Cyclist going over board with lighting

Del2005

As a follow on from this thread in motors.

What is your opinion on too bright lights on bikes? Are cyclists aware of how blinding these lights are for other road users?

_AVALANCHE_

Anything is better than not seeing a git on a bike untill the last second. If I meet someone with an overly bright light I'll flash a few times and unless he's an idiot he'll know to adjust the angle.

The more the lights the better I say.

Lumen

_AVALANCHE_ wrote: »

The more the lights the better I say.

That attitude is so obviously idiotic in the context of the linked thread as to barely need countering, but I'll do it anyway.

The point of lighting yourself up is to reduce the chances of an accident. If your lights are so bright/poorly angled as to blind traffic from the front or rear, then you are achieving precisely the opposite of your intent.

WHIP IT!

Lumen wrote: »

That attitude is so obviously idiotic in the context of the linked thread as to barely need countering, but I'll do it anyway.

The point of lighting yourself up is to reduce the chances of an accident. If your lights are so bright/poorly angled as to blind traffic from the front or rear, then you are achieving precisely the opposite of your intent.

You seem to be purposely misinterpreting the second poster's comment here. I don't cycle but I am a motorist, work in the city centre and drive home late after dark every evening. The amount of cyclists I see who are "under-illuminated", I suppose we'll say, is incredible.

Alot of cyclists stick on a hi-vis jacket and think they're glowing - some of em are barely even reflective.... I can't remember being blinded by a cyclist's light too often but I have regularly had a bit of a "jump" when a badly-lit cyclist seems to appear out of nowhere.

Certainly, as far as this motorist is concerned - it's definitely a case of 'the more lights the better'.

triggermortis

It's the same as every thing else, moderation and common sense is required. There's no use throwing on a high viz and millions of lights and going around thinking that you're safe and not a nuisance to other road users.
I don't commute at the moment but I will be doing so soon. I won't be covered in lights, and the lights I do fit will be considerately adjusted

Lumen

WHIP IT! wrote: »

You seem to be purposely misinterpreting the second poster's comment here. I don't cycle but I am a motorist, work in the city centre and drive home late after dark every evening. The amount of cyclists I see who are "under-illuminated", I suppose we'll say, is incredible.

Alot of cyclists stick on a hi-vis jacket and think they're glowing - some of em are barely even reflective.... I can't remember being blinded by a cyclist's light too often but I have regularly had a bit of a "jump" when a badly-lit cyclist seems to appear out of nowhere.

Certainly, as far as this motorist is concerned - it's definitely a case of 'the more lights the better'.

By the same logic..since there are a lot of starving people in the world there is little harm in overeating.

You've admittedly never come across anyone cycling with blinding lights. I have. They are blinding. This is bad.

run_Forrest_run

while I'm out running (on footpaths) I've often met cyclists with those strong strobe type front lights, jesus they are bright, and another thing, get off the footpath! :mad:
BTW: I was wearing a high-vis vest for runners so I'm all for being seen in the dark.

Arthurdaly

My opinion is that anyone with these type of lights is well aware of what they are capable of. I currently run low power lights and am not actually aware of how many lumens they output. I would be surprised if they exceeded 100 lumens. I have no real need to upgrade as I commute on well lit roads in Dublin.

These high power lights are expensive and I would imagine that anyone investing would be more than aware of their capabilities and perhaps bought them for that very reason.

Whats the average lumens on a car lamp? 500 - 800 lumens?
Anything in excess of a cars output is excessive and probably a danger to the cyclist if anything.

If I was riding dark country roads I would probably want one of these high powered lights but i believe there are options to reduce the lumens just like dips on a car.

Beasty

Arthurdaly wrote: »

Whats the average lumens on a car lamp? 500 - 800 lumens?
Anything in excess of a cars output is excessive and probably a danger to the cyclist if anything.

A 65w light bulb puts out 1,000 lumens. It's not the number of lumens that matters, it's how they are focussed. A focussed but well positioned/directed bike light does not dazzle oncoming drivers, but does illuminate the road (particularly important for those of us who ride a lot in the dark on unlit country roads) and makes you very visible to other road users

C3PO

I suspect a lot of the guys upsetting people are mountain-bikers riding home from the trails! Some of the new head-mounted lights are incredibly bright (my new hope is rated at nearly 1500 lumens!) and very sharply focused. You really can't have too much light off-road but I think people forget to switch to lower output levels when they hit the public highways!

Tenzor07

RPL1 wrote: »

I suspect a lot of the guys upsetting people are mountain-bikers riding home from the trails! Some of the new head-mounted lights are incredibly bright (my new hope is rated at nearly 1500 lumens!) and very sharply focused. You really can't have too much light off-road but I think people forget to switch to lower output levels when they hit the public highways!

Your right there RL, I use a 200 Lumen front light switched to 30% brightness for the roads, people just forget to switch down to lower setting when not on the trails etc...

Captain Havoc

I have magic shines and just turn them a wee bit left when cycling on country roads. I use a standard torch strapped to my bike for city riding.

Victor

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

BTW: I was wearing a high-vis vest for runners so I'm all for being seen in the dark.

Hi-vis isn't particularly useful after dark - it needs to be reflective also, some active lighting may also be useful.

Del2005

Thanks for the replies.

Just met another one this evening on this evening. Suppose there are ignorant people on all modes of transport.

fixie fox

The issue of over-lighting of vehicles is serious for cyclists and motorcyclists. The more lighting they have the less obvious cyclists are. Some trucks are now lit up like Christmas trees and a cyclist would be 'invisible' in front of them. There seems to be no regulation or enforcement on this. Cyclists' lights just can't compete

Beasty

fixie fox wrote: »

Cyclists' lights just can't compete

I don't think it's a matter of competing. So long as everyone sticks to white on the front and red on the back (and makes sure the lights are not positioned in a way to dazzle oncoming traffic), then vehicles can see there is something coming and adjust if appropriate (such as making sure they do not overtake into the oncoming lane)

cyclopath2001

fixie fox wrote: »

The issue of over-lighting of vehicles is serious for cyclists and motorcyclists. The more lighting they have the less obvious cyclists are. Some trucks are now lit up like Christmas trees and a cyclist would be 'invisible' in front of them. There seems to be no regulation or enforcement on this. Cyclists' lights just can't compete

Apart from the one in twenty drivers driving on just one headlamp, my pet peev would be the ones with fog lamps on when it's not foggy, or just parking lights when they're actually driving.

On a bike, I think the needs of city cyclists on lit streets are quite different from those on unlit roads. The former just need the basic legal lights and some reflective strips to be seen, the latter need serious candlepower to pick out potholes.

There's still a lot of ninjas, plus others with poorly fitted lamps, sometimes attached to clothing or bags and not facing the right way to be effective, or with ancient batteries.

It's a mess out there.

Wishbone Ash

I have a 1500 lumen light. Much of my commute is on unlit outer suburban roads. My light has 3 settings - high, low, and flashing. I use it in the flashing mode to preserve the battery life. I try to keep it focused downwards as much as possible but when cycling at speed I need to raise it as it's utterly pointless illuminating the road directly in front and only seeing hazards when it's too late.

Work colleagues have commented on the brightness of my light and I've noticed many drivers refusing to dip their lights on long straights. I do my best to avoid inconviencing others but the constant low setting would just drain the battery too much and I feel that I have no choice but to use the flashing setting.

happytramp

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Work colleagues have commented on the brightness of my light and I've noticed many drivers refusing to dip their lights on long straights. I do my best to avoid inconviencing others but the constant low setting would just drain the battery too much and I feel that I have no choice but to use the flashing setting.

So, let me see, you have been told your lights are dangerous but some drivers don't dip their headlights so it doesn't matter? Also there could be an argument that preserving your or someone else's life is equally important at preserving the life of your lamp batteries.

DePurpereWolf

Car drivers commenting on bright cycling lights is a bit of the pot telling the kettle he is black.
I've been blasted by brights so often it's not funny. The worst is when the car has passed you, then it seems you're biking in the void.

This whole thing reminds me of old men shaking their fist at clouds.

monument

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

Car drivers commenting on bright cycling lights is a bit of the pot telling the kettle he is black.
I've been blasted by brights so often it's not funny. The worst is when the car has passed you, then it seems you're biking in the void.

This whole thing reminds me of old men shaking their fist at clouds.

That's more than a little unfair, and the then vs us point-of-view is unhelpful.

The motorists on the motoring section here also give out about poor driving. And just because some of one type of road user does something wrong, or breaks the law, it does not mean none of the same type of road user can't give out about others.

C3PO

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I do my best to avoid inconviencing others but the constant low setting would just drain the battery too much and I feel that I have no choice but to use the flashing setting.

Unless you're doing a massive commute I would be very surprised if you can drain your battery in one day on the low setting? Unless of course you just don't like charging the light every couple of days?

DePurpereWolf

monument wrote: »

That's more than a little unfair, and the then vs us point-of-view is unhelpful.

The motorists on the motoring section here also give out about poor driving. And just because some of one type of road user does something wrong, or breaks the law, it does not mean none of the same type of road user can't give out about others.

But you have to distinguish between real complaints and made up issues.
Yes, it is possible that the one cyclist uses a super bike-light with lots of lumens, and has it shine straight ahead of him that might have a nuisance to the driver. But I think it's a hyperbole that the driver almost swerved into the trees because of being blind.
Cyclist light are often a single focused beam. This means they're very bright, but also means that you can't continuously look into the light while in a car. So to me it sounds like an old men's ramblings.
It doesn't need to be a discussion. Yes, bright lights can be too bright. But given the amount of cyclists using these lights, it's just not an issue.

Zorba

happytramp wrote: »

So, let me see, you have been told your lights are dangerous but some drivers don't dip their headlights so it doesn't matter? Also there could be an argument that preserving your or someone else's life is equally important at preserving the life of your lamp batteries.

Who told him his lights are dangerous did i miss something in his post ?

ednwireland

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

Car drivers commenting on bright cycling lights is a bit of the pot telling the kettle he is black.
I've been blasted by brights so often it's not funny. The worst is when the car has passed you, then it seems you're biking in the void.

This whole thing reminds me of old men shaking their fist at clouds.

at least with my magicshines car drivers mostly dip their headlights

happytramp

Zorba wrote: »

Who told him his lights are dangerous did i miss something in his post ?

I assumed when he mentioned work collegues commenting on the brightness of his light it was in relation to the fact that it might be somewhat 'too' bright, but maybe I read that wrong.

Beasty

It was suggested that some of my lights were the brightest in the 2010 RAI - it does not mean they dazzle oncoming drivers - they just need to be set-up correctly

They will go 3 hours on the maximum setting, 10 hours on the intermediate one and 24 hours on the low setting. They are very bright (and expensive), but entirely appropriate for the type of roads I ride

Lumen

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

It doesn't need to be a discussion. Yes, bright lights can be too bright. But given the amount of cyclists using these lights, it's just not an issue.

It is an issue here, which is where it's being discussed. People come on to the cycling forum asking for light recommendations. One of the most popular choices last winter was the MagicShine, which is very, very bright.

Using a 1500 lumen light on flashing is complete madness.

Gavin

Lumen wrote: »

Using a 1500 lumen light on flashing is complete madness.

Was just about to post this. It is far too bright for flashing, totally crackers to leave it like that with oncoming cars. You should be able to recharge each night, or have spare batteries to swap out in-between journeys.

monument

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

Cyclist light are often a single focused beam. This means they're very bright, but also means that you can't continuously look into the light while in a car. So to me it sounds like an old men's ramblings.

Most likely yes for a light fixed correctly on a bike, but less so for a helmet/head mounted light the OP over in motors was describing. Any kind of strong helmet/helmet mounted lights are just a bad idea.

While cycling I've have a cyclist with a strong-ish helmet-mounted light keep looking at me for a few seconds -- it maybe was not blinding but kind of had the same effect full headlights directed right at you. Very distracting and could have been worse with stronger lights.

C3PO

monument wrote: »

Any kind of strong helmet/helmet mounted lights are just a bad idea.

Well actually for riding offroad they're almost essential - bar mounted lights point where the bars direct them which is not necessarily where you're actually going!

Having said that I agree that helmet mounted lights are not ideal on the road - it is very easy to blind oncoming traffic!

Beasty

monument wrote: »

Any kind of strong helmet/helmet mounted lights are just a bad idea.

I completely disagree. Decent helemt lights are invaluable on unlit roads, for both spotting potholes and alerting drivers to your presence. The motion and position of them makes it more obvious you are a cyclist. There is no need for them to be pointed straight ahead - like my main light I have mine pointing down and slightly towards the kerb. I also have a rear (red) light attached to it which is equally invaluable in making sure drivers coming up behind can clearly see you are a cyclist