https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 12:20:09 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db

<https://bikerumor.com/byb-focus-5000lm-bike-light/>

The article claims 5,000 lumens output with 3 LEDs or 1,666 lumens per
LED. The theoretical maximum efficacy for an LED is 260-300
lumens/watt. Assuming they have delivered the holy grail of lighting:
<https://phys.org/news/2010-08-white-super-high-luminous-efficacy.html>
that power required to light one of the 3 LED's would be:
1666 lumens / 275 lumens/watt = 6 watts per LED

There's no detail on the packaging, but my guess(tm) is they crammed
two 18650 LiIon cells into the package which are each rated at 2500
ma-hrs. Therefore, running at full blast, and theoretical maximum
values, this headlight will deliver:
(3.7volts * 5Amp-hrs) / (3 * 6 watts) = 1.03 hrs runtime

More realistically, including not discharging the batteries below 20%
charge:
1666 lumens / 120 lumens/watt = 13.9 watts/LED
13.9 watts/LED * 3 LED's = 41.7 watts
(3.7v * 5Amp-hrs * 0.8) / 41.7 watts = 0.35 hrs runtime
That also assumes that the 5000 lumens figure is accurate, which I
doubt, and that the package will fit 2x 18650 cells, which is
currently unknown. Therefore you can blind oncoming traffic for about
20 minutes before this headlight runs out of steam.

Incidentally, the "brightness" of an LED is not measured in lumens.
The correct measure is candelas or lux:
<https://hilclare.com/how-is-the-brightness-of-a-light-measured/>
A headlight, which focuses its light into an area the size of the
oncoming drivers head is far "brighter" than a headlight that spreads
the light all over the road, even though both can have the same
luminous flux (lumens).

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

>
Whoever invents a lightweight battery will be the richest man in the world.
>
Andre Jute
You didn't hear it here first.

On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 3:13:58 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >
> Whoever invents a lightweight battery will be the richest man in the world.
> >
> Andre Jute
> You didn't hear it here first.

I'm told that there are some very light almost instant charge batteries coming to market soon. Although I can't really believe in 5 minutes to full charge with a 100 kWhs. That sounds to me like a large capacitor which could be possible using Graphene which is superlight as well.

On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>

Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
is by definition unsafe.

More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
attention" with a headlight?

We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
He was running a daytime running light.

Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
just fine without his headlight.

Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
"Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 3/31/2022 6:42 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>
>
> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to
> the natural law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding
> than the current maximum is by definition unsafe.
>
> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a
> driver's attention" with a headlight?
>
> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of
> rural area and saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he
> was in the opposite lane. He was running a daytime running
> light.
>
> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would
> have seen him just fine without his headlight.
>
> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad
> they don't have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool
> finishing touch. "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>

Then there's the 'moth effect' in which automobile pilots
ram straight into parked State Patrol cruisers with their
voluminous bright light banks flashing:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/illinois-state-troopers-vehicle-hit-by-alleged-drunk-driver-after-traffic-stop

Sadly, not an rare event.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>
>
>Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>is by definition unsafe.
>
>More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>attention" with a headlight?
>
>We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>He was running a daytime running light.
>
>Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>just fine without his headlight.
>
>Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>"Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"

I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
then the other two.

While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>
>>
>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>> is by definition unsafe.
>>
>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>> attention" with a headlight?
>>
>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>
>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>> just fine without his headlight.
>>
>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>
> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
> then the other two.
>
> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.

I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
make a cyclist visible from farther away.

But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
doesn't need a light to make that happen.

The one possible exception might be pea soup fog. I have very little
experience riding in dense fog. But that's not what these lights are
advertised for. They're advertised as if one dare not ride without them
even in the best conditions.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>
>>>
>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>
>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>
>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>
>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>
>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>
>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>> then the other two.
>>
>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>
>I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>
>But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>
Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
bicycle but in heavy traffic?

>The one possible exception might be pea soup fog. I have very little
>experience riding in dense fog. But that's not what these lights are
>advertised for. They're advertised as if one dare not ride without them
>even in the best conditions.

Which wasn't my point ):-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 12:29:40 AM UTC+1, cycl...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 3:13:58 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >
> > Whoever invents a lightweight battery will be the richest man in the world.
> > >
> > Andre Jute
> > You didn't hear it here first.
> I'm told that there are some very light almost instant charge batteries coming to market soon. Although I can't really believe in 5 minutes to full charge with a 100 kWhs. That sounds to me like a large capacitor which could be possible using Graphene which is superlight as well.
>
Well, I hope the inventor gets rich. The biggest pain in the arse about the sort of electric motor that keeps me cycling in my very extended sunset years is not the weight of the motor but the weight of a sensible battery.

As for lamps, even a roadie can fit a hub dynamo and a B&M Cyo lamp, and have a lamp as good as those on the VW Beetle back in the 6V days, nearly as good as my first road legal Porsche 356 (road-legal as opposed to racing-no-lamp or rallying-Cibie-d-up-to-burn-a-hole-in-hell). Those filament lamps weren't brill even in their 12V versions, but we got by.
***
I see Franki-boy is at his danger-danger rants again. Yo, Franki-boy, have some heartburn: I never switch my Cyo off, day or night, that's the main lamp, not the daylight running lamps which I don't have. What's the point of switching the lamps off when the LEDs have an expected life span of 50,000 hours? There's no engineering or economic justification for it except your petty tyrant's desire to regiment everyone to your joylessly arid outlook on life. Furthermore, I have a good deal of experience in cars with daylight running lamps, since I gave my wife a Volvo Estate when our child was born to keep it safe. I can probably remember all the occasions when the Volvo's daylight running lamps approaching at speed and noticed by someone in my way very likely saved them and me a disturbance in our progress. See, Franki-boy, my life is clearly more valuable than yours, and you know it and admit it by these pinchpenny strictures against saving "only" 300 lives of American cyclists by enforcing helmet wear, or your equally idiotic instinctual reaction against daylight running lamps making cyclists safer out to 300 yards rather than your worthless 50 yards, which is sure to get someone killed who would have lived if only a motorist had seen him earlier. WTF is it with you, Krygowski? Do you really hate other cyclists so much that to prove your point you'll let them be killed unnecessarily? Or are you just a psychopath unable to grasp the consequences of your actions? You should get psychiatric help.

***
Frank-boy, the perfect lowest common denominator asshole. would have made an outstanding "Block Warden" in Germany before World War 2, keeping people down, lopping off the tall poppies for fear that they would see the masters of the universe hurtling towards disaster, and perhaps even, oh horrors!, speak an unapproved thought, or enjoy themselves, streng verboten activities.

Andre Jute
Riding in the Donkey Party Clown Car can kill you before your time.

On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 7:06:32 AM UTC-4, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 12:29:40 AM UTC+1, cycl...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 3:13:58 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > > >
> > > Whoever invents a lightweight battery will be the richest man in the world.
> > > >
> > > Andre Jute
> > > You didn't hear it here first.
> > I'm told that there are some very light almost instant charge batteries coming to market soon. Although I can't really believe in 5 minutes to full charge with a 100 kWhs. That sounds to me like a large capacitor which could be possible using Graphene which is superlight as well.
> >
> Well, I hope the inventor gets rich. The biggest pain in the arse about the sort of electric motor that keeps me cycling in my very extended sunset years is not the weight of the motor but the weight of a sensible battery.
>
> As for lamps, even a roadie can fit a hub dynamo and a B&M Cyo lamp, and have a lamp as good as those on the VW Beetle back in the 6V days, nearly as good as my first road legal Porsche 356 (road-legal as opposed to racing-no-lamp or rallying-Cibie-d-up-to-burn-a-hole-in-hell). Those filament lamps weren't brill even in their 12V versions, but we got by.
> ***
> I see Franki-boy is at his danger-danger rants again. Yo, Franki-boy, have some heartburn: I never switch my Cyo off, day or night, that's the main lamp, not the daylight running lamps which I don't have. What's the point of switching the lamps off when the LEDs have an expected life span of 50,000 hours? There's no engineering or economic justification for it except your petty tyrant's desire to regiment everyone to your joylessly arid outlook on life. Furthermore, I have a good deal of experience in cars with daylight running lamps, since I gave my wife a Volvo Estate when our child was born to keep it safe. I can probably remember all the occasions when the Volvo's daylight running lamps approaching at speed and noticed by someone in my way very likely saved them and me a disturbance in our progress. See, Franki-boy, my life is clearly more valuable than yours, and you know it and admit it by these pinchpenny strictures against saving "only" 300 lives of American cyclists by enforcing helmet wear, or your equally idiotic instinctual reaction against daylight running lamps making cyclists safer out to 300 yards rather than your worthless 50 yards, which is sure to get someone killed who would have lived if only a motorist had seen him earlier. WTF is it with you, Krygowski? Do you really hate other cyclists so much that to prove your point you'll let them be killed unnecessarily? Or are you just a psychopath unable to grasp the consequences of your actions? You should get psychiatric help.
>
> ***
> Frank-boy, the perfect lowest common denominator asshole. would have made an outstanding "Block Warden" in Germany before World War 2, keeping people down, lopping off the tall poppies for fear that they would see the masters of the universe hurtling towards disaster, and perhaps even, oh horrors!, speak an unapproved thought, or enjoy themselves, streng verboten activities.
>
> Andre Jute
> Riding in the Donkey Party Clown Car can kill you before your time.

Funny how this asshole jute accuses Frank of being a bully yet constantly launches unprovoked invective along with his Dumb twin kunich.

On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 8:46:36 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
> >
> Then there's the 'moth effect' in which automobile pilots
> ram straight into parked State Patrol cruisers with their
> voluminous bright light banks flashing:
>

As one of my early racing mentors told me decades ago when I was learning cornering skills, "focus on where you _want_ to go. If your attention is diverted to something you don't want to hit, you're probably going to hit it." That advice has helped immensely in mtb racing.

I remember reading an article years ago about a motorcycle that rear-ended a bicycle in california on an uphill winding road. I'm surprised I was able to scrounge it off the web so quickly.
https://road.cc/content/news/82251-video-british-cyclist-rear-ended-motorbike-california-amazingly-no-bones-broken

They were calling it "target fixation" then.

On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>
>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>
>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>
>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>
>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>
>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>> then the other two.
>>>
>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>
>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>
>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>
> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
> bicycle but in heavy traffic?

In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
or no.

In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>>
>>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>>
>>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>>
>>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>>> then the other two.
>>>>
>>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>>
>>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>>
>>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>>
>> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
>> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
>> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
>> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
>> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
>
> In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
> traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
> the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
> or no.
>
> In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
> but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
> opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.
>
>
Personally I’d say it’s more dappled sunlight/low sun type days, where
lights can help pick out folks.

But you certainly don’t need 5000 lumen lights for that! Or to be honest
need any lights.

But it’s one of the things I do, on the Commute and Gravel bike is run
lights, MTB don’t bother rear light is invisible under mud anyway, and
frankly I’m visible anyway.

But since It costs nothing to run the lights on the others I do, but this
is want rather than need.

Roger Merriman.

On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:58:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>>
>>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>>
>>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>>
>>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>>> then the other two.
>>>>
>>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>>
>>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>>
>>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>>
>> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
>> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
>> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
>> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
>> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
>
>In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
>traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
>the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
>or no.
>
>In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
>but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
>opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.

Well, on the main highway that I rode on here if you were in the outer
lane, which would be your Right lane and my Left lane you would be in
the midst of a long line - I once saw a line 1 km long - of heavy
trucks thundering along at about 90 kmh :-) Try taking the center of
that lane.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 21:04:21 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

>Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>>>> then the other two.
>>>>>
>>>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>>>
>>>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>>>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>>>
>>>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>>>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>>>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>>>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>>>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>>>
>>> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
>>> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
>>> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
>>> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
>>> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
>>
>> In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
>> traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
>> the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
>> or no.
>>
>> In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
>> but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
>> opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.
>>
>>
>Personally I’d say it’s more dappled sunlight/low sun type days, where
>lights can help pick out folks.
>
>But you certainly don’t need 5000 lumen lights for that! Or to be honest
>need any lights.
>
>But it’s one of the things I do, on the Commute and Gravel bike is run
>lights, MTB don’t bother rear light is invisible under mud anyway, and
>frankly I’m visible anyway.
>
>But since It costs nothing to run the lights on the others I do, but this
>is want rather than need.
>
>Roger Merriman.

I ran both a white front light and a red tail light as I reckoned it
probably make me more visible to others and it didn't cost much, so
why not.

I would add that the most visible cyclist I ever saw was a bloke
wearing bright orange knee socks. I could easily see him at a measured
1 km distance. Orange things going up and down, up and down.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 2:04:24 PM UTC-7, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
> >>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
> >>>>> is by definition unsafe.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
> >>>>> attention" with a headlight?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
> >>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
> >>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
> >>>>> just fine without his headlight.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
> >>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
> >>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
> >>>>
> >>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
> >>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
> >>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
> >>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
> >>>> then the other two.
> >>>>
> >>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
> >>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
> >>>
> >>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
> >>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
> >>>
> >>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
> >>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
> >>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
> >>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
> >>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
> >>>
> >> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
> >> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
> >> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
> >> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
> >> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
> >
> > In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
> > traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
> > the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
> > or no.
> >
> > In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
> > but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
> > opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.
> >
> >
> Personally I’d say it’s more dappled sunlight/low sun type days, where
> lights can help pick out folks.
>
> But you certainly don’t need 5000 lumen lights for that! Or to be honest
> need any lights.
>
> But it’s one of the things I do, on the Commute and Gravel bike is run
> lights, MTB don’t bother rear light is invisible under mud anyway, and
> frankly I’m visible anyway.
>
> But since It costs nothing to run the lights on the others I do, but this
> is want rather than need.

I did a parts pickup ride the other day. I had to be at the San Francisco Ferry Building at 8:00. I had forgotten to pick up the money for the parts so I had to leave for the bank at 7:00 and sunrise was 7:30. It was light enough to ride and I wear bright clothing so I felt safe enough but it probably wasn't a good thing to do. I then rode up to BART and was at the Ferry Building at 7:45. It could be dead midnight on a dark night and it would be safe to get from Embarcadero station to the Ferry building because it is all on sidewalks (or whatever the technical term is for 30 foot wide sidewalks where bikes and pedestrians mix.) and the Embarcadero is both well lighted and signal controlled.

On 4/1/2022 6:49 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 2:04:24 PM UTC-7, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>>>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>>>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>>>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>>>>> then the other two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>>>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>>>>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>>>>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>>>>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>>>>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>>>>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
>>>> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
>>>> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
>>>> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
>>>> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
>>>
>>> In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
>>> traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
>>> the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
>>> or no.
>>>
>>> In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
>>> but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
>>> opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.
>>>
>>>
>> Personally I’d say it’s more dappled sunlight/low sun type days, where
>> lights can help pick out folks.
>>
>> But you certainly don’t need 5000 lumen lights for that! Or to be honest
>> need any lights.
>>
>> But it’s one of the things I do, on the Commute and Gravel bike is run
>> lights, MTB don’t bother rear light is invisible under mud anyway, and
>> frankly I’m visible anyway.
>>
>> But since It costs nothing to run the lights on the others I do, but this
>> is want rather than need.
>
> I did a parts pickup ride the other day. I had to be at the San Francisco Ferry Building at 8:00. I had forgotten to pick up the money for the parts so I had to leave for the bank at 7:00 and sunrise was 7:30. It was light enough to ride and I wear bright clothing so I felt safe enough but it probably wasn't a good thing to do. I then rode up to BART and was at the Ferry Building at 7:45. It could be dead midnight on a dark night and it would be safe to get from Embarcadero station to the Ferry building because it is all on sidewalks (or whatever the technical term is for 30 foot wide sidewalks where bikes and pedestrians mix.) and the Embarcadero is both well lighted and signal controlled.
>

Sunrise at 7:30?

Today in Oakland 94621, sunrise is 6:55am. Civil Daylight
starts at 6:28am.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 21:04:21 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
>
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>>>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>>>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>>>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>>>>> then the other two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>>>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>>>>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>>>>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>>>>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>>>>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>>>>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
>>>> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
>>>> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
>>>> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
>>>> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
>>>
>>> In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
>>> traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
>>> the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
>>> or no.
>>>
>>> In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
>>> but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
>>> opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.
>>>
>>>
>> Personally I’d say it’s more dappled sunlight/low sun type days, where
>> lights can help pick out folks.
>>
>> But you certainly don’t need 5000 lumen lights for that! Or to be honest
>> need any lights.
>>
>> But it’s one of the things I do, on the Commute and Gravel bike is run
>> lights, MTB don’t bother rear light is invisible under mud anyway, and
>> frankly I’m visible anyway.
>>
>> But since It costs nothing to run the lights on the others I do, but this
>> is want rather than need.
>>
>> Roger Merriman.
>
> I ran both a white front light and a red tail light as I reckoned it
> probably make me more visible to others and it didn't cost much, so
> why not.
>
> I would add that the most visible cyclist I ever saw was a bloke
> wearing bright orange knee socks. I could easily see him at a measured
> 1 km distance. Orange things going up and down, up and down.
>
>
Used to occasionally see a guy in the Royal Parks, on a bike no lights but
covered in reflective, so as soon as my lights hit him, he glowed!

Roger Merriman

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 12:57:27 AM UTC+1, Roger Merriman wrote:

> >
> Used to occasionally see a guy in the Royal Parks, on a bike no lights but
> covered in reflective, so as soon as my lights hit him, he glowed!
>
> Roger Merman
>
Years ago I saw a bike ridden by a Danish tourer. It was a sort of cream color and the whole thing glowed in and out of sunshine under overhanging trees. The owner said the makers called it "Buttermilk" and the paint had micro balls of reflective plastic in it. I already knew about the makers, Biomega, a bunch of trendies with the nous to engage leading industrial designers. Today their bikes do not seem so innovative but twenty-odd years ago they had a wonderful S-shaped bike designed for them by Marc Newson, almost entirely consisting of two hollow half-shells of foamed aluminium glued together; there was also a carbon fibre version. See:
https://marc-newson.com/mn-bicycles/
The only reason I didn't buy one of the S-shaped bikes was that a bike without mudguards is hardly practical in a place as wet as Ireland.
>
Andre Jute
Now let us praise great men. --- Ecclesiastes
>

On 4/1/2022 11:17 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 12:57:27 AM UTC+1, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
>>>
>> Used to occasionally see a guy in the Royal Parks, on a bike no lights but
>> covered in reflective, so as soon as my lights hit him, he glowed!
>>
>> Roger Merman
>>
> Years ago I saw a bike ridden by a Danish tourer. It was a sort of cream color and the whole thing glowed in and out of sunshine under overhanging trees. The owner said the makers called it "Buttermilk" and the paint had micro balls of reflective plastic in it. I already knew about the makers, Biomega, a bunch of trendies with the nous to engage leading industrial designers. Today their bikes do not seem so innovative but twenty-odd years ago they had a wonderful S-shaped bike designed for them by Marc Newson, almost entirely consisting of two hollow half-shells of foamed aluminium glued together; there was also a carbon fibre version. See:
> https://marc-newson.com/mn-bicycles/
> The only reason I didn't buy one of the S-shaped bikes was that a bike without mudguards is hardly practical in a place as wet as Ireland.
>>
> Andre Jute
> Now let us praise great men. --- Ecclesiastes
>>

Same paint used for highway signs.

https://www.coatingpaint.com/light-reflective-paint/

p.s. Bicycle design, 1987:
http://classiccycleus.com/home/kirk-magnesium/

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 8:31:49 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>
> p.s. Bicycle design, 1987:
> http://classiccycleus.com/home/kirk-magnesium/
> --

Dig those white Modolos.

On 4/2/2022 7:43 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 8:31:49 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> p.s. Bicycle design, 1987:
>> http://classiccycleus.com/home/kirk-magnesium/
>> --
>
> Dig those white Modolos.
>

White Modolos are easily found. That is the La Vie Claire
set which I agree is beautifully done.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 9:13:16 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/2/2022 7:43 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 8:31:49 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
> >>
> >> p.s. Bicycle design, 1987:
> >> http://classiccycleus.com/home/kirk-magnesium/
> >> --
> >
> > Dig those white Modolos.
> >
> White Modolos are easily found. That is the La Vie Claire
> set which I agree is beautifully done.
> --

I just swooned....
https://velobase.com/ViewComponent.aspx?ID=06e2c9d9-3b4e-477d-83a2-2aa5374c7ada

On 4/1/2022 7:15 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:58:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/31/2022 11:06 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 22:02:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2022 9:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:42:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/2022 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> https://email.cloud.secureclick.net/c/7206?id=840426.1803.1.91223e80d65643150b9428e5a55ff2db
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now we'll all have to throw out all our headlights! Due to the natural
>>>>>> law of Safety Inflation, anything less blinding than the current maximum
>>>>>> is by definition unsafe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More seriously: What's all the paranoia about "getting a driver's
>>>>>> attention" with a headlight?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We were on a minor state highway last week in a sort of rural area and
>>>>>> saw a cyclist coming toward us. Of course he was in the opposite lane.
>>>>>> He was running a daytime running light.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?? There were no intersections. And in any case I would have seen him
>>>>>> just fine without his headlight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet another "SAFETY!!" product that nobody needs. Too bad they don't
>>>>>> have it activated by an iPhone app, for that cool finishing touch.
>>>>>> "Siri! Blind that oncoming driver!"
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to argue a bit as the other day we met three girls on bicycles.
>>>>> It was a sort of overcast, rainy, day although it wasn't "coming down"
>>>>> just then and one of the girls had a "head light" on her bike and it
>>>>> did make her more noticeable from a distance -say 2 - 300 meters -
>>>>> then the other two.
>>>>>
>>>>> While I agree that they probably aren't a necessity I would say that
>>>>> in poor visibility conditions they are a benefit.
>>>>
>>>> I will admit that in some conditions, having a daytime running light can
>>>> make a cyclist visible from farther away.
>>>>
>>>> But I'll also note that I've never, ever seen a situation where a DRL
>>>> made a _practical_ difference. I'm referring to taillights as well as
>>>> headlights. Specifically, why does one need to see an oncoming bicyclist
>>>> 300 meters away? It's sufficient to see him when he's 50 meters away. He
>>>> doesn't need a light to make that happen.
>>>>
>>> Well, maybe on your roads, but here I would normally ride on 4 - 6
>>> lane highways with auto traffic at, usually, over 100 km/h. I'm not
>>> sure that seeing someone 50m away in 100+ kph traffic is sufficient.
>>> Agreed that it is likely sufficient if it is a lone car and a lone
>>> bicycle but in heavy traffic?
>>
>> In my experience, only a tiny number of cyclists ride among 100kph heavy
>> traffic. I've done it, but not often. To do it safely, I had to be in
>> the middle of the right lane. That's a very visible position, taillight
>> or no.
>>
>> In daylight, opposite direction motorists might have seen a headlight,
>> but they are of ~zero concern. Following motorists were waiting for an
>> opportunity to pass, usually behind another car also waiting to pass.
>
> Well, on the main highway that I rode on here if you were in the outer
> lane, which would be your Right lane and my Left lane you would be in
> the midst of a long line - I once saw a line 1 km long - of heavy
> trucks thundering along at about 90 kmh :-) Try taking the center of
> that lane.

Like this?
https://cyclingmagazine.ca/sections/news/one-cyclist-stopped-an-entire-trucker-convoy-in-washington-d-c/

OK, the trucks are not at 90 kph. But I've ridden highways with big
trucks doing that speed. I did it by taking the lane. They waited behind
until it was safe to pass using the next lane.

If the lane is too narrow to safely share, taking the lane is the safest
way to ride. What's the alternative? Sneaking along at the edge of the
asphalt with huge trucks brushing your elbow? No thanks.

--
- Frank Krygowski