Cycling UK Forum

Brucey wrote:

Jamesh wrote:How many variations of the Eveready lights were there?

several;

Those images of the history of different Ever Ready lamps made me feel quite old. The only ones I never used or owned were the first two. I can distinctly remember using the third front lamp because it had a spring underneath the bakelite knob used to switch it on and off, and the spring would make noises in protest as the base of the knob rotated against it.

Brucey wrote:
1D rear light. The front lamp above had a screw-type switch, requiring several turns to make a sound connection or disconnection. This was replaced by a switch which required just a part turn;

pete75 wrote:......My experience too. I used this sort metal front lights with a double battery - don't think you can get those batteries now. We used those lights as torches as well because they gave a good beam. The contacts were on the battery so every time you changed it you got new contacts. Never has any problems wit the back light either.

Oh yes, the original tin Never Ready......more like original sin, really.
Yeah, you got new contacts on a new battery, but that's less than half the story....the top battery contact had to make contact with the switch, the switch itself had to make contact, but the real piece of design wizardry ….the rusty tin top had to make contact with the rusty tin bottom bit in order to complete the circuit...OK when it was all new, clean, dry and shiny, but if you actually tried to use the thing it was pants!

Re slowster's noise; I've heard that noise; I've always thought it would make a brilliant sound effect!

cheers

Brucey wrote:the above photo is the first version of the plastic front light, with the combined spring clip I mentioned. The later ones had the twist catch in the base and a more secure mount to the bike itself.

BITD one of the mad things I did was to carry an Ever unready front light on tour, on the basis that it would be a torch around the campsite as well as a (not very good) bike light. I even modified one so that it had a jack plug socket in the side of it, which was intended to run a 3V rear lamp in a dynamo lamp housing, using a simple ground return single wire arrangement. It wasn't a bad idea per se, but as usual I spent more time faffing with the light itself (for all the usual reasons) than I did using it. Even when the lamp was carried inside a pannier, the batteries still vibrated enough to generate black crud, bad contacts, etc etc.... all very tedious indeed.

cheers

I did something similar for touring but with a different rationale. My front lamp was the Ever Ready plastic one with the swivel latch on the bottom of the case and nuts to clamp it onto the lamp bracket instead of it being spring loaded mount. I had a Karrimor rear pannier rack that came with a little washer welded onto it top rear offside for mounting a rear lamp. The Ever Ready rear lamp could not be attached to the frame or the pannier rack (didn't we call them "carriers" in the 70s/80s?) due to the panniers so I fixed a Sturmey Archer "egg-shaped" dynamo rear lamp (with 3v bulb) between the rack and the mudguard and wired it in parallel up to the front light batteries. My recollection is that the batteries wouldn't last one decent length night ride and I recall sleeping off the roadside just outside of Grantham one night after the lights died and I didn't feel safe continuing without lights (thankfully I was carrying camping equipment).

I fitted low current bulbs in my setup, but even with good quality batteries they conked out pretty quickly. I only ever used that setup on the basis that I wouldn't be using the lights except in emergencies. However the nature of the lights simply turned those situations into a different type of emergency...

cheers

Mick F wrote:Thanks, but there's some bits missing from the rear lamp.
There should be two hex bolts, a plate, two washers and two nuts to form the clamp for the RH seatstay.

does it really matter they are RUBBISH Some one will buy it/them for their period rebuild?

Today's tiny rechargeables that actually light up the road make it impossible for me to generate any nostalgia for the Ever Ready Frontguard II I had. I seem to have a fuzzy recollection of being impressed with the lens, but can't remember exactly why. Perhaps it shaped the feeble beam to some advantage?

"The Frontguard II has been built to the rigorous specification of the British Standards Institute; before being awarded the prestigious 'kite mark' the front lamp had to be switched on and off 5,000 times and continue to work without a flicker, and there were punishing vibration, moisture, corrosion and dust tests as well. BSI stipulated that the Frontguard had to be as conspicuous from the front as a car side-light, and that it throw a wide enough beam to cycle by; the intricate lens was designed by the Department of Opthalmic Optics at London University. After using this latest model of the Frontguard ourselves we feel that it is quite the best lamp on the market." - International Cycling Guide, 1982

531colin wrote:

pete75 wrote:......My experience too. I used this sort metal front lights with a double battery - don't think you can get those batteries now. We used those lights as torches as well because they gave a good beam. The contacts were on the battery so every time you changed it you got new contacts. Never has any problems wit the back light either.

Oh yes, the original tin Never Ready......more like original sin, really.
Yeah, you got new contacts on a new battery, but that's less than half the story....the top battery contact had to make contact with the switch, the switch itself had to make contact, but the real piece of design wizardry ….the rusty tin top had to make contact with the rusty tin bottom bit in order to complete the circuit...OK when it was all new, clean, dry and shiny, but if you actually tried to use the thing it was pants!

As I said I never had any problems using them. Must admit Dad used to modify them at the BRM factory where he worked. Now what's not to like about an object that works very well once it's been fettled by somebody who makes F1 Grand Prix cars for a living.

Sid Aluminium wrote:Today's tiny rechargeables that actually light up the road make it impossible for me to generate any nostalgia for the Ever Ready Frontguard II I had. I seem to have a fuzzy recollection of being impressed with the lens, but can't remember exactly why. Perhaps it shaped the feeble beam to some advantage?

"The Frontguard II has been built to the rigorous specification of the British Standards Institute; before being awarded the prestigious 'kite mark' the front lamp had to be switched on and off 5,000 times and continue to work without a flicker, and there were punishing vibration, moisture, corrosion and dust tests as well. BSI stipulated that the Frontguard had to be as conspicuous from the front as a car side-light, and that it throw a wide enough beam to cycle by; the intricate lens was designed by the Department of Opthalmic Optics at London University. After using this latest model of the Frontguard ourselves we feel that it is quite the best lamp on the market." - International Cycling Guide, 1982

wrong thread posted in. should be in the tea shop's funniest joke... section

As I said I never had any problems using them. Must admit Dad used to modify them at the BRM factory where he worked. Now what's not to like about an object that works very well once it's been fettled by somebody who makes F1 Grand Prix cars for a living.


That’s an interesting perspective and very typical of that time when we were still, if only just about, a nation that made lots of physical things. Many products sold then lacked today’s perfection, but decades ago a lot of folk had the skills to get imperfectly made stuff and stuff with design flaws working well and to keep it working. Today my family and friends typically have relatively limited idea of what would once be described as practical skills (most couldn’t mend a puncture) but are a wizz on other (newer) technologies.

tatanab wrote:... which is why we used to push a piece of carboard between the batteries, to stop them moving.

That's what we did, quite successfully. The plastic-generation Never Readys were pretty reliable if you did that. I do recall, though, someone (Richard's Bicycle Book? Maybe.) publishing a piece pointing out that using the same springs to retain the battery and hold the light together was an inherently bad idea, especially with heavy batteries. The cardboard was basically fixing that fundamental design mistake, because that's what caused batteries to bounce around and break electrical contact.

foxyrider wrote:... but of course car headlights were less powerful too before the 'mines bigger/more powerful' than yours sales race got underway in the 80's.

Yes, I'm grateful for today's bright, reliable lights. However a working Never Ready did seem adequate at the time. I reckon that half of the benefit of modern lights goes on actual, useful, seeing better (e.g. to spot potholes), and the other half just goes on fighting the (now much brighter) lights of oncoming vehicles, which are preventing you from seeing those very same holes.

Carlton green wrote:…. a wizz on other (newer) technologies.

I get in trouble when I whizz on new technologies....

cheers

drossall wrote:Yes, I'm grateful for today's bright, reliable lights. However a working Never Ready did seem adequate at the time. I reckon that half of the benefit of modern lights goes on actual, useful, seeing better (e.g. to spot potholes), and the other half just goes on fighting the (now much brighter) lights of oncoming vehicles, which are preventing you from seeing those very same holes.

Yep.

Spot on!

drossall wrote: However a working Never Ready did seem adequate at the time.

I was once reprimanded by a motorist for too bright a light when I fitted a halogen bulb in a NeverReady

Whereas now the same motorist would tell you that the same light was hard to see.