| |
Main
Date: 31 Aug 2006 23:54:24
From: Gooserider
Subject: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
|
|
| |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 11:43:16
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 10:55:58 +0100, Jim Higson wrote:
>
> That depends on the LED. Luxeon stars are very, very bright (as far as I
> know, the brightest available anywhere). That light uses 3-watt ones, and
> three of them. It is probably the brightest small light that you can buy
> off the shelf.
I did not see that they were 3w leds. That would be pretty bright. It
would also suck down those 4 AAA NiMh batteries fairly quickly. My (older
model) diNotte headlight uses 4 AA NiMh batteries for a single 5W bulb,
and lasts about 1.5 hours on high. I'm guessing more like 30 minutes for
this one.
>
> than to illuminate the way. But then I live in a place where drivers
> aren't hostile to cyclists, which doesn't seen to be the norm on this
> group.
Interesting. Where would that be?
--
David L. Johnson
__o
|
| | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 19:13:52
From: Jim Higson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
David L. Johnson wrote:
>> than to illuminate the way. But then I live in a place where drivers
>> aren't hostile to cyclists, which doesn't seen to be the norm on this
>> group.
>
> Interesting. Where would that be?
West Wales.
The nearest to hostility I've had is a couple of schoolage kids laughing
from the back seat as I pushed my bike up a steep (25%) hill. I just
laughed back. I probably did look pretty funny.
I don't cover as many miles as most people here, but I do ride in the towns
and sometimes make the journey to the English border and have never had
anything I'd call hostility, even when the roads are clogged. This is also
true when I used to live in a more urban area, near Manchester, England.
Apart from one in the south, Wales doesn't have any motorways (I think you'd
call these interstates or freeways or something - big roads with a 70mph
speed limit) so you can go on pretty any road the cars can.
In fact, for the most part, the only reks I get from motorists is
encouragement as I race up steep hills (we have quite a lot of them round
here). Cycling isn't that uncommon here, although as you get out of the
bigger towns you see a lot more bikes on the backs of cars than on the road
(there are some very good mountain bike routes)
--
Jim
|
| |
Date: 04 Sep 2006 17:25:20
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 18:10:52 +0100, Jim Higson wrote:
> Not that I have any reason to think the light isn't all that bight, but you
> can make any light look bright in a photo with large aperture, slow
> exposure or just Photoshop.
>
> To be fair, a slow exposure would make it blurred (unless the cyclist is
> actually staying still...)
>
> The light looks bright partially because it looks very red.
I think you are selling DiNotte short, there. I have one of their 5w
headlights, and it is very bright. Their website does not exaggerate its
brightness. It is more than adequate for riding on any road at night, at
a good speed, brighter than a 10w halogen.
> Anyway, there are some very bright and very small lights
out there now.
> Take a look here, for example:
>
> http://dansdata.com/littlefriend.htm
This seems to have 3 1-watt led's. I have a light with a 1-w led, and it
is not that bright. Even three would not be that impressive. And it is
not cheap; there are others like that available for less.
>
> You couldn't just put a red filter on that without lousy efficiency,
> though, because white LEDs are just blue ones with filters already,
I believe a red led is a different bulb, and supposedly a 3w red led, like
diNotte uses, is brighter than a 3w white led.
--
David L. Johnson
__o
|
| | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 10:55:58
From: Jim Higson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
David L. Johnson wrote:
> I think you are selling DiNotte short, there. I have one of their 5w
> headlights, and it is very bright. Their website does not exaggerate its
> brightness. It is more than adequate for riding on any road at night, at
> a good speed, brighter than a 10w halogen.
Well, I said I didn't have any reason to think the light isn't all that
bright. I was just pointing out that you can't rely on a photograph for
these things.
All kinds of cheap lights are sold on ebay photographed with beams like
lightsabers because the camera is set up that way.
> This seems to have 3 1-watt led's. I have a light with a 1-w led, and it
> is not that bright. Even three would not be that impressive. And it is
> not cheap; there are others like that available for less.
That depends on the LED. Luxeon stars are very, very bright (as far as I
know, the brightest available anywhere). That light uses 3-watt ones, and
three of them. It is probably the brightest small light that you can buy
off the shelf.
I'm not sure you could use that light for cycling. A general purpose
flashlight might have too narrow a beam for handlebar mounting, where you
can't aim the light as easily as if you were just holding it in your hand.
Having said that, I mount a fairly normal torch on my stem and haven't had
any problems.
White LEDs have improved a lot recently. It is quite likely a 1w from a year
ago wouldn't match up with one from now (either it'd be less bright at the
same draw, or the same brightness with greater draw). The new ones tend to
take a long time to filter down to normal equipment though - first they're
seen in 'enthusiast' devices (yes, there is such as thing as a flashlight
enthusiast - see http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ for example!).
In that review it measures 2900 lux. It is difficult to say how bright that
is in text, but it is *bright*.
>> You couldn't just put a red filter on that without lousy efficiency,
>> though, because white LEDs are just blue ones with filters already,
>
> I believe a red led is a different bulb, and supposedly a 3w red led, like
> diNotte uses, is brighter than a 3w white led.
Probably, since white ones are just blue ones with a phosphor coating, and
perhaps also helped by the eye being less sensitive to blue than red. The
white might still look brighter because it'd let you see in colour, but
that's a pretty subjective question anyway.
I like the look of the DiNotte light (although a bit too expensive for my
tastes) - the choice of a NiMH battery is probably a good one over lithium,
which would be lighter and higher capacity, but not last as long.
They claim 140lumens, which certainly is pretty bright. I don't really think
I need a very bright rear light, which is more for me to be seen than to
illuminate the way. But then I live in a place where drivers aren't hostile
to cyclists, which doesn't seen to be the norm on this group.
--
Jim
|
| |
Date: 04 Sep 2006 18:10:52
From: Jim Higson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Gooserider wrote:
> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>
> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
> this. Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
Not that I have any reason to think the light isn't all that bight, but you
can make any light look bright in a photo with large aperture, slow
exposure or just Photoshop.
To be fair, a slow exposure would make it blurred (unless the cyclist is
actually staying still...)
The light looks bright partially because it looks very red. Human eyes see
at night in mostly black and white, but cameras with a decent exposure pick
up the colours from a dark scene. This is why the night sky looks
colourless to the eye but very colourful when shot in the right way.
Anyway, there are some very bright and very small lights out there now. Take
a look here, for example:
http://dansdata.com/littlefriend.htm
You couldn't just put a red filter on that without lousy efficiency, though,
because white LEDs are just blue ones with filters already, but as a front
light for short rides (with a few spare cells in the saddle bag) it'd
probably be brighter than most of the fancy lights sold for bikes.
--
Jim
|
| | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 23:29:40
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"Jim Higson" <jh@333.org > wrote in message
news:vMKdnRzasIiGw2HZRVnyjA@eclipse.net.uk...
> Gooserider wrote:
>
>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>
>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>> this. Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>
> Not that I have any reason to think the light isn't all that bight, but
> you
> can make any light look bright in a photo with large aperture, slow
> exposure or just Photoshop.
>
> To be fair, a slow exposure would make it blurred (unless the cyclist is
> actually staying still...)
>
> The light looks bright partially because it looks very red. Human eyes see
> at night in mostly black and white, but cameras with a decent exposure
> pick
> up the colours from a dark scene. This is why the night sky looks
> colourless to the eye but very colourful when shot in the right way.
>
> Anyway, there are some very bright and very small lights out there now.
> Take
> a look here, for example:
>
> http://dansdata.com/littlefriend.htm
>
> You couldn't just put a red filter on that without lousy efficiency,
> though,
> because white LEDs are just blue ones with filters already, but as a front
> light for short rides (with a few spare cells in the saddle bag) it'd
> probably be brighter than most of the fancy lights sold for bikes.
That is a hell of a nice flashlight. Don't know how it would compare to the
DiNotte 5W Ultralight, but it would be a nice toy.
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Sep 2006 19:18:15
From: Jim Higson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
> That is a hell of a nice flashlight. Don't know how it would compare to
> the DiNotte 5W Ultralight, but it would be a nice toy.
Probably pretty well. I'd say roughly twice as bright, although the beam
might be a bit narrow for cycling. I often use my seven-LED pocket torch
(one of these http://peakledsolutions.net/CR123SS.html) though and I've
never had a problem.
If you wanted something with a slightly more sensible battery life, but
still exotic and expensive, this would be a good place to look:
http://darkgear.com/mrbulk/
--
Jim
|
| |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 22:06:57
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 17:47:44 -0700, Roy Zipris wrote:
> I don't trust o-rings mounts to hold lights in place well enough, which
> might be the reason why that light comes with an extra o-ring.... --Roy
> Zipris
Actually, it works well on the headlight. I haven't had trouble with the
light moving around, or aiming, or the o-ring breaking, or any such thing.
I don't have the taillight, but it should be similar.
--
David L. Johnson
__o
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 17:47:44
From: Roy Zipris
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
I don't trust o-rings mounts to hold lights in place well enough, which
might be the reason why that light comes with an extra o-ring.... --Roy
Zipris
|
| | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 09:01:28
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"Roy Zipris" <LRZipris@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1157158064.419293.136870@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I don't trust o-rings mounts to hold lights in place well enough, which
> might be the reason why that light comes with an extra o-ring.... --Roy
> Zipris
I've had a DiNotte Ultralight mounted to my bar since it came out, and the
mounting system works. I think it's a good idea, because if I were to wreck,
the only thing that can break is an O-ring that's cheap to replace. Better
to replace that than a proprietary mount.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 09:57:53
From:
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Ken C. M. wrote:
>
> Yeah you can always rig up some sort of way to mount a light. Here is my
> rig: http://www.bikesandmoreonline.com/techtips.html
I wonder - it looks like that mount puts your blinkie 90 degrees out of
its normal orientation, no? Sort of turned on its side?
LED blinkies are excellent, but they're quite directional. Most spray
their light in a beam that's wide side-to-side, but narrow up and down.
They work well as long as they're mounted accurately vertical, proper
side up. If you rotate them 90 degrees, you'll get a beam that's quite
visible to earthworms and airline pilots, but not to motorists who are
slightly off to your side.
You might want to check that out by observing your bike as a friend
test rides it at night.
> And bright is the key for night time riding. I ride home almost every
> night between 9:15 and 9:45 and a few times I had to do it with no
> lights and it made me a little nervous.
It would make me a _lot_ nervous. I don't think you need overpowering
lights, but I do think you need lights!
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 13:08:20
From: Ken C. M.
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken C. M. wrote:
>
>>Yeah you can always rig up some sort of way to mount a light. Here is my
>>rig: http://www.bikesandmoreonline.com/techtips.html
>
>
> I wonder - it looks like that mount puts your blinkie 90 degrees out of
> its normal orientation, no? Sort of turned on its side?
>
No my blinkie slides into its mount either way. It can be positioned in
either the up and down direction or the side to side direction.
> LED blinkies are excellent, but they're quite directional. Most spray
> their light in a beam that's wide side-to-side, but narrow up and down.
> They work well as long as they're mounted accurately vertical, proper
> side up. If you rotate them 90 degrees, you'll get a beam that's quite
> visible to earthworms and airline pilots, but not to motorists who are
> slightly off to your side.
>
> You might want to check that out by observing your bike as a friend
> test rides it at night.
>
Interesting, I never knew that some lights had an up and down way to
mount them, I always just thought as long as they blink in a lateral
direction you okay.
>
>>And bright is the key for night time riding. I ride home almost every
>>night between 9:15 and 9:45 and a few times I had to do it with no
>>lights and it made me a little nervous.
>
>
> It would make me a _lot_ nervous. I don't think you need overpowering
> lights, but I do think you need lights!
>
I have never seen any bike lights that I thought of as /overpowering/
Ken
Messengers and mountain bikers share a common chromosome. ~James Bethea
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 09:22:38
From: SMS
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Gooserider wrote:
> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>
> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
Sure it's bright, but it doesn't provide a wide field of view like the
CatEye TL-1000 that has both rear and side pointing LEDs, or like a
xenon strobe as sold by Night-Sun and others.
I see a lot of very poor rear LED flashers, generally the ones sold for
$2-5 at drug stores and hardware stores, but a good LED flasher with
side pointing LEDs, and an internal reflector is really sufficient. A
xenon strobe is better, but the bulb life is less than for LEDs, and the
current draw is much higher.
I think that some light manufacturers look at a 0.6W incandescent tail
light, such as used on the old dynamo systems, and then go totally
overboard in trying to solve a problem that's already been solved by
company's like CatEye, Blackburn, Trek, and NightSun.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 18:21:35
From:
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Gooserider wrote:
> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>
> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
"Insane" is a good word.
Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment. A $130 taillight
bright enough to blind drivers makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
armor.
Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
negatives eclipse the slight gain.
If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
enough?
I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
taillight. Nothing more is needed.
Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 16:01:51
From: Bill Baka
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Gooserider wrote:
>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>
>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>
> "Insane" is a good word.
>
> Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment. A $130 taillight
> bright enough to blind drivers makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
> thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
> armor.
>
> Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
> negatives eclipse the slight gain.
>
> If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
> taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
> enough?
>
> I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
> standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
> taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>
> Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>
I looked at the web site and all the products and pictures and any tail
light that throws a noticeable beam on the ground to the rear would
probably get me a fix-it ticket from the California Highway Patrol.
They don't really appreciate that much light in the rear and do like to
find excuses to right some outright silly fix-it tickets.
I do like their line though.
Bill Baka
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 16:17:06
From: R Brickston
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 16:01:51 GMT, Bill Baka <bbaka@syix.com > wrote:
>frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>> Gooserider wrote:
>>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>>
>>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>>> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>
>> "Insane" is a good word.
>>
>> Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment. A $130 taillight
>> bright enough to blind drivers makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
>> thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
>> armor.
>>
>> Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
>> negatives eclipse the slight gain.
>>
>> If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
>> taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
>> enough?
>>
>> I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
>> standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
>> taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>>
>> Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>I looked at the web site and all the products and pictures and any tail
>light that throws a noticeable beam on the ground to the rear would
>probably get me a fix-it ticket from the California Highway Patrol.
>They don't really appreciate that much light in the rear and do like to
>find excuses to right some outright silly fix-it tickets.
>I do like their line though.
>Bill Baka
You would probably get a ticket for RWB, Riding While Baka.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 02:03:35
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
<frkrygow@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1157073695.573424.216990@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Gooserider wrote:
>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>
>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>> this.
>> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>
> "Insane" is a good word.
>
> Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment. A $130 taillight
> bright enough to blind drivers makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
> thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
> armor.
>
> Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
> negatives eclipse the slight gain.
>
> If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
> taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
> enough?
>
> I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
> standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
> taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>
> Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
>
> - Frank Krygowski
But it's cool, Frank. :-)
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 02:01:18
From: R Brickston
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On 31 Aug 2006 18:21:35 -0700, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>
>Gooserider wrote:
>> http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>>
>> Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>> Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>
>"Insane" is a good word.
>
>Cycling is about efficient and appropriate equipment.
> A $130 taillight
> bright enough to blind drivers
That's an opinion?
>makes as much sense as using spokes 1/2"
>thick, or 4" wide steel belted radial tires, or riding in full body
>armor.
>
>Yes, any of these might concievably make you 1% safer. But the
>negatives eclipse the slight gain.
>
>If you think otherwise, ask yourself: Why not use three of these
>taillights? Or five of them? Or ten? How do you judge what's really
>enough?
Hey, why not mount a 12 volt car battery and use a headlight on the
rear?
>
>I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
>standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
>taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>
>Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
Not bad at all, until some teenager yakking on a cell phone rams you.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 13:44:03
From:
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 02:01:18 GMT, R Brickston
<rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@ > wrote:
>
>>
>>I've judged by observing my bike in the dark, with its relatively
>>standard equipment: LED blinky, reflectors, and (perhaps) generator
>>taillight. Nothing more is needed.
>>
>>Calm your fears. It's not that bad out there.
>
>Not bad at all, until some teenager yakking on a cell phone rams you.
Well, that could happen, yes.
But the stats say that you don't really have to worry that much about
it. Death while cycling occures at a rate of roughly one per 450
years of riding, 24 hours a day, non-stop.
It really isn't dangerous, and we should conciously avoid thinking
that it is. If we fall into the trap of believing the propaganda that
anti-cycling groups and governmets try to keep feeding us, we will
wind up with cycling lanes, helmet laws, etcetera - none of which are
actually a benefit.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 08:08:47
From: wvantwiller
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
R Brickston <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@ > wrote in
news:oq4ff2h1ju81qt54nlogaek2b7772el74s@4ax.com:
>
> Not bad at all, until some teenager yakking on a cell phone rams you.
And, considering that same teenager will plow right into the back of a car
with at least TWO tail lights and filling the lane, just what is this light
going to do?
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 00:26:04
From: sally
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com >,
Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
$130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
required external battery pack. It better be bright.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"sally" <caspam@doj.ca.gov > wrote in message
news:ed7ums$i9s$1@blue.rahul.net...
> In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
> Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>>this.
>>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>
> $130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
> required external battery pack. It better be bright.
The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense. Anyone
who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces off
of his/her ass.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 00:56:46
From: R Brickston
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
<Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
>
>"sally" <caspam@doj.ca.gov> wrote in message
>news:ed7ums$i9s$1@blue.rahul.net...
>> In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
>> Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>>>this.
>>>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>
>> $130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
>> required external battery pack. It better be bright.
>
>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense. Anyone
>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces off
>of his/her ass.
>
How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
Dirt cheap.
|
| | | | |
Date: 03 Sep 2006 13:51:15
From: SMS
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
R Brickston wrote:
> How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
> Dirt cheap.
The issue isn't the price, it's whether or not such a tail light is any
better, or as good as, a high-end LED flasher, or a xenon strobe.
The Nightsun xenon strobe would provide a higher level of safety than
the DiNotte tail light, at $30 for the two AA version, and $40 for the
12 volt version. The biggest advantage is the 180 degree visibility.
There are high-end LED blinkers that also provide 180 degree visibility,
by the use of multiple LEDs, pointing to the sides.
The downside of the xenon strobes is that the high visibility comes with
the trade-off of short battery life (7 hours), and relatively short
strobe-tube life (relative to the life of an LED).
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 01:06:59
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@ > wrote in message
news:m71ff25a8rlhj04achissin4md3ibgnojq@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
> <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"sally" <caspam@doj.ca.gov> wrote in message
>>news:ed7ums$i9s$1@blue.rahul.net...
>>> In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
>>> Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>>>>this.
>>>>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>>
>>> $130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
>>> required external battery pack. It better be bright.
>>
>>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense. Anyone
>>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces
>>off
>>of his/her ass.
>>
>
> How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
> Dirt cheap.
Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because when
my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
people complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
dramatic). If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a
nice crap before every ride.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 09:04:58
From: Ken C. M.
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Gooserider wrote:
> "R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote in message
> news:m71ff25a8rlhj04achissin4md3ibgnojq@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
>><Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"sally" <caspam@doj.ca.gov> wrote in message
>>>news:ed7ums$i9s$1@blue.rahul.net...
>>>
>>>>In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
>>>>Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>>>>>this.
>>>>>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>>>
>>>>$130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
>>>>required external battery pack. It better be bright.
>>>
>>>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense. Anyone
>>>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces
>>>off
>>>of his/her ass.
>>>
>>
>>How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
>>Dirt cheap.
>
>
> Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because when
> my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
> seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
> people complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
> dramatic). If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a
> nice crap before every ride.
>
>
Yeah you can always rig up some sort of way to mount a light. Here is my
rig: http://www.bikesandmoreonline.com/techtips.html
And bright is the key for night time riding. I ride home almost every
night between 9:15 and 9:45 and a few times I had to do it with no
lights and it made me a little nervous.
Ken
--
Messengers and mountain bikers share a common chromosome. ~James Bethea
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 14:46:33
From: Claire Petersky
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"Ken C. M." <ken@up-yours-spammer.net > wrote in message
news:CJednWTbesVhsmXZnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Yeah you can always rig up some sort of way to mount a light. Here is my
> rig: http://www.bikesandmoreonline.com/techtips.html
Ooh yeah, I like it.
--
Warm Regards,
Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 06:31:47
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Ken C. M. <ken@up-yours-spammer.net > wrote:
> Gooserider wrote:
>>
>> Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because when
>> my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
>> seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
>> people complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
>> dramatic). If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a
>> nice crap before every ride.
>>
> Yeah you can always rig up some sort of way to mount a light. Here is my
> rig: http://www.bikesandmoreonline.com/techtips.html
That's a neat way to mount a blinkie. I'll have to keep that in mind.
The Minoura Besso Fork mount holdier is one of my favourites:
http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?sku=13291&srccode=1067
I have one on my fork to mount a 5 LED light as a front blinkie, and
one on the rear off a seatstay for a regular blinkie. My Carradice
makes the seatpost mount unuseable.
> And bright is the key for night time riding. I ride home almost every
> night between 9:15 and 9:45 and a few times I had to do it with no
> lights and it made me a little nervous.
For me, that late at night is a lot better. Since it's not rush hour
people tend to be calmer and paying more attention. Of course that will
vary wildly depending on your local traffic patterns.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"After I asked him what he meant, he replied that freedom consisted of
the unimpeded right to get rich, to use his ability, no matter what the
cost to others, to win advancement." -- Norman Thomas
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 10:14:51
From: Ken C. M.
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Dane Buson wrote:
> Ken C. M. <ken@up-yours-spammer.net> wrote:
>
>>Gooserider wrote:
>>
>>>Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because when
>>>my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
>>>seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
>>>people complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
>>>dramatic). If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a
>>>nice crap before every ride.
>>>
>>
>>Yeah you can always rig up some sort of way to mount a light. Here is my
>>rig: http://www.bikesandmoreonline.com/techtips.html
>
>
> That's a neat way to mount a blinkie. I'll have to keep that in mind.
>
That was just a rig I came up with in a pinch when my hours at work
changed. I just hobbled it together from stuff I had hanging around the
garage. I guess I could paint it black to make it look a little cleaner.
But then again it's just my commuter. And I have been using it for
almost a year with no problems, I mean it hasn't fallen off or anything
so it must be pretty secure.
> The Minoura Besso Fork mount holdier is one of my favourites:
>
> http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?sku=13291&srccode=1067
>
> I have one on my fork to mount a 5 LED light as a front blinkie, and
> one on the rear off a seatstay for a regular blinkie. My Carradice
> makes the seatpost mount unuseable.
>
>
>>And bright is the key for night time riding. I ride home almost every
>>night between 9:15 and 9:45 and a few times I had to do it with no
>>lights and it made me a little nervous.
>
>
> For me, that late at night is a lot better. Since it's not rush hour
> people tend to be calmer and paying more attention. Of course that will
> vary wildly depending on your local traffic patterns.
>
True, but I still worry about the rednech drunks racing around in their
pick-up trucks tossing empty beer cans and bottles out the windows.
Getting hit by one of those would make it a bad commute home.
Ken
--
Messengers and mountain bikers share a common chromosome. ~James Bethea
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 19:33:20
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
> "R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote in message
>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
>>>
>>>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense. Anyone
>>>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces off
>>>of his/her ass.
>>>
>>
>> How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130? Dirt
>> cheap.
>
> Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because when
> my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
> seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when people
> complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be dramatic).
> If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a nice crap
> before every ride.
You know, normally I'd totally agree with you, but a 1/2 lb tail light?
I mean, I'm riding around on athon Plus tires, with a 48 spoke rear
wheel, a nice chunk of tools, work clothes, dynamo hub front, etc. But
I think it crosses my threshold for weight/light return.
How about instead I strap *two* nice bright blinkies on the rear and
save $80 bucks and 4-5 ounces?
Also, the fact that I'd have to recharge it about 5x as often as my
normal lights would get obnoxious.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"I think it's about time we voted for senators with breasts.
After all, we've been voting for boobs long enough."
-Arizona senatorial candidate Claire Sargent, on women candiates.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 03:03:42
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"Dane Buson" <dane@unseen.edu > wrote in message
news:foiks3-7re.ln1@zuvembi.homelinux.org...
> Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>> "R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote in message
>>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
>>>>
>>>>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense.
>>>>Anyone
>>>>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces
>>>>off
>>>>of his/her ass.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
>>> Dirt
>>> cheap.
>>
>> Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because
>> when
>> my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
>> seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
>> people
>> complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
>> dramatic).
>> If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a nice
>> crap
>> before every ride.
>
> You know, normally I'd totally agree with you, but a 1/2 lb tail light?
> I mean, I'm riding around on athon Plus tires, with a 48 spoke rear
> wheel, a nice chunk of tools, work clothes, dynamo hub front, etc. But
> I think it crosses my threshold for weight/light return.
Then the extra 8 ounces really doesn't matter. :-)
> How about instead I strap *two* nice bright blinkies on the rear and
> save $80 bucks and 4-5 ounces?
>
> Also, the fact that I'd have to recharge it about 5x as often as my
> normal lights would get obnoxious.
DiNotte claims 12 hours on low power. I've found that with rechargeable
batteries it's a good idea to charge them when they're not in use, anyway. I
rotate several sets through my DiNotte Ultralight. Hey, I'm not saying it's
a perfect tail light, or that everyone should rush out and get one. I just
think it's cool, and would definitely get the attention of drivers. Shame
the mounting system won't work for many people.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 01:55:55
From: R Brickston
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 01:06:59 GMT, "Gooserider"
<Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
>
>"R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote in message
>news:m71ff25a8rlhj04achissin4md3ibgnojq@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
>> <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"sally" <caspam@doj.ca.gov> wrote in message
>>>news:ed7ums$i9s$1@blue.rahul.net...
>>>> In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
>>>> Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>>>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>>>>>this.
>>>>>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>>>
>>>> $130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
>>>> required external battery pack. It better be bright.
>>>
>>>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense. Anyone
>>>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces
>>>off
>>>of his/her ass.
>>>
>>
>> How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
>> Dirt cheap.
>
>Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because when
>my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
>seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
>people complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
>dramatic). If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take a
>nice crap before every ride.
>
How about lower down the seat tube or perhaps the chain/seat stays?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 02:02:42
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
"R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@ > wrote in message
news:be4ff25o43bi2ii6trohur67m5264doqns@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 01:06:59 GMT, "Gooserider"
> <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"R Brickston" <rb20170REMOVE.yahoo.com@> wrote in message
>>news:m71ff25a8rlhj04achissin4md3ibgnojq@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:28:11 GMT, "Gooserider"
>>> <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"sally" <caspam@doj.ca.gov> wrote in message
>>>>news:ed7ums$i9s$1@blue.rahul.net...
>>>>> In article <QEKJg.18363$JO5.2477@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
>>>>> Gooserider <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider
>>>>>>this.
>>>>>>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>>>>>
>>>>> $130 for a taillight. Weight almost half a pound, including the
>>>>> required external battery pack. It better be bright.
>>>>
>>>>The weight argument is silly. The price argument makes more sense.
>>>>Anyone
>>>>who bitches about 8 ounces could just carry less water, or lose 8 ounces
>>>>off
>>>>of his/her ass.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How much is your life or use of your limbs and/or brain worth. $130?
>>> Dirt cheap.
>>
>>Hey, I totally agree. The light doesn't work for my situation, because
>>when
>>my rack trunk and seat bag are on, there is no way for the DiNotte to be
>>seen. I'm sure I could jerry rig something but... Anyway, I laugh when
>>people complain about a weight as minimal as 8 ounces(half a pound to be
>>dramatic). If someone wants to save 8 ounces, he/she can should just take
>>a
>>nice crap before every ride.
>>
>
> How about lower down the seat tube or perhaps the chain/seat stays?
I don't think so. The light mounts with an O-ring, which holds it to the
seatpost. If I tried to put in on a smaller tube, I think it woudl move . I
ride a small frame, and I have a rack and fenders. If I moved it down to the
seat tube it would be blocked by the fenders. The light is meant for the
roadie crowd--a bike with a lot of seatpost showing and minimal gear. It's
very cool, and if I was riding a stripped down racing bike with just a tiny
seatbag it would be ideal. Neat light.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 00:14:45
From: R Brickston
Subject: Re: DiNotte's tail light is unreal.
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 23:54:24 GMT, "Gooserider"
<Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
>http://www.dinottelighting.com/DiNotte_Lighting_Ultra_Tail_Light.htm
>
>Wow. If I wasn't using a rack trunk I would seriously have to consider this.
>Judging by the pics on that page, the illumination is insane.
>
I like it. Driver's will think it's a big assed county maintenance
truck and give a wide berth; might even get someone off the cell phone
and involuntarily give a few seconds of attention to the road.
|
|
