2_i 

There is no practically detectable difference when activating a Cyo with a Schmidt dynohub. Since Cyo consumes less electrical energy than Lumotec, there should be principally less difference with Cyo than Lumotec. An interesting issue, that I still plan to explore, is whether there is a detectable advantage of Cyo over Lumotec, regarding the mechanical resistance for the light on, when using a bottle dynamo.

PaulRivers

???

I don't understand what you mean by the Cyo vs the Lumotec - the Cyo *is* made by Lumotec. What's the second light you're comparing it to?

I used a Cyo with an Alfine hub on a 2 day, 70 mile trip. You cannot tell the difference while pedalling between having the light on and off. I did feel, after a while, like it *might* be a tiny bit easier to pedal with the light off. Though whether that's my imagination is hard to say...

Commando303

So, technically, what allows a Cyo to be twice as bright as a Lumotec, when both are being powered by the same 6V/3W generator...?

As I understand, the Lumotec and Cyo both are made by Busch and Müller. The Lumotec is either a round or an oval light, with an output of 17 lux.

Thanks.

SlowRoller

By 'Lumotec' do you mean the halogen light? The Cyo is an LED-based light.

interested

Efficiency. The new 1 Watt LED is at least 3 times as good to convert current into light as the old Halogen HS3 bulb. The newest hub generators from SON or Shimano (DH-3N80) also delivers more current (around 650 mAh) than the old generators (350-550 mAh). There a no over voltage protection in these hubs, so they may deliver more than 6V/3W, it is now up to the lights to survive what they are being fed, either by having protection circuits or just being able to deliver more light when the current increases. So all in all will the IQ Cyo deliver around 70-75 lux at full speed with these hubs, even though it is only rated at 60 lux.


There is a lot of confusion on this; "Lumotec" is is a "family" name, like "IQ", so both the old round halogen light (now called Basic) and the new Cyo are both member of this family, eg. B&M, "Lumotec Basic" and " Lumotec IQ Cyo". The oval shaped halogen light is called "Lumotec Oval", and the "Lumotech Fly" (halogen) and "Lumotec IQ Fly" (LED).
My oldest is B&M catalog is from 2007, but I am sure that the round "Lumotec Basic" wasn't called that several years ago, but just "Lumotec", which makes sense when it was the only front light they carried.

I am sure a biologist could give the right taxonomic terms, but I am confident that "Lumotec" went from being a name of a specific model to a name of a family of dynamo lights when B&M started to carry many different models of dynamo lights. So this renaming is probably the cause of confusion.

--
Regards

hartsu

All current Bumm dynamo headlights is named " Lumotec ".

LUMOTEC IQ Cyo (LED)
LUMOTEC IQ Fly (LED)
D-LUMOTEC topal (LED)
D-LUMOTEC oval (LED)
LUMOTEC Fly (halogen)
LUMOTEC Retro (halogen)
LUMOTEC topal (halogen)
LUMOTEC oval (halogen)
LUMOTEC round (halogen)

Commando303

I'm sorry for the confusion (and I believe Interested's clarification is correct): by "Lumotec," I've meant to refer to the round halogen-lamp headlight.

JimBeans83

OP: thoughts on your decision for the Sport ? You would have preferred having more light close to you?

CliftonGK1

I just picked up a Cyo Senso N for my singlespeed commuter/distance bike, and I can't say I'm disappointed. I was thinking about the Cyo-R, but after talking to the guys at my LBS, they made me fairly comfortable with the decision for the regular Cyo. After my first day commuting with it, I agree fully.

On an extended descent reaching speeds of 40+ mph, I didn't find that I was outrunning the front edge of the beam. On my brevet bike I use a Supernova E3, and I found the Cyo to be every bit as bright on the road as the E3. The focused beam of the Cyo vs. the symmetrical beam of the E3 made the road lighting equivalent. There was no scatter lighting from the Cyo, however. The focus is very tight, so supplementary illumination is needed for signage and side-lighting.

On rolling/flat sections of moderate street lighting, the Cyo was not washed out, even though it was not really necessary due to incedental lighting.

On rolling/flat unlit sections the shadow cast of the Cyo at a mid-fork mounting position was more than adequate to identify and avoid any road hazards at 17 - 18 mph. The Cyo casts a bright and reasonably wide beam which not only illuminates the ground well enough to see the way, but also to avoid rocks and sticks as well. It's well brighter than the $120 price tag would suggest.

The nearfield lighting is less than adequate if you're riding on unfamiliar, uneven terrain. I would want a secondary Cyo-R if I were riding hardpack dirt trails, loose gravel country roads, or potholed streets. But, for a relatively smooth commute on decent roads I've found the Cyo Senso N to be quite a nice light... not just "for the price", but at any price.

JimBeans83

Interesting comparison between the Supernova!

And a good way to look at when the R may be necessary (certain conditions).

Could it be approached from the other direction and, when would the R people have preferred to have the Sport? On steep fast descents on unknown, unlit streets?

How dark is that "dark" spot in front of you with the Sport? You can still see something? Or it's completely dead? (people have said it's darker in comparison with the well lit path ahead)

Thanks - hope to pick one up in a day, will report back my findings to the thread as well. As the price/power evolves, I didn't want to get something too expensive now, as this will be better in 1 year.. but the Fly (30 pcnt cheaper) seems to do worse a job in near area than even the Sport, the switch can't turn off the light (and thus leave the standlight charged like with Cyo+), brighter standlight, mounting, etc. which I think justify the difference in features now.

CliftonGK1

The "dark" spot isn't devoid of all light, it's just not where the main focus of the beam is. You can still see in it just fine for general road and MUP riding. I wouldn't try navigating a rut and chuckhole filled Jeep road at 8mph with just that lighting, though.
Most of the riding I do is moderate speeds to high speeds (15 - 40mph) on smooth, well maintained roads. I've got the horizon cutoff aimed such that I have about 50' of spot on the roadway and the beam isn't any taller than people's wheels so I'm not blinding anyone with it.

The big disadvantage to the tightly focused beam pattern is lack of side visibility. There's no spillage past the shoulder of the road, so I need to keep a closer watch for forest critters which may scamper into my path. The E3 just lights up everything, so there's less concern since I can see a much wider swath of the landscape.

JimBeans83

So it sounds like for someone travelling at 10mph or more, there can be little "danger" for that dark spot - one only gains the extra distance from the Sport version. Even being on bike paths or other areas that could be completely dark (please correct if I'm wrong), the "dark spot" is sufficiently bright to navigate that, if you look down at your wheel and need to hop over a branch, for instance.

It's tough making these decisions from a distance without being able to do a real world test.. I think the Sport sounds right for me. I went into a large bicycle shop recently where they had 15 lights setup pointing at a reflector wall. There's no utility at all in this type of demonstration.

echotraveler

B&M is now offering a new line of all its lights adding SENSO to the name...senses night and day, automatic on/off switch...

Lumotec is the round fixture, lumotec oval is the oval shaped...hopefully ill enjoy them this weekend!! the bike is in the LBS...they are building my dynohub wheel...the need to hurry up a bit!

andrelam

I grew up using the European standard bulb head lights with the side wall generators... now THOSE you can feel when you turn them on. As far as seeing the road, the lights were OK, but not great. In Holland where I grew up that was no big deal as there were lights everywhere so it was mostly so you could be seen and provide enough light so you could get through any dark areas on a ride.

Fast forward a better part of 30 years and now living the Western NY. Commuting year round here is a whole different experience. I need to realy see what it is in the road. Pot holes are plentiful and street lighting is minimal. I started out with a Shimano 70 series generator hub and a DLumotec Oval Senso Plus (LED head light with stand light and sensor). I can tell you that I can honestly not tell if the light is on or off. The load is so slight that it is not perceptable to me. Maybe if the road was perfectly smooth would I be able to tell a little. The resistance is so slight there the extra effort truly minimal. I ended up just leaving the light on year around and use it as my "driving" lights. Anything to make me more visible is a good thing. As far as seeing in the dark, the light was acceptable, but I definitely yearned for more. I considered upgrading to the IQ Fly (released only 2 months after getting my light), but could not justify the expense. This spring my stand light failed and asked if Peter White if the light had to be replaced, if I could not pay the difference to the new Cyo R. That turned out to be no problem. Since I leave then light on all the time I didn't bother with the Senso edition the 2nd time around. The light is either on or off and that works fine for me.

All I can say is WOW. The new light is SO much better. There is a large rectangular box that starts at the bike and lights up the road in front of you. I like that there is lust enough scatter that you can see street signs. I don't know if the non R edition lets enough light scatter. My light is mounted at the top of the fork and it lights up the front wheel a bit. This makes my bike VERY visable from the sides. I am extremely happy with the light. If however I had to use the non R light, I bet I'd be happy as well. The output from these modern lights is excellent, and for being just over $100 they are affordable. Sure the Big Bang light looks truly awsome, but serisouly who's got a spare $1100 laying around for a light?

No matter if you end up with an R or non R version of the Cyo light... you WILL be happy. I wanted a front reflector to conform with local traffic laws and also like being able to see the road closer to the bike. I can adjust the light so I can see down the road just fine riding around 17 MPH. Soon I'll be putting on the snow tires and they will slow me down by at least 2 MPH, so super high speed riding is not realistic for my Winter commutin.

Happy riding,
André

JimBeans83

Just got my Cyo Sport, first impressions after 2.5 hours : I don't think I need the R version, either. I was with someone and we weren't going very fast (15-20km/h), but at this speed I still preferred having the longer view. I had no trouble finding an obstruction from a distance, watching it, and still being able to see it in the "dark spot" (which isn't that dark).

What I would like to know with the R is: when doing tight turns (since the Cyo (at least non-R) doesn't illuminate much outside of the rectangle), does the R really help you to see the areas around you better? That's where I found I had to "shimmy" the handle bars a bit and wiggle at slower speeds to see around tight corners, like one might find on small bike paths. I would like to do a comparison this way. From what I guestimate from the aktiv radfahren 11-12/08 review with photos, it doesn't seem it would help for this application. But also to answer my question from above : what would I be missing with having the R? Is it that much you lose to gain the local area being brighter.

For road riding : I can't see needing the R, but I'll do some faster riding 30-40km/hr later and report back. I agree with what others have said, maybe having ridden in pacelines for a while forces you to memorize what you see every once in a while while surveying a head, and sensing when you'll touch that. But even when you come close, I could still see that object.

Commando303

What I wonder — and perhaps this can't be decided by anyone who hasn't himself or herself used both lights — is whether the non-R ("sport") version of the Cyo is really much brighter than the Cyo R. The difference is stated by the manufacturer to be 20 lux — more than the total output of B + M's Lumotec (which is 17 lux) — but I wonder how noticeable this distinction is in the "real world."

CliftonGK1

Inexpensive mounting solution for IQ Cyo, if the fork crown mount won't work for you. (Common on bikes with full fenders, or short crown-to-tire clearance.)




Cateye 19mm - 22mm clamp mount for taillights. 1 1/4" M5 bolt. 2 spherical washer assemblies from some canti brake pads. 2 knurled valve stem washers from presta tubes as spacers. Total cost: $2.99 for the Cateye clamp; LBS gave me the spare bolt and parts for free.

interested

Both Cyo version shares the same LED and therefore they both produce almost the same amount of light (160 lumens for the Sports version, 150 for the R-version). The main difference is that the R-version has slightly different optics that directs more light downwards in front of the bike. The difference in Lux measurement reflects that, since Lux are about where the light is directed, not the total amount of light.

There are some beam shots taken from above that show the difference in where they put the light on the road. It is in German, but the pictures are easy to understand, see page 60. I think the overlaying grid is in 1 meter length.:
https://www.nabendynamo.de/service/pdf/ar_11-12_2008.pdf

As can be seen, the Cyo Sport has much better "throw". I am perfectly happy with the near field illumination from my Cyo Sport, but others may prefer the R-version, especially if they don't ride very fast.

--
Regards

2_i 

As someone having used both versions, I can sum up the difference as that of the Sport illuminating more the area that you cannot see anyway, while dimming the area that you need to see. Now, you will presumably immediately hear from someone that my view must be biased. Within a bit broader perspective, I would say that, at this day and age, compromises such as made within the Sport should not be needed anymore.

CliftonGK1

I'm a bit confused by this description. Are you meaning to say that the Sport throws light beyond an effective range of vision?
I rather enjoy the extra long throw pattern on the Sport for high speed (40mph+) descending.

JimBeans83

Clifton, any significant difference between (1) mounting it lower (does this increase lighting of the ground more so than if it's above), (2) the interference from the [left] side of the wheel. Why mount on right side ? (I think) - seems like for visibility from opposing traffic, if you're not in the old world, you'd prefer it to be on the left? Good idea using a common bracket to mount it this way - I think we've got a stash of these from seat post light mounts.

CliftonGK1

The lower you mount the lamp, you get longer shadows from hazards and they're more visible/avoidable.

You mount on the drivetrain side so that if you lay your bike down to fix a flat, stop and eat lunch, have a ditch nap at 3am during a 600k, etc... you don't have to choose between "do I lay it on my derailleurs, or my lamp head?" They're all on the same side.
Plus, the connectors for most dynohubs are drive-side and you don't have to run super long wires crossing the fork crown this way.

2_i 

Yes, this is what I am saying. In a standard orientation, the light will add illumination to the region of 250m-350m or so. When moving, you can't distinguish much detail in that region, beyond the fact that it is essentially there.


For every type of illumination, you can presumably find some application. Nominally, a laser should be great for illuminating far-away objects.

CliftonGK1

I think that depends on how high you mount and aim the lamp. Keeping it at a mid-fork mount position there isn't any benefit to the reflector/optics if you aim it high enough to light up street signs at 200m or more. I keep the top cutoff pointed just below straight forward, and this puts a very bright effective spot on the pavement for about 100', and doesn't throw much incedental light higher than a car's bumper.

interested

While my Cyo sport can "light up" reflective road signs at 1-1.5 km's distance, it doesn't illuminate the road in a useful manner that far at all. What could be seen on the previous linked beam shots was that the Cyo R illuminated the road fully to around 10 meters distance (50 lux) where after it began to diminish visibly. The Cyo Sport delivered 70 lux at the 10 meter mark, and continued beyond that without any visible diminished light beam.
So the Cyo Sport deliver much more light at the 10-20 meter distance than the Cyo R, which is useful for fast and moderately fast riders, especially when the roads are wet or it rains, since that seems to suck up some of the light output.

--
Regards