this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
49 points (96.2% liked)
Bicycling
2241 readers
70 users here now
A community for those who enjoy bicycling for any reason— utility, recreation, sport, or whatever!
Post your questions, experiences, knowledge, pictures, news, links, and (civil) rants.
Rules (to be added on an as-needed basis)
- Comments and posts should be respectful and productive.
- No ads or commercial spam, including linking to your own monetized content.
- Linked content should be as unburdened by ads and trackers as possible.
Welcome!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I say this as a fellow cyclist so please don't misunderstand me:
If your bike blinks, I hate you. You're not more visible, because I have to look away or feel like I'm being attacked by an industrial grade strobe-light. Your lights are too bright, it's pointed directly into my eyes. The blinking only irritates my eyes further.
If you want to be visible, use an excessive amount of retroreflective tape because that only makes you bright to the source emitter and it makes you far brighter than your 3000 lumen rear LEDs do.
A mild blinking light beside a respectable brightness light is the best.
If there is only a flashing light, it can make it very difficult to judge distance, direction and speed of the cyclist. So an always-on light should be required.
And very few other things on the road have blinking red or white lights, which makes it very easy to identify that they are a cyclist. So a (not-blinding) flashing light is extra safety for the cyclist.
Reflective tapes are fine, but don't work for pedestrians in the dark.
Reflective tapes are extra safety.
I second this. Blinking lights make it more difficult to gauge your position, speeds,or even Tell if you're stationary or moving.
Also at an intersection if I look your way in the split second your light blinks, you're invisible.
Whem i cycle i always use solid lights, and only if i have more than one rear light I'll make it blink.
Think, if blinking lights are safer, why aren't they installed factory default on cars and airplanes? They are in fact less safe.
For me:
Solid light in the dark + a second flashing toplight on the helmet if possible.
Drying the day, both sets flashing.
A flashing toplight has definitely saved me before as it's flashing where your are looking so people pulling out of side roads see you, has definitely made a few drivers jump!
In the dark you need that fixed light for judging distance etc as you said.
Counterpoint: blinking lights are in fact installed on airplanes both large and small. Red beacon lights blink, and so do high intensity white strobe lights. The variation helps identify the source of lights against a busy city skyline at night (that must be an aircraft we're looking at) and serves to call attention against a sea of steady lights in the background. It's very easy for the airplane to blend in otherwise. Even some racecars pulse their brakelights automatically to draw the attention of fellow racers. Finally, as a driver in sometimes poorly lit areas compounded with a rather avid local bicycling culture, I have found that bicycles equipped with rear-facing red blinking LEDs really help distinguish the bike against the background. The best setups had a light on the back of their helmets as well, which does the most to aid depth perception.
Planes typically do not overtake each other at night on a width limited road.
Blinking indeed helps identifying object as a bicycle, that is undeniable.
Blinking also makes it significantly more difficult to assess bicycle's exact speed and position at poor visibility conditions, especially while overtaking it, when not supported by another, constant light source indicator.
I do not understand why having an additional, always on light is such a controversial thing to do for many people. If it's all about safety, then having it is in worst case scenario an extra protection.
Sorry, but you're just wrong on the facts here. Blinking lights are significantly safer.
Perhaps more to the point though: "I hate you", directed at any cyclist just trying to go about their lives in a safer way, makes you an arsehole.
I'm a cyclist and driver and think it's very important to see other users easily. IMO the strobing lights can be distracting and overwhelming.
Are you being literal? Because rear bike lights are often very low lumen.
The Varia RT515, for example, has a range of 8 to 65 lumens, with 65 being the daytime mode.
Trek's radar light has a 5 lumen night mode.
By comparison, car taillights are generally 500 lumens and brighter. In many states, you can have headlights on your car that produce 3000 lumens, while most commuter bike lights that I've seen are generally designed to be operated at 200 to 400 lumens (usually the lower end if you're commuting at night).
I would say that I'm not an advocate for strobe flashing patterns, and I don't see any practical use for them at all. But a slow pulse pattern is about as gentle as you can get while still being more visible than even a brighter solid mode.
Nobody is using rear lights anywhere near as bright as what you're describing. Cars are way, way brighter.
Retroreflective tape is a fine additional measure though.
100% agree and I feel like some of the onus is on the light manufacturers to provide some notes as to the safest and most equitable operation
I HATE cycling in the city when the two lanes are adjacent as the power and all the different modes make it super distracting, but you can't exactly flag these people down to explain... Grrr