Light & Motion VIS 180 Rear Bicycle Light
 

Anyone using the Light & Motion VIS 180? a 180 Lumens Rear tail Light.

I had one and then sent it back. Didn't like that it wasn't as bright as I had hoped and I didn't like the flash.

I bought a Dinotte 300R instead. Now THERE is a taillilght.
J.

Have had this new light for 3 mornings out now and it sure seems fantastic. I dont know how to rate it among other tail ights but it sure is mighty bright. Well worth $100.00 spent considering the $1500.00 on Lupine head Lamps..

I had one and sold it. The light didn't appear as bright as advertised -- no brighter than my $20 Planet Bike Superflash when placed side by side and way dimmer than my Dinotte 140. The biggest issue was that I couldn't figure out how to mount it on my bike. It is designed to mount to a seatpost and some seatbags. However, my seatpost is blocked by my seatbag, and the light clip would not fit on the tab on my seatbag.

I have one and like most everything else Light and Motion makes, it seems like a wonderful product.

It isn't 180 lumens, it is 180 degrees. It is 50 lumens. I'm still on Superflash tail lights and I don't know how that compares.

i used their vis 360, picked up on amazon with a 25% off sporting goods coupon.

no complaints, and there is a definite difference in cars observing me in downtown sacramento.

+1 on the super flash.

I also tried a Vis 360 and returned it. I really love the idea but feel like it isn't executed to perfection. First, the taillight doesn't seem as bright as advertised. I placed it side-by-side with a Planet Bike Superflash and it seemed no brighter. I also didn't like the way it mounted to my helmet, although I am sure that is a challenge since helmets vary quite a bit in design. Finally, it didn't hold a charge nearly as long as advertised, which was the biggest reason why I returned it. My commute is 2+ hours round trip, and I was having to charge it after each leg, which is a pain.

On the plus side, I loved the headlight on the Vis 360. It was much brighter than I expected, easy to adjust and really gets drivers' attention.

The SuperFlash is now outdated and out classed by several other lights including the Blackburn Mars 4, the Cygolite Hotshot, the Serfas Shield, and of course the L & M Vis 180. On to top of that the Superflash is a piece of junk, mine lasted me 7 months and their customer service never responded to my warranty claim nor numerous e-mails after I sent it back for adjustment.

Now here's the dramatic proof of how good the L & M Vis 180 works: http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...2&d=1335801807

Also if you check the reviews the L & M Vis 180 you'll find that it got very high reviews.

I own the Mars 4 demonstrated in the link, it's a great light but you can't recharge the batteries unless you take them out which after about 5 years of ownership the screw head is getting trashed so I may be getting a new light, probably the Vis 180 because of it's flood spillage.

Checked out the Light and Motion stand at ExpoCycle this year and specifically the Vis 180. There was an unlit booth next to the display and from a distance of 15ft it was hard to see the light aimed against the wall. I was expecting better myself - there was some ambient light but not lots. We put a man on the moon years ago - decent bicycle lights shouldn't be that big of a challenge.

Well, I guess I thought they looked good last year so I bought one. Tried it and took it back. I didn't like the blink pattern - kind of a heartbeat sort of thing and I did not think it was bright enough vis a vis it's price (thought it overpriced). I wanted bright and for a bit more the Dinotte 140 is brighter and the 300R is wa-a-a-a-y brighter although more expensive but a better value in my book.

J.

Personally I think they can make better tail and head lights, but I believe these large corporations are purposely doing that. They keep making a light just a tad better then last years model so you can run out and buy a new one thinking your getting the newest and greatest technology. Have you noticed that newer rear lights are coming with WORSE designed mounting brackets? The newer the lights have become the flimsier the brackets have become which break way faster then the older ones did...why? Because they forgot how to engineer better designs? No, it's so you can go out and buy another one more frequently.

I don't think that's the case at all (in fact, it's kind of silly). I think we are into the incremental phase of this where the improvements are harder to come by as the technology matures.

J.

I have no issues with mine what so ever and i am totally please wiht how it works. I use it every single morning and i think its fantastic. Sometimes i wonder if some people just buy something with no intension on keeping anyways.. if someone thinks there $3.00 china import works just as well then so be it..

I replaced with the Dinotte 300R. Not chinese and far, far brighter.

J.

I also replaced my Dinotte head lamp with a Lupine Betty R 3600 Lumens.. Great light at $1100.00

I just saw a Vis180 mounted above a Cygolite Hotshot. The Vis180 may put out a less directional light, but it isn't as impressive as the hotshot. Much less interested in the Vis180 now

You could be right, but I remember people saying that when LED's first came out that they would never work because their too dim and HID was the future. I always think there's room for improvement, how much still remains to be seen. And the improvement to brighter tail lights will come with the improvement of battery technology.

Were you looking directly into the lights or did you also keep moving till you were 90 degrees off angle?

If you look at the beam shots the VIS180 lights up the entire room whereas the HotShot is a spot beam of light with very little spillage. That's why I'm wondering about what and how you saw the two.

The hotshot puts out light at a wide enough angle that I am not really concerned about the fact that it definitely has a limited view angle. I don't think lighting up an entire room or being seen at more than about a 30 degree angle are things I'm too worried about. I know others put a lot of weight on it.

Mmmm. I guess what I mean is that we are against a top end on the front of lights of about 4000 lumens - or about what you would get from two car headlights on full bright. On normal, they are about 2600 lumens. After that, there is no real need to go brighter on a bike, IMO. On the rear, it's probably about 400 lumens which is an amazingly bright taillight.

After that, it gets down to the feature wars - better mounts, smaller size, programmability, wireless remotes, beamshaping, better and smaller batteries etc.... It's sort of down to the point like with cars where we had the marketing battle over cupholders a few years ago.

J.

Pretty much agree with your post. The thing that no-one really seems to agree on yet is "what actually makes a light effective?". The requirements for a front headlight are similar, but different than a car in that being conspicuous is far more critical than just lighting up the road since bicycles are smaller. Motorcycles are legally permitted headlight modulators for exactly that reason.

Tail lights have a similar situation and 'brighter' isn't necessarily the answer to more visibility. Something I'm curently experimenting with myself is painting the road behind me with high powered red LEDs. The lights are aimed at the road and so don't bother motorists, but create a much larger area of illumination for traffic to notice. Different but so far surprisingly effective.

Just go to the Cree website and see if you think they are standing still. Their goal, stated or unstated, is to create lights that will replace the current compact fluorescents and have them become a household standard. Right now they don't quite compete on lumens/watt but they are getting very close. I think when you include bulb life in the equation they are about even.

That's not the point. It's when we hit the top end of the lighting range that we reasonably (or unreasonably "think" we need) then there is going to be a diminished demand for more and more lumens. We're close to that when we can get 2600 lumens (equivalent to two car headlights) into a bar mounted light and battery at about 300 grams (i.e. Lupine Wilma). After that point, we're probably going to go to feature wars.

No one said anything about Cree doing anything.

J.

Ok, now I get you, I was talking originally about taillights. As far as headlights you would be correct realistically. Realistically because anything brighter, which they could make, would be unreasonably bright for a vehicle travelling less then 45 mph. I have that Phillips Saferide on the bar and it's plenty of light, then add on top of that a Cygolite MityCross 480 on the helmet and combined they look brighter then car headlights.

I've seen mounts, especially rear light mounts actually get worse over the years, they use to use solid thick plastic clamps with rubber inserts, now a lot of companies use a fancy zip tie that won't last long. Programmability...not sure how much more a cyclist needs then what they already offer. Beam shaping is definitely a huge area and Phillips is the only one doing that currently and it works great, less lumens (400) needed and has the effect of a far brighter (1000+) lumen lights. While most 500+ lumen lights have separate battery packs, the Phillips simply uses 4 AA rechargeable batteries self contained in the light housing, so again Phillips does have the smaller battery pack, but as technology in batteries get better we may see a revolution in smaller longer lasting batteries.

I personally would like to see larger taillights, because I just don't think the small ones are all that noticeable in a sea of red lights at night no matter how bright. I saw a guy the other night with some sort of tail light that was about 6 inches long but maybe 1/2 inch wide and had about 8 LED's in it, that thing showed up really well, but I can't find anything like that on the internet. I was in my car and couldn't stop to ask what make of light it was, but it was the best taillight I've ever seen.

since this thread is nominally about a taillight, they pretty much have been standing still for the last couple of years -- at least as far as the red leds that we can get our hands on. White LEDs have been getting lower Vf and higher output at an impressive pace. Hopefully some of that will transfer over to the other colors sooner or later

There are already 3W LEDs readily available in red and amber capable of putting out about 200 lumens. The thing is - I can find then being used for off-road, but not for bicycle use. Personally I think cyclists are the problem - most apparently won't spend money on lights. Or specialized rainwear for that matter. A poll of several (6) stores in the area concurred that none carried rainwear because it didn't sell. On the other hand outdoor shops like MEC are loaded with the stuff and that's probably where I'll end up going (rainwear - not lights).

1. I'm with you on this. I've got three lights- Cherrybomb 1/2w, PBSF clone (1/2w), and a 4D Toplight. The 4D doesn't have the power as the other two*, but it is just as noticeable if not more so from a distance. There's also the RZ4 (on my short list if I win the lotto) which is large by the standard, the beam design is omni-directional, and I suspect the only reason why it doesn't push out it's full 5w on steady is thermal regulation.

2. You think that light had 8 LEDs, but what about 30 microLEDs? Serfas has the Thunderbolt that, without having the benefit of knowing the dimensions, comes close to your description. https://www.serfas.com/products/view...%7Ctail-lights

*As tested by turning all lights on steady and pointing at the wall in my kitchen.

Like I said prior, I have the Dinotte 300R which is a roughly 300 lumen taillight with a diffuser on it. That thing is noticeable in a big way. I get terrific respect with that on my bike, even more respect from cars than when day riding. It's so bright that it almost hides the bike in a bloom of red light that drivers naturally avoid. It's not big (but not small either) so I don't think square inches of lit area may be all that important.

J.