Depends .. Schmidt has a 5 year warrantee.. Shimano , 1.( your typical component on bike is that)
Depends .. Schmidt has a 5 year warrantee.. Shimano , 1.( your typical component on bike is that)
Dynohubs changed my life man..... *tears of joy*
I have a shimano dyno with about 6500 hard ,off road/ loaded touring/commuting miles in the last year on my fargo and its going strong.
And if it stopped working tomorrow , I'd buy anoher one (or maybe upgrade to a son lol)
I've been running my Shimano 3n71 for 6 years now, about 6500 miles or so. I haven't even had it overhauled. Maybe I'll have that done over the holidays. I would recommend replacing the tail light wiring every year if your doing a lot of riding; it's the one part that can fail plus it's not noticeable when it does - mostly due to wire movement at the connections or coming loose at a mounting point such as inside your fender. I also use a secondary battery operated tail light in poor conditions such as fog, rain, or snow (both the dyno powered and the battery powered tail lights have built-in reflectors).
I have the Shimano Afline Dynohub (dsh501) and it has about 10,000 miles on it. Commuting, touring, singletrack and some epic 55 mph downhill runs in Colorado. Recently (last 500-1000 miles), it developed a pretty strong humming noise when I get to about 25 mph but it still works. The right cone nut came poorly adjusted from the factory/wheelbuilder and fouled out at about mile 5,000. I replaced it, which was quite difficult. No shop was able to order it locally, I resorted to importing it from the UK.
Also, overhauling the disc side bearing is a real PITA. It is much better sealed than the right side. I've changed the balls/grease 2x since I got it about 2 years ago. The hub has survived being submerged in FL swamp water and mountain stream water. It's not perfect but for most riders who aren't too demanding it's priced just right. I will probably get a SON hub in the future if/when this one kicks the bucket. Loose ball bearings are tiring to maintain.
http://www.bikequarterly.com/images/...Resistance.pdf. Among other things, it shows good dynohubs have less than 1 W draw when not running the lights. Google a bit more and you'll likely find that good dynohubs have less rolling resistance, with the lights off, than not-so-good hubs. I.e., there's no practical downside to rolling resistance from a dynohub.
The electrical Output is nominally 3 watts, 6 volts..
light for bikes have long been on this standard.. when bulbs were used
the 3w load was split, 2.4 for the front, 0.6 for the rear..
Last edited by fietsbob; 12-16-13 at 03:13 PM.
but as a human mass of muscle you put out several hundred watts.
not including the freebies, going down hill ..
I can't answer for Josh. I'd like to hear his response.
Myself, it depends on where you're coming from. I own a 2009 Schmidt Edelux and a 2013 B&M Luxos-U. Both are the high-end light for their respective model years.
If you're coming from another high-end dynamo headlight, it's not worth upgrading at this time. If you're coming from a low to mid-range LED dynamo light (10-40 lux) it's certainly worth it, and if you're coming from an old halogen one, what the hell are you waiting for?
In a nutshell, in the five years separating my lights, there hasn't been significant improvement in the amount of light that high-end dyno headlights produce.
The difference between the Edelux and the Luxos are that the Luxos steals some photons from the central beam and spreads them into a wider pattern. Over 15 mph, I prefer my Edelux--it has better "throw". Under 15 mph I prefer my Luxos, especially when slowly picking my way through icy ruts and semi-plowed streets. It's also far easier to wipe collected snow off the lens of the Luxos--there's no bezel ring to trap the snow.
The Luxos also has a nice daytime running light mode, and the U model uses a battery for the standlight instead of a capacitor, and offers USB charging at the handlebar.
They're both fine lights, I recommend them both, if you choose the right one for your circumstances. If you have one, it's not worth "upgrading" to the other.
How do you get a decent lighting system if you only have 3 watts to deal with? I run 5 watts just on my tail, and I certainly would not be willing to reduce that. Even with an efficient shaped beam I'd think you'd want at least 3 watts up front as well. My current light draws 8.5 watts, I imagine a shaped beam could get that down to 5 and still seem reasonable, but I'd think 10 watts would be a minimal amount of light I'd want to commute with in total.
I'm not trying to diss dynos. I'm getting involved with the discussion because I'm interested. Just not sure if I'm interested enough to drop $250+ and build a wheel in the middle of the winter, rather than just continue to use the $30 light that I'm reasonably happy with now.
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
And 10 watts of light is going to use about 20 watts at the wheel- dynamo's aren't very efficient. That's about a fifth of your total output when cruising along at 15 KPH. It's gonna feel like pedaling through mud.
To your wattage question, I own a long list of lights, from very expensive (Seca 1400), to middling expensive (2 Dinotte 400L's), to cheap (a Dinotte 200l AA), and a Lumotec Cyo dynamo light.
The weird thing is, on my road bike I put 2 Dinotte 400L's on it, so 800 lumens total. The difference between low, medium, and high power is doubling the lumen output at each stage. But one of the weirdnesses of light is that turning up the power only gives me a perceived increase of about 10% more light. Believe me, I tried it again and again and again, and I just couldn't believe it - making the light twice as bright only helped a very little bit.
The shaped beam on a dynamo doesn't *just* avoid wasting light off to the sides. One of the problems with my big battery lights is that you up the power, then your adjust adjust to more light, losing some of the effect. When I moved to a dynamo light, one of the advantages was that I could still see off the the sides much like I could when the light was off. If I have my dynamo light I can see everything around me just like as if I didn't have the light on, but I can also see better in front of me where the light is actually hitting. (Note: This is also likely because I live in the city where there's some peripheral light, if you lived in the country things might be different)
You mentioned in another thread that you just bought and returned a Phillips Saferide, other than the abysmally crappy battery life, how did you like the light from the light itself for riding? A dynamo light will be similar to that (they also make the Saferide in a dynamo version).
first off I must apologize, with the up coming holidays I haven't had a chance to follow the board and this thread . I also got my winter tires in the mail and had to get them on for the weather we've been having. thanks for all the info. I should have included a little info about my plans. My commuter / tourer has about 9000 hard miles on the current rear wheel and unknown miles [more] on front. I commute 24+ miles round trip daily year round and need lights every morning , early mornings and afternoons when inclement weather.
I was considering a new bike, but I really love my poprad, so I've been collecting parts to replace the drive train , and its time to do the wheels. I'm planning on tearing the bike down in the spring and rebuilding , possibly changing out the fork and installing a disk brake.
So thats where I'm at. Again, thanks for all the info, a lot to ponder over the cold winter months.
If you're using watts to refer to light output, then I'm guessing you're using incandescents of some sort? (Halogens are also incandescent.) Remember that incandesents are very, very, inefficient. It helps to think of them as heaters that give off light as a waste product. Most of the power consumption goes into heating the filament, in much the same way as tube amps use most of their power to heat the tubes.
My first real light was a 10-watt NiteRider TrailRat halogen. Its light output was roughly equivalent to the pair of 200-lumen DiNotte 200-L-AA lights I replaced it with. They draw less than three watts each.
The current crop of LEDs are very efficient. Both my dynamo lights are easily 2x to 3x brighter than that pair of 200-lumen DiNottes, so, their 2.4 watts of power consumption is producing light output easily in excess of a 10 watt halogen--at least judging by my old eyes and memory.
The German lights all rate their output in lux, which is a measure of how much light actually falls on a specific target at a specific distance. It's a much better comparison than lumens, which is a raw measure of light output, not necessarily what ends up on the road.
Same goes for taillights, BTW. The pair of LEDs in my B&M Toplight Line Brake Plus draw a half-watt together, but are easily visible in daytime. This past summer I chased a bike on a sunny day to find out what taillight he was using in the daytime--a B&M Toplight Line Brake Plus. That's why I bought one.
IMHO, the problem is the ISO setting he uses, 3200. Higher ISO settings reduce the contrast between light and dim areas, bringing up the dimmer areas to meet the brighter ones. You can't make the fully-exposed areas any brighter, so you bring up the dimmer ones, which effectively, is reducing the contrast between them. (EDIT: This is why even after "darkening" his photos due to customer complaints, Peter's photos are still a long way off from reality. He needs to re-shoot them using a lower ISO setting.)
I used to shoot a lot of existing light photos back in the day when we used silver instead of silicon, but the same principles apply. I found an ISO of about 800 seemed to come closest to what I saw with my eyes. To this day, I still use ISO 800 when I shoot existing light.
Clicky to embiggen (Caution mobile users: 2MB file.)
Last edited by tsl; 12-17-13 at 08:02 PM.
Touring bike has a first-generation Schmidt SON dynohub, commuter has a Sanyo, no noticeable difference in light performance if I swap wheels.
The Luxos U has a wider beam pattern, especially at lower speeds -- its beam pattern changes with speed, accessory flood light LEDs on the sides that come on at lower speeds. I don't have the facilities to do a scientific test, but in use, it feels like the Luxos should be significantly more visible to cross-traffic at intersections, as well as being more visible when stopped.
Luxos U has slightly higher total output, not enough to be worth upgrading from one to the other, but double or better what older LED dynamo headlights put out.
Luxos U has a battery-backed standlight instead of capacitor, so it holds a standlight charge longer (over the weekend or longer) and can also run all output on high-power mode, 90 lux vs. 70 if I remember correctly.
Considering the Luxos U costs less than I'd spend on gas for a month of commuting by car, I can't see any reason not to buy the best dynamo headlight on the market. I think that's the Luxos U at the moment, but the Philips Saferide is still right up there.
Philips SafeRide Bicycle Headlight Beam Pattern by joshua_putnam, on Flickr
And here's a different view of the Saferide,
Headlight Beam Pattern, Philips Saferide by joshua_putnam, on Flickr