# Fitted lights & bike reflectors... How 'legal' are we all really?



## flake99please (8 Oct 2015)

In light of recent 'discussions' regarding the legality of BS approved/non approved lights, light colours, reflectors, etc. I am genuinely interested in the number of forum users that are truly 'road legal' when they are riding. I myself fall into the non BS approved lights, and no reflectors category. 

For what its worth, my lighting set up is...

Front
2 x Cateye Volt700 (continuous, and angled well towards the road), 2 x Cateye RapidX (flashing)

Rear
1 x Exposure Tracer (pulse), 2 x Cateye RapidX (flashing)

Although the likelihood of being pulled over for non compliance of fitted reflectors, it does bother me that there is a potential for a driver to argue this fact in a court case should there be an RTA between us (assuming they're at fault).


----------



## glasgowcyclist (8 Oct 2015)

With my current setup my bike is fully compliant with the lighting regs. In fact they are to STVZO (Straßenverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung) standard so exceed the British requirements. No surprise really as it's a new bike bought from a German outlet online.

I have additional non-compliant lights.

GC


----------



## fossyant (8 Oct 2015)

No BS crap lights here. No pedal reflectors.

Lit up like a Christmas Tree on fire.


----------



## Drago (8 Oct 2015)

Legal light front and rear as backups, effective lights front and rear as my main lamps.

Pedal reflectors I technically miss the boat. On my 520s and 540s I got the reflectors, but on others I've improvised with Amber reflective tape.

Rear reflector on all bikes I use on the road.


----------



## glenn forger (8 Oct 2015)

Cat eye EL320 front, been a star that light, had it years, that's on flash and a tenner Aldi torch zip locked to the bars is on steady so drivers can judge speed. Pedal reflectors that came with the bike and seventy spoke reflectors, rear is the Smart keyhole shaped one and that flat one that can strobe backwards and forwards like off Close Encounters, dunno what it's called. I am entirely legal apart from the class A drugs in the panniers.


----------



## Simpleton (8 Oct 2015)

I have one rear blinky and one front. No reflectors at all. 

Don't fall into the trap that being lit up like a christmas tree will be safer - because it won't.


----------



## glenn forger (8 Oct 2015)

I would feel uncomfortable with one light in case of failure, and drivers seem to be able to judge speed better with a steady light.


----------



## Drago (8 Oct 2015)

Simpleton said:


> Don't fall into the trap that being lit up like a christmas tree will be safer - because it won't.



Here we go...


----------



## Simpleton (8 Oct 2015)

Drago said:


> Here we go...


''How could you not see me?"

Famous last words, riding defensively will reap more benefits then riding with enough lumens you are seen from outer space.


----------



## Drago (8 Oct 2015)

I'm not arguing the case either way. I'm simply predicting a, er, 'lively' discussion about that point.


----------



## mjr (8 Oct 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> With my current setup my bike is fully compliant with the lighting regs. In fact they are to STVZO (Straßenverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung) standard so exceed the British requirements.


Same here, so I picked "Non BS" even though they are legal. Actually, I still have a BS Cateye light amongst the fleet in the shed and it's surprisingly good. Is the only widely-available BS light now the Askalitt one in Clas Ohlsen?


----------



## Slioch (8 Oct 2015)

With the advancements made in LED technology I think the BS for bicycle lighting is no longer fit for purpose and should be reviewed. The current standard puts cyclists who have lighting that is superior to the BS into a "grey area" both from a legal and an insurance point of view should they be involved in an incident. 

I have more than adequate lights front and rear to ensure I can be both seen, and to see by, but I am not BS compliant.


----------



## summerdays (8 Oct 2015)

Reflectors fitted as arrived with the bike (even got the ones on the spokes - as well as some aldi spoke reflectors). 

Lights non compliant - the need for bright, easily removable, transferable, bright lights outweighs the need to meet the standard. So a mixture of lights from Electron nano?, cateye volt, smart superflash, hope etc, and some of those blinky ones that are based on the original frog design ones.


----------



## MontyVeda (8 Oct 2015)

I have no idea if my lights are BS approved or not. but there's no poll option for that.


----------



## fimm (8 Oct 2015)

On the Brompton - two lights front and rear (a Cat-eye set and an Edinburgh Bike Co-op set that they don't make any more). Front and rear reflectors. Pedal reflectors (except two have fallen off! I really should see if I can superglue them back on...)

On the road bike - two "be seen" lights at the rear plus a wee blinky thing hanging off the pannier. Two powerful (one is a Leyzane) lights at the front (I have a section without streetlights on the commute I do on that bike). No pedal reflectors (I run clipless pedals and the pannier obscures the pedal that side anyway). I do use reflective ankle straps.

EDIT - a few spoke reflectors on both those bikes.

I also own a TT bike that has neither lights nor reflectors - because I never ride it in the dark... (I think the OP was trying to stop smart-arse answers like this with the line about "most used" bike)


----------



## summerdays (8 Oct 2015)

MontyVeda said:


> I have no idea if my lights are BS approved or not. but there's no poll option for that.


It's a fairly safe bet that if you didn't specifically look for lights that were BS approved then chances are they are not.


----------



## MontyVeda (8 Oct 2015)

summerdays said:


> It's a fairly safe bet that if you didn't specifically look for lights that were BS approved then chances are they are not.


oh well.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (8 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Same here, so I picked "Non BS" even though they are legal. Actually, I still have a BS Cateye light amongst the fleet in the shed and it's surprisingly good. Is the only widely-available BS light now the Askalitt one in Clas Ohlsen?



I didn't cast a vote as BS doesn't apply to my setup but it is of an acceptable (and higher) alternate European standard. There should be a voting option for 'exceeds BS requirements'!

I'd never heard of the Askalitt light before. I've no idea which lights on sale in the UK are BS compliant, I tend to go for B&M stuff.

GC


----------



## Jody (8 Oct 2015)

fossyant said:


> No BS crap lights here. No pedal reflectors.
> 
> Lit up like a Christmas Tree on fire.



^ This (almost) for me. Although you need to add an option for non BS conforming reflectors also. 

Lights Non BS twin cree upfront with a BS single LED also on the bars. Rear, 1/2 watt smart, Zecto and a single LED knog blinder on the helmet for emergency. I assume the rears are all BS but could be wrong

I have 3M tape on my forks, steerer tube, rear triangle near the pivots and the top of my seat tube. Slick wheels have 3M spoke reflectors and the nobbly wheels have some small bits blue reflective material on the rims. 

No pedal reflectors but have reflectives on on my shoes and also DHB bibs with large reflectives on the calfs n zip.


----------



## mjr (8 Oct 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I'd never heard of the Askalitt light before. I've no idea which lights on sale in the UK are BS compliant, I tend to go for B&M stuff.


Yes, you have far more choice of good lights when buying from Germany.

There's a commentary at http://swhs.home.xs4all.nl/fiets/tests/verlichting/verkeersregels/uk_rvlr/index_en.html that says the BS was last updated in 2003, so it's not as out of date as some think, but it looks possible to produce a light that would pass BS but still be pathetic (about 4 lux on the German measurement system - StVZO requires 10 and I think 30 is the useful minimum!). It also looks possible to produce a BS light that would be good, but seeing as cyclists in our country have been blinded by meaningless lumens marketing for years and don't seem to care about dazzling other road users, is there sufficient market for it?


----------



## Mrs M (8 Oct 2015)

I have Cateye front and rear x2.
I have no reflectors but reflective jacket and shoes.
I don't ride often at night but always have a set of lights on when it's a bit dull (most of the time )


----------



## summerdays (8 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Yes, you have far more choice of good lights when buying from Germany.
> 
> There's a commentary at http://swhs.home.xs4all.nl/fiets/tests/verlichting/verkeersregels/uk_rvlr/index_en.html that says the BS was last updated in 2003, so it's not as out of date as some think, but it looks possible to produce a light that would pass BS but still be pathetic (about 4 lux on the German measurement system - StVZO requires 10 and I think 30 is the useful minimum!). It also looks possible to produce a BS light that would be good, but seeing as cyclists in our country have been blinded by meaningless lumens marketing for years and don't seem to care about dazzling other road users, is there sufficient market for it?


Surely we can only buy what is there to buy. I don't go looking for the brightest light, I look at it in use on the road on other people's bikes, whether it blinds someone (I don't see the point - I'd rather they were not shutting their eyes when near me), if there is a useful spread of light, if I'm not directly behind them does it still show up. 2003 is a long time in terms of lights!


----------



## Dogtrousers (8 Oct 2015)

It depends which bike. I have reflectors, including pedal reflectors on two of my bikes, but not the third. Whether my lights are BS approved or not I don't know. Probably not.

Note that pedal reflectors aren't a legal requirement on bikes manufactured before 1980-something. (1985?) So my Dawes doesn't need them legally. But I've fitted some anyway.


----------



## cd365 (8 Oct 2015)

Jody said:


> No pedal reflectors but have reflectives on on my shoes and also DHB bibs with large reflectives on the calfs n zip.


I also have reflectors on my shoes, not sure if legally that is sufficient. I'm sure someone on here knows the answer. I've never seen a question yet on this forum where someone isn't an expert


----------



## Jody (8 Oct 2015)

cd365 said:


> I also have reflectors on my shoes, not sure if legally that is sufficient. I'm sure someone on here knows the answer. I've never seen a question yet on this forum where someone isn't an expert



They aren't legal and especially as mine are white.


----------



## mjr (8 Oct 2015)

summerdays said:


> Surely we can only buy what is there to buy. I don't go looking for the brightest light, I look at it in use on the road on other people's bikes, whether it blinds someone (I don't see the point - I'd rather they were not shutting their eyes when near me), if there is a useful spread of light, if I'm not directly behind them does it still show up. 2003 is a long time in terms of lights!


Sure, but 2003 is just a blink in terms of human eyeball evolution, so what was good enough to see or dazzling back then probably still is. There's not been any step change like LEDs or plastics since 2003 so it should be pretty simple with the progress in technology for someone to make a compliant light now that's actually some good. Well done on checking lights yourself - I think that's more thorough than most people do before purchasing.


----------



## raleighnut (8 Oct 2015)

Another Christmas tree here, 4 front lights (Electron twin lamp set and 2 opticube Cateyes) and at least 2 (if not 3, depends on the bike) rear lamps 1 flashing and one constant/flashing (Cateye 2 row TL-LD1000) plus retroreflective flashes on clothing, boots and panniers, plus sometimes a HiViz tabard.


----------



## summerdays (8 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Well done on checking lights yourself - I think that's more thorough than most people do before purchasing.


When you are commuting and seeing lights regularly it's easy to notice what works and what doesn't, and then it's just a case of asking them what their light is when you have to stop at the junctions.


----------



## NickWi (8 Oct 2015)

Ignoring the alternative German / EU approved option, is it actually possible to by a light that just isn't BS approved, but actually mark up as so. i.e. the kitemark is moulded into the lense or wherever it's supposed to be?


----------



## sight-pin (8 Oct 2015)

Simpleton said:


> Don't fall into the trap that being lit up like a christmas tree will be safer



Depends if you have any visible presents....or is it presence


----------



## Tin Pot (8 Oct 2015)

Fitting lights is conforming to the prevailing zeitgeist that a cyclist is in any way in control of his/her own destiny.

Plus, light pollution.

I can't remember what the requirements are anyway..?


----------



## dave r (8 Oct 2015)

Full B S Lights, 2 front, 2 rear, pedal reflectors on rear of pedals, spoke reflectors on the rear wheel, I've got to get another pack of these to do the front

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00ELBYFF0/ref=pe_385721_37986871_TE_item


----------



## Dan B (8 Oct 2015)

There used to be a maximum wattage on BS lights, that's good news if they've removed it. There also used to be requirements of the mounting brackets that hardly anything on the market complied with. 

My lights are legal in the UK by virtue of the "equivalent or better standard from another EU country" loophole. The other country is of course Germany

I don't have pedal or wheel reflectors (SPDs) but I'm fairly sure the bike predates 1985 or at least that it would be an awful lot of effort to prove otherwise


----------



## snorri (8 Oct 2015)

sight-pin said:


> Depends if you have any visible presents....or is it presence


Guardian angels are never visible


----------



## lazybloke (8 Oct 2015)

I briefly had pedal reflectors last year (they are just visible in the avatar pic).
I think I'm right in saying I don't need them because my bike is of 1983 vintage.

And i'd enjoy pointing that out (smart alec style) to a copper some day, if only the rest of the bike met regulations; the lights don't have any kitemarks, and the traditional rear reflector pinged off during an argument with a fence.


----------



## subaqua (9 Oct 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> With my current setup my bike is fully compliant with the lighting regs. In fact they are to STVZO (Straßenverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung) standard so exceed the British requirements. No surprise really as it's a new bike bought from a German outlet online.
> 
> I have additional non-compliant lights.
> 
> GC



this is my set up too. german lights run from the dynamo hub. even have wheel reflectors too


----------



## Slioch (9 Oct 2015)

User said:


> BS are minimum standards. If your lights exceed them then you are legally compliant.



I wasn't aware of that. Useful to know. Thanks for the heads-up.


----------



## MontyVeda (9 Oct 2015)

I'm wondering if @flake99please is actually going to correlate the poll results with various claims/whines about lighting in other threads.


----------



## flake99please (9 Oct 2015)

I think that when the poll has had a good time to run (and a few more results in), it would be perhaps useful to mention the percentages.


----------



## sidevalve (9 Oct 2015)

As a point the OP asks about legality - lights of any sort are not required in daylight [as with cars and m/cycles] only - yep - poor visibility and at night.


----------



## Saluki (9 Oct 2015)

Blinks Frog lights front and rear, cat eye front and rear and a couple of other front lights, probably not B S but the are nice and bright.
No reflectors on the bike but have reflecty bits on shoes, longs, jacket, gloves etc

I have those clip on individual spoke reflectors but can't find them at the mo


----------



## mickle (9 Oct 2015)

I don't know if my lights comply and am not motivated to find out. Two fronts, one on flash. One rear which has a main constant lensed led plus two flashing less within it. I have one of those multi led flashing pattern making thingies in the backwheel when the nights draw in. And a ton of reflective tape on rims and cranks. Also several hand fulls of those 3M clip on spoke reflectors.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Oct 2015)

sidevalve said:


> As a point the OP asks about legality - lights of any sort are not required in daylight [as with cars and m/cycles] only - yep - poor visibility and at night.



Not required in poor visibility, only required between sunset and sunrise (although it would be wise).

GC


----------



## Tin Pot (9 Oct 2015)

> *Two clauses (sections) in detail (taken from the 1992 version of BS 6102-1)*
> Clause 15. Lighting and reflectors:
> 
> 
> ...



So bikes must look really uncool to be compliant.


----------



## mjr (9 Oct 2015)

Tin Pot said:


> So bikes must look really uncool to be compliant.


Retro roadsters are compliant AND cool


----------



## Tin Pot (9 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Retro roadsters are compliant AND cool



:facepalm:

Can reflectors be fitted to shimano spd sl pedals?

Genuinely never had this compliance problem as I have only trained during the day.


----------



## Dan B (9 Oct 2015)

Tin Pot said:


> So bikes must look really uncool to be compliant.


Does it say anything about pie plates? Or use of the inner chainring?


----------



## Tin Pot (9 Oct 2015)

Dan B said:


> Does it say anything about pie plates? Or use of the inner chainring?



Haha, we should start an epetition to replace the Highway Code with the Velominati Rules just for kicks.


----------



## subaqua (9 Oct 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Not required in poor visibility, only required between sunset and sunrise (although it would be wise).
> 
> GC


when is that exactly  bearing in mind refraction etc .


----------



## Ian H (9 Oct 2015)

Two of my bikes have legal lights (dynamo) and rear reflectors. Another three can have lights fitted when needed. None have pedal reflectors. I think nearly all cycling shoes and overshoes have rear reflective patches.

Wheel reflectors and (as far as I'm aware) front reflectors are only legally required at point of sale.


----------



## glenn forger (9 Oct 2015)

Cateye EL320 is the front:

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/categ...s/front/product/review-cateye-hl-el-320-9424/

Had it six years easy. Been rained on, snowed on, frozen and dropped numerous times, it's a rock-steady Eddie.


----------



## mustang1 (9 Oct 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> With my current setup my bike is fully compliant with the lighting regs. In fact they are to STVZO (Straßenverkehrs-Zulassungs-Ordnung) standard so exceed the British requirements. No surprise really as it's a new bike bought from a German outlet online.
> 
> *I have additional non-compliant lights.*
> 
> GC


Do they work in a more suitable way than the compliant ones?


----------



## RMurphy195 (12 Oct 2015)

glenn forger said:


> I would feel uncomfortable with one light in case of failure, and drivers seem to be able to judge speed better with a steady light.


As a driver as well as a cyclist I agree that yes, a steady light allows better judgement of speed/distance, and indicates the presence just as well as a flashing one. With a flashing light, even in conjunction with a steady light, speed/distance is more difficult to judge. A couple of very small lights on a bike with a drakly dressed rider is VERY difficult to see at all, even at dusk. Size matters!


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Oct 2015)

I've gone for non BS plus all the reflectors god sends as I have some German lights and a mix of fixed & flashy excellent visibility i assume non BS ones (never askedor RTFM TBH) I'm comfortable and confident I could justify my choice in court if the need arose and show I'm more than compliant with the spirit and police interpretation of what they consider acceptable in practice

Whether our auto centric judicial system would agree to the n'th legal degree is another matter but thats what the adversarial system is. And to be frank I suspect my wearing a helmet infrequently; increasing the chances of me being involved in litigation bare headed; will be an easier win for the defence as Plan A.

Just as a question I don't know the answer to, probably Glenn or MRJ will (or its been raised in this thread that I've not read through)
Has the BS standard or not of lights ever successfully been a mitigating factor in a driver's defence against running a cyclist down?


----------



## mjr (13 Oct 2015)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Just as a question I don't know the answer to, probably Glenn or MRJ will (or its been raised in this thread that I've not read through)
> Has the BS standard or not of lights ever successfully been a mitigating factor in a driver's defence against running a cyclist down?


I don't know who MRJ is  but I don't know the answer to that and I suspect it's not on the public record because if it's either a good or useless argument then it won't have reached court. It would probably be recorded at the Motor Insurer's Bureau, but we can't search that for case outcomes, can we?

The cases I found on www.BaILII.org citing the Road and Vehicle Lighting Regulations all concern motor vehicle lighting (unlit trailers, private ambulances and so on) and cases mentioning "bicycle lights" or similar don't include any where the BS-or-not status was challenged. I only found one recent case where a motorist's side challenged whether fitted lights were lit and that challenge was refuted.

Given the highway code tells motorists to drive within what we can see to be clear, challenging lights as non-BS purely for that reason would probably be pointless because you're meant not to crash into unlit things. I think there might be more potential to challenge lights for being dazzling (similar to cases where motorists are found more liable because they used full beam when they should not have), but I didn't find a case where anyone has done so yet and I suspect it would hit the news, wouldn't it?


----------



## summerdays (13 Oct 2015)

I must admit I'm finding the newer car lights more dazzling than the old style ones.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Oct 2015)

Oops, @mjray sorry, sausage fingered typing is my only excuse.

Thanks for the comprehensive reply, I imagine it is an unlikely acenario or would be cited regularly when lights come up in this context


----------



## mjr (13 Oct 2015)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Thanks for the comprehensive reply, I imagine it is an unlikely acenario or would be cited regularly when lights come up in this context


No worries. I think the main problem with non-BS lights is having to choose between not being able to see properly if the light is aimed downwards and being an anti-social nobber dazzling other cyclists if it's not. BS and K lights have much better shaped beams, so you can see the ground a decent distance ahead but it's only a be-seen amount above the horizontal.

In theory, any police officer could fine you for not having proper lights, but that's slightly undermined because all the cycle police I've seen are using non-BS pathetic low-end cateyes. Criminals! If you want to escape cycle police, just ride off somewhere unlit and I'd be amazed if they can see well enough follow at any speed.


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Oct 2015)

BS front and rear lights backed u by Ixon lights (not BS but still legal all as carry the German K certification)


My real reflectors are fitted but on several bikes are illegal as not visible


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> No worries. I think the main problem with non-BS lights is having to choose between not being able to see properly if the light is aimed downwards and being an anti-social nobber dazzling other cyclists if it's not. BS and K lights have much better shaped beams, so you can see the ground a decent distance ahead but it's only a be-seen amount above the horizontal.
> 
> In theory, any police officer could fine you for not having proper lights, but that's slightly undermined because all the cycle police I've seen are using non-BS pathetic low-end cateyes. Criminals! If you want to escape cycle police, just ride off somewhere unlit and I'd be amazed if they can see well enough follow at any speed.



The trick is to have the BS lights fitted and have a "backup" set that are worthwhile 

That way you get decent lights and are legal


----------



## mjr (13 Oct 2015)

Cunobelin said:


> The trick is to have the BS lights fitted and have a "backup" set that are worthwhile
> 
> That way you get decent lights and are legal


Only legal if the "worthwhile" set aren't horrible O-shaped beams that have to be aimed at the floor to avoid dazzling oncoming cyclists... by which point, you might as well have bought BS or K lights as a reasonable assurance that they're not O-shaped.


----------



## totallyfixed (13 Oct 2015)

Which camp are you in?
http://www.ctc.org.uk/blog/chris-juden/bobby-dazzlers


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Oct 2015)

mustang1 said:


> Do they work in a more suitable way than the compliant ones?



They're backups in case the main ones fail and I have a magicshine rear, mounted down at the rear axle (offside) which I use as a fog lamp.

GC


----------



## Tanis8472 (17 Oct 2015)

subaqua said:


> when is that exactly  bearing in mind refraction etc .



http://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/different-types-twilight.html


----------



## oldstrath (17 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Only legal if the "worthwhile" set aren't horrible O-shaped beams that have to be aimed at the floor to avoid dazzling oncoming cyclists... by which point, you might as well have bought BS or K lights as a reasonable assurance that they're not O-shaped.


Completely worthwhile in some circumstances when the equivalent of a car main beam is needed.


----------



## totallyfixed (17 Oct 2015)

I cannot see how it is beyond the wit of bike light manufacturers for them to produce a light that mimicks that of a car headlight i.e. dipped and main beam, you then have a light suitable for both road and off road.


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Oct 2015)

totallyfixed said:


> I cannot see how it is beyond the wit of bike light manufacturers for them to produce a light that mimicks that of a car headlight i.e. dipped and main beam, you then have a light suitable for both road and off road.



They do, but are not BS standard!

You can (as previously) use some as they have a German "K" stamp, and are willing to argue the point

Mine is the Ixon IQ Premium... note the beam pattern


----------



## Tanis8472 (17 Oct 2015)

That looks like a decent light


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Oct 2015)

Also has a "dual" power system

It has 4 AA rechargeable batteries, but also a charging circuit

So you can recharge the batteries in situ with a charger, remove the batteries and use a normal charger, or finally (if touring?) ditch the rechargeables and use ordinary AA

It is bulky compared with some, but I like them


----------



## totallyfixed (17 Oct 2015)

Cunobelin said:


> They do, but are not BS standard!
> 
> You can (as previously) use some as they have a German "K" stamp, and are willing to argue the point
> 
> Mine is the Ixon IQ Premium... note the beam pattern


Yes and no, I have been using German lights for the last 20 years and they do not produce one with a main beam, almost as if they do not trust their citizens to dip in response to oncoming traffic, so it is ok for cars but not for bikes, a bit of a dual standard there methinks, however , better than being blinded I suppose. The Ixon IQ Premium also does not have a main beam, it still has a cut off and the beam shots in your post clearly show that, in fact I think the wider of the 2 images is just 2 Premiums side by side, I could be wrong.


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (17 Oct 2015)

totallyfixed said:


> Yes and no, I have been using German lights for the last 20 years and they do not produce one with a main beam, almost as if they do not trust their citizens to dip in response to oncoming traffic, so it is ok for cars but not for bikes, a bit of a dual standard there methinks, however , better than being blinded I suppose. The Ixon IQ Premium also does not have a main beam, it still has a cut off and the beam shots in your post clearly show that, in fac*t I think the wider of the 2 images is just 2 Premiums side by side, I could be wrong*.


I've recently bought one of the Ixon IQ Premium and the wider beam shot shown above is what the beam pattern from my single lamp looks like. I think the narrower beam might be the older version as that's how I remember the one on the rickshaw looking.

You're right about the main beam though. It has a high and a low power setting but that's not the same as a dip and a main beam.

Impressed with it all the same and look forward to some good illumination down the dark lanes on my evening commutes.


----------



## oldstrath (17 Oct 2015)

Tanis8472 said:


> That looks like a decent light


Optically it's very good as a dipped beam equivalent. The handlebar mount isn't really stable on my bars, but it works fine on a fork crown mount. The battery cover catch is somewhat on the feeble side (and has a reputation for breaking). This is a battery version of the Cyo dynamo light, which is both mechanically simpler and more robust. There's an element of bodge about it to my mind, but if you want this beam in a battery light it's probably the best on offer.

I do wish their standard allowed a main beam though. I know this wasn't possible with dynamo lights, but really the world has moved on.


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Oct 2015)

It has two beams, low and high power... Equivalent to high and low beam in terms of intensity


Personally I always run a pair, one of each,then reverse on the way home

Ensures lighting for both trips


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (17 Oct 2015)

Cunobelin said:


> *It has two beams, low and high power... Equivalent to high and low beam in terms of intensity*
> 
> 
> Personally I always run a pair, one of each,then reverse on the way home
> ...


No, two different intensities but only 1 beam pattern - dipped. It's a great lamp but I'm with @totallyfixed on this and don't understand the lack of lamps with main and dipped beam patterns that you can easily switch between like on a motor vehicle.


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Oct 2015)

Rickshaw Phil said:


> No, two different intensities but only 1 beam pattern - dipped. It's a great lamp but I'm with @totallyfixed on this and don't understand the lack of lamps with main and dipped beam patterns that you can easily switch between like on a motor vehicle.



Hence the use of the words "in terms of intensity" no claim was ever mad for beam patten


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (17 Oct 2015)

Cunobelin said:


> Hence the use of the words "in terms of intensity" no claim was ever mad for beam patten


That's how I read your response to Totallyfixed:


totallyfixed said:


> I cannot see how it is beyond the wit of bike light manufacturers for them to produce a light that mimicks that of a car headlight i.e. dipped and main beam, you then have a light suitable for both road and off road.





Cunobelin said:


> They do, but are not BS standard!
> 
> You can (as previously) use some as they have a German "K" stamp, and are willing to argue the point
> 
> Mine is the Ixon IQ Premium... note the beam pattern


----------



## totallyfixed (17 Oct 2015)

The technology is certainly available for bike lights to emulate vehicles and has been for a number of years, the question is, why don't they?


----------



## gavintc (17 Oct 2015)

I could not give s sh*t if my lights are compliant and will not be checking. They are bright and ensure I can see and be seen. I wear reflective stuff as well.


----------



## ManiaMuse (20 Oct 2015)

I have a couple of Cateye HL-EL135s on the front which I believe meet the standard when in flashing mode but not when constant confusingly. Probably annoying in rear view mirrors but I don't care if motorists notice me.

A couple of different rear lights, one which flashes in a pattern with different brightnesses so probably doesn't meet the standard but the other one flashes at a constant rate. Again possibly annoyingly bright but I'd prefer to annoy drivers than not be seen. 

No proper spoke reflectors but I've recently put some of those ones which clip onto a single spoke. I'm not sure how much they improve visibility but might help a bit at roundabouts etc. in the dark.

No proper pedal reflectors as have SL pedals. Shoes/overshoes have reflective bits though so could argue that if stopped I suppose. Have some trouser clips with flashing LEDs if I'm cycling in normal clothes/jeans as well :P


----------



## RichK (20 Oct 2015)

Couldn't find a kite mark on my pedal reflectors


----------



## mjr (20 Oct 2015)

ManiaMuse said:


> I have a couple of Cateye HL-EL135s on the front which I believe meet the standard when in flashing mode but not when constant confusingly.


Very confusingly: if you mean the British Standard, it only applies to constant lights and then they'll have the BS6102-3 marked on them somewhere - do they?

Alternatively, the UK regulations controversially permit flashing lights as long as they are more than 4 candelas bright, but only if they don't have a constant mode and I think all Cateyes have a constant mode (which makes sense for riding dark roads IMO). So strictly speaking, if your flashers have a constant mode and are marked as BS or equivalent, you should have an approved light too, according to http://www.ctc.org.uk/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations



RichK said:


> Couldn't find a kite mark on my pedal reflectors


Should be embossed on the lens, most likely saying "BS 6102-2" or "K~" then a number, rather than a kite mark.


----------



## simon.r (20 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Retro roadsters are compliant AND cool



None of my bikes have reflectors* or lights (until I strap a few on for use in poor visibility or at night), except this one, which is fully legal:






Edit - *A couple that I use at night have reflective tape and spoke reflectors.


----------



## ManiaMuse (20 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> Very confusingly: if you mean the British Standard, it only applies to constant lights and then they'll have the BS6102-3 marked on them somewhere - do they?
> 
> Alternatively, the UK regulations controversially permit flashing lights as long as they are more than 4 candelas bright, but only if they don't have a constant mode and I think all Cateyes have a constant mode (which makes sense for riding dark roads IMO). So strictly speaking, if your flashers have a constant mode and are marked as BS or equivalent, you should have an approved light too, according to http://www.ctc.org.uk/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations


Ah I see, well they're probably illegal then as they have a constant mode as well if what you say is true but this is what it says on the manual which makes what you said even more confusing...

FOR UK CONSUMERS “When used in constant flashing (sic) mode this light complies with the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 2005 No. 2559. If used in constant mode, this light should be used in conjunction with a British Standard 6102/3 cycle light.”

They are decently bright and cheap enough lights for city commuting though so think I will continue to be illegal if it means I am seen.


----------



## mjr (20 Oct 2015)

ManiaMuse said:


> Ah I see, well they're probably illegal then as they have a constant mode as well if what you say is true but this is what it says on the manual which makes what you said even more confusing...


Yep, sounds like they're interpreting the law differently to CTC. This stuff hasn't been tested in court, as far as I can tell, and I suspect it's highly unlikely that it ever will be. So rejoice in that.

Mini pedantry: the lights aren't illegal as long as they're not used in a dazzling way (aimed too high or front light on the back or whatever). They're just not enough to make your bike legal to use at night.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (20 Oct 2015)

My tourer/ commuter is the very model of a modern major-general



and complies with all the relevant laws regarding lighting and reflectors. As does my B.

I don't ride my other bikes at night.


----------



## Davidc (20 Oct 2015)

I don't really care about the rules, which are out-dated and inadequate, what I want is to see where I'm going and be seen by any other road used who isn't asleep or completely absorbed in their phone conversation so not looking.

Both my bikes have a dynamo and K standard lights so they're fully compliant. Having damaged the B&M CYO 60) on the tourer it's about to get a Herrman which is even brighter and also K standard, and I prefer the beam pattern.

I do have other lights (Hope Vision 1 and Smart Lunar R1 which aren't compliant but as far as I know that's not a problem as they're used with the ones that are) and always ride with 2 front and 2 back lit - .

The non-compliant ones get used in flashing mode in daylight, but since lights are not legally required then I presume it's irrelevant whether they're compliant or not.


----------



## mjr (20 Oct 2015)

Davidc said:


> I do have other lights (Hope Vision 1 and Smart Lunar R1 which aren't compliant but as far as I know that's not a problem as they're used with the ones that are) and


That's no problem as long as they're not "Used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road" but I think you have to be a bit careful with Hope Vision 1 as it seems like a powerful torch more than a headlamp.


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (20 Oct 2015)

While helping to take the thread slightly off-topic earlier  I neglected to mention the status of my own bikes:
*Raleigh*: Front and rear British standard reflectors + extra reflective tape + pedal reflectors + reflective sidewall tyres. Front lights: one BS compliant Hella lamp plus a B&M Ixon Premium lamp (very nice). Rear lights: one BS compliant Hella lamp plus an On One Phaart Bleep 0.5 watt.

*Hawk *(the famous knockabout bike): Rear British standard reflector + extra reflective tape front and rear + pedal reflectors + Tortec Reflex mudguards. Front lights: one Phaart Aeon 3 watt lamp plus a B&M Ixon Premium lamp (still very nice). Rear lights: one BS compliant Hella lamp plus a Phaart Bleep 0.5 watt.


----------



## summerdays (20 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> That's no problem as long as they're not "Used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road" but I think you have to be a bit careful with Hope Vision 1 as it seems like a powerful torch more than a headlamp.


It's easy to angle it, and I rarely would use the brightest setting apart from on a unlit path or road. Apart from anything I want it to light up the road surface, not the air in front of me.


----------



## Vertego (27 Oct 2015)

I know that my lights are always compliant...I only ride when it's daylight .

Seriously, as a lawyer I've never encountered anyone argue that the lights fitted were not compliant with the RVLR and for that reason contributory negligence is appropriate, although I have encountered strong arguments when no lights are fitted. That's likely because a defence solicitor or insurer does not understand the regulations, or that such arguments have been made historically but without success. I'm sure that these arguments would be made if they had been successfully raised in the past. Insurers are always looking for ways to reduce the amount of compensation they may have to pay.


----------



## mjr (27 Oct 2015)

Norfolk police are even encouraging people to buy non-RVLR lights: http://pic.twitter.com/DtsScjMAWy

So I think as long as your lights aren't dazzling (which rules out a lot of those eBay specials), then probably almost anything goes... but good German lights are still good IMO.


----------



## Sara_H (27 Oct 2015)

I always have two lights on the rear in case one stops working. I've never rally paid much attention to whether they're BS or not.


----------



## ianrauk (27 Oct 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I've never rally paid much attention to whether they're BS or not.



No one does.


----------



## Sara_H (27 Oct 2015)

ianrauk said:


> No one does.


Goodo.


----------



## Davidc (28 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> That's no problem as long as they're not "Used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road" but I think you have to be a bit careful with Hope Vision 1 as it seems like a powerful torch more than a headlamp.


Same as summerdays, and if angled down sensibly the forward intensity is only a bit more than the German spec dynamo light.

I think Hope designed the V1 as a road use bike light, but it isn't BS marked. Mine is usually aimed at the left verge out of town, so that I can see the pot holes and places where the LHS of the road has collapsed or eroded - all too common round here.


----------



## Karlt (29 Oct 2015)

Not quite sure how I compare legally, but PDA and Aldi rear 3-LED lights on the back for redundancy (the Aldi one has some striking flash patterns and the PDA one shines out to the sides as well as back), the rack bag has some red flashing LED running armbands that are also yellow reflective attached round it, and front has a cheap backup Aldi rubber LED "be seen by" jobby and a Lifeline 386 lumen front which is the main "actually see where I'm going" light. Pedals are completely illegal unreflectored SPDs.


----------

