Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Bicycler » 8 Feb 2016, 3:23pm

Manc33 wrote:I can't grasp why people are still spending whatever it is like £50-£70 on a "Cateye" front light from Halford's, if you can get stuff like the "Cree x2 Solarstorm" off eBay for under £20 and it is like having a portable sun on your handlebars. That light is so good it is good enough for pitch black trails. It literally lights up the road for 100 Meters. If that's not enough you can always have 2 on your bars, its still cheaper.

I don't think the OP (or anyone else) was intending upon spending anything like £50-70 on such a light. He clearly states his reasoning as wanting to seek out, in addition to his existing lights, a pair of British Standard lights to comply with the law.

For me, when walking or cycling about, eBay Cree-type lights lights are a very frequent source of annoyance. Too much light for most uses and it is emitted indiscriminately in a manner which has the potential to dazzle others. A special place in hell is reserved for those who design the ones which flash/strobe at full brightness. I'm aware that some people dip their lights or buy aftermarket Fresnel lenses to avoid annoyance. All I can say is that these steps are evidently too much effort for a lot of the people who own such lights. In reality, I suspect that in a lot of situations it would be asking a lot of anyone to manual dip a light every time they came across another road user who might be dazzled.

I too like to have a decently bright headlight. I paid about £40 for a bright Bush and Muller light (http://www.bike24.de/p167790.html) because a) It has a much more useful beam shape for road use b) It complies to the German lighting standard and, as such, is road legal in the UK, c) I wanted a light which used AA batteries.

If the Cree light works for you and you are confident that you use it in a way which doesn't annoy others then that's great. Each to his own.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6471
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Tangled Metal » 8 Feb 2016, 3:50pm

With hindsight I know I should have asked for the manager (I sincerely hope it wasn't him). I didn't partly because his complete and utter flouncing off like that (about 5 steps into the back of the checkout bay next to get the lights display) took me by surprise. It was as close to a petulant teenager as I've ever seen in a +40 year old man. He struck me as that Will and Perry sketch characters from Harry Enfield and Kathy Burke. I am not kidding. It is hard to collect your senses when you see a display so jaw dropingly petulant.

BTW it was in the UK' s biggest bike shop, an independent retailer with a very good reputation. I think the shop is great, with nothing but the highest levels of customer service. I would recommend the shop to anyone, and still would. It's possibly one of the only places that doesn't sell cheap apart from end of season sales of bikes and the other odd type of products. Yet it's still very popular, rightly so.

It is this problem I've got. There's this shop that is one of 3 bike shops I prefer. Then there's this incident that was severe enough to make me never shop there again. It's part of my view that I need to give the shop feedback and the opportunity to address my justified concerns.

My partner says I've given too much time and attention to that guy, to move on and forget about it. I think something should be said because nobody should get that treatment from sales assistants.

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Bicycler » 8 Feb 2016, 4:27pm

I agree with you. If I were the manager I would wish to know.

Steady rider
Posts: 2189
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Steady rider » 8 Feb 2016, 4:38pm

What requirement are in place to regulate the lights from being too strong/glary or point into other people eyes, other cyclists for example? Should they be pointed down?

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 17924
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Vorpal » 8 Feb 2016, 6:26pm

Tangled Metal wrote:It is this problem I've got. There's this shop that is one of 3 bike shops I prefer. Then there's this incident that was severe enough to make me never shop there again. It's part of my view that I need to give the shop feedback and the opportunity to address my justified concerns.

My partner says I've given too much time and attention to that guy, to move on and forget about it. I think something should be said because nobody should get that treatment from sales assistants.


Even if you don't mind for yourself, he could put someone right off cycling.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 15051
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby mjr » 8 Feb 2016, 7:13pm

Manc33 wrote:I can't grasp why people are still spending whatever it is like £50-£70 on a "Cateye" front light from Halford's, if you can get stuff like the "Cree x2 Solarstorm" off eBay for under £20 and it is like having a portable sun on your handlebars. That light is so good it is good enough for pitch black trails. It literally lights up the road for 100 Meters. If that's not enough you can always have 2 on your bars, its still cheaper.

That light is so antisocial, so dazzling, most use is illegal as far as I've seen, plus it has next to no side spill, which is also a bit odd, plus the reports of fires make me think the quality control is poor.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Manc33
Posts: 1545
Joined: 25 Apr 2015, 9:37pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Manc33 » 8 Feb 2016, 7:16pm

Its probably hit and miss but that Cree x2 I got has been working solid for at least a year now.

The included battery packs are bad I agree with that, I "upgraded" it with a 4x18650 and a 6x18650 waterproof pack (DX.com). Now its got about 10 hours of lighting on it on the "lowest" setting. Apart from them being a lot more resistant to water, those packs last FAR longer than the rubbish batteries that came with it.

TrustFire... you can trust that there will be a fire.

Tangled Metal wrote:It was as close to a petulant teenager as I've ever seen in a +40 year old man.


Every 40 year old man has a petulant teenager trapped inside him but... normally we can hide it. :)

Tangled Metal wrote:My partner says I've given too much time and attention to that guy, to move on and forget about it. I think something should be said because nobody should get that treatment from sales assistants.


I completely agree and you're one of the few people that stands up for themselves and says its their choice to wear a helmet and doesn't wear one (at times).

I say the same things you're saying but I always do wear one, I think a lot of it might be to do with if you banged your head in the past, since I got a helmet pretty much the day after I first came off and banged my head on a tree... cue the next reply "that explains a few things" lol.
Last edited by Manc33 on 8 Feb 2016, 7:18pm, edited 1 time in total.
When two cyclists get married, they should throw anodized cable crimps instead of confetti.

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Bicycler » 8 Feb 2016, 7:18pm

Steady rider wrote:What requirement are in place to regulate the lights from being too strong/glary or point into other people eyes, other cyclists for example?

The law states that the principal headlight and taillight of a bicycle must be approved to either the British Standard or an equivalent EU lighting standard. Amongst other things, these standards limit the amount of light which - when properly aimed - will be emitted above the horizontal (ie. towards the eyes of other road users). The three problems are that it is now quite difficult to actually find an approved light for sale in the UK; the law is never enforced; and additional lights do not have to comply with the standard. The law does make it an offence to use any head or tail light which dazzles or causes undue discomfort to other road users. Again, the problem is one of enforcement. Both of those laws only apply to lights on your bike, not light on helmets or backpacks. As I opined above, if someone were to wreak havoc by blinding all in his wake with a helmet searchlight then it could almost certainly be prosecuted as a public nuisance.

Should they be pointed down?

Virtually all lights are designed to be angled downwards. The problem with some lights is that they would have to be angled very steeply downwards not to annoy others. At this point they would be annoying the cyclist himself who would have a very brightly lit bit of road just in front of his front wheel. Obviously someone with a helmet lamp has very little control over where their light is pointed. I can see the use of helmet lights/head torches in some scenarios (eg sign/map reading) but I would avoid putting anything powerful there.
Last edited by Bicycler on 8 Feb 2016, 7:27pm, edited 2 times in total.

Manc33
Posts: 1545
Joined: 25 Apr 2015, 9:37pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Manc33 » 8 Feb 2016, 7:20pm

I do point it down so I only have my front wheel lit up, pretty much. I know a lot of people ride around with it blinding people though. Its a bit like the old ladies that suddenly stop in the middle of the aisle shopping, almost as if only they exist in the world.
When two cyclists get married, they should throw anodized cable crimps instead of confetti.

Steady rider
Posts: 2189
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Steady rider » 8 Feb 2016, 7:55pm

Thank you Bicycler for those details. I know someone who finds both cycle lights and car lights a problem. It looks to be an area where research and standards are needed.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6471
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Tangled Metal » 8 Feb 2016, 8:01pm

I guess if you have had a spill with a bang to the head you'll be more likely to wear a helmet like Manc33 said. Personally I've never had a bad spill or accident.

As a kid a neighbour kid bruised and cut his face up with an over the handlebars face plant following contact with a pothole.

Then less than a year later I was just starting out on a ride with 2 other lads and one hit a 2-3" stone on a steep downhill bend. He somersaulted with twist to land with head on grass at edge of road. His body from neck down hit the tarmac hard.

It was the last one that got me worried. I got a helmet and wore it for about 7 years. Then another one. Then I kind of stopped wearing it. Nothing happened so it's not bothered me.

Now I got one again because my road based commute has a sharp right turn after a downwards slope from a metal surfaced bridge onto stone flags. Those flags get very slippy when wet and I've yet to see them icy. Any ice there would be lethal. At that point I'm travelling very slowly but if I fell, hitting my head would probably be close to the level of impact in the helmet tests. If I'm right then the helmet makes sense.

BTW I've nearly lost my back end on a hill before so it's that turning, slipping feeling I'm wary of hence my use of helmet for this. Plus in winter I can wear an under helmet hat with the helmet I get a degree of protection from the rain for my glasses. It's not good to ride with rain streaming down your glasses.

PhilWhitehurst
Posts: 260
Joined: 9 Aug 2011, 4:14pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby PhilWhitehurst » 8 Feb 2016, 8:29pm

You won't find BS marked lights because lights are manufactured and sold globally. Your best lights for compliance are probably German lights, which are K marked.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6471
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Tangled Metal » 8 Feb 2016, 9:23pm

Cateye TL-LD500 it's CPSC & BS standard approved. There's a newer version with auto in the name which turns the lights on automatically. It says it's BS approved but I'm not sure if it means the reflector or the lighting part of it.

If you look around you can find the front and rear versions of these. It was this one I saw that got me asking the salesman about BS lights.

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby Bicycler » 8 Feb 2016, 11:10pm

The approval is just the reflector (ie BS 6102/2, not the light BS6102/3). AFAIK only Eurolight still make a BS 6102/3 light and it's the model EL156 http://www.eurolightcycling.com/products.aspx?id=2# If you trawl the internet you can just about still find shops with stock of old Cateye models such as the AU-100, LD260, EL300 and HL500 which were all made in BS variants. The AU100 is the only one which stands up well against current lights (in fact it's still my favourite rear light), the rest are now thoroughly obsolete.

Phil's right, if you're bothered about the legal angle, the easiest thing is to buy a couple of German K-marked lights.

Or I can send you a free pair of well used Ever Readys for the cost of postage (supply your own D-cells) :lol:

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Bike shop salesman abuse for not wearing a helmet

Postby TonyR » 9 Feb 2016, 6:01am

Bicycler wrote:The approval is just the reflector (ie BS 6102/2, not the light BS6102/3). AFAIK only Eurolight still make a BS 6102/3 light and it's the model EL156 http://www.eurolightcycling.com/products.aspx?id=2# If you trawl the internet you can just about still find shops with stock of old Cateye models such as the AU-100, LD260, EL300 and HL500 which were all made in BS variants. The AU100 is the only one which stands up well against current lights (in fact it's still my favourite rear light), the rest are now


BS6102 is being replaced by ISO6742-1:2015 to -5:2015. Its ISO6742-1:2015 that replaces BS6102/3 so that's what you need to look for now on a light.

ISO 6742-1
Cycles. Lighting and retro-reflective devices.
Lighting and signalling devices

ISO 6742-2
Cycles. Lighting and retro-reflective devices.
Retro-reflective devices

ISO 6742-3
Cycles. Lighting and retro-reflective devices.
Installation and use of devices

ISO 6742-4
Cycles. Lighting and retro-reflective devices.
Lighting powered by cycle movement

ISO 6742-5
Cycles. Lighting and retro-reflective devices.
Lighting not powered by cycle movement