Sixty Fiver

bubbles - We have light building workshops at our co-op and many of the supplies come from deal extreme... might have to tack that on to the order and then see how we can't make it run just a little longer.

mrbubbles

He has 5 1/2 watt blinkies, not flashlights, most likely PB Superflash, can you read?

As for your $50, I have 15 times more lights than you and the starting cost is less than $40.

I used to make lights (cause bike manufacturers were too slow in coming out with the new leds), now I don't bother, the price has dropped so much it just doesn't make sense anymore.

The lights I used to make were high powered rear blinkie and front light, now it's much cheaper just to buy the flashlights and be done with it. Make sure you buy the batteries and chargers as well, otherwise you can't run those 18650 powered flashlights.

Sixty Fiver

Yep... it is time to flush this one.

twobadfish

Wow that's a tough deal to pass up. It says 1.5hrs runtime.. on high? Do you know what the runtime is on medium?

tarwheel 

You guys have been had. Don't you recognize a troll when you see one? Jeez ... 4 mph riding speed, blaze orange vest, Trek light that is supposedly brighter than, blah, blah, blah...

If this guy if for real, then it is no wonder that the Tea Party took over Congress.

colleen c

Don't forget the Miner helmet light that's capable of throwing 10,000 ft up to the clouds. If I had one of those, I will make it a Batman signal light.

earth2pete

truth be told, if it wasn't for the weight issue, i'd go with 12W car headlights w/high and low beams.

Leisesturm

Thats 12V car headlight. Car headlights are 55W low beam and maybe 65W or a little more on high-beam. But it does beg the question:how much more light does the average car throw on the road vs the average bike (bicycle)? True, the car goes much faster... 2x, 3x or more than a bicycle...at night. How much more light does that require... 20x? 50x? Anyone know how many lumens in front of a 12V/55W halogen in a 6" reflector?


H

mnaines

Well, considering the fact that the rule for illumination at night is your maximum riding/driving speed determines how far away your headlights must illuminate. The rule of thumb is for every foot per second of travel, your headlight must illuminate everything five feet ahead of you if you're on a bicycle or 10 feet ahead of you if you're in a car. At 60mph in a car, you're traveling at 88 feet per second. If you go by the aforementioned rule, you would need headlights that illuminate everything to a minimum distance of 880 feet in front of you. For a bicyclist riding at 30mph, that is 44 feet per second, so your bicycle headlight would need to illuminate everything to a minimum distance of 220 feet in front of you. The faster you ride or drive, the brighter your headlight needs to be. The reason for these numbers is this: At a speed of 88 feet per second, an illumination distance of 880 feet would give you 10 seconds to react to whatever happens to run out in front of your car. For most drivers, that is very easily more than enough time unless they're too busy paying attention to their cell phone conversation. For bicyclists, the illumination range gives them 5 seconds to react to whatever is in front of them, and that is easily more than enough time if they're paying attention.

Note: "Overdriving the headlight" is a term used to describe a situation in which a driver or bicyclist rides or drives so fast that he has less than 3 seconds to react to whatever is in front of him if he's on a bicycle or less than 5 seconds of reaction time if he is in a car.

These numbers come straight from the Department of Transportation and are for safety reasons. Overdriving the headlights is dangerous for both the driver/rider and any pedestrians in his path.

Leisesturm

... ... 30mph... you wish. I wish... but you didn't answer my question. Not that I was really expecting you to have an answer. It's clear you have something of a brain which is all the compliment I am paying you, savor the moment, but you juxtapose fact and fiction in a rather unique way. A disconcertingly unique way. Do you know how long 10 seconds is? A poor reaction time is on the order of 1/2 second. Sigh.

H

mnaines

Actually, a POOR reaction time is on the order of 2 seconds. Half a second is actually a very good reaction time. Two seconds is how long it takes most people to move the mouse to click the "post reply" button on these forums. When you blink your eyes or snap your fingers, that snap or that blink is about one-half to two-thirds of a second, so its very quick.

Note: Several people on here have admitted that they buy an 18650 light and ride faster because they have the light. I'm saying it defeats the purpose of having a brighter light. Brighter lights are supposed to give you more time to react to whatever is in front of you, but riding faster actually decreases the amount of time you have to react to things, so riding faster because you have a brighter light defeats the purpose of the brighter light.

Note: 10 seconds is how long it usually takes most small cars to hit 60mph from a dead stop at wide open throttle. Some of the larger cars can hit 60mph from a dead stop in just over 7 seconds. Most high-performance racing motorcycles like the Suzuki Hayabusa or the Kawasaki Ninja can hit 60mph in just 3 seconds.

This vid shows how short 10 seconds really is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nJuM_e2o7g

For the old-timers in here, the 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 could hit 100mph in 13 seconds and the 1963 Chevrolet Impala SS could do it in about 12 seconds. A 2011 Corvette ZR1 can run the quarter mile in 9.8 seconds, if that gives you any idea of how fast 10 seconds really is.

Here's a better example of how fast 10 seconds is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By1JQFxfLMM

EKW in DC

Wow... last time I looked at this thread it was on page one. I had no idea it got this crazy...

My favorite line:
"Because I need to get back into shape, I can only average about 4 miles per hour on my bicycle."

That's just epic troll. Not that other things weren't but this "jumped out at me" for some reason. Kinda like the deer "jumping out" in front of him when he was going 15. So if he can hit 15 mph in places, but avergaes 4, I'll asume he hit 15 going down a hill and is riding <4 mph where it's flat. No wonder that Trek light seems so effective to him!

BTW, this was bikeforums.net last time I checked and not 1960musclecarforums.net.

I'm gonna have to subscribe to this thread. This is too much fun to read. How come trolls are so amusing sometimes?!

For the record, I have the Terralux 220 lumen tactical flashlight and a twofish lockblock for my headlight. It's worked flawlessly for me for over a year in all kinds of lighting conditions, and I average well over 4 mph.

JimJimex

@mnaines Sorry but I ride average 22mph at night in-sync with Boston traffic ALL the time. With a SSC-P7 I got from dealextreme, I was thought to be a motorcycle, and had got the high-beam-"turn-down-your-light"-signal from motorists SIX times in the past year. I adjusted the aim of my light accordingly.

Do your really know how fast each mph's you have mentioned? I WALK average at 3.7mph, and it is silly to stay on a bicycle at 4mph as you've mentioned, since it is WALKING speed.

Also, what is the point of having 1-hour-flashlights: Well, I have 4 fully charged backup batteries in my backpack at all times. I own chargers that can charge 4 of them at the same time. My commute is only 26 minutes. I think that makes PERFECT sense.

Also, your question about why bother to have electricity if you can only have it for 1 hour a day is extremely insulting to at least 20% of the world's population. To quote a co-worker of mine who is involved in civil engineering in Haiti, "that is disgusting." Please widen your world view before post something so insulting.

JimJimex

WRONG. Median reaction time for visual stimulus is only 0.445 seconds (Thorpe, S. et al, 1996)

https://www1.nin.knaw.nl/~korjouko/do...ot.%201996.pdf

Check your science before teaching ALL of us how fast a second lasts.

mnaines

Okay, I know I'm not a moderator here, but I think its time we close this thread, because its obvious people here aren't getting the point, and that point is it doesn't matter who uses what light. Lights are all a matter of personal preference, and arguing over what light is better is like arguing over whose dick is bigger. There is no "best light" because it varies depending on the weather, terrain, time, and place. Most people here state they ride on bike trails which often have no light sources available to illuminate them. Others, like myself, ride only on main or arterial roads which are usually very well-lit. Where I live in Kansas City, there are no bike trails other than in parks, there are no shoulders on the main roads, there are no dedicated bicycle lanes, and bicyclists here almost always have to share the road with automobile traffic. There are street lights every 100 feet or so, however, so the streets are very well-lit and because of that, there is no problem with the bicyclist seeing what is going on around him. The biggest issue is being seen, and hoping the drivers are nice enough to move over instead of running you off the road and onto the sidewalks (around here, most drivers think bicyclists belong on the sidewalks, and some will intentionally run bicyclists off the road because "bicycles don't belong on the road", but the condition of the sidewalks is such that pedestrians won't even walk on the sidewalks).

Allen

Oh, for god's sake y'all are going to make me strap my star back on.

Wish granted, thread closed.