do cateye ld1100 meet bs6102?

[RedBike]

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]

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]

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]

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]

sorry,

i should have said

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

 

[marinyork]

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]

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

 

[marinyork]

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]

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]

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

 

[ufkacbln]

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

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]

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]

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

 

[andrew_s]

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]

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.

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