[Closed] Jeremy Vine show - bike lights are too bright!

all cyclists should be taxed, insured and have registration plates. this is guaranteed to stop them running red lights/getting in the way, riding on pavements/getting in the way on Our Roads(tm) and having really bright lights/having no lights...etc

and some of them wear lycra! bastards.

Shall we play bingo then?

I guarantee that within the first 4 calls a London cabby (who sounds like Phil Daniels doing Parklike) has warmed to his theme and gone off on one about red light jumping, and not paying road tax? 😀

Big ass lights constantly on flood mode instead of the beem being directed? Seems fair

I think we should all phone in..

I do point my jumbo lights down when in traffic - and I'm not sure that 2000 lumens on your city bike is really doing anyone a favour. My issue is with flashing bright lights as they're hard to judge the distance away from it.

so as many lumens as a strong light bulb. hmm.

The thing about flashing lights is that if you see one its quiet clear whats headed your way.

Obviously if its set to an eye raping level of intensity it looks like ET has returned!

Ay, the bastards..
Lights on most vehicles are too bright for my (getting older) eyes. I have trouble sometimes with intermittent flashes, sometimes vehicle LEDs are too bright too.. But then you have to counter that with not being seen at all. I still see folks riding in Town without lights and wearing black (hoodies invariably) which is a proper PITA.

I give the Vine programme 6/10 for proper journalism.

It's not totally wrong, though. Trouble (as with car lights) is aim. Which is really weird because if you're riding on unlit roads, you want to have your lights aimed downwards anyway.

Bike headlights are rarely as bright as car headlights.

ass lights

Are they just for the rear?

chipps - I work here

Just heard in passing...

Just heard in passing...... 😆

a debate on poorly-located sat navs and phone cradles in the middle of windscreens is needed more than this.
it's a satnav mate, it's not a f***ing head-up display...

How about indicators behind white lenses, they are lethal, its often really hard to see a driver indicate his intention to ignore your existence on the road and cut right across you from the other side of the road.

Isn't he a big cyclist himself? Assume this is about urban usage not bombing down through the woods....

[i] chipps - I work here
I do point my jumbo lights down when in traffic - and I'm not sure that 2000 lumens on your city bike is really doing anyone a favour. My issue is with flashing bright lights as they're hard to judge the distance away from it. [/i]

Exactly!

How about indicators behind white lenses, they are lethal, its often really hard to see a driver indicate his intention to ignore your existence on the road and cut right across you from the other side of the road.

This. In addition to indicators placed towards the centre of the car rather than outside, usually the french cars. Also cars that have indicators that are not visible from the side, having to rely on tiny repeaters.

As a motorist I'm all for bright lights front and rear and as much flashing as possible. Anyone who goes to great lengths to prevent my precious tin box from ending up with a dent in it, is alright by me.

other commuter lights often have me shielding my eyes. i dont often do this with car lights. i dim my lights on road or if approaching people. its worse when thy are mega bright and also flashing.

i`d agree with mr vine.

Just because some cars have problems with indicators, satnav positions ect, ect it doesn't mean there can't be a discussion about cycle lights. And yes some cyclists do use inappropriate lights 🙁

once you've dried your eyes you big baby, put some sunglasses on.

I really should ring in...

Road Riders can be a nuisance if the light isn't 'dipped' especially if they're out and about in big groups. Do roadies need 1200 lumens in the city with street lighting?
Some rear lights can be a real nightmare to ride behind, why do they need to be off the scale lumen wise?

So yes, really bright bike lights should only be the province of off roaders.

1000 lumen job pointing down about 6ft in front of me on the road with my "hat lights" switched off until I get off road.

Don't need any more. If I get hit it is because they haven't looked so if I'm lit up like Old Trafford it wouldn't make a difference.

Now, people riding with little or no lights and dressed like Ninjas... that boils my wee. Saw a roadie (just) on a high end bike, dressed in black with lights out of a Christmas cracker weaving through wet rush hour traffic last night.

[b]Saw[/b] a roadie (just) on a high end bike, dressed in black with lights out of a Christmas cracker weaving through wet rush hour traffic last night.

that's the important bit though. I bet your satnav was in a sensible place 😉

Here we go...

It's really up to manufacturers to set some standards and provide guidance. Buying and using lights is a minefield.

Personally though, I've never experienced any problems while driving. If I see anyone with a super bright light, my first thought is, [i]where can I get one?![/i]. Never ever been blinded by them. They've never been any more overpowering than the oncoming motor traffic. Usually much less so.

The one place they're a pain in the arse though, is on unlit tracks. As a pedestrian or a cyclist, if you dip your beam and put it in utterly feeble mode, and someone approaches with 1200 lumens directly in your face, all you can see is blackness... I've literally had to stop a few times, not even knowing whether I'm on the edge on in the centre of the track because I couldn't see [i]anything[/i] at all. Little bit different in a car when you have a fair bit of power blasting back at them, even on dipped beam (but perhaps I just haven't experienced it yet).

the worst bit of this debate is having to sit through all the crap music and Vine getting shirty with Corbyn.

Shall we play bingo then?

I've got £10 on first mention of IS or immigrants. Top talking point for the cabbie(s) who will call in.

bans - tick

I think its a fair criticism, On my commute I meet cyclists with
-overly bright poorly angled bar lights
-stupidly dim lights which are completely useless
-helmet mounted lights flashing straight in my eyes as we pass
-Road ninjas with no lights and dressed in all black
-An idiot with a rear light on the front
None of which are helpful for other road users, many of which make it dangerous for the cyclist in question some make it more dangerous for me to cycle.

Maybe there is something to be said for some form of certification of lights for road use, not that it means they will actually be used correctly.

As said above, on unlit tracks they're a bloody nuisance, but it isn't the brightness that's the issue it's the fact that some idiots have them pointed so that the beam is parallel to the ground.

Like driving round in your car with full beams on permanently and wondering why it annoys other drivers.

I have asked a few folks on my cycle path commute to point the light down the way, if you need that extra bit of light to ensure a car at a junction sees you, then a helmet light is the best way.

Jeremy Vine is nob though.

Jeremy shining lights straight in his face and saying how bright they are.. science at work!

How many lumens is a car headlight? 2000+

VINE: "if I point it in my face I can only see the light!!!"

WTF

motoring journo spouting industrial-strength bollocks

that's the important bit though

the

just

Leg Over! - Zog gets bitch slapped. Quality.

good work James

Jeremy Vine is nob though.

He dances like he's got a Grippa-Rod™ up his ass too.

This Zog is a right dickhead.

must be a middle ground somewhere (not on Jeremy Vine to be fair).

"Ninja cyclists"
"lights are too bright"

Do roadies need 1200 lumens in the city with street lighting?

Helmet lights on the road are a bit pointless and can be dazzling imho. However most riders light reasonably.

They just had the guy from Chilli-tech talking about road lights and standards and horizontal cutoffs so they don't dazzle.

I emailed him recently and he pointed out there new standards compliant model, and mentioned that their other newish 600 lumen model was only standards compliant at its lowest setting.

http://www.chilli-tech.com/bike-lights/british-standard-bike-light

their web site seems bust atm though.

No lights for me anymore. Fitted a brazier on the rack. bit of fire wood in the pannier bag. nobody comes near now when i go out.

😛

imagine a venn diagram of Radio 2 listeners and daily mail readers - Jeremy Vine is that overlap

need to make myself a meme for all these threads...

Never mind all that. They're playing Cilla.

You don't get this on 6 Music*
😀

I was at the dentist on Friday, having a root canal filling while Vine was on the radio. As if a root canal filling wasn't bad enough....

To be fair, bright (1200lm+) lihgts even when angled down can still be very bright to oncoming traffic due to the nature of the reflectors & clear lenses.
Most times i spot someone with modern lights coming down the road, all you see is a very bright white spot & nothing behind it because of the way your eye processes the light & so for a split second, as a driver you can't actually see anything at all on an unlit road once the rider goes past.
I'm not saying it's necessarily less safe for the rider but i can see how it's another thing to get worked up about for less than tolerant motorists.

Get in the sea.

I know this is like Groundhog Day all over again, but the German-type lights with defined cut-off are great on the road, don't dazzle oncoming traffic and barely if ever get a mention in road bike light tests which seems a bit daft.

Meanwhile just pointing a big, wide, bright flood downwards a bit doesn't necessarily help as much as you think. If you visualise the light cone on a flood, the light has to be dipped an awfully long way, almost unusably down before it stops scattering light at driver eye level.

Try setting your lights up as you think of them as not dazzling then get someone else to ride towards you while you're at driver height.

I know making people use non-dazzling lights seems to be an unpopular idea, but I'm sick of being dazzled by other riders myself, your low-angled flood may not be quite as unintrusive as you think. Anyway...

As I said in a recent bike light thread cyclists will always be to blame, bike lights, even powerful ones are nowt compared to car lights, I'm constantly getting mildly dazzled by cars going over speed bumps, pot holes, rises in the road, dunno maybe there's loads of badly adjusted lights round our way. But on lit roads it's only a minor annoyance.

On unlit trails/bike paths getting dazzled by oncoming bikes is a pita tho.

I see we're shifting from "you had no bike lights so I had to run into you" to "your lights are too bright and dazzled me so I had to run into you" while totally ignoring the [i]don't drive into spaces you can't see properly[/i] argument. Ho hum.

Part of the lumen wars problem is the constant and perpetuating insistence by media and general public that the responsibility lies (moreso) with the cyclist to be seen, and that unless they are wearing hi-vis, reflectives, wearing plastic hats, and have 12 reflectors and 8 lights fitted then it's their own fault if they get hit.

It's no wonder that this rhetoric coupled with the cheap availability of bright LED lights has led to cyclists thinking they need brighter and brighter lights, it's not because they can't see where they are going(in the city at least), it's the constant fear that if they're not visible enough that people will drive their cars into them, and worse, blame them for not being visible enough.

I've lost count of the times I've tried to advise people on buying proper lights with a good beam pattern and side visibilty, I'm normally met with a strange look and a "but this one says it's $BIGHT, that ones only $LESS_BRIGHT and I want to be seen"

Beam patterns on a lot of lights are poor, no denying it, but that's only part of the problem. And FWIW, I find a lot of modern car/van headlights to be too bright and poorly aimed as well when I'm on the bike or in the car, it's at the point where there is too much light in general from them and our eyes cannot adjust the the rapid changes, when everything was dimmer you actually had better visibility as your eyes adjusted and there was less difference between ambient street lighting and burn-your-retinas headlights.

I see we're shifting from "you had no bike lights so I had to run into you" to "your lights are too bright and dazzled me so I had to run into you" while totally ignoring the don't drive into spaces you can't see properly argument. Ho hum.

I've been shouted at twice for lights too bright.

1> turned onto river side unlit path, turned lights on and 300 yards later shouted at by two walkers, crapping their dog, wearing dark long winter coats, no torches or light. 'Turn yer bloody lights off' they shouted. you can imagine my polite reply advising.
2> lady shouted similar, "wow, they are really bright". My reply was yeah they're great aren't they at least now the cars have no excuses to hit me.

I don't have them on the brightest setting and they are dipped.

I see we're shifting from "you had no bike lights so I had to run into you" to "your lights are too bright and dazzled me so I had to run into you" while totally ignoring the don't drive into spaces you can't see properly argument. Ho hum.

Not really, I think we're just saying that using lights on the road that aren't suitable for that purpose is part of the problem. Not the whole problem. Or even the most important part of the problem, but one of the constituent parts of it, just as the attitude of some motorists towards cyclists is also part of the problem.

Car lights got annoying at the point where HIDs appeared because the wattage limits originally introduced to keep halogen bulbs at a reasonable level - 60w max - mean nothing when an HID with a far lower wattage can produce a load more light. Guess who drives a low-ish car and is sick of following Range Rover headlights illuminating the entire interior of the car at night...

I don't have them on the brightest setting and they are dipped.

When you say 'dipped' what do you mean?

Double Dipped ??

Helmet lights on the road are a bit pointless and can be dazzling imho

I disagree. There are certain situations where a wee 'dazzle' is very useful. Those very small roundabouts, generally just painted on the road, that are usually employed at new junctions coming from new housing estates.

Lots of folks just belt straight through them, if I'm coming onto that road, I want to know that that van approaching from the left knows I'm going to be on the roundabout. A quick look at his eye level allows his peripheral vision to see me.

New roundabouts are where I've had most close calls, and they've only been avoided due to my vigilance.

The beeb should seriously consider removing vine from the radio. A lot of his debates appear to do nothing apart from allow a bigoted/racist/asshat section of the community a wide audience to spout their hatred and misconceptions.

a bigoted/racist/asshat section of the community

.... that probably are representative of the majority.

Although I've now moved office I used to hack 11 miles each way down the A5 most days, had some decent rechargeable lights, bright clothing etc but still had regular issues with people pulling out on me, near miss doorings, etc.

After ending up flying over the bonnet of a Ford Fiesta who'd pulled out of a queue of traffic to do a three pointer and 'hadn't seen me' I decided "F 'em" and switched to a dirty great 1,500 Lumen Light and motion Taz.

The number of incidents decreased dramatically, it was like night and day (pardon the pun), I just wasn't getting the SMIDSY incidents anymore where as I was reliably having 1 or 2 or proper brown trouser moments a week beforehand with my 'sensible' lights.

I'm sure the Taz very much qualifies as 'too bright' but in the end I decided to balance mildly discomforting a few drivers against the possibility that my 2 kids could grow up without a dad, guess which won?

If people's driving wasn't so shocking it wouldn't have been necessary, but the conclusions I've drawn from my own experience suggests that when riding after dark on busy roads in rush hour traffic, the more lumens the better, you may mildly annoy some Daily Mail readers, but you make it home.

and that story perfectly illustrates my earlier point, general standard of behaviour on the roads forcing you into escalating lumen wars.

On the road I have my lights on lowest setting of 5. Still get flashed by cars sometimes..

I do pity the poor dog walker who gets the full 5000 lumens in the woods though. Had a runner jump off a fire road thinking a landy with its full beams on was coming towards her 😀

I switched to Smooth FM sonI didn't ruin my lunch.

So lets see:

If we have bright lights, a motorist or other road user might occasionally get a bit dazzled and have to slow down a bit.

If we don't, those self same motorists run into us and kill us.

Hmm, seems fair to me...........

hatter - Member

The number of incidents decreased dramatically, it was like night and day (pardon the pun), I just wasn't getting the SMIDSY incidents anymore where as I was reliably having 1 or 2 or proper brown trouser moments a week beforehand with my 'sensible' lights.

I mentioned this in another thread recently, but I do an unlit section on my commute so I fitted a brighter light than usual (an old XML torch, rubbish offroad, pretty good on). Anyway, when the street lights start is a really contested road where usually getting squeezed and crowded out is really common on the bike. But with the bright headlight, it just doesn't happen. And tbh it can't be because they didn't see me before- they saw me and just drove dangerously. I think it's because the bright light makes them think I'm not a pushbike, so they don't treat me like a pushbike, ie an inconvenience to be driven at, "Taking up too much of the road!"

This is pretty shit. And possibly sounds a bit paranoid, but it fits. Visibility is only a small part of the equation- largely it's "didn't look at all" or "Actually did see you but did something dangerous anyway because **** you, cyclist"

This is pretty shit. And possibly sounds a bit paranoid, but it fits.

I don't think its paranoid at all. Even when I'm in a car other motorists treat me differently depending on which car I'm driving. I used to own a Peugeot 106 and constantly had people doing stupid things because I was in a small car. This stopped when I jumped in my people carrier. Recently I owned a rather rusty old Mazda Premacy, and despite hoofing it around Wales at the NSL I'd still have other cars desperately overtaking only to slow down when they got in front. It doesn't happen to me in my current Mondeo. Motorists treat all other road users differently.

Meanwhile just pointing a big, wide, bright flood downwards a bit doesn't necessarily help as much as you think. If you visualise the light cone on a flood, the light has to be dipped an awfully long way, almost unusably down before it stops scattering light at driver eye level.

I think this is under-recognised. I was driving back tonight across the moor back towards Sheffield and there were an unusually large number of roadies out for an evening ride (probably because it's the first break in the rain for days). Anyway, several of them had massive powerful lights that were really distracting. On a wide NSL road with good visibility - I could see the light a good 1/2 mile away. However, getting closer I'm just dazzled and can't see anything - inconvenient for me (I basically had to stop - others wouldn't have done) and definitely not safer for the rider.

Of all the motorist vs cyclist rants, this is the one I actually have some sympathy for.

I think it's because the bright light makes them think I'm not a pushbike, so they don't treat me like a pushbike

I used to think that, but now I tend to think it's because the drivers can't see a ****ing thing. I would rather not render the driver of a potentially lethal machine blind, tbh.

Not the case here. The only way this light is having that effect, is if they're lying on the ground 10 feet in front of me.

Recently I did three years of three days per week cycle commuting in central London.

I started out by not using lights in the daylight hours and I was being cut-up, crossed in front of, and generally treated like I didn't exist all the time. It was bloody dangerous.

Then I fired up the flashing lights back and front, day and night, and you could see folks start to do the stupid manoeuvre across you, or whatever, but then stop because they'd caught the flashing light.

On the front I did notice a marked difference depending on the light I used. The Diablo seemed to create more of a safety zone around me than the joystick did.

So the brighter the better as far as I'm concerned, and bollox to Jeremy because I'd rather stay safe and offend him, than risk my safety and gain his approval.

The issue here is not about the lumen output of modern lights but the beam pattern, if there was a 1500lumen cree emitter with a properly focused reflector suitable for road use then fantastic - we all should have them but the use of a cheap 1500lumen led with a generic reflector that gives a round flood beam is totally irresponsible to use on the roads as it creates a halo of blinding light that obscures all surrounding detail to anyone approaching. When driving i've encountered [i]other[/i] local riders with massive flood beams on the unlight country roads and [b]they[/b] are genuinely blinding as their lights totally overpower the dipped headlight beam of cars.

Personally i use a Schmidt Edelux II / Son dynamo set up on my tripster and for all road use it is perfect with a controlled focused beam that illuminates the road, along with a son rear light and occasionally i use a Moon Comet to supplement the rear if i deem the weather/visibility condition merit it.

Add to the above with some reflective scotchlite type banding on my Cycle clothing and i'm perfectly visible from a decent distance, the sooner we introduce legislation such as Germany with regard to beam patterns the better imho.

The only way this light is having that effect, is if they're lying on the ground 10 feet in front of me.

You should have someone ride towards you on your own bike whilst you sit in a car, to verify that.

I don't have much of an issue with front lights, as even if they are bright, they're soon gone. What does my head in is people with insanely bright rear lights, especially when they're in front of me and riding at exactly the same speed as I want to ride!

The last time I bought a front light (an Exposure Diablo Mk7), it was actually cheaper to buy it from Evans in a kit with a tiny rear Exposure light than it was to buy on its own anywhere. It has various settings, but the most powerful ones are just nuts! I wouldn't dream of ever using it on full power.

to be honest I think we just have to make our own decisions and ignore the various rants and raves that seem to come at cyclists from all corners - if people don't think you're visible enough, they complain, and if they think you're too visible, they complain. a lot of people are stressed and they want something to whine about.... and cyclist are the current target...

In the meantime, I ride well-lit on the basis there's too many unobservant drivers out there and it will hopefully make my lawyer's life easier if I ever get hit if they can show I've taken every care to be visible.

All my lights are commuting lights, none of them are off-road lights. I can only buy what's available so if some random thinks they're too bright then they can just whine away... I can't actually do anything about it until the manufacturers do something about beam patterns.

I took my helmet light off this time last year on the basis it may have been too much, and nearly got hit 3 times on the ride home, so it went straight back on the next day... it definitely gets me noticed

molgrips - Member

You should have someone ride towards you on your own bike whilst you sit in a car, to verify that.

It's really not hard to verify- lean bike against wall, go and see whether it's glarey. First thing you should do with any light really. And, it's not.

I disagree, Try driving towards a glaringly powerful light with a spherical beam pattern on an unlight road and if you still feel it's not irresponsible to other road users then you are a …………..

Have to say I do empathise with hatter's example and a lot of this is cause and effect - idiot drivers were around long before super-bright LEDs. But I'm with somafunk on lighting for my own riding. Non-flashing, German-legal F+R, works superbly, all-round visibility is excellent and my experience for night road rides away from city centres is that I feel cars give me more space/respect for having good lights and some reflective details, ie less of that close passing that comes from p1ssed off idiots who have to make a point of some sort. I find the beam pattern far better for longer rides also, less tiring on my eyes, better depth perception etc. Impressed all-round.

if I was in town commuting in rush hour it may be different, I'd probably use a head torch for 'spotting' at junctions and keep the other lights I have.

I can't actually do anything about it until the manufacturers do something about beam patterns.

A good place to start - 80 lux refracted cut-off beam, USB charged. A bit pricier than the average ebay LED torch but money well spent imo. There's a fairly good selection from the German MO shops, just a shame that UK shops don't tend to range them. The Sigma Mono RL rear light is really good.

I think the law simply has kept up with technology. I think people are genuinely unaware of how dazzling lights can be, and you can hardly blame cyclists for buying and lights sold for cycling in cycle shops.

I remember my old cheap 2.4w halogen light from halfords had a more focused light pattern than modern "cycle torches" because it had to otherwise you wouldn't see where you were going.

Personally i'm using a dynamo as it was the only way to get a nice beam pattern and decent (infinite!) runtime without resorting to DIY electronics.

It should be noted that when riding quieter roads with no lighting and less traffic I'm generally happy with a far less powerful light because you stand out just fine in a dark lane with a 300 or so lumen jobbie because you're the only light source.

The incidents that I had tended to be when I was riding through towns with heavy traffic, and hundreds of other light sources that my smaller lights just blended into.

Hence my adoption of the 'pulsating portable sun' route and hence why it made such a difference.

I took no great pleasure in running such a beast of a light as I knew it would be pretty obnoxious to some, however, as my experience with my previous 'polite' non-dazzling lights showed, 'obnoxiously bright' seems to be the only way to make the dozier denizens of out highways realize you exist.

Sad that it's come to this but, as stated before, when balancing mildly inconveniencing drivers against my children growing up without a dad, there's only going to be one conclusion.

Sad that it's come to this but, as stated before, when balancing mildly inconveniencing drivers against my children growing up without a dad, there's only going to be one conclusion.

The argument is that you may actually are MORE at risk if drivers cannot see anything, not safer. And other road users are almost certainly at more risk.

My point is that rather than simply increasing the lumen count, it should be spread around a bit which would both make you more visible AND dazzle drivers less.

Not dazzling drivers isn't simply a nicety.

lean bike against wall, go and see whether it's glarey

I would not expect that to be representative at all. If you've never done my suggestion, how do you know that your test is comparable?