# do cateye ld1100 meet bs6102?



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (14 Nov 2009)

as the title says. i've googled but can't find anything. just want to be legal in case of an accident. i've put reflectors back on the pedals. just want to be sure cateye lights are actually legal


----------



## gaz (14 Nov 2009)

having been in an RTA and got the cops involved, they just ask if you have lights, and don't ask for any model.


----------



## marinyork (14 Nov 2009)

I believe they are legal. They are also the best "standard" light on the market (there are plenty of non-standard lights on the market that are much brighter).


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (14 Nov 2009)

but bs6102 is quite simple and they either legal / comply or illegal. if they are illegal you can be sure a slimy lawyer will get the drivers insurance company off the hook


----------



## marinyork (14 Nov 2009)

I can't recall what it says on the back (as the frigging mount has worn down so I had to cable tie it on, however I believe it meets one of the regs) and the BS you quote isn't the only one http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4071

It's not actually simple at all.

Out of interest where did you buy the reflectors from? I've been looking for a good couple of years for somewhere that sells them.

P.S. If you're going to be really paranoid I reckon that if I were rammed from the back and seriously injured and that if that someone wanted to get off they would simply nick my lights and claim that they didn't see me. All they need is a screwdrive/pair of scissors or just simply pick it up and lob the light in the bushes. Cops turn up and they rant and rave about the NINJA.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (14 Nov 2009)

i git the pedal reflectors from a raleigh dealer for £2.50 for 8. bs 6102 is the only standard applicable on a bike used on a road. it's actually after reading ctc's site that i'm wondering. i'm gunna have a look at the light later.


----------



## ufkacbln (14 Nov 2009)

Even more complex than that!

The Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations (2005) have superseded the BS6201/3 and it is possible to have lights that comply with the RVLR and fail to meet the British Standards. It is also possible to have a light such as the AU100 which carries the BS kitemark, but for the reflector,and NOT for the light

Most Cateyes are advertised as "RVLR compliant" so I guess tha answer is that the light is listed as such, it is legal as it complies with RVLR.


----------



## Will1985 (14 Nov 2009)

Shouldn't be a problem - anyone who fails to see such a retina burning light needs their eyes tested. As said above, the police don't appear to care as long as you have working lights.


----------



## sbseven (14 Nov 2009)

To answer your question, the LD1100 doesn't meet BS6102/3 standards. Not many 'good' lights do.

The LD1100 packaging says:
For UK Customers: When used for cycling, this light should be used in conjunction with a British Standard 6102/3 cycle light.

But, as others have said, I wouldn't worry about it. 

The Cateye TL-AU100BS does meet BS6102/3 (in non-flashing mode).

If you want a cheap rear BS6102/3 light to run along side your preferred option then try here.

Shaun


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (14 Nov 2009)

no win no fee solicitors can really find the smallest of loops to get either the payout lowered or null and voided. i've got another light on the back. i'm going to see if this complies, i think it will as it doesn't have a constant mode. bloody hell tho, a £35 light that is illegal....wish i'd read the article before i bought it. i've had it replaced twice aswell due to it leaking in hard rain.


----------



## marinyork (14 Nov 2009)

shauncollier said:


> no win no fee solicitors can really find the smallest of loops to get either the payout lowered or null and voided. i've got another light on the back. i'm going to see if this complies, i think it will as it doesn't have a constant mode. bloody hell tho, a £35 light that is illegal....wish i'd read the article before i bought it. i've had it replaced twice aswell due to it leaking in hard rain.



You'd be a good boy and be with the CTC and they'd probably take the no win no fee solicitors to the cleaners.

In anycase working lights are not contested in my experience of RTAs.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (14 Nov 2009)

i think i will join ctc just for the peace of mind, legal fees are included aren't they?


----------



## marinyork (14 Nov 2009)

shauncollier said:


> i think i will join ctc just for the peace of mind, legal fees are included aren't they?



Yes, you have third party insurance in the case of accidents upto whatever it is £1m, 2? There are alternatives to the CTC like BC if you have issues with the CTC.

PS Surprised you've had water issues with the LD-1100. I've had two and never had this and it's not famous for this unlike say the smart 1/2 (excellent light) that is prone to breaches.


----------



## andrew_s (14 Nov 2009)

To be legal, a light has to be marked with the BS6102/2 marking, not just meet the published brightness standards. That means submitting it to the fairly expensive testing process, and not many light manufacturers bother. You can use a German light, and be legal under the "or any other equivalent European standard" rule.

I'd recommend having two lights, one to meet the standard, and a bright one.
You really should use two anyway, as otherwise you'll be riding along unlit if one fails.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

i've checked all my cateye lights and none are marked up, neither on the inside or outside. therefore they are illegal unless used in conjunction with a light compliant with bs6102. but neither is my very very expensive hope vision 4 led. so going to have to buy some dirt cheap legal lights so the lights that i have that are not legal but are brighter can used legally. confused? i know i am


----------



## RedBike (16 Nov 2009)

Shaun, before you splash out £25 on the LD1100 (which are very good btw) it's worth having a look at the Raleigh RSP light. They're not very popular at the moment so you can pick them up for £8/£12. It's got 2 x 1/2 watt leds so it's slightly brighter from directly behind than the LD1100.

This should leave you a few pennies over to get that BS standard light to go with it.


----------



## fossyant (16 Nov 2009)

Personally, I wouldn't bother with legal lights...... certainly not caused me any issues after being side swiped last year, with a total on 6 lights on the bike and 4 little flashers on my rucksack (plus reflective clothing). I pointed out to the driver the number of lights as the bike lay on the road..... The dirver's insurance are not contesting liability (the claim is far from settled though).

Do join the CTC or BC.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

hi red,

think you misunderstood, already got it, had it ages. just bought the raleigh light about 2 weeks ago as a back up, it also mounts perfectly on my brompton bracket, but that's not marked up either.

hi fossy,

i think for the sake of £20 to have crappy legal lights aswell as my bright lights is no problem, they can make good back ups. i am going to join ctc, seems well worth it for the free legals.

weird tho, you don't to have a reflector on the rear but not on the front.


----------



## marinyork (16 Nov 2009)

shauncollier said:


> hi red,
> 
> weird tho, you have to have a reflector on the rear but not on the front.



Front reflectors don't tend to work terribly well because of the symmetry of the traffic and mounting breaks down.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

sorry,

i should have said

"weird tho you DON'T have a relector on the front"


----------



## marinyork (16 Nov 2009)

shauncollier said:


> sorry,
> 
> i should have said
> 
> "weird tho you DON'T have a relector on the front"



Is it though?

In non christmas tree/forget about the NINJA/Fairy bashers Rear reflectors actually work pretty well. The cyclist is quite likely to catch the beam and they'll be approaching it. Could save a kids life if you aren't one of these inattentive drivers who drive into anything. 

Front reflectors the cyclist will be on the other side of the road, beams don't tend to catch them as much and apart from at junctions is a fairly irrelevant. Even at junctions the approaching speeds will be added rather than subtracted so little use.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

i'm talking about the legaL requirement. rear and pedals, yes. front, no


----------



## marinyork (16 Nov 2009)

shauncollier said:


> i'm talking about the legaL requirement. rear and pedals, yes. front, no



Yes. I've outlined my reasons why I think it's not at all surprising that rear and pedals are yes and front no. I'm sure that the people that drafted the requirements probably thought along these lines in the days when there were fewer stupidly bright lights knocking around.

In my opinion the legal requirement is pretty sensible, although I have a dissenting view on the pedal reflectors.

Not being argumentative, pointing out I think there is good reason for this puzzling rule .


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

mmm, i can see why they chose to include the pedal lights, they are moving flat reflectors that rotate and will catch any light available front and rear. just seems odd to ommit the front reflector. needs to be on the bike when sold, but not when used. ditto for the wheel reflectors. like you said previously, let the lawyers argue. i'm just ensuring there is no wriggle room on the legality of my bike. daft i know, but i don't want to be the poor bugger that is set as an example. like that poor bugger who had his payout cut by a stupid judge even tho the fact he wasn't wearing a helmet has nothing to do with his injuries.


----------



## 4F (16 Nov 2009)

Not forgetting that if you bike is of a certain age it is exempt from having to have pedal reflectors


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Nov 2009)

sbseven said:


> To answer your question, the LD1100 doesn't meet BS6102/3 standards. Not many 'good' lights do.
> 
> The LD1100 packaging says:
> For UK Customers: When used for cycling, this light should be used in conjunction with a British Standard 6102/3 cycle light.
> ...



No it doesn't!

If you read the small print the *reflector* meets BS standards 

From the "blurb"



> TL-AU100 REAR LIGHT
> Code: CA475AU100
> Designed specifically for the uk, this powerful 6 diode led rear light meets bs6102/3. Wide angle lens ensures excellent all round visibility. *Features integral British Standard reflector.* Constant or flashing modes.
> Batteries included.



It's flashing mode precludes BS6102/3 compliance.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

but it has a constant mode therefore does not meet bs6102. if it didn't then they would.....i think. plus i checked my lights today and they are not marked up anywhere. i have 3 cateye rear lights. no marks no compliance


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

i'm going to buy some reelights which meet all standards. problem solved and permanent back ups...bonus


----------



## andrew_s (16 Nov 2009)

The cateye TL-AU100BS meets both the lighting standard (BS6102/3) and the reflector standard (BS6102/2). It's got both markings on it.

If you had a light-only BS light like one of the old never-readies, you'd still need a separate reflector. The cateye light does both jobs.
It doesn't matter that it's got a flashing mode, but you only qualify as legally lit if it's in steady mode.

The reelights don't meet any standards. A law was passed a while back (Oct 2007?) that made flashing lights legal (previously illegal to use even together with other lights), and also stated that a light flashing at 1 to 4 Hz and with a brightness of at least 4cd was a legal light on its own, no standards mentioned.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (16 Nov 2009)

andrew_s said:


> The cateye TL-AU100BS meets both the lighting standard (BS6102/3) and the reflector standard (BS6102/2). It's got both markings on it.
> 
> If you had a light-only BS light like one of the old never-readies, you'd still need a separate reflector. The cateye light does both jobs.
> It doesn't matter that it's got a flashing mode, but you only qualify as legally lit if it's in steady mode.
> ...




sorry but that statement is incorrect. they exceed danish standards, therefore are accepted under the bs6102.


----------

