Originally Posted by
PaulRivers
I find it nearly impossible to believe that a single car tail light is putting out 300 lumens, seems like by your estimation it's putting out more than 300 lumens - something I find even more impossible to believe. I used to ride with 200 lumens - it was a lot brighter than my car tail lights. If it's somehow putting out that kind of power, it's definitely doing something to make it non-blinding that bike lights are not doing.
Car lights don't exist in a magical separate reality, they use lights just like bike lights do. And modern bike lights don't have a problem putting out similar or occassionally greater power than car lights.
I believe the 300R puts out 200 lumens. Lux, I don't know.
What car lights put out depends on the car and the bulb (or now, LED). Without spending the $70 to get a copy of the SAE spec what I've been able to find is that there are minimum lumen levels but nothing that indicates maximum for cars (vehicles in general). So if you want to go buy the spec to verify this, knock yourself out.
I did go out and verify this against the tail lights on our car with the 300R right alongside of it at night. The 300R is maybe, as a point source, would seem to be about 20% brighter than diffused tail light but the overall effect is about the same as the much larger flashing tail light. In other words, it's not different by much and it's largely immaterial. incidentally, both car and 300R were flashing.
The points that needs to be made are threefold:
1. In practice, and verified with my bright lights, the 300R is no more intrusive than a bright car tail lights when viewed from a reasonable distance such as a car would see when approaching a bicycle so equipped from behind. I believe the video posted supports that point accurately. There is even less of a discrepancy when I take my 300R and place it near the tail lights on my SUV that has LEDs providing the illumination.
2. If you look at a 300R in close proximity (i.e. arm length), it is painful to look at. Noteworthy is that the same thing happens from the same distance with those LED tail lights. I would note that if a vehicle driver gets this close of a look at your 300R it's likely because you are going up and over his windshield and is not a useful case.
3. The only place this is an issue is on this forum and with a small number of individuals. When it becomes a big issue and it is such that it is deemed a hazard to transportation, then I'm sure we'll find regulations and statutes put in place to deal with it. When that happens, then it's worth the debate. Now, it's presupposing a problem that might never happen. Until then, if it bothers you and you think we all need to change our behavior, write your legislator.
Until then, if you don't like them, don't use them. If you are worried that it would be annoying to you driving a car, then don't drive at night. There are not statutes that prohibit it. Few cyclists have them. Even if a LOT of cyclists had them, there are far fewer cyclists on the road at night than vehicles and most police are probably grateful they don't have to go out and pick up run over cyclists. "Annoying" doesn't mean anything and is highly subjective to the point of being useless. So it's a waste of time.
If you want annoying, try getting arrested for vehicular manslaughter or sued for wrongful death after you run over a cyclist you didn't see. Personally, as a vehicle driver, I'd find that "annoying" and would prefer that all cyclists have lights as bright as a 300R so they are plainly visible when riding at night.
J.