Flashing headlights on the trails

[ctankcycles]

@mstone 97737 wrote:

We’ve been over all this before, and I truly believe that if you personally go completely blind in the presence of an oncoming light, you shouldn’t be riding at night, period.

Why is the onus on the person who is blinded by the bright oncoming light? Perhaps it’s the person who requires a blinding (dazzling?) level of brightness to ride on an MUT that doesn’t belong on the trail at night. Those of you who are arguing that it’s necessary, what did you do before these powerful lights were available? I realize some of you are new to the game, but there was a time when I commuted between downtown and Shirlington with nothing up front but a 3xAAA battery powered Cateye that didn’t do much more than alert oncoming riders and cars of my presence. Now I use a 360 lumen Cygolite and find the lowest setting is usually sufficient on moon lit nights and I’ll bump it up to the next level and then maybe 360 if it’s really late and pitch black.

[timo96]

@mstone 97737 wrote:

We’ve been over all this before, and I truly believe that if you personally go completely blind in the presence of an oncoming light, you shouldn’t be riding at night, period. No amount of bellyaching on this forum is going to make oncoming headlights go away, and if you are so sensitive that you pose an ongoing danger to yourself and others you have an obligation to take yourself out of that situation. I

So, if I get blasted with someone’s helmet light set at full 1,800 lumens and go temporarily blind, I shouldn’t be riding? Whatever dude.

[timo96]

I mostly reverse commute, meaning I’m coming into the city when most of you are riding out of it so when the weather is nice I’ll ride at dozens of headlights… so if I’m not shielding my light for a few of you it’s probably because I can’t see (read: need lights + both hands on brakes) because the person in front of you has their light on nuclear. Sorry in advance.

I really appreciate the people who have a light set at full blinding lumens and a second light running on strobe. That’s generally helpful.

[jabberwocky]

Thing is, being blinded by a light doesn’t really take lumens, it just takes getting the brunt of the light right in the eyes. Which is why I hate helmet lights; no matter how bright (or not) they are, if they look at you you’re getting the main beam right in the face, and that absolutely sucks. I have a little headlamp I use for running that can’t be more than 80 lumens, but I’ve accidentally zapped myself in the eyes with it (looking at it while turning it on, genius!) and its certainly blinding.

Bright lights compound the issue because they simply throw a lot of light all over the place, but with proper aiming they aren’t as bad. I think a lot of the problem on the trail isn’t people running massively bright lights, its people aiming the things completely horizontal so the main beam is hitting oncoming traffic. I always strove to aim it down enough that the main beam is into the trail 20-30 feet in front of the bike, and the peripheral light is going out to the maximum distance I need to see to. The only complaints I ever got over several years were from runners who didn’t have lights.

[mstone]

@hozn 97751 wrote:

90% of the cyclists I encounter are using “normal-power” lights, and I only find it mildly annoying when they shine in my face. There are, however, a few people riding east-bound on the W&OD in the AM with what are probably 1000+L lights that are absolutely ridiculous. There are also some people that ride with extremely bright lights but do shield them; I thank them. I don’t have sensitive eyes in any other scenario (e.g. driving), so as convenient as it may be to think other people are just genetically unfit for being on the road at night, I don’t think that’s what’s going on here.

Hell, if the message were “there are a couple of people with 1000+lm lights who have them aimed improperly, please check for that as a courtesy”, rather than “if you use more than an arbitrary 150lm on the trails SOMEONE WILL DIE YOU HEARTLESS BASTARD”, then I’d be all over it. But this conversation never stays that rational for long.

@ctankcycles 97753 wrote:

Why is the onus on the person who is blinded by the bright oncoming light?

Because the lights aren’t going away. If your position is that an oncoming light makes it impossible for you to see to such an extent that you are likely to maim or kill someone, but it’s ok as long as nobody ever approaches you with an oncoming light, you’ve got a fundamental and unsolvable problem with riding at night. I have family members who simply don’t drive anymore at night because they don’t trust their vision at night. This is the same thing–the onus is on the person who knows that they are posing a danger to others in the conditions that exist. You can’t just wish that away by saying the conditions should be other than they are. Now, if you think that you’re sensitive to oncoming lights but compensate by looking away from them and proceeding more slowly and cautiously, without the knowledge/expectation that you’re endangering anyone, then carry on.

@jabberwocky 97757 wrote:

Thing is, being blinded by a light doesn’t really take lumens, it just takes getting the brunt of the light right in the eyes. Which is why I hate helmet lights; no matter how bright (or not) they are, if they look at you you’re getting the main beam right in the face, and that absolutely sucks. I have a little headlamp I use for running that can’t be more than 80 lumens, but I’ve accidentally zapped myself in the eyes with it (looking at it while turning it on, genius!) and its certainly blinding.

Bright lights compound the issue because they simply throw a lot of light all over the place, but with proper aiming they aren’t as bad. I think a lot of the problem on the trail isn’t people running massively bright lights, its people aiming the things completely horizontal so the main beam is hitting oncoming traffic. I always strove to aim it down enough that the main beam is into the trail 20-30 feet in front of the bike, and the peripheral light is going out to the maximum distance I need to see to. The only complaints I ever got over several years were from runners who didn’t have lights.

Exactly. The messaging on this is so hysterical and so misguided as to be counterproductive. People who are reading this forum should be aware of the importance of properly aiming a headlight. People who aren’t reading this forum aren’t reading the frothing rants about overly bright (that is, badly aimed) headlights. People who are reading frothing rants on the forum and are now paranoid that their lights are too bright, to the extent that they’re riding around with lighting that isn’t safely illuminating the road ahead of them, should put their light back up to the level that they require while making sure that the light is aimed well.

[dkel]

@mstone 97747 wrote:

Yes, that’s exactly the thing that asymmetric beam optics can address; by focusing a larger portion of the available luminosity on the far field, you can achieve more consistent illumination over the whole field.

Which is why I want one!

@mstone 97747 wrote:

Also, FWIW, B&M uses the same optics on its generator lights and its non-generator lights. This will not help justify a dynamo hub to the spouse.

So maybe we just keep this between you and me. Oh wait, she reads this forum, too. Never mind.

[UnknownCyclist]

God, I love the internet. They should have invented this years ago!

[mattotoole]

Unfortunately, nearly all the lights sold in US shops are round beams with MTB heritage, inappropriate for road and commuter trail use.

Why can’t our local shops carry “shaped beam” lights? Maybe it’s our job to educate them about it, or simply buy from sources like Peter White until they start to care.

I’m as guilty and frustrated as anyone, with my super-blindomatic Princeton Tec. I try to shade or cover it, but wind up going off the trail steering blind and one-handed.

[Vicegrip]

@UnknownCyclist 97765 wrote:

God, I love the internet. They should have invented this years ago!

No kidding. Bust a capslock. I am clueless as I was going around thinking that swiveling the light off line when someone was oncoming was good enough.

[PotomacCyclist]

@Raymo853 97712 wrote:

I am so stealing this as a title for a song for my next band.

Your name wouldn’t be Jimmy Page? (Kidding. Sort of. See “Stairway to Heaven copyright infringement lawsuit.”)

[KWL]

@jabberwocky 97694 wrote:

Flashing anything doesn’t belong on the trail. I always turn the headlights and taillights to constant as soon as I enter any MUP.

Including this? (And I agree on steady lights when on the MUPs)

[Starduster]

Please note my post and pics on the It’s Dark=Lights thread: http://bikearlingtonforum.com/showthread.php?7693-It-s-dark-lights/page5

Until what time the US market vendors listen to their market and address the glare issue in traffic, you can buy from *the* lighting guru himself, http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/, or get your local bike shop to order for you.

And I will have a posting on Missed Connections that involves a close call and a flashing headlight [sigh].

[Starduster]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6894[/ATTACH]

(Insert lyrics from a Manfred Mann song covered by Springsteen here)

[vern]

@Starduster 97781 wrote:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6894[/ATTACH]

(Insert lyrics from a Manfred Mann song covered by Springsteen here)

Yeah, but in bringing this to the conversation it becomes even murkier and more controversial. Because really, is Manfred Mann singing “revved up like a deuce” or “wrapped up like a douche” during the chorus? I’m guessing the low lumens, anti-headlight crowd goes with revved/deuce, and the mega-lumens, a headlight for every household crowd sides with wrapped/douche.

[Geoff]

@Starduster 97781 wrote:

(Insert lyrics from a Manfred Mann song covered by Springsteen here)

Great song, but I believe it was actually written by Springsteen and covered by Mann…

[Author]

Posts