cheap bike lamps

[richard taylor]

Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.

Cheers
Richard

[Rachel]

Argos
Chav-MAXX (TK-MAXX)
Wilko (mill Road)
Cycle King (mill Road)
Asda
Acorn (pseudo pound shop - Bradwell's court)

Cheap bike lights usually = not very good, low LED density more liable to
fail/fall off have crap fittings so rotate out of view, important
protection from cars is them being able to see
you... some economies aren't really worth it... in deadness and not
becoming so terms

[Nick Wagg]

Post by Rachel
Cheap bike lights usually = not very good, low LED density more liable to
fail/fall off have crap fittings so rotate out of view, important
protection from cars is them being able to see
you... some economies aren't really worth it... in deadness and not
becoming so terms

I totally agree. But don't forget that wearing light coloured clothing
or a high-viz jacket is just as important, speaking from the POV of
the driver and as a cyclist.

[Peter Naulls]

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.

University cycles, probably around a tenner/set. The guy usually chucks
in free fitting too, although that's probably not needed for just
lights.

[Stuart Moore]

Post by Peter Naulls

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.

University cycles, probably around a tenner/set. The guy usually chucks
in free fitting too, although that's probably not needed for just
lights.

Seconded - I generally go for the ones from there, they're quite good.

Can I also suggest investing £11 in http://www.danlite.com/ - gives you
a 2nd light source on your bike; a good thing (esp. if your headlight
goes off and you don't notice, as happened to me a while back)

Stuart

[zulu]

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.

Dare I suggest you think *efficient* rather than *cheap*!
...or are you yet another road user who imagines that everyone else can see
as well as (I assume) _you_ doe?

[Theo Markettos]

Post by zulu

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is ?16 a set.

Dare I suggest you think *efficient* rather than *cheap*!
...or are you yet another road user who imagines that everyone else can see
as well as (I assume) _you_ doe?

Don't forget there are some legitimate uses of cheap and nasty lights. Like
replacing the 20p bulb with a halogen or upgrading a cheapo LED set with
hyperbright LEDs. I once made a (bright) light set with some plastic drinks
bottles - having a decent housing would have made a big difference.

I think Richard probably knows what he's doing...
(I still have a halogen bulb from his clearout on ucam.adverts.giveaway a
few months ago. Just got to get around to finishing the trailer to fit
it...)

Theo

[David Damerell]

Post by Theo Markettos

Post by zulu

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is ?16 a set.

Dare I suggest you think *efficient* rather than *cheap*!
...or are you yet another road user who imagines that everyone else can see
as well as (I assume) _you_ doe?

Perhaps people with defective eyesight shouldn't drive (although, of
course, we have to assume that they do).

Post by Theo Markettos
Don't forget there are some legitimate uses of cheap and nasty lights.

I've no problem with cheap and nasty lights for being seen; the light only
has to go one way, not two - provided that they are not excessively
directional like cheap LED lights. I have an extremely cheap and nasty 2xC
incandescent rear light on my trailer, but then I'm not so worried about
that being run over.

Better headlights only really come into their own for seeing when it is
actually dark (ie, on unlit roads).

Reflectors - while not effective at all times - are enormously useful when
car headlights are pointing at you; a reflective vest is a far better
investment than replacing cheap lights with super-boffo ones.

[Philip Hazel]

Post by David Damerell
Perhaps people with defective eyesight shouldn't drive (although, of
course, we have to assume that they do).

My optician tells me that by the time you are 50, you need twice as much
light to see as well as you did when you were a child. Old folk are
always complaining that they need brighter lights to read by; young
children are always being chastised by their parents for "reading in the
dark". For me, 50 is long gone, and I know I do not see as well as I
used to in conditions of poor light. Is my eyesight "defective"??

[zulu]

Post by Philip Hazel

Post by David Damerell
Perhaps people with defective eyesight shouldn't drive (although, of
course, we have to assume that they do).

My optician tells me that by the time you are 50, you need twice as much
light to see as well as you did when you were a child. Old folk are
always complaining that they need brighter lights to read by; young
children are always being chastised by their parents for "reading in the
dark". For me, 50 is long gone, and I know I do not see as well as I
used to in conditions of poor light. Is my eyesight "defective"??

No Idea...get it checked!
I _know_ mine is, that's why I have to go to Moorfields Eye Hospital in
London every three months for treatment...

[Gropius Riftwynde]

Post by Philip Hazel

Post by David Damerell
Perhaps people with defective eyesight shouldn't drive (although, of
course, we have to assume that they do).

My optician tells me that by the time you are 50, you need twice as much
light to see as well as you did when you were a child. Old folk are
always complaining that they need brighter lights to read by; young
children are always being chastised by their parents for "reading in the
dark". For me, 50 is long gone, and I know I do not see as well as I
used to in conditions of poor light. Is my eyesight "defective"??

I doubt it. My night sight has fallen off by at least 50% in the last
6 years. The key thing is to relaise it and react accordingly. I don't
drive after dark any more except in well lit places or on small
country roads where you can see what's coming better than in the
daytime. On only two occasions in my driving life have I passed cars
going the other way in the pitch dark without any lights. How do they
did they do it? - testing out infra-red goggles?

GR

[Nick Wagg]

Post by Gropius Riftwynde
I doubt it. My night sight has fallen off by at least 50% in the last
6 years. The key thing is to relaise it and react accordingly. I don't
drive after dark any more except in well lit places or on small
country roads where you can see what's coming better than in the
daytime. On only two occasions in my driving life have I passed cars
going the other way in the pitch dark without any lights. How do they
did they do it? - testing out infra-red goggles?

Pedestrians are usually less visible on small country roads and they
rarely carry lights. I have encountered them on at least two
occasions, walking in the road itself, without lights and in dark
clothing, and facing away from the oncoming traffic. Probably
something about not wanting to see death coming.

[Linda Fox]

On 04 Mar 2005 16:17:59 +0000 (GMT), David Damerell

Post by David Damerell
Perhaps people with defective eyesight shouldn't drive (although, of
course, we have to assume that they do).

But "defective eyesight" is something which can be measured.
Variations in level of night vision may be measurable too, but there
don't seem to be any commonly available tests, neither is it a
prerequisite of eligibility for a licence, as is normal visual acuity.

I am apparently legal to drive, according to my Addenbrookes optician,
providing that I am wearing the contact lens I've currently been
provided with (but I'm managing without one in that eye completely a
lot of the time as this little bugger can usually only be taken out
with a sucker and the after-effects can be traumatic even after only
wearing it for three or four hours). I don't drive, however (no car,
but I don't drive even when we hire one), because I don't feel safe
any more.

I think what zulu was getting at was that acuity of night vision is
more of a movable feast - you _have_ to meet a minimal standard of
daytime vision, and if yours is even better, those whose sight is only
slightly worse are still ok. We have no measure of how good your night
vision needs to be in order to be safe, but if yours is exceptionally
good, you may not realise to what extent someone who is "average"
falls short of your ability. And I feel there must be many who "pass"
during the daytime but have difficulty in the dark _IF_ people are
going to assume everyone can see "just like day". I don't think safety
standards should be measured by the ability of the best. If that were
the case, by definition, we'd almost all be judged as unsafe.

I know my night vision is on the poor side, and even when I was still
driving by day I did my damnedest not to drive after lighting-up time
for that reason. I also had trouble at the other end of the scale.
Living as I was at the NW corner of the Wirral, I was doing Saturday
morning teaching in Chester, and my first pupil was at 8.30 and my
last finished shortly before 2, after which I often had rehearsals or
meetings. In the winter that meant I was driving south-east with the
sun low and right in front of me, and I was driving with the sun in my
eyes on the way back as well. It became such a strain to see, even
with the visor down, dark glasses and a peaked cap on, that I
preferred, instead of driving just over 30 minutes, to take a 6.15
train round Liverpool and change somewhere down the line and walk 30
minutes from the station. Two hours instead of 30 minutes but I felt
safe.

Linda ff

[zulu]

Post by Linda Fox
On 04 Mar 2005 16:17:59 +0000 (GMT), David Damerell

Post by David Damerell
Perhaps people with defective eyesight shouldn't drive (although, of
course, we have to assume that they do).

But "defective eyesight" is something which can be measured.
Variations in level of night vision may be measurable too, but there
don't seem to be any commonly available tests, neither is it a
prerequisite of eligibility for a licence, as is normal visual acuity.
I am apparently legal to drive, according to my Addenbrookes optician,
providing that I am wearing the contact lens I've currently been
provided with (but I'm managing without one in that eye completely a
lot of the time as this little bugger can usually only be taken out
with a sucker and the after-effects can be traumatic even after only
wearing it for three or four hours). I don't drive, however (no car,
but I don't drive even when we hire one), because I don't feel safe
any more.
I think what zulu was getting at was that acuity of night vision is
more of a movable feast - you _have_ to meet a minimal standard of
daytime vision, and if yours is even better, those whose sight is only
slightly worse are still ok. We have no measure of how good your night
vision needs to be in order to be safe, but if yours is exceptionally
good, you may not realise to what extent someone who is "average"
falls short of your ability. And I feel there must be many who "pass"
during the daytime but have difficulty in the dark _IF_ people are
going to assume everyone can see "just like day". I don't think safety
standards should be measured by the ability of the best. If that were
the case, by definition, we'd almost all be judged as unsafe.
I know my night vision is on the poor side, and even when I was still
driving by day I did my damnedest not to drive after lighting-up time
for that reason. I also had trouble at the other end of the scale.
Living as I was at the NW corner of the Wirral, I was doing Saturday
morning teaching in Chester, and my first pupil was at 8.30 and my
last finished shortly before 2, after which I often had rehearsals or
meetings. In the winter that meant I was driving south-east with the
sun low and right in front of me, and I was driving with the sun in my
eyes on the way back as well. It became such a strain to see, even
with the visor down, dark glasses and a peaked cap on, that I
preferred, instead of driving just over 30 minutes, to take a 6.15
train round Liverpool and change somewhere down the line and walk 30
minutes from the station. Two hours instead of 30 minutes but I felt
safe.

Well said.Linda!
That makes at least two of us with some sense... :-)

[Gropius Riftwynde]

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 14:04:55 -0000, "richard taylor"

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.
Cheers
Richard

Possibly a carbide lamp will do the trick.
http://wasg.iinet.net.au/clamps.html

GR

[Brian Watson]

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.

Aha, another cyclist with a deathwish...

[Theo Markettos]

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is ?16 a set.

The Bikeman on the market sells second hand lights. I bought a second set
of dynamo lights for something like 3ukp each - but they needed new bulbs.

Theo

[Mary Pegg]

Post by richard taylor
Can anyone recomend a bike shop in cambridge for cheap lights, so far the
cheapest I've come across is £16 a set.

The chap half way down Mill Road with his bits of bikes shop will probably
sell you a set for less than a fiver. But these may not be LEDs so you'd
either need to invest in some rechargeable batteries or take the long-term
hit of feeding them batteries.