What light for dynamo hub?

[Brucey]

I quite like the middle one of those three beamshots. That is the cyo premium, right?

cheers

[stewartpratt]

Ah, sorry, I didn't spot that the other two weren't labelled. The second is the Luxos; the Cyo Premium is at the bottom.

I have both of those and I find them comparable in terms of performance. I've not ridden with the CP in the dark since the winter, but I seem to recall I might very slightly prefer it to the Luxos beam. But if I do have a preference, it is very slight.

I'm not sure why the IQ-X has been designed to send so much light to the nearfield. I find the CP's beam coverage adequate; I'd prefer that any additional light was sent to the distance. Maybe that's just me, but I'd have thought a 139€ 100lux light is pitched at audax-style use rather than lower-speed urban use.

Beam shots never seem to tell the full story, though, so I wouldn't be surprised if I give in and buy one to try out at some point.

[beardy]

A happy mistake leaving the labels off. I came to the same conclusion as Brucey assuming the middle shot had better lighting of the fields to the sides because of the Premium's "cinemascope" beam shape.

I would be quite happy enough with any of the three beams but the middle looked the best to me too.
Like wise I would prefer to throw more light much further forward but that probably is difficult using a "dipped" beam and could need a second "high beam" which may not be allowed in German regs.

[interestedcp]

I'm not sure why the IQ-X has been designed to send so much light to the nearfield. I find the CP's beam coverage adequate; I'd prefer that any additional light was sent to the distance. Maybe that's just me, but I'd have thought a 139€ 100lux light is pitched at audax-style use rather than lower-speed urban use.

I think it is because people doing more technical rides in woods and winding cycle paths are starting to use dynamo lights, and for tight cornering that nearfield illumination to the sides is really welcome. Even some MTB riders are now using dynamo lights these days.

Beam shots never seem to tell the full story, though, so I wouldn't be surprised if I give in and buy one to try out at some point.

Very true (about beam shots). They should be treated more as general overviews of the beam performance and not be mistaken for what the beam will actually look for the human eye in reality.

[Brucey]

in which case for mixed use the Luxos is probably best but on reflection on an open country road the CP gets my vote.

The stuff to each side in the Luxos beam could just be a distraction perhaps, and at 20mph or more the bright splodge in the middle of the CP beam is the thing that is most similar to what I'm used to and is also the thing that is going to best avoid you running over/into something you shouldn't.

I guess a system that offered a 'dip' like the luxos and a 'main' more like the CP might be best?

(BTW the IQ beam looks patchy to me, away from the centreline but maybe that is the road, not the light, making it look like that? In any event it seems less important in the other beams which have a bright centre zone only)

cheers

[beardy]

The three beam patterns and power have little to choose between them but the price of the various lights is rather different.

While that price difference remains it is hard to justify buying other than the Cyo Premium.

[stewartpratt]

The stuff to each side in the Luxos beam could just be a distraction perhaps

It's not too bad (though the banding in those areas isn't great) but I tend to agree that light where it's not needed can just be a distraction.

I actually placed an order for the Luxos not long after it was announced, and waited months for delivery, purely on the basis of its "floodlight" feature. I had naively assumed this would be a main beam style mode, sending some light above the horizon, but in reality it only serves to brighten the area about five yards in front of the bike, which isn't helpful at all. (The feature is further undermined by the fact that it turns the floodlight off at climbing speeds, and you have to remember to manually reactivate it once you're back up to speed. As a result, I very rarely use it.)

I occasionally contemplate wiring up my Cyo Premium and Cyo as a pair, with a switch on the bars to use the Cyo (angled up) as a main beam. I'd need to hack it to bypass the standlight, though, plus I'd need to find a suitable switch that's tidy and compact enough for me to be happy to have it on the bars, and I've not found such a switch yet.

[stewartpratt]

While that price difference remains it is hard to justify buying other than the Cyo Premium.

Yes, that's very much the pointy bit in the bang vs buck curve.

[beardy]

I'd need to hack it to bypass the standlight

I find the demise of the power from the Cyo is pretty instant when a bike stops moving (comparable to a halogen bulb cooling in a car headlight) and the power of the standlight comparable to a car sidelight (and much less than a daylight driving light).

I wouldnt have thought it was necessary, or called for, to bypass the standlight.

[stewartpratt]

I wouldnt have thought it was necessary, or called for, to bypass the standlight.

You're probably right. I'd certainly give it a go without hacking it first.

Now… Who knows of any suitable switches?

[andrew_s]

I think it is because people doing more technical rides in woods and winding cycle paths are starting to use dynamo lights, and for tight cornering that nearfield illumination to the sides is really welcome. Even some MTB riders are now using dynamo lights these days.

None of these lights are suitable for off-road riding, and they can't be whilst still meeting the StVzO requirements.
The sharp cut-off that avoids dazzling oncoming motorists also means that if you ride in the woods, at some point you'll get a branch in the face that wasn't brightly lit enough to see in time to duck. Cycle paths tend not to be very well pruned either. As well as branches, there's also seeing the climb out of a dip whilst you are still going down.

A wider beam does help on twisty country lanes, but the closer area looks too bright to me - you want to let your eyes at least partly adapt to the dark so that you get maximum value from the light on the more distant parts of the road.

Off-road dynamo users usually use lights with a symmetrical circular beam, like the Supernova E3 Triple, or the Exposure Revo.

[interestedcp]

None of these lights are suitable for off-road riding, and they can't be whilst still meeting the StVzO requirements.

There are other forms of riding in the woods than riding highly technical off-road MTB paths. There are lots of high quality cyclepaths passing through woods, or gravel cycle paths to explore without the risk of getting hit by low hanging branches, and cyclist are increasingly using them perhaps as a part of their ride, simply because it is pleasant. Recreational night-riding have increased the last years simply because lights have become so much better and cheaper. I am partly split about this; it is nice that people enjoy nature, but I wonder if it stresses the wildlife when even the night isn't quiet anymore.

The "true" MTB'ers that uses dynamo lights seems to use it as a base light while supplement it with a powerful helmet mounted light. That way they both have a legal light for the roads to and from the woods and one less battery pack to babysit.

[Samuel D]

The middle beamshot photo on page 1 (of the Luxos) shows a lot more light on the tunnel walls than the others. That suggests it is the Luxus U in 90-lux ‘floodlight’ mode or with ‘Panorama light at close range’ rather than the Luxus B. But does the Luxos B also put more light outside the beam proper than other Busch & Müller lights?

[stewartpratt]

IME the Luxos U has the same coverage with and without the "floodlight" option. The floodlight just slightly brightens the nearfield area that's already covered. It's a bit of a damp squib, to be honest.

I'm not sure whether/how the B's beam differs.

[Samuel D]

The floodlight just slightly brightens the nearfield area that's already covered.

But Busch & Müller describes the ‘floodlight’ feature as “full output of all lights sources”, which presumably includes the daytime running lamps. Right? These are less directional than the shaped beam and might therefore make a very large difference to the brightness of nearby objects outside the shaped beam, e.g. the tunnel walls in the beam shots.

Since the Luxos B doesn’t have the ‘floodlight’ feature, I am wondering what those tunnel walls would look like with that model – assuming, of course, that the beamshot actually is of the Luxos U and not the Luxos B. Busch & Müller doesn’t say!