I bought a couple of life vest strobe lights from REI a couple of years ago. They are designed for boats, life vests for boats, safety. These things give off some serious flashed light, or strobe.
One day I'm thinking .. I bet this strobe would be perfect for my bicycle. First, I attached it to my bicycle trailer. What a flash. Next I tried it on the back of the bicycle. Flash Flash Flash. Very bright.
I already own a couple of the red flashing safety lights that you can buy at the local bike shop.
Is the color of the light important. Does it make any difference if you use white strobe or red flash on the back of your bicycle.
My main objective is being seen. Period. I want the guy in the car to avoid me. Red, White, Green....
Is the color of the light important. Does it make any difference if you use white strobe or red flash on the back of your bicycle.
Most countries and localities require red only. Some don't allow flashing--Germany for example. Use the white up front.
Sounds like overkill--a good LED taillight with four bulbs and fresh batteries should be enough for anyone--or one small blinky and one small steady. Plus reflectors of course.
I like a white cateye LED up front, but I keep it on constant beam--connotes vehicle more than a flashing light imho.
Is the color of the light important. Does it make any difference if you use white strobe or red flash on the back of your bicycle.
Most countries and localities require red only.
More important: Because of this, drivers who see non-red will assume they're in front of you and not behind you. So stick with red for the back.
Quoted message said:
Some don't allow flashing--Germany for example.
Ontario as well. (Unless you're a school bus, or an emergency vehicle, or a law law enforcement vehicle, or they're your four-way flashers.)
I find solid is no worse for visibility and a lot less annoying once I know something's there than flashing, in any case. (I can't stand riding behind a red blinkylight.)
dave
-- Dave Vandervies [email hidden] So are you saying main() returns int? You really should be more clear next time. --Daniel Fox in comp.lang.c
I bought a couple of life vest strobe lights from REI a couple of years ago. They are designed for boats, life vests for boats, safety. These things give off some serious flashed light, or strobe.
One day I'm thinking .. I bet this strobe would be perfect for my bicycle. First, I attached it to my bicycle trailer. What a flash. Next I tried it on the back of the bicycle. Flash Flash Flash. Very bright.
I already own a couple of the red flashing safety lights that you can buy at the local bike shop.
Is the color of the light important. Does it make any difference if you use white strobe or red flash on the back of your bicycle.
My main objective is being seen. Period. I want the guy in the car to avoid me. Red, White, Green....
Just don't run me down.
Input .......... ?????
What you describe sound like rescue strobes. If that's what they are they are far too bright to mount on the rear of any vehicle, bicycle or otherwise. Why would you think you are safer by shining a blindingly bright light into the eyes of approaching drivers? The color is important as well. Most States' traffic codes specify that no vehicle be equipped with any white light that is visible to the rear except for lights that are only operable when the vehicle is backing up.
Is the color of the light important. Does it make any difference if you use white strobe or red flash on the back of your bicycle.
Most countries and localities require red only.
More important: Because of this, drivers who see non-red will assume they're in front of you and not behind you. So stick with red for the back.
Even a German driver in Ontario could figure out that a light (any color) in the rear view means 'vehicle behind', and if the light is seen thru the wondsheild it means 'vehicle ahead'.
The color might mislead as to which direction it is facing and traveling though.
I bought a couple of life vest strobe lights from REI a couple of years ago. They are designed for boats, life vests for boats, safety. These things give off some serious flashed light, or strobe.
Quoted message said:
One day I'm thinking .. I bet this strobe would be perfect for my bicycle. First, I attached it to my bicycle trailer. What a flash. Next I tried it on the back of the bicycle. Flash Flash Flash. Very bright.
<SNIP>
Quoted message said:
My main objective is being seen. Period. I want the guy in the car to avoid me. Red, White, Green....
I had a strobe (Night Ryder brand IIRC) in back, plus a 7-LED REI blinkie. Went for a ride with my son, and he observed that the blinkie was more noticable than the strobe (though yours may be different). Happily, the strobe's cheap plastic mounting screw broke soon after that when I hit a pothole. I replaced it with Cateye's latest, a 10-LED model with two banks of five diodes, three on each facing aft and one each on each side. I run all 17 LED's in blinking mode, which creates quite an effect as the flashes go in and out of phase. Drivers passing me at night give me far more leeway than drivers passing me in the daytime. Oh, and stick with red in back. White or yellow in front.
Bill
------------------------------------ | There oughta be limits to Freedom. | | -- George W. Bush | ------------------------------------
More important: Because of this, drivers who see non-red will assume they're in front of you and not behind you. So stick with red for the back.
Even a German driver in Ontario could figure out that a light (any color) in the rear view means 'vehicle behind', and if the light is seen thru the wondsheild it means 'vehicle ahead'.
Well, yeah. But are *you* ahead of or behind *that* vehicle?
Quoted message said:
The color might mislead as to which direction it is facing and traveling though.
That was what I said. Putting a white light on the back of your bike means people will assume you know exactly where they are all the time, but red tells them they're behind you, which means you'll be working with "the guy behind me was there last time I checked" most of the time.
dave
-- Dave Vandervies [email hidden]
[T]he program's running time will be reduced by ONE WHOLE MILLISECOND! WOW! --Eric Sosman in comp.lang.c
More important: Because of this, drivers who see non-red will assume they're in front of you and not behind you. So stick with red for the back.
Even a German driver in Ontario could figure out that a light (any color) in the rear view means 'vehicle behind', and if the light is seen thru the wondsheild it means 'vehicle ahead'.
Well, yeah. But are *you* ahead of or behind *that* vehicle?
Same answer - if I have to look behind me to see them, they are well, behind me.
But I agree, red on front or white on back is dumb.
>More important: Because of this, drivers who see non-red will assume >they're in front of you and not behind you. So stick with red for >the back.
Even a German driver in Ontario could figure out that a light (any color) in the rear view means 'vehicle behind', and if the light is seen thru the wondsheild it means 'vehicle ahead'.
Well, yeah. But are *you* ahead of or behind *that* vehicle?
Same answer - if I have to look behind me to see them, they are well, behind me.
Yes, they're behind you. But *are* *you* *behind* *them*? How do you know?
dave (are you doing this on purpose?)
-- Dave Vandervies [email hidden] Oddly enough, he can be difficult to work with and has two annoying habits: being right most of them time, and admitting it when he's not. --Andrew Dalgleish in the scary devil monastery
You seem to have a problem understanding other people's correct grammar.
Be careful with how the OP used the words "they" and "you". His post means something very different from how you interpreted it.
How ironic that your post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever since there's no clue as to whom it's directed or what he or she said (and what it was about).
>>More important: Because of this, drivers who see non-red will assume >>they're in front of you and not behind you. So stick with red for >>the back. > >Even a German driver in Ontario could figure out that a light (any >color) in the rear view means 'vehicle behind', and if the light is >seen thru the wondsheild it means 'vehicle ahead'.
Well, yeah. But are *you* ahead of or behind *that* vehicle?
Same answer - if I have to look behind me to see them, they are well, behind me.
Yes, they're behind you. But *are* *you* *behind* *them*? How do you know?
If they are behind me - light in the rear view - then I am in front of them and moving away from them, not much else matters.
If the driver sees a light ahead then, in all cases, he (the driver) is behind the bike (which is ahead of him). Based on a knucklehead with a white rear light or a red front light, he might make the wrong assumption as to the *direction* the bike is traveling, but since most cars travel faster than most bikes he is still approaching a bike.
If the driver sees a light ahead then, in all cases, he (the driver) is behind the bike (which is ahead of him). Based on a knucklehead with a white rear light or a red front light, he might make the wrong assumption as to the *direction* the bike is traveling, but since most cars travel faster than most bikes he is still approaching a bike.
This is true, but the closing speed will be wildly different depending on whether the cyclist is a knucklehead or not. Assume a cyclist moving at 15 MPH and a motorist at 30 MPH.
A. Same direction of travel: motorist closes with a relative speed of 15 MPH. B. Different directions of travel: motorist closes with a relative speed of 45 MPH.
Assuming A (red taillight ahead) when B is the case (knucklehead put the red light on the front) means one third of the expected reaction time.
You seem to have a problem understanding other people's correct grammar.
Be careful with how the OP used the words "they" and "you". His post means something very different from how you interpreted it.
How ironic that your post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever since there's no clue as to whom it's directed or what he or she said (and what it was about).
You seem to have a problem understanding other people's correct grammar.
Be careful with how the OP used the words "they" and "you". His post means something very different from how you interpreted it.
How ironic that your post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever since there's no clue as to whom it's directed or what he or she said (and what it was about).
Bravo!
Try using a threaded viewer.
I use one. However, your reply appeared "alone" beneath a slew of posts, and it wasn't clear which one it addressed.
(For example, if you waited 2 or 3 days and then just wrote "Try using a threaded viewer" without quoting me, the /average reader/ would have no clue WTH you were talking about -- especially if there'd been a number of replies since then.)
It was only the irony of you lecturing someone else on clarity and comprehension that moved me to comment. <eg>
But, why, Bill, why do you care? If it ain't useful, ignore it. Ye gods, man, you can manage to ignore gdaniels, why can't you ignore other purveyors of useless babble? There's plenty of value out there that you could be busying yourself with.
But you seem to have a need to obsess over this. And I obsess over your obsession. I'm worried about you. Maybe you need to take a timeout from usenet.
And just because it's stupid doesn't mean you need to point it out. Unless it makes you feel better. Are you a victim of low usenet self-esteem?
