Used the helmet mount to attach the Exp 700 to the headband of sound attenuating earmuffs to provide light while blowing snow during the blizzard last night. It provided plenty of light on Low and worked a treat.

I think two lights for the situations listed, are a good idea.

I started out a couple years ago with the Cygolite Pace 150. Works good, thought 'high' was just a bit dim. Just recently got the Pace 400. Despite the number, not a whole lot brighter, but together, they can boost illumination up quite a bit. These two headlights, and the 700 appear to be using the same basic housing. That's simple, makes sense.

The switch...the way it cycles through the power levels, and learning the right amount of gentle pressure needed to activate it, took some getting used to, but I'm very comfortable with it now, and can easily change settings on the fly.

The cumbersome way the dopey little rubber USB cover meets up with its receptacle seems lame to me. I realize Cygolite, from a design perspective, is dealing with a very small area to work with on the back of the housing where the USB port is located, but perhaps with just a slight redesign of some of the plug's edges, it could meet up with the receptacle a bit more readily and still do its important sealing job. This would save users of its light, out in the cold and wet, and dark from having to use a fingernail or whatever, to try jam the plug back in after it's been accidentally been tugged out, which can happen easily when a hand brushes over the side of the housing towards the back where the cover is.

Yeah I agree the little USB cover is a bit fussy. The cover over the port on the Cygolite Hotshot is larger and much easier to deal with.

well I have to report that after my first actual night ride using this light, I'm absolutely thrilled with it. Ride time was probably close to 2 hours, and temps were in the upper 40's. I started out with the light on medium for the first half of the ride, but then cranked it up on high on the way back. I keep it aimed down towards the road to keep the hot spot out of oncoming drivers' eyes. Great light, couldn't ask for anything more, except maybe a second light on my helmet. :)

Those ExpiliOns are so light you could just get another one for the helmet. Perhaps consider the 400 lumen version for the helmet.

Yeah I'm thinking about it. Now do all the Expilions use the same 18650 battery and battery housing?

compatibility chart http://www.shop.cygolite.com/category.sc?categoryId=70

According to their spare parts chart (See Garfield's link above), not all use the same battery. However, I have loaned the spare battery for my Pace 400 (which originally came with a Pace 200) to a friend who has an Expilion 700 and it has fit and worked perfectly. I have also tested his battery in mine and it has worked fine.

Sent an inquiry to Cygolite asking what the difference was (thinking maybe the 700 used a higher capacity battery that would give me more runtime in the 400) but they did not respond. My suspicion is that they use the same battery and just charge more when you order it for the higher end model. If it was incompatible, they would key the housing so that it would not fit the other models.

Agree it's possible the batteries are the same, but I think it's equally likely they have a better spec for the 600/700 battery. It's possible that the 600/700 lights won't meet spec (brightness, run-time) with the lesser battery. There would be no need to key it differently as the batteries are not incompatible, but might only provide lesser run-times at the higher current draw of the brighter lights, or have higher ESR that could limit max brightness. ...but maybe not.

That's what I was hoping, and you would think they could then offer the 600/700 battery as an extended run battery for the lower end models. But the fact that they did not respond to a reasonable inquiry suggests to me otherwise.

Just called the support number at Cygolite. The rep says the batteries are indeed compatible, but slightly different. The lower powered Pace/Expilion models use a 2600 mAh battery and the 600/700 lumen models use a 2900 mAh battery.

So I would get a longer runtime from the higher end battery, but it would probably not be a huge difference. I'm figuring it could make 15-30 minutes extra runtime, depending on what intensity you run the light at. He didn't have any actual runtime figures for me.

He did also confirm that the Pace is simply the version that is branded for sale through Perfromance & Nashbar.

Ah so, if I really wanted a 2nd battery and mount for my 700, along with a bonus light to go with it, the 600 is probably my best bet. Might have to wait until next Christmas or something. :p

Must have been a short sale, it's back to $28 now (and also was yesterday).

Yes, the Cygolite expilion/pace headlights seem light...and compact, fitting easily in the palm of a hand. As for use of these lights on bike helmets, I don't presently have a light mounted on the helmet, but I might consider one if there was something on the market, better suited for that purpose than there currently seems to be.

There may be something obviously wrong with it that hasn't occurred to my non-designer mind, but here's an idea: it just seems logical for a company using basically good designers, which Cygolite seems to, drawing up and engineering a double ended light...white headlight on front, red tail light on back. Adapting the same basic light housing components, reflectors, switches and LED's used for the headlights, I would think a nice looking light using a 18650 could be devised. Two headlight bodies (total length 8"), or...one full length one and half of another(total length 6") could make two halves joined together using a kind of lock such as that used by the expilion/pace headlight rear battery cover.

Using two headlight bodies together, logically would allow two 18650 batteries, one for headlight, one for tail light, allowing power enough to maintain current headlight run times; though maybe an 18650 for the tail light is more than necessary. Maybe the weight of two cygolite headlights mounted to a helmet is more in that location, than people would be comfortable riding with.

A double-ended light wouldn't really be ideal. For helmet mounting, you really need the front light towards the front of the helmet, and any rear light on the very back side of the helmet. A double-ended light would have to go on the very top of the helmet, and if you're tilting your head down to get the front light on the road, the rear light would be pointing up into the sky. Not very useful.

Patrick...good points...although the use I've tended to see people make of helmet mounted lights for the street has been as a secondary or auxiliary role to handlebar and seatpost or rear rack mounted tail lights. At least that's what I'm thinking the use of a double ended light would be. I've read that some people use helmet mounted lights to view the road or trail, but the strongest argument I've heard for them mounted atop helmets is for the 'be seen' purpose.

For a variety of reasons, aesthetics, aerodynamics, functionality(easy for it to snag onto stuff when mounted there.) I don't particularly like the idea of lights mounted on top of bike helmets. A possibly better idea for a helmet w/headlight-tail light would have the helmets' shell somehow shaped and contoured to provide a port for the light. But of course, since the primary purpose of a bike helmet is to provide shock absorption to the wearer's head in the event of a crash, the helmet mounted light being able to 'break-a-way' in the event of an impact to it would probably be essential so that the body of the light doesn't come between the helmet wearer's head and the surface being impacted, negating the shock absorption capability of the helmet.

There's been some discussion in this bikeforums category about the fairly recent kickstarter proposal for a bike helmet with integrated front light. People commenting here were wary of possibly poor ventilation...too low lumen lights. Manufacturers of fireman's helmets and motorcycle helmets have made some efforts to come up with lights on their helmets, but what I saw in web searches didn't seem to very desirable for use on a helmet used for biking.

Perhaps, perhaps not! The light on your helmet doesn't need to be as bright since that light will mainly focused on an area close to the front wheel, and the occasional flash through a drivers side window or a street sign. The bar light is intended to shine further distance thus should be the brightest of the two lights. I use a Cygolite MityCross 480 (480 lumens on high) on the medium setting for my helmet light and at that setting it puts out more then enough light for my needs at about 320 lumens. So it depends on how crazy you want to get, personally I would just get a ExpiliOn 400.

In case your wondering I use the Philips Saferide light on the bars, this light is fantastic, it may "only" put out 400 lumens but due to the aiming (low and flat like a car) of the beam is equal to 1000 lumen light. Run time on high is bit short at 2 hours but on low it will run for 8 hours. I usually run it only on low but occasionally on dark country roads with no moon, or raining I will crank it to high, but I rarely ride for more then 2 hours after dark anyways. Besides after the 2 hours on high it shuts down to low and will run for another hour. Batteries are readily available for it too since they use 4 AA rechargeable bats and not some dedicated pack. You would have to pay at least twice as much for a different light to get the same or more output then the Phillips. I consider the Phillips to be the sweet spot in lights, just the right amount of light without being an overkill at just the right price without taking you for everything you have, very much like the Cygolite ExpiliOn 700. The difference between those two lights is the ExpiliOn uses a flashlight type of beam, and the Phillips a car like beam which projects further without hitting drivers eyes.

If you want to wait for Christmas, save up a tad more and get the Phillips and then use your current ExpiliOn for the helmet.

The point of getting another Exp 700/600 is to have a second bar mount and battery. I could use the 2nd light on the helmet mount that came with this light I just got, and then put the 2nd light's bar mount on my other bike.

That as opposed to buying just a second mount and second battery, for more than half the cost of a Exp 600.

In my experience, when helmet mounting lights like the Exp, it's best to put them squarely on top of the helmet due to their length and weight. This keeps the helmet better balanced and positioned on your head and can be less tiring, particularly when mtbing in rough terrain.

well yeah but I think it would also be somewhat dictated by the location of the vents on the helmet. In the case of my helmet the mount would have to just slightly forward of centered on the very top of the helmet.

Another factor to consider is the riding position of the rider. Both my wife & I wear the same type helmet with a Trustfire AA flashlight secured by a Zefal Doodad. My riding position is more aggressive, leaning forward...my helmet light is mounted centered and slightly to the rear. Her riding position is more upright...her helmet light is mounted centered and slightly to the front. We run our helmet lights mostly on strobe mode. YMMV.

Top only coincides with the center when the helmet is level. In both your and your wife's cases, it sounds like you both mount the lights "squarely on top" of the helmets. Since yours is tipped forward compared to hers, the tops falls at a different positions with respect to the brim of helmets. If you mounted them centered on the helmet, it would be in front of the top in your case and behind the top in her case. :)

Roger that. That's what I was trying to say. GMTA. Safety first.