Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: connected lights
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 16:13:42 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <vbvi1o$d607$6@dont-email.me>
References: <NfYDO.437045$VK2e.110808@fx01.ams4>
 <vbq12l$3376h$1@dont-email.me> <5l0EO.497929$v0Jd.164943@fx06.ams4>
 <vbqnm3$37v20$1@dont-email.me> <emkEO.201680$kpic.80347@fx15.ams4>
 <rpr3ejt34mgh4ok31fm079ea1pppce4tvh@4ax.com> <vbsvph$3pk1g$5@dont-email.me>
 <vbt2df$3qi08$1@dont-email.me> <vbt2s6$3qjev$2@dont-email.me>
 <vbuo7u$8isg$2@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 22:13:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="82de71aa965ace77ba3301cba288361d";
	logging-data="432135"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX192LY6r9RJa+NzKsIQhw6C6orskmB551as="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:39/4WFNXpaluv5X9sCPx/cfOuz0=
In-Reply-To: <vbuo7u$8isg$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4192

On 9/12/2024 8:53 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/11/2024 4:42 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 9/11/2024 5:34 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 9/11/2024 3:49 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 9/11/2024 3:37 PM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>>> Am Wed, 11 Sep 2024 17:23:22 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is also the fact I like lights that can kick out more oomph 
>>>>>> that a
>>>>>> Dynamo can do, and I’m not wild on such cut off beams, while my 
>>>>>> commute
>>>>>> light has a low wide beam on low, ie fine around town and so on, 
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> High Beam to give a bit more punch in the woods and so on.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my experience, a modern, StVZO-conforming LED based headlight is 
>>>>> more
>>>>> than good enough for riding in city traffic. More power usually only
>>>>> serves to blind other cyclists and still can't compete with car
>>>>> headlights. Riding in the woods and in the dark, on the other hand, is
>>>>> better done using a weaker, but wider beam.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only reasonable need I see for more powerful headlights is when
>>>>> driving on unlit rural roads. Here you need a powerful low beam and
>>>>> sometimes also a high beam.
>>>>
>>>> I agree woods riding is different than road riding. But I've done 
>>>> lots of unlit road riding with dyno lights and no problems. So have 
>>>> countless randonneurs.
>>>>
>>>> Night vision varies, I'm sure; but I believe the general desire for 
>>>> more and more and more lumens is caused by the same mechanism the 
>>>> triggers the desire for more and more rear cogs, less and less bike 
>>>> weight, bigger and bigger pickup trucks, etc. After a while, people 
>>>> are chasing advertising copy or quickly diminishing returns.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You've repeated that for years, implying that unlike mere mortals you 
>>> are magically immune to the evil spell of marketers. OK, that could 
>>> be true.
>>>
>>> Or maybe other people actually ride offroad and actually need 
>>> brighter lights than you.
>>
>> Read again, Andrew. See where I said "I agree woods riding is 
>> different than road riding"?
>>
> 
> And all the others inbetween who may very rarely ride offroad without 
> ambient streetlights but want the capacity, people who use the wondrous 
> little things for car repair and the like (me, just not on my bicycle), 
> people who just want 'the best one' and yes some amount of the Veblen 
> effect.
> 
> As with most consumer decisions, sorting out motive is a fool's errand 
> as people sincerely misstate motive as they sometimes don't have any 
> conscious logical process.

Understood. Your near-default point is "Everyone's decision is correct."

My frequent point is "You don't need to go to extremes to be safe, 
especially on a bike."

-- 
- Frank Krygowski