware stores, not dynamo lights. I can buy the low-end CatEye stuff,
el-cheapo dynamo systems, (and even some Park tools) in the drugstore
that’s a two minute ride from my house.

As you stated, it is extremely rare to see anyone using a dynamo powered
light, though I do know one woman at work who bought a Joe Breeze bike
with a hub dynamo. Then again, it may be geographically related, with KC
and California being different than the rest of the country, but I doubt it.

Where I live, commuters invariably use >=5W lights, or no lights at all.
The low end battery powered handlebar lights are bought by people who
rarely, if ever, actually ride at night.

BTW, I notice that CatEye makes a bunch of white LED flashers for the
front, but doesn’t sell then in the U.S. apparently. The
TL-LD500C-White, would be a good complement to a low-power front light,
to solve the “being seen” part of the equation. See
http://www.geehinchan.com/cateye/flashing.htm

I think that I may be one of the only people in Silicon Valley that
actually has a dynamo light, though I don’t use it on my commute.

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Matt O'Toole wrote:

> This is also true. Too much self-discharge can ruin nicad and NiMH
cells, even
> if you do remember to recharge them. The worse mistake you can make
is to turn
> on a light that's been sitting awhile. If one cell has gone flatter
than the
> others, it can be ruined by charge reversal. So if your lights have been
> sitting through the summer, charge them up before turning them on,
even for a
> second or two.

Actually it doesn’t ruin Ni-Cads, since the battery can easily be
recovered by zapping the internal short. I haven’t had a NiMH battery
fail, and don’t know if the same procedure can be applied, but I seem to
recall reading somewhere that it does NOT work on NiMH cells. There was
an article in an old Popular Electronics that explained how to do it,
but basically it’s discharging a big ole capacitor across the battery to
burn out the short. I’ve saved many ni-cads that were supposedly dead.

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/rejuv.html
http://www.barc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page19.html

> All these battery hassles are why lead-acid batteries are better for
occasional
> use. Lead-acids have their issues too, but in general, smart
chargers are much
> cheaper, and battery management is easier.

I find the lead-acid batteries to be less hassle as well. The cheap NiMH
chargers require removal of the individual cells from the light, and
insertion into a charger. The AA NiMH cells are the only inexpensive
NiMH cells, but you really need to parallel multiple packs to get
sufficient current. While one advantage of NiMH over NiCads is the
ability to hook packs in parallel with no isolation, this is only for
discharging—for charging they need to be charged separately. If you’re
using battery holders for NiMH, rather than solder-tab batteries, the
reliability of all those spring tabs are also an issue. However, smart
NiMH chargers are widely available, and not too expensive. Costco sells
a Panasonic charger that monitors temperature, voltage, and the internal
resistance, and it’s around $25 including a bunch of batteries.

You can buy a NiMH charger that will charge twelve cells in series
(14.4V), but it is rather expensive ($75), see
http://www.thomasdistributing.com/mh-c777plus.htm

Lead-Acid batteries are cheap, as are the smart chargers, and they come
in a single, easy to manage package. The downside to lead-acid is that
they aren’t as efficient in terms of weight/AH as NiMH. Also, if you
leave a lead-acid battery unused and uncharged, it goes bad.

Li-Ion has great potential since both chargers and batteries are getting
cheaper due to the after-market chargers for camcorders and digital
cameras. Two 7.2V Li-Ion packs in series, over-voltaging an 12 volt
MR-16, make a poor-man’s HID-like setup. Li-Ion batteries have very low
self-discharger rates.

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Matt O'Toole wrote:
> Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps that's a fundamental difference between the battery fans and
>>the generator fans. One crew is willing to tie themselves down with
>>log books, recharging schedules, special parking places, limits on
>>ride duration, etc.
>
> Some people like that stuff -- Sili Valley is full of
quasi-Apsbergers types who
> need to invent these little routines to amuse themselves.

Come on now. You charge your cell phone, your digital camera, your PDA,
your notebook PC, etc. It's not something you give a second thought to.
You get home, or get to work, and connect the device(s) to the charger,
via a dock or a plug.

I don't think anyone actually logs the hours a battery is used or
charged, it's just not necessary unless you're using a really low-end
charger that doesn't cut-off when the battery is fully charged. As you
are probably aware, Frank has a _very_ long history of attempting to
make simple things seem complicated when it fits his agenda (or perhaps
he really does believe that plugging a battery into a charger is a
complex engineering task)!

Sure a battery-less system would be less hassle, but as all the experts
agree, generator powered systems aren't the safest option for urban
commuting.

 

[Frank Krygowski]

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> > This is also true. Too much self-discharge can ruin nicad and NiMH
> cells, even
> > if you do remember to recharge them. The worse mistake you can make
> is to turn
> > on a light that's been sitting awhile. If one cell has gone flatter
> than the
> > others, it can be ruined by charge reversal. So if your lights have
> been
> > sitting through the summer, charge them up before turning them on,
> even for a
> > second or two.
>
> Actually it doesn’t ruin Ni-Cads, since the battery can easily be
> recovered by zapping the internal short. I haven’t had a NiMH battery
> fail, and don’t know if the same procedure can be applied, but I seem to
> recall reading somewhere that it does NOT work on NiMH cells. There was
> an article in an old Popular Electronics that explained how to do it,
> but basically it’s discharging a big ole capacitor across the battery to
> burn out the short. I’ve saved many ni-cads that were supposedly dead.
>
> http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/rejuv.html
> http://www.barc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/page19.html
>
> > All these battery hassles are why lead-acid batteries are better for
> occasional
> > use. Lead-acids have their issues too, but in general, smart
> chargers are much
> > cheaper, and battery management is easier.
>
> I find the lead-acid batteries to be less hassle as well. The cheap NiMH
> chargers require removal of the individual cells from the light, and
> insertion into a charger. The AA NiMH cells are the only inexpensive
> NiMH cells, but you really need to parallel multiple packs to get
> sufficient current. While one advantage of NiMH over NiCads is the
> ability to hook packs in parallel with no isolation, this is only for
> discharging—for charging they need to be charged separately. If you’re
> using battery holders for NiMH, rather than solder-tab batteries, the
> reliability of all those spring tabs are also an issue. However, smart
> NiMH chargers are widely available, and not too expensive. Costco sells
> a Panasonic charger that monitors temperature, voltage, and the internal
> resistance, and it’s around $25 including a bunch of batteries.
>
> You can buy a NiMH charger that will charge twelve cells in series
> (14.4V), but it is rather expensive ($75), see
> http://www.thomasdistributing.com/mh-c777plus.htm
>
> Lead-Acid batteries are cheap, as are the smart chargers, and they come
> in a single, easy to manage package. The downside to lead-acid is that
> they aren’t as efficient in terms of weight/AH as NiMH. Also, if you
> leave a lead-acid battery unused and uncharged, it goes bad.
>
> Li-Ion has great potential since both chargers and batteries are getting
> cheaper due to the after-market chargers for camcorders and digital
> cameras. Two 7.2V Li-Ion packs in series, over-voltaging an 12 volt
> MR-16, make a poor-man’s HID-like setup. Li-Ion batteries have very low
> self-discharger rates.

Using a generator is SO much simpler!


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

 

[Frank Krygowski]

[email protected] wrote:

> A Muzi wrote:
>
> 2.4W halogen battery/dynamo
>>lights together are on the bulk of night riding bicycles
>>which have lights...
>
>
> Maybe in Wisconsin night riders use the little 2.4 Watt bulbs. But not
> in Kansas City during the 1998-2000 time period. We had up to about 50
> people on many of the evening group rides through the winter. No one
> had generator lights. A few did try the 2.4 Watt Cateye battery setup.
> They were ineffective. The NiteRider type 10, 15, 20 Watt setups were
> the lights of choice.
>

Admittedly, generators are not currently popular in America. Still,
Russell is probably making the common mistake of the avid cyclist: "If
they're not using what I'm using, they're not really cyclists."

Club cyclists are not representative of cycling in general. I'm sure
you don't think your club riders' drivetrains (All Dura Ace or Ultegra?
All Campy?) are typical of most night night riders. Why would you
think your club riders' mega-lights were typical of most night riders?

Admittedly, in my area there are few regular night cyclists. But the
most dedicated bike commuters in my area are not using anything over 5
watts. Most are using about 2 to 3 watts. The couple that tops the
list of transportational cyclists in this area have lights that are
_less_ powerful than my generator's. They've been using them for
decades. And yes, they're perfectly visible at night.

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

 

[Frank Krygowski]

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

> Matt O'Toole wrote:
> > Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Perhaps that's a fundamental difference between the battery fans and
> >>the generator fans. One crew is willing to tie themselves down with
> >>log books, recharging schedules, special parking places, limits on
> >>ride duration, etc.
> >
> > Some people like that stuff -- Sili Valley is full of
> quasi-Apsbergers types who
> > need to invent these little routines to amuse themselves.
>
> Come on now. You charge your cell phone, your digital camera, your PDA,
> your notebook PC, etc. It's not something you give a second thought to.
> You get home, or get to work, and connect the device(s) to the charger,
> via a dock or a plug.

Steven really doesn't realize how atypical he is!


> Sure a battery-less system would be less hassle,

Yep. _Much_ less.

but as all the experts
> agree, generator powered systems aren't the safest option for urban
> commuting.
>

_All_ the experts? You've polled each and every one?

Wait, I get it! It's the usual Scharf definition of "expert", which is
"someone who agrees with Scharf."

The nice thing about that is, it makes polling them a short, simple
task! ;-)

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

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Matt O'Toole wrote:

> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
>
>>Argh, I get so tired of the exaggerations, "stadium lights,"
>
>
> That's a Cateye trade name for their HIDs, not hyperbole from this forum. It's
> an apt name too because the technology is similar.
>
> Matt O.
>
>

Sorry, you are correct. The term that Frank likes to use is "mega-watts"
not "stadium lights." Do a Google Groups search for "mega-watt lights
author:frank", and you'll find the posts.

In any case, it's the same type of wild exaggeration, since no one uses
mega-watts of lights on their bicycles. There are even some lights that
use only 10 watts of power that are excellent.

 

[Tim McNamara]

"Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> writes:

> Matt O'Toole wrote:
> > Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Perhaps that's a fundamental difference between the battery fans
> >>and the generator fans. One crew is willing to tie themselves
> >>down with log books, recharging schedules, special parking
> >>places, limits on ride duration, etc.
> >
> > Some people like that stuff -- Sili Valley is full of
> quasi-Apsbergers types who
> > need to invent these little routines to amuse themselves.
>
> Come on now. You charge your cell phone, your digital camera, your
> PDA, your notebook PC, etc. It's not something you give a second
> thought to. You get home, or get to work, and connect the device(s)
> to the charger, via a dock or a plug.

Only if you choose to tie yourself down to all that malarkey. I
charge my cell phone about once every two weeks. I replace the
batteries in my Palm III about once a month or less. I rarely use my
digital camera because it's so friggin' wasteful with batteries- my
film camera goes for years on a battery. I don't own a laptop. Its
just too much of a PITA to deal with all this battery powered ****,
which tends to let one down when one needs it most. Same with battery
lights.

I like a simple and, as much as I can manage it, ecologically
responsible life. Putting batteries in land fills (tips to you Brits)
is irresponsible IMHO.

> I don't think anyone actually logs the hours a battery is used or
> charged, it's just not necessary unless you're using a really
> low-end charger that doesn't cut-off when the battery is fully
> charged. As you are probably aware, Frank has a _very_ long history
> of attempting to make simple things seem complicated when it fits
> his agenda (or perhaps he really does believe that plugging a
> battery into a charger is a complex engineering task)!
>
> Sure a battery-less system would be less hassle, but as all the
> experts agree, generator powered systems aren't the safest option
> for urban commuting.

The only "expert" agreeing with you is you, it seems. The experts who
actually ride for useful purposes and/or who ride long distances at
night know that generators are the way to go.

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Mark Janeba wrote:

> Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
>> Mark Janeba wrote:
>>
>>> * Does anybody remember Kearney lights?
>>
>> Yep. Never owned any, but I've met others who used them. Ed Kearney
>> was probably the very first proponent of mega-lights - including that
>> yellow barrier-flasher taillight! Are you still using one of those?
>
>
> He certainly was. Yes, I'm still flashing (on my commuter) like a hole
> in the road, after 20 years.

I think that Ed inspired a whole industry, by showing the advantages of
good lighting, versus what was available at the time.

His rear light was not a "mega" light, other than the physical size.
When I was manufacturing lighting systems I looked at the barrier
lights, but thought they were just too large, and had too slow of a
flash rate, though they did have the advantage of easy bulb replacement.

Hmm, maybe I'll order a barricade light for old-times sake,

"http://store.yahoo.com/standard-signs/barac.html"

If you have a digital picture of the Kearney lights I'd appreciate one
to use on my web site. I found one photo of the rear lamp at:
"http://users.rcn.com/delimadantas/stolen%20bike/Panasonic_theft.pdf" I
hope he got his bike back!

 

[[email protected]]

i keep seeing reviews and raves about this naturalisproducts.com and
organiconline.com.sg . many people are discussing in beauty forums and
magazines have positive reviews on this . but this thing ain't new, its
been around for 20 years! anyone tried can feedback to me on exactly
how good it is?



----------------------------------------
<quote>
[email protected]
can anyone help me please, am looking for the local distributor or any
shop selling the naturalis range of skin and body care products, from
this company http://www.naturalisproducts.com . looking for this
urgently. for those who have not come across it, its some foodbased
anti-aging products. i googled for this and received result
showing its available at http://www.organiconline.com.sg. i need this
urgently but shipping from singapore will take some time, if anyone is
distributing this please contact me at [email protected]
urgently. i have a group of us looking to buy this. thanks!

 

[[email protected]]

i keep seeing reviews and raves about this naturalisproducts.com and
organiconline.com.sg . many people are discussing in beauty forums and
magazines have positive reviews on this . but this thing ain't new, its
been around for 20 years! anyone tried can feedback to me on exactly
how good it is?



----------------------------------------
<quote>
[email protected]
can anyone help me please, am looking for the local distributor or any
shop selling the naturalis range of skin and body care products, from
this company http://www.naturalisproducts.com . looking for this
urgently. for those who have not come across it, its some foodbased
anti-aging products. i googled for this and received result
showing its available at http://www.organiconline.com.sg. i need this
urgently but shipping from singapore will take some time, if anyone is
distributing this please contact me at [email protected]
urgently. i have a group of us looking to buy this. thanks!

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Tim McNamara wrote:

> Only if you choose to tie yourself down to all that malarkey.

Yes, this is very true, though often much of it is not a choice if you
want to have a decent job, at least where I am located.

> I like a simple and, as much as I can manage it, ecologically
> responsible life. Putting batteries in land fills (tips to you Brits)
> is irresponsible IMHO.

I agree. Rechargeable batteries should be used, and then recycled when
they no longer work.

Bicycle lights are different than the various other gadgets with
batteries, since good lights are essential for safety, and let you give
up a much more wasteful transport mode.

The point was (and is) that connecting a charger to a device is not a
complex task, even though it does require some discipline to remember to
do it.

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Tim McNamara wrote:

> Only if you choose to tie yourself down to all that malarkey.

Yes, this is very true, though often much of it is not a choice if you
want to have a decent job, at least where I am located.

> I like a simple and, as much as I can manage it, ecologically
> responsible life. Putting batteries in land fills (tips to you Brits)
> is irresponsible IMHO.

I agree. Rechargeable batteries should be used, and then recycled when
they no longer work.

Bicycle lights are different than the various other gadgets with
batteries, since good lights are essential for safety, and let you give
up a much more wasteful transport mode.

The point was (and is) that connecting a charger to a device is not a
complex task, even though it does require some discipline to remember to
do it.

 

[David Damerell]

begin quoting Joe Haggadah <[email protected]>:
>I was reading the history of where the legal standards
>came from, and they appear to be more based on
>what a generator is capable of providing in terms of
>power, than on the amount of light that is necessary
>for safe cycling. These standards are very old, and
>haven't kept up with changes in the urban environment,
>the vastly increased numbers of drivers,
>and the easing of licensing requirements for drivers,

Do you mean as compared to the days of the S-A Dynohub, when there was,
er, no licensing requirement for drivers?

My paternal grandmother never took a driving test in her life. And it
showed.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[David Damerell]

begin quoting Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]>:
>Come on now. You charge your cell phone, your digital camera, your PDA,
>your notebook PC, etc. It's not something you give a second thought to.

Indeed. That's why my cellphone is always running out of battery, because I
don't give a second thought to it.

>Sure a battery-less system would be less hassle, but as all the experts
>agree, generator powered systems aren't the safest option for urban
>commuting.

Actually, as you keep forgetting, some of your motley collection of quotes
want mega-lights for rural riding, an issue you are due for another U-turn
on any day now.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[David Damerell]

quoting Matt O'Toole <[email protected]>:
>Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>Matt O'Toole wrote:
>>>Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>>>>Argh, I get so tired of the exaggerations, "stadium lights,"
>>>That's a Cateye trade name for their HIDs, not hyperbole from this
>>>forum.
>>Right. I would have thought everybody knew that!
>Especially the world's greatest expert...

Hey, don't knock Scharf. He discovered the "SON tire dynamo" he posts
about, which us lesser mortals have never heard of. That's expertise.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!