# Too bright is too bright



## boubla (May 12, 2012)

I ride at night and those really high power lights bother me. There's many in my area (SF)

I've got a small light and I can setup the intensity while I ride. I rarely need to put it very high but if i do i can turn it down, like cars do. In fact, I only have it medium-high when I'm in the forest.

But the other bikes, specially on the road/street, oh god. They all have those super duper 10000 lumen lights. Result? Every single time I come across another rider going the opposite direction I am blind. And I mean, really, really blind. Cars with lights fully up don't blind me as much. This is sometimes extremely dangerous.


----------



## AlienRFX (Sep 27, 2006)

Corey Hart - Sunglasses At Night - YouTube


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

boubla said:


> I ride at night and those really high power lights bother me. There's many in my area (SF)
> 
> I've got a small light and I can setup the intensity while I ride. I rarely need to put it very high but if i do i can turn it down, like cars do. In fact, I only have it medium-high when I'm in the forest.
> 
> But the other bikes, specially on the road/street, oh god. They all have those super duper 10000 lumen lights. Result? Every single time I come across another rider going the opposite direction I am blind. And I mean, really, really blind. Cars with lights fully up don't blind me as much. This is sometimes extremely dangerous.


Well, do you stare at the headlights of oncoming cars? If you do, the same thing will happen.

Few lights for bikes are even as bright as a single car headlight. A headlight is 1300 lumens out the front (not claimed lumens like on bike lights).

Presuming you have a driver's license, you might recall the part about night driving where they train you to not look at oncoming headlights directly. Same thing applies on a bike.

J.


----------



## RBrady (Jan 20, 2009)

alienrfx said:


> corey hart - sunglasses at night - youtube


lol.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

boubla said:


> ....But the other bikes, specially on the road/street, oh god. *They all have those super duper 10000 lumen lights.* Result? Every single time I come across another rider going the opposite direction I am blind. And I mean, really, really blind. Cars with lights fully up don't blind me as much. This is sometimes extremely dangerous.


When I ride the road at night I rarely see another cyclist. On the other hand I see lots of cars, trucks, etc. There are two reasons I ride with my mountain bike helmet; One, my torch fits nicely on it and Two, it has a visor. The visor allows me to tilt my head down to block the blinding glare on all the on-coming traffic. Without it there would be times when I would not be able to see. As such we come from two completely diametrically opposed points of view.

Now as to the *10000 *lumen lights....I agree, no one should ride with one of these on their bike...see below...


----------



## MaximusHQ (Aug 6, 2007)

Don't use a small wussy light! I am actually in the habit of dimming my lights as cars or bicyclists approach. But if a car decides not to dim his brights then I certainly am not going to. I Have yet to see any other bicyclists with a light bright enough light to even remotely bother me yet. Usually the best they have around here is something in the Magicshine range (approximately 500 lumens) which doesn't phase me a bit. No 10,000 lumen lights around here yet.


----------



## colleen c (May 28, 2011)

boubla said:


> *I ride at night and those really high power lights bother me. There's many in my area (SF) *
> 
> I've got a small light and I can setup the intensity while I ride. I rarely need to put it very high but if i do i can turn it down, like cars do. In fact, I only have it medium-high when I'm in the forest.
> 
> But the other bikes, specially on the road/street, oh god. They all have those super duper 10000 lumen lights. Result? Every single time I come across another rider going the opposite direction I am blind. And I mean, really, really blind. Cars with lights fully up don't blind me as much. This is sometimes extremely dangerous.


I usually butt out of thread of this nature, but this one got me curious. When you quoted (SF), I guessing that's San Francisco?.

I ride road 99% nowadays. Although I'm not in the SF area too often, I do travel a 25 miles stretch on the other side of the bay using bart and bike. I ride in one of the most bicycle active city in the East Bay. I must admit I have yet seen another bike with high power lights except my coworker whom I provided recomendation for lights. Most bicyclist out on the road here have the LBS lights like the Cygolite 350. I really have yet to see another cyclist using even a Magicshine. I see bikes all the time on the Bart in the dark hours of the morning and late evening. So far, I am the only one to have used the higher power light.

That much being said, I see a lot of riders here having their low power light aim way to high as if they are trying to compensate for the lack of throw from these lights by means of aiming high.


----------



## XJaredX (Apr 17, 2006)

MaximusHQ said:


> Don't use a small wussy light! I am actually in the habit of dimming my lights as cars or bicyclists approach. But if a car decides not to dim his brights then I certainly am not going to. I Have yet to see any other bicyclists with a light bright enough light to even remotely bother me yet. Usually the best they have around here is something in the Magicshine range (approximately 500 lumens) which doesn't phase me a bit. No 10,000 lumen lights around here yet.


Car headlights aren't spilling light super high like nearly all higher powered bike lights are though,


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

XJaredX said:


> Car headlights aren't spilling light super high like nearly all higher powered bike lights are though,


As someone who has to drive at night for a living I just have to shake my head when I read stuff like this. :nonod: I'm seeing more and more brighter lights on cars every day. Some of those new light systems I'm seeing on some newer cars are _incredibly_ bright. Not sure if they're LED or not but judging from the output they look to be. I'll also add that they don't seem to comply with normal standards as the light they emit seems to radiate straight out. One of these drivers was passing me the other night and I got a real good look at how bright the lights were as he came up behind another car. Boy was I glad when he passed. Just wait another five years or so and you will see more of this kind of stuff.

The company I work for owns a fleet of vehicles. Included in that fleet are some of the newer Dodge vans. When we first got these vehicles cars were flashing their high beams at us all the time. It's been about two years since we've got the vans and now people generally ignore the bright lights. Like me, people are getting used to brighter head lights on vehicles. On occasion though, I still see some that are more irritatingly brighter than others.

With all this in perspective, I don't see why people keep harping on bright bike lights for road use ( which almost nobody uses ). This is like complaining that someone shot you with a squirt gun after you came in from a pouring rain without a rain coat.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Cat-man-do said:


> As someone who has to drive at night for a living I just have to shake my head when I read stuff like this. :nonod: I'm seeing more and more brighter lights on cars every day. Some of those new light systems I'm seeing on some newer cars are _incredibly_ bright. Not sure if they're LED or not but judging from the output they look to be. I'll also add that they don't seem to comply with normal standards as the light they emit seems to radiate straight out. One of these drivers was passing me the other night and I got a real good look at how bright the lights were as he came up behind another car. Boy was I glad when he passed. Just wait another five years or so and you will see more of this kind of stuff.
> 
> The company I work for owns a fleet of vehicles. Included in that fleet are some of the newer Dodge vans. When we first got these vehicles cars were flashing their high beams at us all the time. It's been about two years since we've got the vans and now people generally ignore the bright lights. Like me, people are getting used to brighter head lights on vehicles. On occasion though, I still see some that are more irritatingly brighter than others.
> 
> With all this in perspective, I don't see why people keep harping on bright bike lights for road use ( which almost nobody uses ). *This is like complaining that someone shot you with a squirt gun after you came in from a pouring rain without a rain coat.*


Exactly.

Or my experience on one scuba diving trip. Everyone is standing around, flippers, air on, and all waiting their turn to jump in off the boat. A tropical shower comes by and most people are trying to get under the cover of the bimini on the boat.

J.


----------



## Redaggie03 (May 14, 2012)

I don't see many night riders in the woods and when I do, I stop and turn my bars away. Just too risky to pass at night.


----------



## fragman (May 17, 2012)

I don't like riding at night. I feel it is dangerous since to have to come across the downtown to reach the destination.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

fragman said:


> I don't like riding at night. I feel it is dangerous since to have to come across the downtown to reach the destination.


Pardon me asking, but what are you doing on this forum then?

J.


----------



## pimpbot (Dec 31, 2003)

I personally think the d*** measuring contest that has become bike lighting is a bit out of control. I run a 700 lumen dual head MiNewt and a MagicShine on the lid. Most of the time, I have them on low. I only turn them up for fast descents.

10 years ago, we hit the trail with 250 lumens (combined helmet and bar light) and that was plenty. I remember the first guy to show up with an HID, and everybody else was complaining because it was washing out our own lights. :lol:

Yeah, like others have said, don't stare at the oncoming lights. That is much harder to do on singletrack with an oncoming rider than it is on a 2 lane in each direction freeway. On the other side of that, those of us with crazy bright lights should be in the habit of dimming them or putting a hand over them for oncoming traffic so we don't burn out somebody else's eyes.



JohnJ80 said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Or my experience on one scuba diving trip. Everyone is standing around, flippers, air on, and all waiting their turn to jump in off the boat. A tropical shower comes by and most people are trying to get under the cover of the bimini on the boat.
> 
> J.


That's just funny.

Back when I was a data wiring monkey, I used to work with this guy who was afraid of everything. We wired up this one building that had some asbestos wrapped pipes, but we weren't working with them. We wore dust masks, but really it was fine as long as we didn't touch the asbestos wrap. He saw the warning signs, jumped out of the crawl and got all paranoid and called his doctor on the phone demanding a checkup on the boss' dime.

Meanwhile.... he lit up a cigarette without the slightest bit of irony. He was like a 2 pack a day smoker, on top of being the biggest pothead I ever met. :lol: Gawd, I hated working with that guy.

One of my lines when somebody starts whining about climbing on a mountain bike is, 'bit**ing about climbing when mountain biking is like bit**ing about getting wet while swimming'.


----------



## XJaredX (Apr 17, 2006)

Cat-man-do said:


> As someone who has to drive at night for a living I just have to shake my head when I read stuff like this. :nonod: I'm seeing more and more brighter lights on cars every day. Some of those new light systems I'm seeing on some newer cars are _incredibly_ bright. Not sure if they're LED or not but judging from the output they look to be. I'll also add that they don't seem to comply with normal standards as the light they emit seems to radiate straight out. One of these drivers was passing me the other night and I got a real good look at how bright the lights were as he came up behind another car. Boy was I glad when he passed. Just wait another five years or so and you will see more of this kind of stuff.
> 
> The company I work for owns a fleet of vehicles. Included in that fleet are some of the newer Dodge vans. When we first got these vehicles cars were flashing their high beams at us all the time. It's been about two years since we've got the vans and now people generally ignore the bright lights. Like me, people are getting used to brighter head lights on vehicles. On occasion though, I still see some that are more irritatingly brighter than others.
> 
> With all this in perspective, I don't see why people keep harping on bright bike lights for road use ( which almost nobody uses ). This is like complaining that someone shot you with a squirt gun after you came in from a pouring rain without a rain coat.


I could agree with you about headlights on cars... when HID's started becoming popular, their beam patterns were terrible, but they seem to be getting better in the past few years.

It could actually also come down to headlight aiming... Headlight aiming is for the most part federalized from what I understand, but it can actually vary from one municipality to another- but it can also vary simply based on if the car is set up properly or not.

Subarus, for example, have a noticeable cutoff in the driver's side lamp, done so to cut down on blinding oncoming drivers.

But regardless, for as bright as headlights have become in cars, there still exist a means to adjust them, and also cutoffs so they don't shoot light super high. I can only think of one bike light (that Phillips one that MTBR reviewed in the lights shootout) that has a cutoff so it doesn't shoot light upward at oncoming drivers/riders.


----------



## Trail Addict (Nov 20, 2011)

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no such thing as too bright, there can never be.

I've got a 4000 lumen set up on my bike, that lights the trails as bright as the sun. If you don't like it too bad, come at me and I'll shine it in your eyes.


----------



## dobovedo (Feb 13, 2011)

Trail Addict said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no such thing as too bright, there can never be.
> 
> I've got a 4000 lumen set up on my bike, that lights the trails as bright as the sun. If you don't like it too bad, come at me and I'll shine it in your eyes.


Nice attitude. Can I come ride with you?


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Trail Addict said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no such thing as too bright, there can never be.
> 
> I've got a 4000 lumen set up on my bike, that lights the trails as bright as the sun. If you don't like it too bad, *come at me and I'll shine it in your eyes.*


Well so much for trail etiquette. Most people who mountain bike try to show respect to other riders. I guess that doesn't include you, what a shame. :bluefrown:

As for believing that_ "there is no such thing as too bright"_, Such a statement really doesn't add to the dialog as almost everyone knows it's not true. I'm sure your light set-up serves your purpose. I'm fine with that. Being disrespectful to other riders ( or hikers ) that you might encounter on a ride, that I'm not so fine with.

Just last night I took my road bike on a late night ride though the paved trail system that transverses through sections of my community. While rounding a turn I came up on a couple of people who were just hanging out on the trail. As soon as a made my turn my lights hit these people square in the eyes and I saw them squint and turn their heads. People squint when something is too bright. Quickly I took my hand and shrouded the lamp so as not to blind them. I did this without thinking. As I passed I said, "sorry about that" and continued on. I was only running about 500 lumen at the time but at close range it is very bright.

I really don't think 500 lumen is too bright a light but it really doesn't matter what I think. When I can see the people turn their head or squint I KNOW I'm blinding them. I guess I'm just one of those people who believes in courtesy. I guess I react this way because I hope that in the long run, "what goes around comes around".


----------



## muzzanic (Apr 28, 2009)

Trail Addict said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no such thing as too bright, there can never be.
> 
> I've got a 4000 lumen set up on my bike, that lights the trails as bright as the sun. If you don't like it too bad, come at me and I'll shine it in your eyes.


Yes my light is a bit down on yours (3600 Lumen ) & it does light up the trail just fine.

But it is still a long way off warming up the air enough to leave my Jacket at home

I have found it great when you catch someone in the forest, They all let you past so they don't end up riding in there own shadow.:thumbsup:


----------



## Sandrenseren (Dec 29, 2011)

But.. but..but I need those 250 billion lux to be able to set Strava records at night..


----------



## Trail Addict (Nov 20, 2011)

You guys realize I was only joking about the 4000 lumen light right? 

All I have is a cheap little flashlight ghetto mounted to my handlebars that only produces about 120 lumens.


----------



## fast_monte` (Jul 6, 2009)

Night riding is an arms race. If the guy behind you is throwing a shadow, you are loosing, move over and accept defeat.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

fast_monte` said:


> Night riding is an arms race. If the guy behind you is throwing a shadow, you are loosing, move over and accept defeat.


My fitness level isn't what it used to be. If I let someone pass that is the reason why. I have however encountered the same effect while driving a car. In that situation I'm more than glad to let the other people pass.



Trail Addict said:


> You guys realize I was only joking about the 4000 lumen light right?
> 
> All I have is a cheap little flashlight ghetto mounted to my handlebars that only produces about 120 lumens.


.....food for thought.


----------



## EBasil (Jan 30, 2004)

Ha ha! In terms of trail riding, when homeowners can see you, two miles away, yeah you've managed to find a light that's too bright. When leaves curl in the savage beam of your Night Sun, your light is too bright. When oncoming riders swerve on the singletrack because you're blinding them, your light is too bright. When your riding area is compromised because you, and everyone else, have super-bright lights that piss-off runners and hikers, scare homeowners, freak the hell out of wildlife and are easily seen really far away, _blame the man._.

If you need a light that bright because you're scared of the dark, spend a little time running only a micro light. If the ravenous cougars and wicked owls don't get you, you might find you can ride with less light in the future (unless the rest of your crew are using mega-lights, and then it's game on 'til the **** hits the fan).


----------



## Trail Addict (Nov 20, 2011)

Cat-man-do said:


> .....food for thought.


I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, please don't cry.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Trail Addict said:


> I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, please don't cry.


In regard to the above statement: you might want to consider if your post is adding anything to the subject of the OP.. IMO you are coming very close to meeting the criteria outlined in this link, which I may add is against the*forum rules. FWIW. If you think I'm wrong about that I'd be more than happy to contact a moderator and let them mediate the issue.

( *_ in regard to forum rules, scroll down to the the part that starts off as, " ***Mtbr.com is an online resource for mountain bikers". Read that paragraph. That should clarify things. _)


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Cat-man-do said:


> In regard to the above statement: you might want to consider if your post is adding anything to the subject of the OP.. IMO you are coming very close to meeting the criteria outlined in this link, which I may add is against the*forum rules. FWIW. If you think I'm wrong about that I'd be more than happy to contact a moderator and let them mediate the issue.
> 
> ( *_ in regard to forum rules, scroll down to the the part that starts off as, " ***Mtbr.com is an online resource for mountain bikers". Read that paragraph. That should clarify things. _)


Cat, you are THE MAN.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

znomit said:


> Cat, you are THE MAN.


(*cue, theme from Dragnet ) You've heard the expression, "Like a deer frozen in the headlights.....:eekster:....OH NO...that's ME!....LOL! :lol:


----------



## aBicycle (Jun 13, 2012)

Trail Addict said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no such thing as too bright, there can never be.
> 
> I've got a 4000 lumen set up on my bike, that lights the trails as bright as the sun. If you don't like it too bad, come at me and I'll shine it in your eyes.


Yes, us bright light lovers love to dazzle all that surround us! :thumbsup:


----------



## Beckler (Jan 25, 2008)

We probably need a car-type hi-lo beam arrangement. Several ways I can think to do that--should be easy. Could even be automatic when it senses another oncoming headlight


----------



## aBicycle (Jun 13, 2012)

Trail Addict said:


> You guys realize I was only joking about the 4000 lumen light right?
> 
> All I have is a cheap little flashlight ghetto mounted to my handlebars that only produces about 120 lumens.


Niterider has a 3600 lumen light.


----------



## Titus Maximus (Jan 3, 2004)

Redaggie03 said:


> I don't see many night riders in the woods and when I do, I stop and turn my bars away. Just too risky to pass at night.


Thank you for your consideration.


----------



## RickHancock (Jul 15, 2012)

*Lights*

I use a pair of Serfas lights. Bar mount is 500 lumens. I keep it adjusted to illuminate the trail about 8-12 ft. in front of me. Helmet mount is 250 lumens and is set about 15-20 ft. in front. If I have to travel on a paved road for any reason I tend to angle my head slightly to the right to avoid blinding an approaching driver. The bar light is mounted on the right middle of the bar.

I was always taught to slightly avert my eyes from oncoming traffic to avoid blinding, I guess I just subconsciously do it on my bike.


----------



## tunajuice (May 20, 2009)

*Diminishing returns*

My experience has been that the brighter the light the more splash back. This is particularly so when riding through tight singletrack where leaves, rocks, tree trunks are reflecting the light back at you from just a couple of feet away. (obviously not as bad as fog but you get the idea)

I haven't had much run in with other bikers in the hills (that's one of the reasons I like to ride at night) but when I run into bikers and cars on the pavement on way back home I turn my head away from them (so as not to blind them with headlamp) and place my hand over the bar mounted light - I've even gotten the occasional "thank you".


----------



## Mtn-Rider (May 21, 2010)

Their 10000 lumen lights are for zapping mosquitoes. Get a 20000 lumen light for zapping roadies riding with 10000 lumen lights.


----------



## erol/frost (Jan 3, 2004)

So what is the equivalent to "Nothing beats cubic inches" when discussing bike lights?


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

I run a motorcycle gel pack battery, and two full size Baja off road rally lights. I can get 6 hours of run time at ~ 5000 lumens, AND heat up a burrito at the same time. I am a God to the local aboriginals, really.


----------



## Baja Designs (Aug 3, 2010)

Beckler said:


> We probably need a car-type hi-lo beam arrangement. Several ways I can think to do that--should be easy. Could even be automatic when it senses another oncoming headlight


I will typically lower the light level on my light(s) when I see someone coming up the trail, but like Cat said even 500 Lumens is crazy bright when they are coming at you, let alone an 1800 and 1000 Lumen combo - yikes! I run around in the mid level of my lights generally anyway.

As far as too much light, consider this, I have used my 1800 Lumen Double Stryk and 925 Lumen Strykr SL to ride my RMZ450 MX bike trail riding - fast trail riding - I started to outrun the lights at around 55-60mph. My point is that it's not necessarily pure lumen count that matters really, it's about what color temperature they are and the effectiveness of the optics. IMO a good warm/neutral color and nice combination of throw and spread on a lower Lumen count system will beat a pukey green or blue color high Lumen system with bad or fractured optics.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

BajaDesignsShannon said:


> .... My point is that it's not necessarily pure lumen count that matters really, it's about what color temperature they are and the effectiveness of the optics.* IMO a good warm/neutral color and nice combination of throw and spread on a lower Lumen count system will beat a pukey green or blue color high Lumen system with bad or fractured optics*.


With this I have to agree. Matter of fact, when the lumen wars are over I think there is going to be a return back to more, "Eye friendly bike lights". I have one small XM-L torch that happens to have a nice warm/neutral white color rendition. When I turn it on it doesn't look that bright at first glance but the more I use it the more I realize I can see real good with this little torch.

I think the main reason for this is that for one; There is far less reflective glare. This cuts down on contraction of the pupil and allows the eye to dilate so it gathers more "useful" light. Secondly it gives more natural tone to the trail and lets you see more detail. I really can't wait till more manufacturers start to offer a choice with some slightly warmer tones to the emitters on their bike lamps. This is one of the reasons why I wish there were lamps that had "easy user replaceable emitter modules". Man would that be sweet.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

I too think the lumen war is heading for the closing acts. At some point, when very bright LEDs get cheap, then the feature sets will grow, and beamshaping will become more important. 

J.


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

When they get cheap enough, I'll just put thousands of em up in the trees on my favorite trails, with little solar arrays, and gel battery packs. They will be motion activated by an RFID chip so only humans light them up. 
Problem solved!


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

rideit said:


> When they get cheap enough, I'll just put thousands of em up in the trees on my favorite trails, with little solar arrays, and gel battery packs. They will be motion activated by an RFID chip so only humans light them up.
> Problem solved!


Yes Mr. Gore, one of these days perhaps.


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

Sandrenseren said:


> But.. but..but I need those 250 billion lux to be able to set Strava records at night..


This is exactly when I set my records and my one solitary KOM. 

But I do it with only 480 lumina on the bar and an approx 500 on the helmet. Guess I need more light. I may be able to go faster still


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

rideit said:


> When they get cheap enough, I'll just put thousands of em up in the trees on my favorite trails, with little solar arrays, and gel battery packs. They will be motion activated by an RFID chip so only humans light them up.
> Problem solved!


Actually that would be pretty awesome.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

kerryn said:


> Actually that would be pretty awesome.


Naah....that would be a waste of natural resources. I'm waiting for the lite weight version of true "Low light Night vision glasses". Not those cheap IR things out there now but real low light night vision. Only I want ones that look like a normal pair of glasses. That way you only need lights as back-up. :thumbsup:


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Cat-man-do said:


> Naah....that would be a waste of natural resources. I'm waiting for the lite weight version of true "Low light Night vision glasses". Not those cheap IR things out there now but real low light night vision. Only I want ones that look like a normal pair of glasses. That way you only need lights as back-up. :thumbsup:


Nightgoggles would be great! We wouldn't disturb wildlife as much, no UFO calls in the forests anymore,..
But if some of these social high lux spot riders crosses, you are as blind as a bat for 5 minutes:thumbsup

As a teenager, we went nightriding with only the moonlight, and it was big fun untill someone with a petzl headlamp joined, providing maybe 20 lumens, it was enough to blind us for riding in moonlight.
So we started riding headlamps/ petzls, it allowed us to ride (slow) in the forest and it was big adventure and big fun.

Until the 15 watt halogen systems came up, blinding, but also speeding things up to speeds impossible with an old flashlight.

Then came HID/ LED, the over 200 lumen systems allow dayriding speeds on known technical ground, and improving the colors, so another upgrade. 
untill there, the upgrades made sense to me, but now it is less straightforward:

If I ride my older, around 250 real lumens setup by myself, It needs to go pretty fast on unknown stuff before I need more, I might profit a bit from a 600-900 lumen upgrade but I hardly ride this kind of things, Yet I need to upgrade because some showoff got himself some ultrabright, bleu light and is not willing to power it down, making me ride my own shadow and rendering me blind for a minute after crossing.

So, the main reason why I need to upgrade my current light is because some punk wants to show off with his €€€ light!

I tested a pikko/ wilma combo last year, and even on unknown, fast or rather technical stuff I was just as fast with a 26° wide wilma and piko on half power as on full power!

In lots of cases, singletrail between trees for instance, there is so much reflection that you are blinding yourself!
On wide open rocky area's the added light is impressive, and the fact that you can lighten(irritate) people on the other side of the valley is plain fun, but it 's not making me ride faster!
What is slowing me down is the lack of depth vision and the color differences compared to day riding, not the lack of light.

My eyes are adjusting themself to the amount of light, making things out of the beam completely invisible. So, if I would get more lumens it would be to widen the flood, not to brighten the light!

From the social point of view: 
Riding on half the power, my buddies, one with a sigma powerled evo and a karma; the other using a hope 4 led helm unit, were able to keep up with me comfortably, they could profit from the almost 1000 lumens this combination still provided a half the power to go a bit faster and still see there own spill, they had some shadow when I was behind them, but not to disturbing.
On full power (1500+ 750 lumens) they hardly saw there own spot making it a dangerous ride!

As far as I am concerned, the only ones profitting from this race for light are the manufacturers, they keep selling expensive lights and heavy batteries (to run a high beam for a while).


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Nothing's impossible said:


> ..... Yet I need to upgrade because some showoff got himself some ultrabright, bleu light and is not willing to power it down, making me ride my own shadow and rendering me blind for a minute after crossing....
> 
> ....So, the main reason why I need to upgrade my current light is because some punk wants to show off with his €€€ light!....
> 
> ....As far as I am concerned, the only ones profitting from this race for light are the manufacturers, they keep selling expensive lights and heavy batteries (to run a high beam for a while).


While I can agree with some of your observations I'm not sure I understand why you feel the need to put others down who use brighter lights. People like brighter lights so they can see better "If" they choose to ride fast. Most people with the brighter lights will power down to a lower mode when approaching traffic head on.

I can't speak for others but I rarely cross with another rider at night. It has happened a time or two though so I understand the concern. Not really a big deal as I see it and certainly no reason to call someone a "punk" or "show-off". Just slow down a bit and look away from the light. Remember that some people cannot power down quickly because their lamp operates with a "push to hold' power down arrangement. This requires them to take one hand off the handlebars ( if they have no remote ) and then push and hold the mode switch on their lamp. If the terrain is rough they might not be able to do that and still control their bike....just saying.

As for your last statement, I beg to differ. Better light systems profit everyone who wish to participate in nocturnal recreational activities. If you can see better not only are you more safer but you likely will enjoy the experience more ( although in your case that might not be true ). The rest of us punks though are having the time of our lives....and FWIW, I still love riding with as little light as I can get by with. I just like having the brighter lights when I go fast or choose to show off....:ciappa::cornut:


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Catmando, I have no idea where you live, but Belgium is pretty populated, certainly my region, and for the kind of rides we do here big beams are plain overkill! 

We also have social night rides, lots of people, most of them with small cheap lights, so with a big beam you give a lot of people some problem after passing them.

There are some serious people who have big lights and use them with reason, minding traffic and other bikers, limiting the hinder for the others... but since cheap chinese lights are available there are now lots of people that hardly grasp that they are hindering others or want to show how bright there new light is,....they might evolve into serieous people, but till then,... 


We are seldom riding more than 35 km/ h, so there is no need to put a tree 250 meters away in bright light , it is cool if you can but that's it , it is not usfull, on the contrary, such a bright spot just waists the light of the flood because you are shining this spot also on closer objects.

And if you compensate by using a really bright flood you have even more reflecting light closing the pupils of your eyes.

So you are right that a better light system would benefit a lot of people, but at the moment only a few supliers seem to care much about a better light system as far as I can see, they only care about advertising more lumen, and in lot's of cases you end up with such a bright spot that you can hardly use the spill of the light anymore because your pupils are the same sight as on a sunny day!

I want an even lightning on the places where I normally look during a dayride, and I never ride that fast that I limit my sighting to 26°, so I want mainly a wide spilling flood, over 60° with some more intensity higher / central up the beam without a hotspot. If I need to shine at a tree 500 meters away I'll take a flashlight!

An other good light issue,what is a good color rendering light temperature? And who is willing to sacrafice a few lumens for that? 

....


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Actually, it depends a lot on your night vision capability. That's something that varies widely from individual to individual whether you live in Belgium or not.

J.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Catmando, I have no idea where you live, but Belgium is pretty populated, certainly my region, and for the kind of rides we do here big beams are plain overkill! ....
> 
> ....no need to put a tree 250 meters away in bright light , it is cool if you can but that's it , it is not usfull, on the contrary, such a bright spot just waists the light of the flood because you are shining this spot also on closer objects....
> 
> .....If I need to shine at a tree 500 meters away I'll take a flashlight!...


In the U.S.A. while mountain biking is a fairly popular sport as sports go riding at night is not. As such most places are illegal to ride at night so we have one strike against us from the get-go. Regardless people who ride at night over here and are serious MTB'ers know that a vast market of bright lights exist. There are people who just own the small ( see me ) lights and use them. If they are willing to get by with just that kind of light , more power to them. I look at it this way, If I buy a car with 500 hp don't expect me to sit behind you on the highway while you drive 65kph. I have no problem with slower drivers as long as I can pass them safely ( and hopefully they have no problem with me....live and let live...different strokes for different folks. ) Sorry, these are typical attitudes of Americans and might not be understood fully from someone who lives in another part of the world. Over here, we all try to get along if possible.

The lights I use allow me to safely see into the 200 to 300ft. range ( 60-91M ). Usually though I don't need to see that far and ride with less light, usually in the 75 ft. range ( 22M ) I don't know of anyone that makes bike lights that work into the range you mentioned. Is exaggeration a trade mark for someone from Belgium or do they make lights over there that are that better than ours. ?


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

John J, It is possible that I need a bit less light compared to others, but most people I know agree that 500/ 600 lumens, divided between a small helmspot and a big flood on the bars is plenty for most mountainbikerides if you give yourself some time to get accustemed to the dark;
it takes a while to adjust your eyes to low light, so if someone else passes with a light that is verry bright compared to yours, You are (partly) blinded for a while.

Compare the eye with a camera: if I set my camera on automatic for a garden beamshot comparison between my old under 200 real lumen light and a 2000 claimed lumens chinese light. both lights will show the playground pretty well and the old light will even give a more even lighted picture. 
But If I set the camera on manual and keep the settings for the bright light to shoot the old light it will be a pitch black picture, and vice verse it will be a completely white picture. 

The comparison is not completely valid: the eye has a wider range, more clicks, than a camera so it won't be pitch black or completely wide, but the principle is the same, and camerasettings can be adjusted in milliseconds, the eye needs at least several seconds!


Cat-man-do, there must be some misunderstanding?
I am speaking of real lumens, not the chinese claimed ones!
State of the art bikelights are too bright for biking!

The 200 lumens lights that I am now retiring does light the 200-300 feet area pretty well, I have a 100 meters long garden, and I can light the tree in the end pretty well, certainly more than the 0,25 lux from a full moon (the ANSI regulation) as i can light the tree over a full moon.

I expect the 900 lumen Piko that I ordered now to shine much further than 500 meters far according to the ANSI regulations, in fact I think it is going to outshine a single 55 watt projector hallogen beam from my 4 years old car, and with that I can light a tree more than a kilometer away pretty intense!

Mind off course that 0,25 or 2 lux gets lost completely when you have high illumination peaks in your sight as is the case with most bikelights. 
For instance: With the wilma I could see a windmill over a mile away when I was playing with it pointing the beam into the air, with the beam on the bars in normal riding position I could'nt see the windmill anymore, only the blinking light on the top, probably because I was parly blinding myself with the flood!

And the previous version of the wilma lupine that I tested had only 1500 measured lumens, the white beam outshined the big halogen beams of my 4 years old car, and now they have a new version with 2400 lumens, and the top of the line, the bettyR provides 3600 measured lumens.

To put it more clearly:
There are lokal enduro motorriders that use older 35 watt halogen lights, with a simple reflector, providing maybe 500 lumens, and they ride well over 80 km/h on dirtroads, (now they suffer comparable problems when they ride together with HID/LED fitted modern bikes). 

Even today in motorsports, 3600 lumens is considered a lot! A while ago a friend was boosting that he had a 10 xpg, 3500 lumens ledbar mounted onhis racing Rino (an offroad quad/buggy thing) and that he was turning the competition blind.

About the cars????
Most cars are quite capable of fluently reaching the maximum speed allowed on public roads. So It might be a 700 hp car in front of you with a driver that has enough common sense to know that 300 km/h requires a closed track.

I guess you ment to say: just like a sportscar on a public road a 3600 lumens bikelight doesn't make much sense as you will only use a small part of its potention!

I don't mind people owning a big light, but I do mind the fact that I need to spend €'s because some punk believes he needs more light in the forrest during the night than there is during the day:skep:


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

I've done a lot of night riding, 500 lumens split between two lights is not adequate for me on a mountain bike in the woods at night. About twice that amount of real lumens works well. I've been riding at night since the early days in the late '80s with the halogens and the huge water bottle batteries.

But, now, most of my riding is on the road and at much higher speeds. So I find it comfortable at about 2000 lumens when descending at speed on a road in order to miss road hazards (broken pavement, cracks etc...). 

I totally get the issue with dynamic range of the eye compared to cameras (actually studied it at one point). I'm not sure that is an example that works. Certainly at lumens over about 600 lumens the images are really not representative of what you see with your eyes in the same situation.

You've got one heck of a Lupine light if you can see an object a mile away with it. None of mine have that kind of power or throw. From that comment, I'd suggest that you're correct when you say that it's an issue of night vision. In other words, it's you and not the light.

But for what it's worth, why be stingy with lumens? That's no longer an issue in either money or technology.

J.


----------



## muzzanic (Apr 28, 2009)

Some people do need more light than others because some peoples eyes just don't work as well at night.

Also some people just ride faster.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Nothing's impossible said:


> ...*.Cat-man-do, there must be some misunderstanding?*
> I am speaking of real lumens, not the chinese claimed ones!
> State of the art bikelights are too bright for biking!
> 
> ...


Misunderstanding??...More like we're on different planets. On this forum I've somewhat coined the term, "usable throw". When I use that term I am implying the amount of light needed to clearly see an object on the ground usually associated with mountain biking. ( ie...a log across the trail or a good size rock. )

Used in a perfect environment yes, a 200 lumen light source can shine quite a distance if it has a very good reflector and is aimed at something with the light aimed straight toward the object to be illuminated. Depending on the size and ability of the object to reflect light you might or might not see the object. Regardless, in real world applications, "Usable throw" is limited. Assuming you have an optic producing an optimal "Long throw beam pattern", the more lumen you have the farther out you should be able to see.

The longest throwing lamp I ever saw was a hand held lamp used for boating called a Q-beam. That lamp could throw over a 1/4 mile away and was something like one million candlepower. The reflector though is quite big to say the least. The ones they sell now are even stronger. My car headlamps ( halogen ) use projection type lenses for high beams and can shine over 500 ft ( usable throw ) in good conditions. Once again they are quite large compared to bike lamps and likely are at least 2500 lumen each.

The fact that you can clearly see an object at 500 meter ( more than a 1/4 mile ) using a 900 lumen bike lamp has me in total awe. I guess it must be nice to be able to view the rings of Saturn with the naked eye.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Cat-man-do said:


> Misunderstanding??...More like we're on different planets. On this forum I've somewhat coined the term, "usable throw". When I use that term I am implying the amount of light needed to clearly see an object on the ground usually associated with mountain biking. ( ie...a log across the trail or a good size rock. )
> 
> Used in a perfect environment yes, a 200 lumen light source can shine quite a distance if it has a very good reflector and is aimed at something with the light aimed straight toward the object to be illuminated. Depending on the size and ability of the object to reflect light you might or might not see the object. Regardless, in real world applications, "Usable throw" is limited. Assuming you have an optic producing an optimal "Long throw beam pattern", the more lumen you have the farther out you should be able to see.
> 
> ...


This is a perfect example of why we need a sarcasm font. ;0

J.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

I am not aware of your usable throw theory, but the ANSI regultation states that a flashlight shines a certain distance if it reflects 0,25 lux.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Try to see the ring around uranus, no optics required!

Something like usable throw has nothing to do with how far a light shines, in a low reflective environment (the sky) you will see a big white reflective area pretty well at 500 meters with a 900 lumen spot.

If you are shining/ looking in a high reflective direction (wet grasland, green forest,marble rocks,....) as you do with most bikelights, you will indeed need MUCH more light to see the same reflective area at 500 meters
In a well lit area the same 0,25 lux that is visible in a dark sky is just black, I mentioned that the moment I lowered the beam I got bothered by the reflection of the spilled light and I couldn't see the windmill anymore. And if you use more powerfull lights with a lot of spill, you will need even higher lux values to make the area visible!

A nice thing about the high beam of a big reflector or projectorlamp: it has little spill and doesn't light the road closeby thus reducing the blinding of the driver, this way the typical raw 1400 lumens of a 55 watt halogen bulb allows you to see a mile away. 
In fact I prefer halogen lights over HID, the HID is just to bright to allow visibility outside the low beam, with a combination of low and high beam I am not seeing anything more than with the halogens.

The moment someone with HID lights rides next to you it is the same story as with bikelights.


Anyway, when I used the old wilma on full power in the fields Iprefered aiming it really high, using the spill as flood and a small part of the beam for throw, and the biggest part of the light Is just lost in the air. On the half power setting I just pointed it down a bit, probablyeffectively using about the same amount of light but with a doubled battery capacity.

On singletrack in the forest or with pale rock on the side there was a lot of reflection with the full power beam pointing high, the lux value in the spill area was not high enough anymore comparted to the total amount of light falling into the eye, I had to either point the ligth down increasing the total amount of reflected light even more and decreasing the efficiently lighted surface, or dim the light and point it down a bit, which I liked more.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Nothing's impossible said:


> I am not aware of your usable throw theory, but the ANSI regultation states that a flashlight shines a certain distance if it reflects 0,25 lux.


Actually it's not a theory but more or less a _concept_ and one that most people deal with every day if they use any kind of lamp to see with at night. I understand the application of the ANSI standards. However I feel the ANSI standard for light output is pretty much useless for MTB application ( bear with me and I will explain that ).

From what I've read of the ANSI standard they chose the 0.25 lux as a starting point because they needed something that had correlation to the real world. The idea was that the light of a full moon ( in an open field ) creates this level of light. So be it, this is THEIR standard FOR USABLE LIGHT as I understand it.

Now the human eye can see very well under full moon , especially in an open field. Just remember that the moon represents an omni-directional light source from our perspective. As such it lights everything around us. The effect of a torch shining in one direction and at one small spot would not be so dramatic. Still, with a Lux meter capable of registering minute changes in intensity you could probably get a reading at 500 meters from a good torch. My lux meter will not measure light into that low of a range so I couldn't prove the test right or wrong if I wanted to. Even if I had a meter that sensitive and I was standing next to the light receptor I doubt I could detect that 0.25 lux with my eyes as it hit the meter.

Another reason I tend to dismiss it is because it is a "static test". There is no movement or human interaction involved. MTB'ing involves lots of movement over a diverse terrain and over diverse conditions. While the human eye works very well at gathering light at low levels this ability is hampered when movement and unfamiliar terrain are involved. The moment you start to move ( at speed and or change of direction ) everything changes as your brain attempts to process the information. The faster you go with less and less light, the harder it becomes for your brain to process the now compromised information. Now if you are familiar with the trail that is a big help. If not the brain has to process the information that the eye is giving it very quickly.. The less light you have the less information the brain has to process . On moderate or groomed trails maybe not a big deal. On twisty, steep, slick rock and stone laden mountain single track you are in dire straights without a decent light source...unless you want to limp down the mountain at a snails pace. For me this is all basic common sense stuff. It doesn't mean you can't MTB with low levels of light, you can but you have to ride slower or start taking chances. Once again, common sense stuff.

Oh, sorry about the "rings of Saturn" comment. I meant to poke not to hammer. If it offended you I'm sorry. I take no offense at your response ( although I had a great come back, I'll let it go...:thumbsup: ) Best to keep on the subject at hand.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Well, I don't believe this 0.25 lux is the golden grail, but if you want to explain how far your light is shining, it makes sense to have a measurable value. 
The discussion about how far a light is visible for the human eye is to complex to allow reasonable discussion.

And, we certainly need a certain amount of ligth for higher speeds, but in a lot of conditions more is less! 
There are a lot of conditions where I am faster/ safer with a less brigth light. 

The 2250 lumen of the piko and the wilma still didn't allow me to go full speed, and 10 000 lumen still would'nt do it, no matter how much light you carry, it comes from the wrong direction and if this big beam hits a refelctive object nearby your own light blinds you. 

And if someone claims he needs 1000 real lumens, well, measuring real lumens is not easy, human eyes are different and people ride different.

But people who claim they need a (or several) 3600 lumen lights


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Well, I'm not sure where you are aiming your lights, but 2250 lumens allows me to go full speed.

Hint: aim them forward in the direction of travel. Aiming them up into the sky doesn't work very well. 

J.


----------



## colleen c (May 28, 2011)

Funny how the word lumen is so limited in it's definition when in fact it's has a much wider definition that can be manipulated in so many different ways.

I will agree and disagree that too much lumens is too bright. Take for example using 2500 lumens. Yes, it is too much when a single light source is generating that much light but then if we manipulate that same 2500 lumens and illuminate it from three separate source, then it is a whole different situation.

I hacked my Dry direct drive 3 x XML torch and made it into a handlbar light running external battery and on a bar mount with a switch on the back. As soon as this beast is turn on, everthing lights up.....I mean everything. I can see the porch of the houses on the sidewalk right down to the next intersection way down the street. This beast was rated about 2500 with the three XML driven direct but the throw and spill was just way too much to use. I was constantly getting car flickering their high beam at me. So that so call "2500" lumens was not pratical and way too "bright" In this sense, I can clearly see and agree with those who will say that 2500 lumens is way to bright.

Round two: I switched over to two Gemini Xera on handle bar. One on each side of my drops. I then added a Speed II thrower on my helmet. Total lumens is about 2500. I have yet had anyone flickering their headlights at me with all three on high running down the same road I rode with the Dry torch. What really worth noting is that the same 2500 lumen now is very useable and I can see way much farther and better than before. I even came to a point now that I only need to run the Xera on medium and Speed II on low and still accomplish the same thing as my hacked Dry on high. Efficiency changes everything.

*Moral of this story: It's not how much "lumens" that makes it too bright, but rather how how many wasted "lumens" that makes it too bright.*


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Well, I don't believe this 0.25 lux is the golden grail, but if you want to explain how far your light is shining, it makes sense to have a measurable value.
> The discussion about how far a light is visible for the human eye is to complex to allow reasonable discussion.


I do believe we are starting to understand each other. Yes, we need a measurable value and that value has to relate to what the human eye can see at a reasonable distance while actually engaged in the sport.
. 
This is the reason I came up with the concept of "usable throw" or "usable illumination" many years ago. It is not an exact science per say but based instead on everyday human perception. It does indeed relate to measurable distance but there is room for discussion and difference of opinion as the limitations of vision and riding style come into play.

Very few places I ride have a direct line of sight over 150ft. at any one moment. On occasion I might get something where I can see ( unobstructed ) for over 200ft. but usually it only lasts a matter of seconds. Most trails twist and turn but if I do get that downhill run where I have an unobstructed view for 200ft. or more I want to be able to see into that distance quickly and be able to define and identify what is laying on the trail. Yes, a 200 lumen torch might reach 200 ft. but it might not have the beam pattern needed or total "end lumen" to clearly define what is being looked at while moving / bouncing around in the saddle.

You are right though, we don't always need the higher output light but Colleen is right as well as it depends on how that light is used. With the right combo of beam patterns and using more than one projection point, higher output lamps can be used constructively. All things are possible...keeping in mind the mode switch can be your best friend.


----------



## muzzanic (Apr 28, 2009)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Well, I don't believe this 0.25 lux is the golden grail, but if you want to explain how far your light is shining, it makes sense to have a measurable value.
> The discussion about how far a light is visible for the human eye is to complex to allow reasonable discussion.
> 
> And, we certainly need a certain amount of ligth for higher speeds, but in a lot of conditions more is less!
> ...


If you can't go as fast at night as you do in the day, Then you don't have the right light setup.

So how can you bag what other people are running when you clearly don't have yourself sorted yet ???

If you race just on dusk you soon see the short commings of the little lights.

The thing about a large Lumen light is you can turn it down.

The thing about a low Lumen light is if it's on full & you don't have enough light there is nothing you can do about it.

Your way of looking at things is ok if you don't mind going slower at night than you do in the day, But what I don't get is why you are so worried about what the people that love going as fast as they can ride down hill.

I own many lights from 900Lm HID,35w & 50 Halogen ,30w HID (1850 Lm ), 3x XLM light & a 9Xpg Light & I like the 9Xpg the most.

Sure I don't always run it on full but, I do use it on full atleast once every time I ride hard down Hill in the forest, Sometimes as much as 40 min total on full, With the cooler air I have my fastest times on most tracks at night no matter how hard or tech the trail is.

None of my friends have ended up in hospital because they had to much light, But I do have friends that have ended up in hospital & off work for some time because they didn't have enough.

I'm happy you think you know what is best for you but don't even bother to try & tell me you know what is best for me because you just don't get it.

If i was hangingoff a cliff by a rope I would wan't that rope to be more than I need as well.


----------



## tl1 (Dec 21, 2003)

fast_monte` said:


> Night riding is an arms race. If the guy behind you is throwing a shadow, you are loosing, move over and accept defeat.


Speaking of an arms race, what's really needed in bike lighting is a little flying drone with a big light that follows you and shines down from above instead of horizontally. Perhaps the Tacocopters which were nixed by the FAA for delivering tacos can be re-purposed for this use.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

[

*Moral of this story: It's not how much "lumens" that makes it too bright, but rather how how many wasted "lumens" that makes it too bright.[/QUOTE]

EXCELLENT!

Mole*


----------



## OldAusDigger (Apr 8, 2008)

Check out this you tube link.
This guy (German I think) runs a 400 watt 25000 lumen HID on his bike. 
About half way through the video he fires it up. It takes a while to warm up to full power, but bloody hell it's bright!
You'd hate to have him coming straight at you out on the trail 

bike light comparison II - YouTube

Oh, I just noticed this nutter has one that's over 3 times as powerful 

ride with 1500W HID bike lamp - YouTube


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

For those who claim to ride as fast during the day as during the night??? On the road, yep, on easy riding stuff, yep, but the moment it becomes mountainbike???

Riding familiar ground I can reach dayspeeds with one single piko 700 lumens light on the helm.
On unknown ground it ‘s a different story, it might work, taking a much bigger risk, but whether with 700 lumens, 2250 lumens or 50 000 lumens, it still isn’t close to daylight!

If I ride between trees, big rocks, high(wet) corn or edges I get so much light reflected back into my eyes that I partly blind myself, and I am blind again if I get back into the dark open. A bit as riding from the open into a dark forest on a sunny day!
Dust or fog also lights up pretty well!

I guess that is why people use remote controlled light switches!

If I ride dirt, even without jumping, it is hard to estimate angles and distances. No matter how much light, it comes from the wrong direction! The tacocopter might solve this!

If I jump, or ride a drop, I have to point my helmet down a bit to see what is behind it, creating this overbright spot, and moving the head unbalances me even more and I need to look upfront preparing the landing and spotting the line after that. ( I rely on my peripheral vision to keep balance, but this peripheral field is not lighted).

Wildlife also tends to freeze into the trail staring at you light,….

And, at dusk or down, I tend to use as much daylight as possible, in most cases I can ride flat out without light when others are using their lights, most of the time I need to put on my light because other people start blinding me with their lights (certainly if they have bright rear lights).

If I want a lot of light I need a lot of battery, If I am willing to spend a 1000 euro’s I can get a Wilma and a piko with a 3 hours batterypack around a kilo, to keep things affordable and get the same light output, I think I would end up with a 2 kg system. Somehow I doubt that this would make me go faster or make the bike more nimble. 

The weight of my old, heavy Princeton tec (1,5 kg for both helm and bars) wasn’t really helpful when they were not lit anyway, and after several hours I really started to feel the 100 grams of the spot in my neck. 

My new piko 6 weighs around 300 grams, and on the helm it allows me to ride about as fast as with the betty/ piko combo while in eco mode, providing me 700 lumens for over 4 hours, and the 55 grams is less noticeable than the 100 grams of the Princeton. 

The difference between the 700 and 900 lumens is also hard to notice as it takes 12 flashes to change in between modes, I have the feeling the 700 lumens are spread more even and it gains me 40 minutes burn time!

But I really like the spot/ flood configuration, so I might end up buying an additional piko3 to put on the helm, instead of a Wilma on the bars, ending in something like 550 grams, with the spot at half the power and the bars at 700 lumens that would allow me 4 hours of riding again with around 1000 lumens in total, and I am pretty certain that, unless someone comes to ride next to me with an extreme bright setup I will not be any slower compared to both on full power or the betty/ pikko setup with 3100 lumens! But, I’ll try some other lights first!

I can agree with colleen that a smarter reflector with less spill high into the sky would help, there miht besome disadvantages: On pumping track style rides this would mean you rely completely on your spot facing the next bump? But on the whole, it would make the lumens much more effective!

I would like an even 180° glow starting under the handlebar, shining a few meters far, progressively narrowing and getting brighter to a spot, still providing a well lit area (usable throw) around 60-80 meters. Without lightning the air too much 600 real lumens should be enough to get a perfect flood with real colors, and 1000 lumens should be plenty. Combined with a 450 lumens narrow spot I guess It would be much more usefull than the current monsterthrowers!

An other option would be to measure the lightreflection into you eyes, if there is so much reflection that it might trigger the pupil to close, the light (or a section of it) dims. The system could also adapt the brightness on your riding speed.

So, there is a lot that can be ameliorated, but just taking the most up to date led emitter and putting current through it isn't what I am waiting for!


----------



## muzzanic (Apr 28, 2009)

I think you have come to the right place, Because you have alot to learn.

If you beleave it isn't possable to ride as fast or faster at night you have got alot to learn.

Most of what you are talking about is guess work, Because it is clear that you don't have a handle on what is best for you, You need to have no one riding in the same area so you can get some kind of result but off your best.

Having co driven in top end rally cars in more than 100 Rallys & many running into the nights,Some night only & with different drivers it becomes very clear very quickly that some people have a gift when it comes to seeing at night & some are just crap.

So trying to take your 1 idea fits all approach is just way off.



Nothing's impossible said:


> For those who claim to ride as fast during the day as during the night??? On the road, yep, on easy riding stuff, yep, but the moment it becomes mountainbike???
> 
> Riding familiar ground I can reach dayspeeds with one single piko 700 lumens light on the helm.
> On unknown ground it 's a different story, it might work, taking a much bigger risk, but whether with 700 lumens, 2250 lumens or 50 000 lumens, it still isn't close to daylight!
> ...


----------



## mtbRevolution (Aug 10, 2012)

Nothing's impossible said:


> For those who claim to ride as fast during the day as during the night??? On the road, yep, on easy riding stuff, yep, but the moment it becomes mountainbike???


I am all for responsible riding. However, when I ride, and I normally ride alone nowadays, I want to have the brightest and longest throwing light there is - in my case, more than 1 light. I ride as fast as in the day, if not faster especially on trails and singletracks I am familiar with.

With lighting power, I have sense of security. I don't ever want to feel like Red Riding Hood in the forest. Night riding is an inherently dangerous activity but you minimize it by bringing the sun with you.

This is how I ride. Hope people won't call me a show-off. I just want you to see what I mean when I say I feel safe. I have not ridden in this place in the night for over 17 years (dang, showing my age again). So I didn't venture into singletracks but I stuck to the main trail.


----------



## muzzanic (Apr 28, 2009)

Way to go, Happy ridding.:thumbsup:

I would give you some rep but I'm all out for 24 hours.



Xeccon said:


> I am all for responsible riding. However, when I ride, and I normally ride alone nowadays, I want to have the brightest and longest throwing light there is - in my case, more than 1 light. I ride as fast as in the day, if not faster especially on trails and singletracks I am familiar with.
> 
> With lighting power, I have sense of security. I don't ever want to feel like Red Riding Hood in the forest. Night riding is an inherently dangerous activity but you minimize it by bringing the sun with you.
> 
> This is how I ride. Hope people won't call me a show-off. I just want you to see what I mean when I say I feel safe. I have not ridden in this place in the night for over 17 years (dang, showing my age again). So I didn't venture into singletracks but I stuck to the main trail.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Muzzanic, 

In a mountainbike we have no co driver as you probably now, if there is a drop you won't hear it from your co driver, and with hardly any depth you might notice the drop just because the wheels are leaving the ground!
If you have a difficult passage behind the drop,...

On a lot of bike-events they have a short night race the night before, deciding starting orders or overal points, if recognitions are allowed most bikers are much faster during the trainingsrun during the day than during the official night run, without recognition it's even a lot worse,...
And a lot of these people run state of the art lights!

Xenon, On flat wide open countryroads as the bloso route you got on camera, My old 200 lumens lights never bothered me from riding as fast as I can, my legs and lungs would limit me at 30/ 35 km/ h, not my light! 

the video also shows a bit what happens if you have a really bright spot in your field of view! 

I'll take the camera next time i'mm planning a technical night ride with my new piko!


----------



## mtbRevolution (Aug 10, 2012)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Xenon, On flat wide open countryroads as the bloso route you got on camera, My old 200 lumens lights never bothered me from riding as fast as I can, my legs and lungs would limit me at 30/ 35 km/ h, not my light!


Just came back from "work". I am taking new videos of the lights we stock. Tonight was NB-02, NB-04 and MJ-880 U2's turn which I will upload later.

You say 200 lumens is more than enough for you. To prove my point it's not nearly enough. I did my first run with the 880 U2, then the NB-04. I do an average 16km/h or 10mph through the bushes. I know the singletrack like the back of my hand, or do I?

The Inton NB-02 is about 650 to 700 real lumens. It's equipped with XM-L U2. On the NB-02 run, I came off the bike at the speed I normally travel at. I was annoyed and limped back to the starting point and re-did the video with my Replay XD. Second run, I came off the bike at the SAME point, again! Both times, I did not see what my back wheel caught. I thought I knew the track. Happy to upload these "bike light seller's bloopers" in raw so you can see from the properties it happened as I said it did. MJ-880 U2, NB-04 no problems then bam! twice.

In built up urban areas, yes, 200-350 lumens is more than enough - it's more a be-seen light than to-see one. On the technical trails, anything less than 1500-2000 real lumens is risking your collarbone. We can get away with 500 lumens on fireroads, no problems.

Each to their own. If you feel you can get away with what you have by all means, nobody is stopping you. If you want to go serious trail riding with minimum lumens, let us know which hospital you normally go to so we know where to send the Get Well card.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Xeccon, 
Nice to hear that the ligths I used for 6 years, on sometimes pretty technical mountainbike trips, are still usable for urban trips, unfortunately, traffic doesn't seem to like it If I shine these lights upon them! And in germany, they are not allowed on the road.

And it also becomes clear how lucky the majority of nightriders are not to have broken a collarbone at least twice!
certainly those who have ever ridden technical trails with ligths older than say 2 years old (unless they were willing to spend well over €1000 on a light) have to praise the lord!


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Back about 8years ago me and almost everyone else were using halogen lights, 
( 12watt Marwi on the bars and a 10watt Niterider on the helmet). I was very happy with the set-up. Back in that day there was nothing better unless you used a bigger bulb. Of course that meant using a bigger battery or sacrificing runtime. ( Your choices for batteries were either Lead-acid,Nicad or later on, NiMh. All of them were pretty much like riding with bricks as far as added weight goes.) 

With those lights I did almost everything I do now except back then I knew I had to be much more careful. That meant slowing down and exercising caution when the need arose. ( ** Just keep in mind there is a learning curve when first starting to do night riding. Regardless of how much light you have it is not the same as riding in the daytime. )

My first LED set up were two DiNotte 200L's, one bar, one helmet. Actually worked pretty good but I still lacked throw for the helmet. On a good straight away at speed I could out-run the usefulness of the throw. 

Finally the SSC P-7 and multi-emitter P-4 lamps gave increased output and throw for bike helmet lamps. This was soon followed by the introduction of the Cree line of emitters that gave even better output and throw. Now I only have to slow down in places where "what lights you have make no difference", like sharp turns or steep drops. 

Since I now have the option for "brighter lights" my focus has been, "finding the most usable beam patterns". Since I use both bar and helmet lights I know the standard is different for both. When used in combo I can vary the output to suit almost any situation.
Now the focus is not whither I have enough light but "if I get more light will it help or hamper my riding style". For my personal needs I'm almost completely dialed in. I could still use a little more output on the helmet but for the time being I'm going to have to settle with the limitations of the Cree XM-L emitter. Even though I can't out-run the useful throw throw of my current helmet light I can always wish for a little more useful throw. :thumbsup:


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Catman, if you have a flood that covers as far as you are looking during a dayride, why do you still need a spot to look beyond that? 
(I know it can be fun just looking how far you can shine, or when you are searching for something, but I mean for riding).

My helmet is my secundary light, if it outshines the bars I have no shadows from the bars left and I loose the little depth information the barlight provided me, it only needs to light the entrance and exit of turns where the flood doesn't reach, and behind bumps in the approach.

And, it shouldn't create hotspots when you point the spot in the flood. 

If you want more usable throw, there are several ways:

-Either you go for a MUCH more powerful light with a wide beam/spill, but to gain a few meters you need to double the light output and you 'll and up with a crappy barflood in comparison, so you end up with a flood on your helmet that shines verry bright and you loose all depth information from the shadows on the bar light as you have no visbile shadows anymore. 

-You can also get a light with a smaller beam and less spill, preferably in a cooler light than the flood, and even a less powerfull light with better optics might provide much more usable throw, 
With the bright spot you create bright reflections and if you point it down to much you'll get hotspots and loose shadows from the bars.

-If you are running an xtreme bright flood there is a third way to increase the usable throw, and that is to dim your flood or to point it further down if you are riding into the open air. Your eyes will addapt to the lower light level, and you 'll be able to discriminate stuuf that you couldn't see with the flood blinding you! 

To state how to the point colleen his statement is: 

Yesterday i made a testride with only the piko on the bars,on known ground, but I hadn't been there the whole summer. Not to technical, and I didn't feel like racing, so around 25 km/h. 
I started on 900 lumens, and after the 12 blinks to eco modus I couldn't notice the difference with the 750 lumens in eco modus. Back to 900 lumens again no difference!
I had to point the light straight forward, so I was in fact using the spill as flood and i was lighting the trees 30 meters high. 

Going down to 560 lumens in one short step is noticable but for riding it hardly makes a difference, after pointing the light down a bit I still had a verry bright flood, and I wass still lighting the treetops. 

On 360 lumens I needed a few seconds to adjust to the lower light settings, but after I pointed the light down (the top of the hotspot of the light was now ending around the horizon, I guess 80 to 100 meters away, without forming a hotspot in the field.I didn't notice the beam becoming narrower, but I guess that must have been the case? 
The next level, 50 lumens, was bright enough to keep riding 25 km/h on the easy dirtroads, but the turns were difficult and faster would become dangerous.

But, I could see as far and as good with the 360 lumens as with the 900 lumens in dry conditions! 
On a muddy day I might need the 560 lumens to real colors, but that would work fine for the not so technical rides. 

for technical rides I will need an addtional helmet light, but a 560 lumens on the bar and a 360 lumens on the helmet should be plenty!


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Catman, if you have a flood that covers as far as you are looking during a dayride, why do you still need a spot to look beyond that?
> (I know it can be fun just looking how far you can shine, or when you are searching for something, but I mean for riding).
> !


My bar light works very well and your question is understandable. Just remember that NO Bike light gives you the visibility you get from riding during the day. That being said the right combo of bar and helmet lamp can work very well together if you have the right set-up. Also remember that the bar lamp will always point in the direction the bike is going. If you want to look where you are planning to go but the bar lamp is not pointing that direction than you have a problem.

My purpose for using a helmet lamp is two fold: So I can point the light where I want to see as I have already said and secondly, so it can shine beyond the range of my bar lamp and light up stuff way before I reach it.

Once again, with this said I don't always use the helmet light all the time BUT I always ride with one because at some point on almost every ride I do I WILL use the helmet light. Depending on where I ride will determine which lamp I will bring. For twisty moderate single track with smaller hills I will bring the Ultrafire 501B torch ( with 3-mode XM-L drop-in )and use that on the helmet. For trails that are more aggressive and with bigger hills I will use a dedicated bike lamp ( like the Xeccon S-12 or MagicShine 808E or other. ) Personally I like the S-12 better for faster trails because it has superior throw and a very usable lower mode which compliments the lower modes on my bar lights very well. Not everyone though likes a super thrower on the helmet. It is a choice that is made depending on your riding style. If you're happy with 300 lumen on the helmet I see no problem with that if it works well on the trails you ride.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Cat-man-do, once again, we are talking about real lumen? 

Top notch producers struggle to reach 600 real lumens out of the XM-L, they have first pick at cree, use high end optics, dedicated drivers with powerregulation to avoid smoking the whole lot and without airflow they have to drop the output dramatically!
I doubt that the chinese copy produced from the cheapest parts available will reach the same output? 

So the difference with the 300-360 lumens helmlight I am riding comfortably with and the magicshine or the torch you are riding with might be rather small?



If you want your spot to throw more than your flood with XML emiitters you 'll need more lumens on you helmet than on the bars, in such case I would just dump the barlight and concentrate all the lumens in a helmetlight. 

With narrow emiiters like the XPG and low spill optics the spot/flood outshining the flood combination might work better, 
But you will create extreme bright hotspots in your field of view if you point your spot on close by objects (or the ground). 
At these times you will have so much light reflected into your eyes that, at least for a while, your will loose the "usable spill" of your flood.

But, each his own!


----------



## cr500taco (Sep 8, 2012)

The Niterider Pro 3600 seems waaay to bright, but it would be nice to have.


----------



## Tin Turtle (Sep 6, 2012)

For me the Lumina 650 is more than adequate. In a group I always let them know up front if it is bothering them to let me know and I will adjust.

I don't have a problem with people who have too bright of lights, I have a problem with people who ride with no lights. I've nearly had a head-on with two of them.


----------



## patski (Dec 12, 2005)

Well, back when a niterider battery weighed as much as my current road bike, it was fine.

Then I turned 50.... things were getting iffy on the trail, so, added a Sol and a couple of other NR lights, the names escape me.

Then bought a couple of Trinewts, helmet and bars, they were awesome. But my nighttime eyesight degradation kept marching on.

Last year one of the trinewt batteries died, they wanted $250 for a new battery, I bought a magicshine, it was HUGE, the throw and brightness, . I can SEE.....

This year, I'm almost 60, I ordered a couple of magicshine knockoffs($76 total), can't wait for the time change, beamshot attached...

Might add another one when the $50 3X CREE XM-L T6 LED gets here....

First photo is the Rabbit Hole on Lake Natoma, second, the top of Prison Break in Folsom.


----------



## cr500taco (Sep 8, 2012)

Tin Turtle said:


> For me the Lumina 650 is more than adequate. In a group I always let them know up front if it is bothering them to let me know and I will adjust.
> 
> I don't have a problem with people who have too bright of lights, I have a problem with people who ride with no lights. I've nearly had a head-on with two of them.


Yep, people who ride or hike with no lights are dumb :madman:


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

People should indeed use light to be visible, but people should also watch out about blinding others!

Anyway, here a video of a Flemish nightride, you see I am not riding alone, and i could easily ride well over 55 Km/h on wide unknown dirt with one helmetlight producing 360 lumens. On some occasions there was to much reflection and shadows from the wet grass to ride full speed, but more high power setings made it even worse.
A second light on the bars might have helped.

My clubmate lights, a claimed 900 lumens sigma evo barlight and a claimed 320 lumens sigma karma on the helmet produced together about the same light output on high, as the piko on 360 lumens setting, a bit brigther(lux) but verry narrow, and he could ride comparable speeds, without taking big risks.

A lot of people we passed ride 2000+3000 claimed chinese lumens and they do not produce more light than the piko at full power.

The camera, a drift HD makes it all much darker,parly as it is a fisheye lens, partly because the dynamic range is to small to show the spill.

In the end I showed a comparison with the lights of my car, 2x55 watt projector halogen and later 2x55+ 2x65 so 240 watts of halogen light, with far less spill


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Totally not a problem.

J.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Ok, there Nothing's Impossible - this one is going to make you flip out. If you think bright lights drive everyone to antisocial behavior, this one is going to start a spontaneous riot.

Just got my new wilma tonight (2400 lumens). Put that on the bars and, just for fun, put my old 1500 lumen Wilma on the helmet for 3900 lumens. Now that was the first time I've ridden where I absolutely had no worries in seeing anything - just like at high noon. Worked great and I just may do it again. Felt like driving a car with a good set of modern headlights.

Yep, you can't get too bright. We're not there yet.

J.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

JohnJ80 said:


> Ok, there Nothing's Impossible - this one is going to make you flip out. If you think bright lights drive everyone to antisocial behavior, this one is going to start a spontaneous riot.
> 
> Just got my new wilma tonight (2400 lumens). Put that on the bars and, just for fun, put my old 1500 lumen Wilma on the helmet for 3900 lumens. Now that was the first time I've ridden where I absolutely had no worries in seeing anything - just like at high noon. Worked great and I just may do it again. Felt like driving a car with a good set of modern headlights.
> 
> ...


Ha! I hear ya. Every once in a while if no cars are around I'll hit the high beams. Nice to be able to see that deer on the side of the road at 300ft way before you get there. Just remember you still have the responsibility to lower your intensity just like a car when other traffic is present.

The only exception I have to that rule is if the situation ( or road ) is extra hazardous. 
An example: I'm riding down a long steep hill with little to no shoulder at 30+mph. Woods border on both sides. I'm seeing the occasional pot hole or road debris. In that scenario I will run the high beams even if there is the occasional on-coming car. Now if the traffic on the road is heavy that changes everything. I will slow and use a lower intensity level. A pain to have to do that but with more vehicles present the risk level goes up increasing the chance that I might have to stop/slow to avoid debris or a turning / passing vehicle. When traveling at speed you always have to be ready for anything.


----------



## MaximusHQ (Aug 6, 2007)

JohnJ80 said:


> Ok, there Nothing's Impossible - this one is going to make you flip out. If you think bright lights drive everyone to antisocial behavior, this one is going to start a spontaneous riot.
> 
> Just got my new wilma tonight (2400 lumens). Put that on the bars and, just for fun, put my old 1500 lumen Wilma on the helmet for 3900 lumens. Now that was the first time I've ridden where I absolutely had no worries in seeing anything - just like at high noon. Worked great and I just may do it again. Felt like driving a car with a good set of modern headlights.
> 
> ...


I like to put my Lupine Betty on flash mode and stare at it in a dark room until I put myself into a maddening rage and then I crash through walls like Lou Ferrigno did as the incredible hulk.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

JohnJ80 said:


> Ok, there Nothing's Impossible - this one is going to make you flip out. If you think bright lights drive everyone to antisocial behavior, this one is going to start a spontaneous riot.
> 
> Just got my new wilma tonight (2400 lumens). Put that on the bars and, just for fun, put my old 1500 lumen Wilma on the helmet for 3900 lumens. Now that was the first time I've ridden where I absolutely had no worries in seeing anything - just like at high noon. Worked great and I just may do it again. Felt like driving a car with a good set of modern headlights.
> 
> ...


Must be a burden, if you need such amounts of light to see things, you probably have problems to ride in a dark forrest, even on a sunny day?

And, now you say you ride with absolutely no worries with 3900 lumens, but I can imagine that you said the same when you got the previous wilma (why didn't you get the betty otherwise????), and I can imagine that you will say the same when the new 5000 lumens wilma is available
And, even with 10 000 lumens you will not be able to see the same as during daytime, just because you cannot have the same depth perception!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Must be a burden, if you need such amounts of light to see things, you probably have problems to ride in a dark forrest, even on a sunny day?
> 
> And, now you say you ride with absolutely no worries with 3900 lumens, but I can imagine that you said the same when you got the previous wilma (why didn't you get the betty otherwise????), and I can imagine that you will say the same when the new 5000 lumens wilma is available
> And, even with 10 000 lumens you will not be able to see the same as during daytime, just because you cannot have the same depth perception!


Oh, it's not a burden at all. I like having it lit up like it's day time. Anytime I want to go riding with dim lights in the woods at night, I can do that too (been there done that - no thanks). All the lights have a low beam.

I don't like the betty. It's just large enough that I'm not interested. Nor do I want the remote control.

And, yes, more lumens - bring it on! Why not?

Enjoy your night rides at 300 lumens. Best of wishes so you don't hit anything that can hurt you or get hit because you're not seen. Fear not though, no one is blinded with pretty much any of the lights out now.

J.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

[ Fear not though, no one is blinded with pretty much any of the lights out now.

J.[/QUOTE]

How do you know? I'm curious what your opinions are based on.

Mole


----------



## leaftye (Dec 27, 2007)

My set up in a few weeks will put out 4500 chinese lumens. Realistically, it'll be closer to 2700 OTF lumens. Even so, I can't see myself using all that light. What it means for me is fantastically long battery life on low modes that are still quite bright. I have no idea how many lumens that'll be on the low modes, but it's also quite likely that I won't run all the lights all the time.

As the first post said, lights can be turned down. And they are.

Fwiw, this set up is for street riding.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

Nothing's impossible said:


> People should indeed use light to be visible, but people should also watch out about blinding others!
> 
> Anyway, here a video of a Flemish nightride, you see I am not riding alone, and i could easily ride well over 55 Km/h on wide unknown dirt with one helmetlight producing 360 lumens. On some occasions there was to much reflection and shadows from the wet grass to ride full speed, but more high power setings made it even worse.
> A second light on the bars might have helped.
> ...


halogen headlights on a car = might as well drive with headlights off. when i drive with halogens in the city i can't even tell if they're on or not. comparing to halogens is a waste of time - sorry. it's like those videos where people compare a fenix flashlight to a incandescent maglite - really ? that's like racing a turtle. why are you comparing modern technology to 100 year old technology ?

the piko has a brighter spot than halogen headlights, but the spot is a narrow keyhole. all i see is darkness in your video ( of course i understand portable cameras are not good in the dark ).

if you want to do a comparison to headlights - take a car with HID high beams, and compare your piko to that - you may not even see the piko.

you gotta compare APPLES TO APPLES. compare the latest technology to the latest technology, not to candles or oil lamps. if you want to compare to a car - compare to HID.

your car comparison is useless because i don't even know what halogen car beam looks like. why? because i have never seen it. i mean halogen cars are all around me, including my own, but i just don't see any light coming from their headlights so i don't know what it looks like.

when i tried the 900 lumen piko recently i felt like at full 900 lumen i still could have used double. at medium i could barely see it. i don't exactly do anything technical or even ride on the road often so piko will have to do, but if i had my way i would spring for Wilma or Betty on helmet.

in any case god willing on monday i should get my Niterider 3600 and MAYBE i will make a youtube video. my new camcorder is quite good for night recording.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

so recently i upgraded my mom from 80 lumen Princeton Tec EOS Bike to 900 lumen piko. she didn't know any technical information about either light, so i had her ride around the block and asked how it was. 

before i installed the piko she insisted that princeton tec was bright enough. after she rode the piko she said it was similar to princeton tec. then i turned them on and off back to back one after another and it was obvious that piko is 10 times brighter. at that point she said that it was impossible, that princeton tec couldn't really be that dim. recall - this was the same light that just 1 day ago she said was bright.

moral of the story - everything is relative, and people get used to good things fast.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

androgen said:


> so recently i upgraded my mom from 80 lumen Princeton Tec EOS Bike to 900 lumen piko. she didn't know any technical information about either light, so i had her ride around the block and asked how it was.
> 
> before i installed the piko she insisted that princeton tec was bright enough. after she rode the piko she said it was similar to princeton tec. then i turned them on and off back to back one after another and it was obvious that piko is 10 times brighter. at that point she said that it was impossible, that princeton tec couldn't really be that dim. recall - this was the same light that just 1 day ago she said was bright.
> 
> *moral of the story - everything is relative, and people get used to good things fast.*


....or the flip side; Our mom's don't know a lot about bike lights. ....On the other hand, her observation was correct. I thought the early halogens were bright. The new stuff is just better. If you've never seen a good LED lamp before you wouldn't know. :thumbsup:


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

leaftye said:


> My set up in a few weeks will put out 4500 chinese lumens. Realistically, it'll be closer to 2700 OTF lumens. Even so, I can't see myself using all that light. What it means for me is fantastically long battery life on low modes that are still quite bright. I have no idea how many lumens that'll be on the low modes, but it's also quite likely that I won't run all the lights all the time.
> 
> As the first post said, lights can be turned down. And they are.
> 
> Fwiw, this set up is for street riding.


i would also rather be using a too-powerful light at half-power which would keep my LEDs cool thereby not degrading them, and also giving me double battery life.

i think most lights are designed to be operated at 50% power, and 100% is just there for marketing. i think it is not a coincidence that every single light has a 50% power mode.

it would not cost them anything at all to take the same exact light that can reliably produce 500 lumens and crank it up to 1000 - except that it would reduce the life expectancy of the LED. sort of like you could modify the engine to run at double or quadruple the horsepower but instead of 200,000 miles it would last 1/4 mile.

for this reason i don't care how many lumens are claimed. i care about how many XMLs are under the hood and how big the heatsink is.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

MRMOLE said:


> [ Fear not though, no one is blinded with pretty much any of the lights out now.
> 
> J.


How do you know? I'm curious what your opinions are based on.

Mole[/QUOTE]

Actual practice and having light enough that's in question.

J.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

JohnJ80 said:


> How do you know? I'm curious what your opinions are based on.
> 
> Mole


Actual practice and having light enough that's in question.

J.[/QUOTE]

Have you ever shined your lights in your face (not look directly at them) to see how the glare effects you, or better yet inlisted the help of someone who has 20/60 corrected vision or any glare sensitivity issues (most common side effect of lasik surgery) to see how it effects them? These are legal drivers too. I see you post that you want to have the same power lights as a car which is fine with me as long as your lights meet DOT safety standards for top spill and glare (which none or the bicycle lights do). Top spill on lower powered lights is beneficial to be seen and necessary on offroad lights to see low hanging branches but at your power levels dangerous according to the DOT. Of course all this is meaningless if you only use full power in a high beam situation. I've heard you say "you can always turn your lights down" but I've never heard you say you do, and sorry to be a sceptic but when you talk about needing this much light to be noticed it makes it sound like you don't (I hope I'm wrong).
Mole


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

MRMOLE said:


> .....as long as your lights meet DOT safety standards for top spill and glare (which none or the bicycle lights do)....


MM, I wanted to comment about the clip above. Let's hope that the local DOT's stay away from trying to conform bicycles to "Motor vehicle standards". Whatever they do, I hope they let well enough alone.

Here's why I say that: Anything the government tries to regulate will mean increased costs, not to mention all the bother it would accrue for people who ride on the road. I don't think anyone here would want that to happen. If the government tried to "over"regulate bikes or bike lights, not only would the whole bicycle industry be in an uproar, it would be a total exercise in futility. Most people do not own bike's that have a light imbedded into the frame or otherwise permanently mounted. Cars on the other hand have lights built into the body of the car. To change the projection angle of the light on a car involves a great amount of know-how and effort. This is something most people who own cars would not even attempt to do on their own.

Bicycle lights on the other hand are designed for easy on/off attachment by the user. As such, even a lamp designed for upper beam cut-off can be aimed as high as the user wants. I shutter to think of a policemen trying to run down a bicyclist simply because he feels his light is not aimed properly or that his light is too bright. What a PITA that would be. The day that happens we are all going to be in major Poo-do.

Sooner or later though it probably will happen. Some jerk will get elected to office and make it his personal agenda to screw people on bicycles. Don't think it won't happen. We already have the stupid cell phone laws which I may add that so many people violate that even the police won't be bothered with it anymore unless it involves an accident.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

MRMOLE said:


> Actual practice and having light enough that's in question.
> 
> J.


Have you ever shined your lights in your face (not look directly at them) to see how the glare effects you, or better yet inlisted the help of someone who has 20/60 corrected vision or any glare sensitivity issues (most common side effect of lasik surgery) to see how it effects them? These are legal drivers too. I see you post that you want to have the same power lights as a car which is fine with me as long as your lights meet DOT safety standards for top spill and glare (which none or the bicycle lights do). Top spill on lower powered lights is beneficial to be seen and necessary on offroad lights to see low hanging branches but at your power levels dangerous according to the DOT. Of course all this is meaningless if you only use full power in a high beam situation. I've heard you say "you can always turn your lights down" but I've never heard you say you do, and sorry to be a sceptic but when you talk about needing this much light to be noticed it makes it sound like you don't (I hope I'm wrong).
Mole[/QUOTE]

Yes from appropriate distances where it's no more or less of a problem than a car headlight and it's not blinding. In fact, I did so to verify that it would be fine on a roadway (and it is). But doing that at arms length is foolish unless you count the last microsecond before I would run into someone on my bike meaningful. It would be equally meaningless with a car headlight, btw.

And, no, I don't ride around at 3900 lumens blazing away at approaching traffic just like how I don't drive with my brights on in my car when traffic is approaching. But when it's not, then it's (obviously) just fine to do so.

You are making this into a problem that does not exist. Let's concentrate on solving problems we actually have.

J.


----------



## TKHanson (Aug 16, 2010)

Simple for me, if over 500 lumens, it must be pointed almost at the ground as it will disable others on the trail. If you KNOW you are alone and wont come across anyone else, who cares. Light up the night. But on public trails, keep it to 500 or 600.


----------



## TKHanson (Aug 16, 2010)

By the way, think of driving laws and using your high-beams with on coming traffic. You can get a ticket for that. Why would bikers feel they don't have to abide by such rules and have a 1000+ head light on your bike while on the street. That is dangerous to other drivers and builds a bit of hatred from drivers to bikers.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

so my NiteRider Pro 3600 is "out for delivery" by USPS since 10 AM this morning. i called the store and they said there is a 20% restocking fee if i return it in used condition. they said i can turn it on, but mounting it probably will make it "used."

i originally ordered Seca 1700 then for some reason i cancelled it and ordered Niterider instead ... now i am beginning to think i should return the NiteRider and order Seca 1700 again. the 20% restocking fee would work out to $120 so i definitely want to avoid that !

these lights are for a dedicated bike path that is NOT on the road with cars, but crosses the road at intersections every block.

so the idea is Seca has a better shaped beam pattern that will hopefully not blind others as much as Niterider. in turn the idea behind Niterider was the ability to customize light output levels in software. I am beginning to think i will be able to use MORE light on the Seca because it has less spill up and to the sides.

what should i do ? any thoughts ?


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

TKHanson said:


> Simple for me, if over 500 lumens, it must be pointed almost at the ground as it will disable others on the trail. If you KNOW you are alone and wont come across anyone else, who cares. Light up the night. But on public trails, keep it to 500 or 600.


Sure. It may interest you to know that all of the brighter lights have switches that permit dimming. The more advanced lights even allow you to program this levels to what you want.



> By the way, think of driving laws and using your high-beams with on coming traffic. You can get a ticket for that. Why would bikers feel they don't have to abide by such rules and have a 1000+ head light on your bike while on the street. That is dangerous to other drivers and builds a bit of hatred from drivers to bikers.


Please re-read the last paragraph of my post. Yes, a cyclist has to dim their lights the same as a car would have to. Cyclists are vehicles in most (all) states and have to obey the same rules.

The point is this, if a car puts out 2600 lumens, then a bicycle can as well and it's no more blinding that it would be for a driver in a car. "Hatred" for cyclists with good lights? My experience has been quite the opposite - drivers are grateful that they can see me and that's how I feel when I'm driving too. What gets me upset is when I suddenly come upon some idiot cyclist who is all but invisible on a narrow road in the dark and I didn't see them.

J.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

Ok received my NiteRider Pro 3600 ... JESUS CHRIST ! ! !

It's 2.30 PM right now and sunny outside - i pointed it at a white wall from about 10 feet away and it was almost painful to look at that wall IN DAYTIME.

Scary stuff ... now i have to wait till sunset.

it is not as heavy as i expected however ! and it's not even big. it's only big compared to piko. unless you're putting it on your helmet i wouldn't worry about size and weight of it at all. it's brightness to weight ratio seems about the same as for the piko.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Careful, your lumen addiction is going to drive the any-brighter-than-500-lumens-and-you're-blinding-me crowd nuts. 

Ought to be fun. That looks like a great light.

J.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

JohnJ80 said:


> Careful, your lumen addiction is going to drive the any-brighter-than-500-lumens-and-you're-blinding-me crowd nuts.
> 
> Ought to be fun. That looks like a great light.
> 
> J.


i knew i could count on your support


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

With your light, I'm better you could ride at night with sunglasses. 

Which, of course, would be beyond cool.

J.


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

androgen said:


> Ok received my NiteRider Pro 3600 ... JESUS CHRIST ! ! !
> 
> It's 2.30 PM right now and sunny outside - i pointed it at a white wall from about 10 feet away and it was almost painful to look at that wall IN DAYTIME.
> 
> ...


Nice. Congrats on our setup. That is some serious lumens there.

Looking forward to reading what you got to report after sunset and out in the street usage.


----------



## leaftye (Dec 27, 2007)

JohnJ80 said:


> The point is this, if a car puts out 2600 lumens, then a bicycle can as well and it's no more blinding that it would be for a driver in a car.


There are two headlights, so 5200 lumens. Plus it may be more if daytime running lights, fog lights and driving lights are installed and operating. A car with aftermarket 50W HID could have over 10,000 lumens from the headlights alone. Over 15,000 lumens with those headlights and HID fog/driving lights. My car currently puts out around 7,500 lumens and should have close to 10,000 lumens next winter.

I don't have enough room on my handle bar and helmet or in my wallet to make my bicycle compete with good modern automobile lights.


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

leaftye said:


> There are two headlights, so 5200 lumens. Plus it may be more if daytime running lights, fog lights and driving lights are installed and operating. A car with aftermarket 50W HID could have over 10,000 lumens from the headlights alone. Over 15,000 lumens with those headlights and HID fog/driving lights. My car currently puts out around 7,500 lumens and should have close to 10,000 lumens next winter.
> 
> I don't have enough room on my handle bar and helmet or in my wallet to make my bicycle compete with good modern automobile lights.


Sure you can. Just pickup 3 of the niterider pro 3600 setups and your are golden. You will be out about $1800 (according to amazon)  but you will have 10800 lumens (based n manufactor claims).

2 on the bars and 1 on your helmet.

:eekster: 
:thumbsup:


----------



## roadrider1 (Mar 20, 2012)

I think what is missing in the "too many lumens for the trail or road" discussion when comparing to car headlights is that car headlights have a controlled beam with a cut off to prevent light from projecting upwards. This effect was really noticable in the old Hella brand headlamps, but you can still see it when you pull up to a wall with the headlights on in the dark.

The next evolution in bike lights should be to control the light beam better - half of the light is reflected down from center and the other half is relfected up from center. This certainly lights up the trail top to bottom when you are going through a tunnel of trees on the trail, but doesn't do much good on a fire road or street when you need all of the light reflected down from center.

Contolling the light reflected up would also greatly reduce the blinding light syndrome when you meet another trail rider coming towards you.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

roadrider1 said:


> I think what is missing in the "too many lumens for the trail or road" discussion when comparing to car headlights is that car headlights have a controlled beam with a cut off to prevent light from projecting upwards. This effect was really noticable in the old Hella brand headlamps, but you can still see it when you pull up to a wall with the headlights on in the dark.
> 
> The next evolution in bike lights should be to control the light beam better - half of the light is reflected down from center and the other half is relfected up from center. This certainly lights up the trail top to bottom when you are going through a tunnel of trees on the trail, but doesn't do much good on a fire road or street when you need all of the light reflected down from center.
> 
> Contolling the light reflected up would also greatly reduce the blinding light syndrome when you meet another trail rider coming towards you.


what needs to happen with bike lights is they must be switchable between high and low beams just as with cars. and the difference should be in beam pattern NOT intensity. you select high beams on the trail and low beams in the road.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

JohnJ80 said:


> Careful, your lumen addiction is going to drive the any-brighter-than-500-lumens-and-you're-blinding-me crowd nuts.


Heck, it won't bother me. I've yet to encounter a bike on the road using something that I felt was "Blinding" to traffic. Not that it can't happen, In the mean time I'll worry about that when it happens.

If someone wants to use a monster light system on the road and carry that extra weight of a big as* battery, hey... Whatever turns you on. I look at it this way, eventually the thrill of "Uber lumen" wears off. You realize you only need so much light to ride with and so that is what you end up riding with no matter what the maximum potential of the lamp is. Eventually you reach that point of diminished returns and you realize the game is over. I can't speak for others but personally I think I'm almost there. On the road, I'm just about done. Trail riding...that's another thing.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

[

And, no, I don't ride around at 3900 lumens blazing away at approaching traffic just like how I don't drive with my brights on in my car when traffic is approaching. But when it's not, then it's (obviously) just fine to do so.
J.[/QUOTE]

Like I said "all this is meaningless if you ony use full power in a high beam situation". I've learned on these social forums you sometimes have to ask direct questions or it's easy to misenterpret the meaning of what someone says. I actually thought you ran your lights on high all the time by the way you've worded some of your threads. I'm glad I was wrong! Thanks for the reply.
Mole


----------



## leaftye (Dec 27, 2007)

cue003 said:


> Sure you can. Just pickup 3 of the niterider pro 3600 setups and your are golden. You will be out about $1800 (according to amazon)  but you will have 10800 lumens (based n manufactor claims).
> 
> 2 on the bars and 1 on your helmet.
> 
> ...


I'm doubtful that a light with such small optics is going to have that many lumens out the front, but I can see it being close enough.

Anyhow, like I said, my wallet is incapable of accommodating 3 of those. Now if someone wants to refill my wallet, I'll be happy to prove you right. :thumbsup:


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

Cat-man-do said:


> MM, I wanted to comment about the clip above. Let's hope that the local DOT's stay away from trying to conform bicycles to "Motor vehicle standards". Whatever they do, I hope they let well enough alone.
> 
> I agree. I don't want anyone to think my reference to the DOT safety regulations in regards to top spill/glare means that I want to see the DOT regulate bicycle lights.
> Mole


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

Cat-man-do said:


> Heck, it won't bother me. I've yet to encounter a bike on the road using something that I felt was "Blinding" to traffic. Not that it can't happen, In the mean time I'll worry about that when it happens.
> 
> If someone wants to use a monster light system on the road and carry that extra weight of a big as* battery, hey... Whatever turns you on. I look at it this way, eventually the thrill of "Uber lumen" wears off. You realize you only need so much light to ride with and so that is what you end up riding with no matter what the maximum potential of the lamp is. Eventually you reach that point of diminished returns and you realize the game is over. I can't speak for others but personally I think I'm almost there. On the road, I'm just about done. Trail riding...that's another thing.


pro 3600 is definitely too much for the road now that i tried it. that said it definitely changes driver habits ( and pedestrian habits too ). when i rode with piko i could tell they saw me and gave me good amount of room. when i rode with the niterider they were literally afraid of me - i only tested it for a few minutes, but one car stopped at an intersection a block away and would not go onto my street until i passed even though nothing was stopping it. i saw people stopping from about 70 yards away and just standing there. one woman crossing the street got onto the sidewalk on which i was riding at the time and then she took a couple steps BACK on the street to get out of my beam.

so yeah you CAN have too much light on the road. i trying to convince myself that it wouldn't be too much because i wanted a bigger light ... but it IS too much.

it is NOT as bright as HID high beams on the car i used to have ... but it is not far off. compared to car low-beams it leaves them in the dust.

get it if you're a sadist. one kid looked into it momentarily from about 15 feet away ( when i was standing ), then grabbed his eyes and bent over like he was shot - that sort of thing just doesn't happen with cars, sorry John 

on the upside it FORCES everybody to think about you. they don't just SEE you but they THINK ABOUT you when you're this bright. it is IMO not so much that they think you're a car it's just the fact that they THINK at all. human brain by default tries to ignore everything it CAN ignore - if it wasn't that way we would all be insane. its sort of like the difference between seeing a woman and seeing a woman naked - you see her in both instances, but in one instance she grabs your attention.


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

Androgen,
Are you going to keep the Niterider and just run it on lower output or are you going to try another light? We you running both lights on full output?

Did you use the DIY software with Niterider?


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

cue003 said:


> Androgen,
> Are you going to keep the Niterider and just run it on lower output or are you going to try another light? We you running both lights on full output?
> 
> Did you use the DIY software with Niterider?


i was running piko at medium and niterider at low. niterider at high is like a practical joke. i am leaning towards keeping only the niterider and running at low.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

So, for you androgen it is 3600 lumens that is outrageous, but I can tell you that I can piss off people with the piko900, even well below the 900 lumens, and not even on the helmet shining into someones eyes!

Pissing of someone for a moment is off course less spectacular than blinding someone completely so that he or she just stops the car and calls the police. 


You just mention that these 3600 lumens leaves low beam HID in the dust, but most people ride 120 km/ h and more on the low beam on the highway, and in germany people ride over 250 km/h at night even with halogen high beams, without outunning them.

I ride faster offroad with my 4X4 on halogen low beam and fog lights than most people ever achieve on a Mountainbike, and in most cases it is the suspension that limits the speed, not the light!
And for offroading a 1,8 meter wide vehicle I need more light than for offroading a bike. 

And jet, there are people who claim they need 4000-5000 lumens for mountainbiking??? 

You can always ride more light, but why? 
Your eyes adjust to the new light level, so you need 10 lux instead of 4 lux to see something clear, and the people you just past experinece the same, but they only have 10 lux in a smal beam, not in their spill, so they are ****ed. You won't ride any faster but you need to carry a heavy battery, heavy lighthead, and spend a lot of money,... 

I can imagine that for some people a combined total of 600/700 real lumens is not enough because of medical reasons, and I certainly can imagine that some people THINK 600 or 700 real lumens is not enough because they believe they have bought a 2000 lumens light while it only produces 400 lumens, but I can also imagine that the moment we all start riding with several thousends of lumens in populated areas this will put an end on the fun and regulation will be upon us, and ecomentalists might prevent us from disturbing the wildlife^putting a stop to the whole nightbiking adventure!


----------



## dfiler (Feb 3, 2004)

The only thing certain about this topic is that there are many different scenarios with different lighting needs. It is naive to claim that just because something works for one's self, that it should work for everyone else.

Human vision is incredibly variable, both in terms of sensory capability but also in terms of processing ability. There is variance in overall light sensitivity, color sensitivity, field of view differences due to lens shape, differences in distribution or density of rods on the retina, peripheral vision limitations, blind spots on the retina, requirements on the brain to correct imperfect input from bad lenses or retinas, bifocal limitations if both eyes don't perform different, muscle differences that affect focus in different parts of the field of view, reaction time of the iris, etc.

And that is rather incomplete list. It could be much longer. 

Beyond differences in vision, riding environments are incredibly different, necessitating different lighting. Tight single track can have logs sticking out into the trail at handle bar level. Low hanging vines can snag the head and rip someone clean off the bike. Surface texture visibility can be important if dealing with variable wet conditions. Trail surfaces may be consistent or completely inconsistent. Dust over dry rock can quickly change into loam sprinkled wet diagonal roots. Some places have blinding but occasional ambient light while other places are perfectly dark. Curvy slow trails benefit from a wide angle light while quick or straight trails can benefit from a focused beam. Some places have dirt that contrasts with foliage making the trail easy to see while other places trails are almost indistinguishable from the surrounding area. For example, I need a ton of light in the fall to ride my local trails at high speed. Despite having every rock, root and turn memorized, a fresh covering of fallen leaves makes the trail nearly invisible at night. Another instance when tons of light is beneficial is flying off a jump or drop at full trail speed. There is only a fraction of a second to spot the landing before leaving the ground. In that fraction of a second, corrections are made such as pushing into or absorbing the jump in order to send it the right distance and direction. Finally and most importantly, more light avoids pedal snags and instances where the bike gets torn out from under me due to unseen trail features. Around here you have to time pedal strokes and pay attention to pedal position in order to avoid snagging roots and rocks. And... with winter approaching, it really helps to be able to distinguish between, in a fraction of a second, the difference between dirt, ice, and mud when flying down twisting single track at full speed.

Given my vision, riding style and local trails, I greatly appreciate having as much light as possible. This isn't a problem with proper light etiquette. I point the light away, cover it, or switch it off when passing people or stopping to talk.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

Thanks dfiler for the great post! At one point in time diadetic complications/retina surgerys left me with most of the vision conditions you mentioned. My doctors assured me I was legal to drive but at the legal limit I was not very comfortable and would only drive when I had to. Luckily my eye surgeons were able to return most of the vision I lost but I'll always remember what it was like to be at that point and consider it when I'm blinded by someone running 4000 lumens off road, because they may need it. Like many people have said before, you can always stop and look the other way, which I am happy to do. Because on road you can't stop and look the other way, I always run low top spill optic equiped lights or Action wide angle lenses for my reflector equipied lights (these cut top spill to near car light levels). I know it's human nature for people to make judgements based only on what they see. I hope your post and mine will remind them that what they see and how thier eyes react to lights is not the same for everyone.
Mole


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

MRMOLE said:


> Thanks dfiler for the great post! At one point in time diadetic complications/retina surgerys left me with most of the vision conditions you mentioned. My doctors assured me I was legal to drive but at the legal limit I was not very comfortable and would only drive when I had to. Luckily my eye surgeons were able to return most of the vision I lost but I'll always remember what it was like to be at that point and consider it when I'm blinded by someone running 4000 lumens off road, because they may need it. Like many people have said before, you can always stop and look the other way, which I am happy to do. Because on road you can't stop and look the other way, I always run low top spill optic equiped lights or Action wide angle lenses for my reflector equipied lights (these cut top spill to near car light levels). I know it's human nature for people to make judgements based only on what they see. I hope your post and mine will remind them that what they see and how thier eyes react to lights is not the same for everyone.
> Mole


Yes, great post by *dfiler*. In describing what a person has to deal with while mountain biking, I couldn't of said it better myself. :smilewinkgrin: Also great to hear about the differences in eyesight which can come into play when riding at night.

*MM*, enlightening to hear the details about your vision limitations. It certainly helps others understand where you're coming from when you talk about using lights and riding at night.

My eyes are very astigmatic and I'm near sighted. Easily correctable ( with glasses ) but as I got older I also had to get bi-focals as reading things at distance became harder. Other than that my eyes work very well at night and are exceptional at gathering low levels of light. For me I only need a certain amount of light close in. Too much and the reflective glare comes back and constricts my pupils which lessens how well I see. When I go bright I like that output in a semi tight/confined beam pattern so I can aim it at distance. That is why I like helmet throwers.

Like *dfiler* said, once the conditions on the trail change you can easily find yourself needing more light than you usually use. This is why in the fall I use different lights so I can have more light if I need it. In the fall there is less reflective glare as trail side foliage begins to wither and fall off. Wet leaves cover the trail and absorb more light. Trails in general are more dark, damp and dangerous as obstacles become covered in leaves . Line of sight tends to increase as more trees lose their leaves. In the fall and winter having a real thrower on the lid can really help. Even so with more hidden obstacles on the trail I find I ride much slower in the fall. Ride too fast and you can run into trouble real quick.

Now if you live in an area where you don't see big seasonal changes things could be entirely different.


----------



## roadrider1 (Mar 20, 2012)

Beautiful night for a ride tonight - 80F at 8PM and a dark sky until the moon came up. Only saw one other bike on the fire roads overlooking LA, but there was, very unusually, a lot couples going for a hike in the dark. Felt kind of guilty when everyone of them moved completely of the road in confusion when I came by with 1200lm shinning at them. With the looks on their faces, they must have thought an alien space ship was coming at them.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

ok brothers and sisters let me throw some math at you. here are some numbers:

Lighting levels in workplaces- FAQ Knowledgebase - Department of Labour

recommended illumination levels:

Movement and orientation only 40 Lux

Rough intermittent 80 Lux

Simple tasks 160 Lux

Ordinary tasks 240 Lux

Moderately difficult tasks 320 - 400 Lux

Difficult 600 Lux

Very difficult 800 Lux

Extremely difficult 1200 Lux

Exceptionally difficult 1600 Lux

I would put riding a bike in the city at "movement and orientation only" at 40 lux

i would put a downhill singletrack at "difficult" or 600 lux

Niterider 3000 as tested by Francis put out 255 lux bouncing off a ceiling at about 5 feet. that's 5 feet both ways with perhaps 40% lost in reflection. so this would be equivalent to light level hitting an object 15 feet away or so. when riding you probably want to see further than that, but also the beam is focused so let's say niterider provies 150 lux illumination.

this would suggest that you will need four niteriders to dowhnill at close to daylight speeds, but a niterider on low is still going to be enough to ride on good pavement.

IN FACT where MY pavement is i have enough illumination to ride without any lights. but why ? more light will make me see better ... up to a point. if my light gets too bright ( say 50,000 lumens ) i will not be able to see anything outside of the light cone. which is why the brighter your light is the wider the pattern should be. also it means you can get away with brighter light if ambient light level is higher. in my case my ambient light level is pretty high ( city ) and my beam pattern is very wide, so i can push a lot more lumens without blinding myself.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Dfiler, nice post, and the numbers from androgen are also an important input, I can imagine that other people need more light, maybe at certain age I will need more to.

But even with big lights, around 2250 lumens, I can't ride any faster on technical stuff than with 600 lumens. And with 5000 lumens, i still would have the same problem: the light comes from where I am.

A bump or a hole in a narrow trace partly covered in grass is just visible in daylight, but at night you can't spot them, the gras reflects so much light that the pad behind it only gets darker, less light often even works better, and, the story that you can dim the light, if you are used to a certain amount of light you start to need it, dimming at such time only creates other problems!

In technical stuff with drops, jumps,.. more light doesn't make a difference either, its again the direction of the light that is wrong.

About riding etiquette:
Some have it others not, some don't realise that 1000 lumens into someone's face is blinding and others do it on purpose, some would dim their 3000 lumens when riding behind someone with a small light, remembering how irritating it is, others will turn it to full power to show off, or with the idea that the rider in front of them might benefit from riding in his own shadow. 
And, even the ones who believe themself to be mannered bikers, if you are having big fun, 55 km/ h on a bumpy trail with full light, will you be willing/able to dim for the guy climbing the trail in the oposite direktion, riding with 100 lumens to save his battery a bit????


Remember that this is the night bikers subforum, there are people over here that believe that there is something as too bright, other bikers might think that we have nothing to search on the trails at night and ecomentalists certainly care more about the animals than about a few bikers. 
In a lot of European Countries, cycling or even walking in the forrest is still forbidden by old laws against illegal hunting, till now these are dead laws, but rest asure that ecomentalists are eager to reinstate these laws the moment the public is fed up with bikers shining in their eyes!

In traffic lighting is regulated because without regulation it's a mess, so the moment a enough cyclists start blinding other people you can expect getting tickets if you violate these regulations. 

The moment enough people have enough light to really start biking, we 'll be banned from the forrests and trails at night, and use our lights on the road will be prohibited as they lack DOT/TUV/...


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

androgen said:


> Lighting levels in workplaces- FAQ Knowledgebase - Department of Labour
> 
> recommended illumination levels:
> 
> ...


Not sure what light levels in an enclosed environment has to do with bike lighting. Enclosed areas usually will have several lights depending on the size of the room.
To see on a bike in dark conditions your light is being used to only illuminate the area in front of you that you need to see. As such I see no relationship to lighting designed to light an entire room.

Out of curiosity I took a torch into my bathroom to see if I could simulate 40 lux of ambient light. Holding the torch straight up ( reflecting off ceiling ) and holding the meter in my hand while standing, with the torch (XPE ) on medium ( 30% ) I could get a reading of 40 lux. Although not that bright I had no problem seeing anything in my small bathroom with the only things that would of been hard to do would of been shaving or reading. I could of gotten by with half the light for just moving around. In comparison the normal 60watt bulb read about 106 lux.

Anyway, I can take that same torch on medium and see a good 75ft or more in a dark area although I could certainly wish for more light if I was riding a bike.

I think it best we go back to discussing bike lights and forget comparisons like this.


----------



## kjlued (Jun 23, 2011)

I am sure we have all heard the saying "those who die with the most toys win".

Well the same is true for lights. 

Light your way so you can ride safely the way you want to ride. 
Try and be courteous though by aiming them down and/or dimming them when riding slower or approaching others. 

Most importantly turn your headlamp off when talking to others. 
Damn that pisses me off when somebody is talking to me and their helmet light is blinding me. 

But courteous flows in both directions. 

If you can't tolerate a little bright light in your eyes then ride when it is still light outside because if you ride at night, you will get a beam in your eye occasionally.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

Beckler said:


> We probably need a car-type hi-lo beam arrangement. Several ways I can think to do that--should be easy. Could even be automatic when it senses another oncoming headlight


It would be nice if light manufacturers would include a snap on "road optic" that would redirect a lot of the upward light back down on the road. No doubt if these lights continue in their popularity, we may start to see regulations covering this.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

Nothing's impossible said:


> Dfiler, nice post, and the numbers from androgen are also an important input, I can imagine that other people need more light, maybe at certain age I will need more to.
> 
> But even with big lights, around 2250 lumens, I can't ride any faster on technical stuff than with 600 lumens. And with 5000 lumens, i still would have the same problem: the light comes from where I am.
> 
> ...


Yep, too many folks believe that riding right behind someone with their lights pumped up is helping. It's the worst possible scenario and worth of running a nice 1 Watt tail light facing upward wear only some tailgaiting would get flashed.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

JohnJ80 said:


> I've done a lot of night riding, 500 lumens split between two lights is not adequate for me on a mountain bike in the woods at night. About twice that amount of real lumens works well. I've been riding at night since the early days in the late '80s with the halogens and the huge water bottle batteries.
> 
> But, now, most of my riding is on the road and at much higher speeds. So I find it comfortable at about 2000 lumens when descending at speed on a road in order to miss road hazards (broken pavement, cracks etc...).
> 
> ...


I've got 600 lumens on the bars and on the helmet (Cygolite TridenX). It works very well, so much that I dim the system one setting to get higher run times.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

willtsmith_nwi said:


> It would be nice if light manufacturers would include a snap on "road optic" that would redirect a lot of the upward light back down on the road. No doubt if these lights continue in their popularity, we may start to see regulations covering this.


That's an idea that has been tossed around by others as well. It would depend though on what optic or reflector is being used by the lamp to decide on just how useful it would be.

A while back a made a small hood for one of my lamps in an attempt to knock down the upward spill which was going up into the trees. I lined the underside of the hood with aluminum foil and it did work rather well.

As for your last statement, let's hope not.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

the whole forum tree thing is impossible to navigate. please MTBR switch to some normal forum software. i have been sitting on internet forums since about 1998 and this one is the most difficult to use. either use a tree or linear format - but don't try to use both at the same time. the way this forum is it's like a linear thread but with the posts in random order.

i have browsed threads with hundreds of pages on other forums with no problem, but here any thread with more than about 50 posts is hopeless.


----------



## Buadyen (Apr 18, 2009)

androgen said:


> the whole forum tree thing is impossible to navigate. please MTBR switch to some normal forum software. i have been sitting on internet forums since about 1998 and this one is the most difficult to use. either use a tree or linear format - but don't try to use both at the same time. the way this forum is it's like a linear thread but with the posts in random order.
> 
> i have browsed threads with hundreds of pages on other forums with no problem, but here any thread with more than about 50 posts is hopeless.


At the top of a thread, in the blue menu bar, there's a drop-down menu labeled "Display Modes" -- you can set it to straight linear format there.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

Cat-man-do said:


> As for your last statement, let's hope not.


that's not happening anytime soon.

i was riding the other night in a park in brooklyn that is very well suited for riding - it has a very wide perfectly flat oval road - so a lot of people were there on their bikes ( it was about 8 pm ).

anyway half the bikers had lights, but most of them i would say were as low as about 20 lumens ! ! ! thats right TWENTY. i don't even know where you can buy something so weak ? nevermind - i don't want to know. there were two guys there riding together who were serious bikers and their lights looked about 100 lumens. at that rate we will probably NEVER get to the point where it has to be regulated.

you guys just don't understand the mind of the average moron. he is incapable of understanding even that he needs a light at all. AVAILABILITY of lights will not change this. most people here in NY ride without any lights - not even a tail light.

my aunt got killed maybe 3 years ago by hit and run driver. she was walking back from work at night wearing black. i am supposed to be sad about this, but to me it is funny - because it is just so dumb. she didn't die instantly either - she died about 3 days later in the hospital. it's like people who eat at McDonalds every day then act surprised when they get diabetes, cancer or heart disease.

so no worries. if there is going to be any regulation it will be to require people to use lights.

those HID lights in cars - they only exist because some people want everybody to think their car is expensive - but i don't think this applies to bikes - i don't think anybody wants others to think his bike is expensive unless he wants it stolen.

besides, who will PAY for all this regulation ? a car comes with a whole stream of revenue attached where you have to constantly pay fees, fines etc or you get your license suspended. but with a bike there is no license - so where is the revenue going to come from ? the government aren't a bunch of saints - they don't regulate stuff because they care about you - they just do it to take your money.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

androgen said:


> that's not happening anytime soon.
> 
> anyway half the bikers had lights, but most of them i would say were as low as about 20 lumens ! ! ! thats right TWENTY. i don't even know where you can buy something so weak ? nevermind - i don't want to know. there were two guys there riding together who were serious bikers and their lights looked about 100 lumens. at that rate we will probably NEVER get to the point where it has to be regulated.


True, but do keep in mind the performance lighting LEDs steadily becomes more efficient. Economies of scale from wider spread adoption and new markets will also drive prices down.

\We are witnessing a steady progression of brighter and brighter lights at increasingly lower pricepoints.

Cygolite and Nightrider are putting real 600 lumen self contained lights together for just over $100. It's not hard seeing these same lights (and similar handtorches/headlamps hitting $50 pricepoints in within 3-4 years.

... snip....

besides, who will PAY for all this regulation ? a car comes with a whole stream of revenue attached where you have to constantly pay fees, fines etc or you get your license suspended. but with a bike there is no license - so where is the revenue going to come from ? .[/QUOTE]

Well first, most states require reflectors, that's why you have to always take them off when you get a new mountain bike ;-) That's regulation but it's on the sales end.

The regulation I speak of is requiring manufacturers provide a low beam optic for their high powered lights.

Finally by optic I mean that it would snap over the top of the lights and redirect that light forward and down instead of up. This is useless light for road bike purposes. And it would actually benefit the consumers to have lights with a proper low beam.

Why a snap on optic? It sounds like the cheapest way to do it. And hopefully, some of us with lights could buy the optic for our existing lights.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

willtsmith_nwi said:


> Why a snap on optic? It sounds like the cheapest way to do it. And hopefully, some of us with lights could buy the optic for our existing lights.


Or they could do something like this:
MTBR Light Shootout - Philips SafeRide - YouTube
Philips SafeRide LED Bike Light - 2012 Mtbr Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review

Phillips Safe Ride Light - Provides a "square" shaped optic. Not optimal for MTB vs. road but functional for MTB in conjunction with a helmet light.

This is especially nice for commuter applications in that you can swap out the rechargeable NiMH for Alkaline backups in a pinch.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

willtsmith_nwi said:


> Or they could do something like this:
> MTBR Light Shootout - Philips SafeRide - YouTube
> Philips SafeRide LED Bike Light - 2012 Mtbr Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review
> 
> ...


nah screw NiMH. my ideal light would run on standard 18650 lithium cells, like my Fenix TK21 but unfortunately bike lights are too clever - they want to charge you $100+ for a battery pack that is equivalent of $20 worth of 18650 cells.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

Cat-man-do said:


> That's an idea that has been tossed around by others as well. It would depend though on what optic or reflector is being used by the lamp to decide on just how useful it would be.
> 
> A while back a made a small hood for one of my lamps in an attempt to knock down the upward spill which was going up into the trees. I lined the underside of the hood with aluminum foil and it did work rather well.
> 
> As for your last statement, let's hope not.


A reflective hood works well indeed, I've put a small miror on the piko, no more spill into the air and instead more light to the sides and closeby. It also gave me the impression that a lot of cars have less than 900 OTF lumens.

About regulations, once enough cyclists start riding UFO lights, blinding others, there will be a need for regulation.


----------



## hunter006 (Jan 20, 2012)

muzzanic said:


> Some people do need more light than others because some peoples eyes just don't work as well at night.
> 
> Also some people just ride faster.


I have several coworkers who have issues seeing at night, specifically low light conditions cause them quite a lot of grief in terms of being unable to see. They usually use the higher end MagicShine and L&M lights, which do have a tendency to blind oncoming riders. But anything less and they can't see very far ahead of them. I myself have less than awesome night vision; I have 20/15 vision (excellent clarity) but poor night vision. Anything less than a decently designed 120 lumen light and I'm struggling to see things before I run them over at 15 mph. I tend to average higher than that at night.

Right now I have Seca 400 lights, and I run them on low or medium, depending on the conditions, but I'll be switching lighting soon to something different.



Cat-man-do said:


> That's an idea that has been tossed around by others as well. It would depend though on what optic or reflector is being used by the lamp to decide on just how useful it would be.
> 
> A while back a made a small hood for one of my lamps in an attempt to knock down the upward spill which was going up into the trees. I lined the underside of the hood with aluminum foil and it did work rather well.
> 
> As for your last statement, let's hope not.


Most people familiar with Schmidt SON hubs and German lighting regulations will know of, but not the specifics of, German StVZO (road & traffic) regulations for bicycle headlights on German roads. The very short version of the overly large list of regulations in German are that beyond a certain point, a headlamp should emit barely any luminosity, and thus not blind oncoming drivers. So at least in some countries, these laws exist. Fortunately, the USA is not one of them, however on the bright side **boom tish** those of us in non-regulated countries can take advantage of this and have the option of buying lights responsibly.

I have had people complain that my Planet Bike Blaze 0.5W light was too bright. I even had one guy in the U-District take a swing at me because my 80 lumen light was "too bright". There are people in Redmond and Mercer Island, WA who spread thumbtacks and glass on the trails to stop cyclists riding through the area, supposedly because they don't like cyclists using the "walking trails" (aka dual use trails) with their bright lights. In my opinion, people will b*tch about everything and anything they can, because they can, even if they have no better reason than that. I prefer to think that they're just having a bad day and are taking it out on you, but realistically some people are just a**holes.

As *Cat-man-do* mentioned earlier in the thread, USA night riding already is a strike against riders - I was detained by police in early 2011 riding home one night because I was on a bicycle, and was given the reason "thieves in the area had been using bicycles to steal property". The real reason was politically motivated; the locals with very deep pockets have been waging an ongoing war with cycling advocates in the area for over 25 years.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

hunter006 said:


> I was detained by police in early 2011 riding home one night because I was on a bicycle, and was given the reason "thieves in the area had been using bicycles to steal property".


great. reminds me of a story recently in the news where cops ran a guy over, killing him, then sent his mother a bill to repair the dent in the police car left by his head.


----------



## hunter006 (Jan 20, 2012)

androgen said:


> great. reminds me of a story recently in the news where cops ran a guy over, killing him, then sent his mother a bill to repair the dent in the police car left by his head.


That would probably be this one.

It wasn't nearly as bad as that. He requested ID with my name and address on it; I declined as that would require reaching in to my bag had legal searchability implications and offered my work ID, which was clearly displayed (in my bag were several prototype devices; a loss of a single device would result in my unemployment). The photo ID was for a company with a well known reputation in the area (e.g. Boeing, Amazon, Microsoft, Google) but since such an ID does not qualify for a legal form of identification, I had to wait until my identity was verified.

Enough of that though. Back to lights being too bright. Blinding oncoming riders is bad mmmm'kay...


----------



## willworkforbeer (Jan 14, 2007)

Wow, lots of info, but I am confused (lost).
Never have ridden at nite with lights, but we got stuck in the woods last week on an after work ride and could not see a thing (braile ride), rode it out, but gotta get some lights.
Not sure where to start - basic (500 helmet / 500 bars) or go double that.
I understand that you can turn the bigger lights down, and that is what I am leaning towards.
Looking forwards to readily available night vision equipment........


----------



## leaftye (Dec 27, 2007)

willworkforbeer said:


> Wow, lots of info, but I am confused (lost).
> Never have ridden at nite with lights, but we got stuck in the woods last week on an after work ride and could not see a thing (braile ride), rode it out, but gotta get some lights.
> Not sure where to start - basic (500 helmet / 500 bars) or go double that.
> I understand that you can turn the bigger lights down, and that is what I am leaning towards.
> Looking forwards to readily available night vision equipment........


If money and weight aren't issues, go with the brightest light you can find as long as it has lower modes to extend battery life and prevent blinding others.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

willworkforbeer said:


> Wow, lots of info, but I am confused (lost).
> Never have ridden at nite with lights, but we got stuck in the woods last week on an after work ride and could not see a thing (braile ride), rode it out, but gotta get some lights.
> Not sure where to start - basic (500 helmet / 500 bars) or go double that.
> I understand that you can turn the bigger lights down, and that is what I am leaning towards.
> Looking forwards to readily available night vision equipment........


get the best package that best integrates lumens, beam pattern and various modes of operation ( high, medium, low etc ). any one of those can be a deal breaker IMO. don't look at a single number - look at the whole picture.

i would go for the lightest and most powerful helmet light FIRST and then get a bar light that will compliment it. if you go for a bar light first you may not be able to find a helmet light to match it.

also i would advise not to buy from any place where you can't return it - because you may realize afterwards that you ordered a wrong product for you.

also i would make sure whatever light you get you don't spend your last money on because in a year's time you may decide it's time to get something different.

that said there is little point in getting a helmet light with less than 900 lumens ( a single XML LED ). the lowest Lumen light i would look at is BAJA Strykr SL or Lupine PIKO both at around 900 lumens.

and once again - do NOT buy a bar light until you find a helmet light that you want to keep. helmet light is what is critical. bar lights - you can add a second one later most of the time.


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

willworkforbeer said:


> Wow, lots of info, but I am confused (lost).
> Never have ridden at nite with lights, but we got stuck in the woods last week on an after work ride and could not see a thing (braile ride), rode it out, but gotta get some lights.
> Not sure where to start - basic (500 helmet / 500 bars) or go double that.
> I understand that you can turn the bigger lights down, and that is what I am leaning towards.
> Looking forwards to readily available night vision equipment........


Note that not all light manufacturers offer what they announce! A lot of producers still mention the maximal output of the led! 
A lot of the chinese lights sold as 1200 lumens light will probably deliver less than the 500 you desire while still being to heavy/ bulcky to wear on the helmet!
So depending on the manufacturer, you might even consider a 2000 lumens light!

Keep in mind that more lumens means often a heavier, bulkier lighthead and always a heavier battery or a reduced burn time! There is no such thing as a free lunch!

As I use the bars as main source of light I got myself a piko 6 on the bars, and a piko 3 with smartcore upgrade on the helmet. Total weight under 500 grams, and only 55 grams on the helmet!

With 560 lumen on the bars and 300 lumens on the helmet, I can ride as fast as I want for over 5hours and 20 minutes, and if I need more light, 900 lumens at the bars and 460 lumens on the helmet the batteries would still last over 3h 20 min, with 750 lumen on the helmet it would be only 2 hours, but I like to have a stronger light on the bars, so I 'll seldom go over 560 lumens on the helmet.

If I would need more light, say a wilma 12 and a piko 6, it 'd be 860 grams (and even more expensive)!

With budget lights over 500 OTF lumens you end up with over 150 grams on the helmet, catching every branch you pass, and a weight over 400 grams, barely making it for 3 hours!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

I'd agree that the two Piko solution is a great answer. Very light and very small - great on both handlebars and helmet. You'd like this solution.

J.


----------



## willworkforbeer (Jan 14, 2007)

A couple of guys around here have had pretty good luck with the Magicshine 808 / 872 combo, may give that a try.
Reasonably priced, lotsa light (even if not as much as advertised)


----------



## Nothing's impossible (Mar 5, 2012)

You are the one holding the wallet

For the price it's a lot of light, but as metnioned, a bit bulcky.
Also have a look at Xeccon!


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

willworkforbeer said:


> Wow, lots of info, but I am confused (lost).
> *Never have ridden at nite with lights, but we got stuck in the woods last week on an after work ride and could not see a thing (braile ride), rode it out, but gotta get some lights.*
> Not sure where to start - basic (500 helmet / 500 bars) or go double that.
> I understand that you can turn the bigger lights down, and that is what I am leaning towards.
> Looking forwards to readily available night vision equipment........


When starting rides in the late afternoon it is always a good idea to bring a light source along just in case you don't make it back before dark. This is especially true at this time of the year with the days getting shorter. I like carrying a duel torch set-up for rides like that
( one bar mounted, one helmet mounted ). Since they are lighter than standard light sets and usually take up less room in your bag, they can be more convenient for those rides that only require about an hour of run time.

On the other hand if you're going to be doing longer night rides you need a good ( two lamp ) system. Lots of good choices there depending on how much you want to spend. Choose whatever suits your riding style and enjoy.


----------

