Legal lights?

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
User avatar
freiston
Posts: 1504
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am
Location: Coventry

Re: Legal lights?

Post by freiston »

Bmblbzzz wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 7:03pm
PH wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 6:29pm
Bmblbzzz wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 6:00pm Seeing as darkness falls around 4pm in winter in much of UK, not to mention other parts of the world (and of course much earlier further north), yes, they routinely experience it. Mine used to complain about it when walking along the pavement with me.
It is a problem, I don't know the answer, though I'm not sure it's any more an issue with StVZO lights than any other, they don't tend to put more light below the horizon, just more of their light, there is no StVZO equivalent to a 1,300 lumen light.
Yes, it's not particular to StVZO, I meant that it's a problem which StVZO and similar designs do not address.
The "problem", imho, is not only rare and unlikely in respect to sensibly designed bicycle front lights (we're not talking superbright/off-road arms-race torch lights) but pales into insignificance against all the other problems faced by toddlers on the highway in the dark or of anyone else with eyes lower than a front light and close enough & in front enough to be dazzled below the StVZO cut-off. And it can't be solved by the design of the light.

There's no way any design can avoid all the possibilities (e.g (differing heights, differing distances, changing gradient) of dazzling eyes lower than the light and illuminate the way ahead adequately - you could mount a light with a severe cut-off a foot off the ground but that wouldn't guarantee not dazzling as you go over the brow of a hill; it wouldn't illuminate the way ahead effectively either. You still need adequate light to see the toddler. the wheelchair user or whoever.

StVZO does significantly eliminate the chance of dazzling others for almost all real life & likely instances; for all other instances, I suggest that the cyclist shielding/directing the light away and/or the recipient shielding or averting their eyes are much more practical and useful solutions.


Most non StVZO LED front lights powerful enough to see on moonless unlit roads are extremely likely to dazzle unless turned down to a very low power setting (in which case they're no longer bright) or angled down (in which case you get a massive blinding bright spot by your front wheel, no night-vision and no illumination ahead). Having used such lights, my experience is that there's no sweet spot that gives good illumination and avoids dazzling.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6261
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Legal lights?

Post by Bmblbzzz »

freiston wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 9:20pm
Bmblbzzz wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 7:03pm
PH wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 6:29pm
It is a problem, I don't know the answer, though I'm not sure it's any more an issue with StVZO lights than any other, they don't tend to put more light below the horizon, just more of their light, there is no StVZO equivalent to a 1,300 lumen light.
Yes, it's not particular to StVZO, I meant that it's a problem which StVZO and similar designs do not address.
The "problem", imho, is not only rare and unlikely in respect to sensibly designed bicycle front lights (we're not talking superbright/off-road arms-race torch lights) but pales into insignificance against all the other problems faced by toddlers on the highway in the dark or of anyone else with eyes lower than a front light and close enough & in front enough to be dazzled below the StVZO cut-off. And it can't be solved by the design of the light.
It's a problem that relates to potentially all lights but it's only in recent years bike lights have become bright enough for this to be a problem. It wasn't bike lights I was referring to, nor did I mention them – personal experience (or that of my kids when they were toddlers) is with car lights – I was pointing out that StVZO doesn't address this problem, and more broadly, society doesn't consider it.
User avatar
freiston
Posts: 1504
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am
Location: Coventry

Re: Legal lights?

Post by freiston »

Bmblbzzz wrote: 10 Aug 2022, 9:47pm It's a problem that relates to potentially all lights but it's only in recent years bike lights have become bright enough for this to be a problem. It wasn't bike lights I was referring to, nor did I mention them – personal experience (or that of my kids when they were toddlers) is with car lights – I was pointing out that StVZO doesn't address this problem, and more broadly, society doesn't consider it.
But this is a thread about bike lights and
Bmblbzzz wrote:One of the problems with StVZO lights on any type of vehicle and similar lights which rely on a horizontal cut-off, is toddlers.
I've put some of the quotes in bold.

If it's not bike lights you were referring to but to German StVZO (and not UK British Standards compliant) motor vehicle lights, on a UK cycling forum discussing bicycle lighting and the particular merits of bicycle StVZO lighting over lights that do not comply to any standard, then you are talking completely and confusingly out of the context of the thread but you did refer to StVZO lights on any type of vehicle which includes bikes, which looks very much like you are contradicting yourself (even more confusing).

The super-bright dazzling torch style lights that have become popular in recent years are no more a similar light/design (even if they look similar) to (bicycle) StVZO lights than a handheld torch or a headtorch is: that is why we're discussing them as an alternative. I disagree that StVZO bike lights do not address the problem of toddlers getting dazzled but I do agree that non-compliant bike lights make the problem worse for toddlers, adults and even HGV drivers.
Bmblbzzz wrote:it's only in recent years bike lights have become bright enough for this to be a problem
That to me suggests that the problem is not StVZO lights. The only way that I can tell, as an observer, that a bike light is StVZO is that it doesn't dazzle me but has a cut-off (if I can see it's a dynamo light, I know it's almost definitely StVZO - it just so happens that practically every StVZO light I identify is a dynamo light). How did you determine whether the offending lights were StVZO or not? Of course, there's nothing to stop a cyclist tilting their StVZO light too high thereby dazzling others - but then it would effectively be modified not to be compliant.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)
LancsGirl
Posts: 255
Joined: 5 Jun 2021, 9:57pm

Re: Legal lights?

Post by LancsGirl »

Jdsk wrote: 30 Jul 2022, 10:55am
Jdsk wrote: 30 Jul 2022, 10:43am
LancsGirl wrote: 30 Jul 2022, 10:35amQuestion then - can USB chargeable lights be used, as in emitting light, while they are being charged from an external battery pack? When that external battery pack isn't itself being charged (from a dynamo, for instance).
Yes.

But I don't know what would happen with any particular light if its internal battery was very flat and you tried this.
Hmmm... I've just tested a non-light USB device and it switched mode and stopped working when I plugged it into a USB power supply. So I'm not now sure.

Please could people try the experiment and report back.

Thanks

Jonathan
I've just done the experiment, with a Lezyne MacroDrive 1300XXL. It won't shine when it's being charged by a battery pack.

Other people also seem to think that it is unusual for a light to be able to shine when it is being charged.

Cheers
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6261
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Legal lights?

Post by Bmblbzzz »

@freiston, yes it is not directly on topic (so no need for this many posts) but the point is simple: horizontal cut offs are designed not to dazzle anyone whose eyes are above the height of the light. They can and do dazzle people whose eyes are below that height, which usually means small children.
User avatar
freiston
Posts: 1504
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am
Location: Coventry

Re: Legal lights?

Post by freiston »

Bmblbzzz wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 8:14am @freiston, yes it is not directly on topic (so no need for this many posts) but the point is simple: horizontal cut offs are designed not to dazzle anyone whose eyes are above the height of the light. They can and do dazzle people whose eyes are below that height, which usually means small children.
Not whose eyes are below the height of the (bike) light but whose eyes are in the beam and below the cut-off. How can a light illuminate what you need to see close and directly in front of you without shining directly on it? If eyes are low and in front of a well designed (StVZO) bike light, of course the light is likely to dazzle. This is not a design fault but illumination of what is in your way pure and simple. The alternative is to cycle without effective lighting (the old "Never Ready" comes to mind).

I'm not going to talk about car lights, go into their design, their compliance or their set-up because it's a digression that I'm not happy or prepared to take - it is counterproductive to this thread. This is a thread about bikes lights, their legality and their dazzling potential.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)
User avatar
squeaker
Posts: 4112
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 11:43pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Legal lights?

Post by squeaker »

Bmblbzzz wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 8:14am @freiston, yes it is not directly on topic (so no need for this many posts) but the point is simple: horizontal cut offs are designed not to dazzle anyone whose eyes are above the height of the light. They can and do dazzle people whose eyes are below that height, which usually means small children.
Or some recumbent cycle users :( :shock: But I still prefer to meet users with StVZO approved lights...
"42"
User avatar
freiston
Posts: 1504
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am
Location: Coventry

Re: Legal lights?

Post by freiston »

Yup - I did think about recumbent riders but decided in an earlier post to use the cover-all "anyone else with eyes lower than a front light and close enough & in front enough to be dazzled below the StVZO cut-off"; I was also thinking about wheelchair users. I would guess that a recumbent rider is more likely (than a child or wheelchair user) to be in the beam (StVZO or otherwise) of other cyclists. Both as a pedestrian on the pavement and as a cyclist, I have been dazzled by bike lights but these are usually obviously not (correctly set up) StVZO bike lights.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)
LancsGirl
Posts: 255
Joined: 5 Jun 2021, 9:57pm

Re: Legal lights?

Post by LancsGirl »

Ignoring the slight diversion this thread (my thread?) has taken...

I'm not so sure about returning this light now. I've asked for a returns authorisation, but unless it arrives PDQ, I won't be able to send it back within the 14 days they allow.

And also, I bought this with the immediate intention of using it on holiday. I'm going to a Scottish island. I've been there before. It's flat. Very flat. Not quite Norfolk, but still pretty flat. Sight lines are excellent as there are no fences or trees. So one of the few places where a light that shines brightly, a long way into the distance, and a little bit skywards, might actually be useful because:

1. I can see a very long way in front.

2. More importantly drivers will be used to looking out for approaching lights (at night). They'll see this, for sure. The roads are largely single-track with passing places.

It has a "race mode". Where only two options are available, full-on brightness, and a lot lower power. Switchable from the top button. Like a sort of dip, except it doesn't actually dip. That mode sounds about right.

For "normal" use on busy roads it wouldn't be very good, dazzle-wise. But where I'm going now it could be just the thing.
User avatar
Sum
Posts: 331
Joined: 17 Jul 2010, 9:13am

Re: Legal lights?

Post by Sum »

From what I gather, the race mode allows you to quickly alternate between the 800 lm and 150 lm settings. Have you tried viewing the light whilst it is on the bike, and in the lower 150 lm setting? If so, does it seem dazzling to you and your friends?
LancsGirl
Posts: 255
Joined: 5 Jun 2021, 9:57pm

Re: Legal lights?

Post by LancsGirl »

Sum wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 9:38pm From what I gather, the race mode allows you to quickly alternate between the 800 lm and 150 lm settings. Have you tried viewing the light whilst it is on the bike, and in the lower 150 lm setting? If so, does it seem dazzling to you and your friends?
Actually, I've returned it.

But yes, that's what race mode did. No, I never got a chance to use it on the bike, at night. I didn't really have time. I think it might have actually been quite a good fit for the trip I'm about to make, because of the fairly unusual road and traffic conditions there. But that would be one of the few places. I'm not actually planning to do a lot of night time riding there, though I might end up doing some night time riding. But if I'd kept it I would have ended up with something that wasn't a lot of use in other situations. Or rather, it would be useful to me, but bad for other road users. If I ever have £60 to spare, I might by another one.

So I've ordered one of these Lezyne Lite Drive Stvzo Pro 115 310 Lum ... ZO-V204) - to be delivered to my holiday destination instead. As another poster up thread said, it looks very capable, is StVZO compliant and was a little cheaper than the 1300XXL.

Hopefully it will help to satisfy my "completely legal" pedantry. More to the point, it will a good light for me riding, and won't blind other road users.

Cheers.
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Legal lights?

Post by PH »

LancsGirl wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 10:10pm So I've ordered one of these Lezyne Lite Drive Stvzo Pro 115 310 Lum ... ZO-V204) - to be delivered to my holiday destination instead. As another poster up thread said, it looks very capable, is Stove compliant and was a little cheaper than the 1300XXL.

Hopefully it will help to satisfy my "completely legal" pedantry. More to the point, it will a good light for me riding, and won't blind other road users.

Cheers.
You won't be disappointed. I have the E-bike version of that, same lens and LUX, it's excellent, it outshines the top STVZO dynamo lights by a good margin.
User avatar
Sum
Posts: 331
Joined: 17 Jul 2010, 9:13am

Re: Legal lights?

Post by Sum »

LancsGirl wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 10:10pm Actually, I've returned it.
Wow! That was unexpected.

I was asking because I've been using a StVZO dynamo light for sometime now, and there's been occasions when I wished I had something more along the lines of a main beam. Anyhoo let us know how your new StVZO light works out. The link you posted didn't work, but I assume this was the link?
https://www.cyclestore.co.uk/lezyne_pow ... t-ID_82725
LancsGirl
Posts: 255
Joined: 5 Jun 2021, 9:57pm

Re: Legal lights?

Post by LancsGirl »

PH wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 10:30pm
LancsGirl wrote: 11 Aug 2022, 10:10pm So I've ordered one of these Lezyne Lite Drive Stvzo Pro 115 310 Lum ... ZO-V204) - to be delivered to my holiday destination instead. As another poster up thread said, it looks very capable, is Stove compliant and was a little cheaper than the 1300XXL.

Hopefully it will help to satisfy my "completely legal" pedantry. More to the point, it will a good light for me riding, and won't blind other road users.

Cheers.
You won't be disappointed. I have the E-bike version of that, same lens and LUX, it's excellent, it outshines the top STVZO dynamo lights by a good margin.
That's good to hear. I'll see how I get on, if I need to use it.
User avatar
freiston
Posts: 1504
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am
Location: Coventry

Re: Legal lights?

Post by freiston »

A big thumbs up from me :D
I hope that you are as chuffed with it as I am with my StVZO dynamo light (only 80 lux :wink: )
Happy night time cycling - it can get addictive (and is a nice cool alternative when the days are 30°C +)

Wishing you the best for your upcoming tour too.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)
Post Reply