![]() |
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 16224795)
i think having a light that let's you be seen and see the road is a very good idea. and it's sad that germany shows blatant favoritism to motorists by severaly limiting cyclist's lighting options. if unfocused bike lights were a genuine problem our media would be inundated with "motorist crashes and dies after being blinded by cyclist" stories. but there aren't any of these stories because this is an imaginary problem.
:lol: you're on fire tonight en fuego |
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 16224795)
if unfocused bike lights were a genuine problem our media would be inundated with "motorist crashes and dies after being blinded by cyclist" stories. but there aren't any of these stories because this is an imaginary problem.
Maybe some of those unexplained bike-car accidents, especially hit and run, could be the result of motorists "blinded" by another bicyclist shinning its lighting firepower into the motorist's face. Could be a good phony excuse for not seeing a bicyclist, though not hit and run behavior. "I couldn't see anything due to a jackwad cyclist going the other way blinding me." Another possibility is that there are so few cyclists ridding at night in most places in the U.S. that the presence of a few obnoxious ones with blinding lights hasn't made it to the surface of media attention. |
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 16224833)
Just for the sake of a discussion, let us apply the logic posted frequently by at least one poster in A&S: Just because there is no accident data to support the theory, does not mean the problem doesn't exist.
Maybe some of those unexplained bike-car accidents, especially hit and run, could be the result of motorists "blinded" by another bicyclist shinning its lighting firepower into the motorist's face. Could be a good phony excuse for not seeing a bicyclist, though not hit and run behavior. "I couldn't see anything due to a jackwad cyclist going the other way blinding me." Another possibility is that there are so few cyclists ridding at night in most places in the U.S. that the presence of a few obnoxious ones with blinding lights hasn't made it to the surface of media attention. :thumb: |
[MENTION=36008]Leisesturm[/MENTION] - not sure if your reply was directed at me or you just quoted me to bash MagicShine's lumens ratings.
Luckily there are no tree branches going across the road in my state, so I'm safe with just one light. I agree that the AAA battery-powered lights are worthless for headlights. |
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 16224833)
Just for the sake of a discussion, let us apply the logic posted frequently by at least one poster in A&S: Just because there is no accident data to support the theory, does not mean the problem doesn't exist.
Maybe some of those unexplained bike-car accidents, especially hit and run, could be the result of motorists "blinded" by another bicyclist shinning its lighting firepower into the motorist's face. Could be a good phony excuse for not seeing a bicyclist, though not hit and run behavior. "I couldn't see anything due to a jackwad cyclist going the other way blinding me." Another possibility is that there are so few cyclists ridding at night in most places in the U.S. that the presence of a few obnoxious ones with blinding lights hasn't made it to the surface of media attention. http://blog.oregonlive.com/commuting..._by_bicyc.html And since there are an awful lot of cyclists riding at night here, it's clearly not a major issue. |
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16224814)
non sequitur
:lol: you're on fire tonight en fuego |
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 16224889)
I can't speak for Burlington but here the media loves to make hay of every dumb@#$% move by a cyclist. Here is a fine example:
http://blog.oregonlive.com/commuting..._by_bicyc.html And since there are an awful lot of cyclists riding at night here, it's clearly not a major issue. |
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 16224919)
Again, only for the sake of discussion, with no intent to cast aspersions on BF posters, maybe "blindings" by jackwad cyclists in Portland are so common that it is a dog bitting man story and therefore not a good media story. At least until someone claims it as the cause of an injury/fatality.
|
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16223389)
that's why I like Europe. in Germany, in an urban area, you'll get a ticket for pulling crap like the guys do here with their POS magicshine lights.
. |
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 16225035)
:sigh: i weep for humanity when people distill elegant concepts into a "poster" and employ it incorrectly :( |
Originally Posted by Telly
(Post 16224367)
On the subject, has anyone installed a diffuser lens on Magicshine's or their clones?
This page from Amazon has a few user submitted pics that convinced me to get one. It's one of the best $5.83 I've ever spent on a bike item. |
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16225108)
that should be "Ockham's razor"
|
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 16225175)
alternative spelling.
this village is still spelled Ockham. |
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16225183)
no...
this village is still spelled Ockham. |
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16225183)
this village is still spelled Ockham.
hth. |
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 16225244)
and in the 13th century alternate latinate spellings were common.
hth. do you always repeat gibberish like a parrot? :lol: |
Originally Posted by Darth Lefty
(Post 16225241)
How do they spell München in Ockham?
|
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16225278)
do you always repeat gibberish like a parrot?
:lol: |
Some of the finer points are not worth arguing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor. Yes, it is Ockham, now what? I also use Occam. Does that make me a cretin? There is plenty to disagree over even if we stick to only debating bike topics. All is lost if we also start debating the etymology of arcane philosophical constructs.
H |
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
(Post 16225343)
Some of the finer points are not worth arguing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor. Yes, it is Ockham, now what? I also use Occam. Does that make me a cretin? There is plenty to disagree over even if we stick to only debating bike topics. All is lost if we also start debating the etymology of arcane philosophical constructs.
H edit: That's unfair. I like your handle, so I apologise. |
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16225351)
and a parrot who repeats things with understanding their meaning
http://www.livescience.com/14708-par...-thinking.html http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=...1995-28085-001 And then there was Alex: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/sc...rrot.html?_r=0 |
Originally Posted by David Bierbaum
(Post 16224535)
I hate flashing bright harsh LED lights at night, from the one time I encountered a bicyclist with one while I was driving in the opposite direction. They're enough to trigger an epileptic seizure in the wrong people. I firmly believe that lights that light your way, and lights that warn others of your presence, should be separate lights.
I also hate all LED car headlights. There is something in the quality of that bluish-white light that harshes out my eyeballs far more than the incandescent headllights they replaced. I will only buy LED lights that are, Neutral or warm white 2700k - 4200k. With a minimum of 80 CRI rating. |
Originally Posted by thenomad
(Post 16223144)
I cover my light as courtesy for oncoming cyclists. It avoids that moment of possible blindness as you pass so close on the MUP. So far nobody returns the favor with their bright lights but I understand they may not get it. I still do it to make their commute a little nicer.
As I've been curious about this issue myself, I recently found this post out of Australia: http://the-riotact.com/led-bicycle-l...e-paths/108054 I think I'm going to try that plastic hood idea. I have the same light as the OP. |
Originally Posted by langa
(Post 16225607)
I try to do this, too, although it's easier to aim the light down and to the right side of the MUP, so I do that 90% of the time. If I try to shield the light I end up covering the whole thing and not being able to see anything in front of me.
As I've been curious about this issue myself, I recently found this post out of Australia: http://the-riotact.com/led-bicycle-l...e-paths/108054 I think I'm going to try that plastic hood idea. I have the same light as the OP. |
Originally Posted by acidfast7
(Post 16225108)
that should be "Ockham's razor"
:sigh: i weep for humanity when people distill elegant concepts into a "poster" and employ it incorrectly :( |
Originally Posted by gregjones
(Post 16225139)
I just got one yesterday. Having just ran it down the road and back once, I like it.
This page from Amazon has a few user submitted pics that convinced me to get one. It's one of the best $5.83 I've ever spent on a bike item. |
Originally Posted by langa
(Post 16225607)
I try to do this, too, although it's easier to aim the light down and to the right side of the MUP, so I do that 90% of the time. If I try to shield the light I end up covering the whole thing and not being able to see anything in front of me.
As I've been curious about this issue myself, I recently found this post out of Australia: http://the-riotact.com/led-bicycle-l...e-paths/108054 I think I'm going to try that plastic hood idea. I have the same light as the OP. This thread, and the one linked are good reads for me. With several recent bicycle / auto accidents in our city recently, including two cyclist deaths it is easy to get caught up in the paranoia of the "more / brighter lights is better!" approach. And while I do have a relatively bright set of front / rear LEDs I am trying to find that balance of a rider that can see and be seen, but at the same time I also want to be seen as a cyclist that is responsible and respectful, both on the road and on the trail. Lately, I have been focusing more on ensuring I can be seen via reflective devices / materials versus simply adding more lights. I do appreciate the comments re: etiquette for trail riding as I understand different needs for lighting on MUPs versus that while sharing the road with other motorized traffic. |
Originally Posted by thenomad
(Post 16223144)
I cover my light as courtesy for oncoming cyclists. It avoids that moment of possible blindness as you pass so close on the MUP. So far nobody returns the favor with their bright lights but I understand they may not get it. I still do it to make their commute a little nicer.
|
1 Attachment(s)
I put some hockey tape along the top 1/3 to 1/2 of my lights and it reduced glare significantly. I aim the hotspots to just below the windshield level of on coming sedans and I've never had a single complaint afterwords. I get plenty of throw without producing glare.
I've tried just aiming it down but it would be excessively short throwing to reduce glare to the hockey tape levels. Almost unusable to have to point it down that low. The hockey tape doesn't actually contact the glass of my NR lights, just the rim. http://i.imgur.com/xiIGwM2.jpg |
A quick question to Magicshine (and clone) users.
Is it okay to leave the battery connected to the light when not in use? I ask this because the mode button is continuously lit, and I'm a bit worried about the quality/safety of the Li-Ion battery pack. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:49 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.