Primo Rivera 5&3/4" LED Headlight

[ponters]

@barbagris,
Appreciate all your work regarding this MC lighting dilemma.
So, we now have a "NEW" 8630 Evolution model that seems to go for $520.00 EACH!!!
Sure would like to test a couple of these against my Daymakers, which were $300.00 each.
After some experimenting, I have set my high beams to 1° below level and they seem so far to work well.
I can safely ride at 50 - 55 mph in the true dark before outrunning them. I only get flashed by oncoming vehicles occasionally.
I do dip whenever I can, but the low beams are only safe for like 40 mph in the true dark.
Seriously considering the Erica from Clearwater near Sacto, CA.
https://www.clearwaterlights.com/infopg_erica.html

Mate my JWS 8630's are good for about 65 mph. I have PIAA LED's a driving lights and they are good for 80 mph.

 

[1olbull]

Mate my JWS 8630's are good for about 65 mph. I have PIAA LED's a driving lights and they are good for 80 mph.

M8, I would respectfully offer . . .
If you were to actually test how far in the dark you can perceive and identify a low contrast object (Deer/Roo) in the roadway with your lights, I would bet it would be MUCH farther than you could see and avoid at 80 mph.
80 mph is 117.4 feet per second. At a minimum of 2 seconds perception response time that is 235 feet you travel before you even react to the brakes. It would take at least another 305 feet and 5 seconds for you to stop.
Therefor, a minimum of 540 feet and 7 seconds is required for you to identify an object in the road and come to an EMERGENCY stop from 80 mph.
I seriously doubt your lights cast 3.2 lux (.3 foot candles) of light that far or farther!

Testing of my Daymakers, which are indeed bright, has shown sufficient light (3.2 lux / .3 foot candles) to identify an object in the roadway is cast downstream 300 feet.
This distance is just enough to perceive, respond and come to an emergency stop at 50 mph on a dark roadway with no ambient light.

Just saying . . . all of us think we can see farther than we actually can at night and most of us overrun our headlights. There has been much scientific testing proving this.
BE CAREFUL RIDING AT NIGHT!!!

 

[1olbull]

After much searching I did indeed find them for $428.00 here:
http://www.headlightrevolution.com/mobile/Product.aspx?ProductCode=0549911

 

[cr0ft]

all of us think we can see farther than we actually can at night and most of us overrun our headlights.

Indeed, and most people seem to think they actually have quick reaction times. They don't, because no human does. 1.5 seconds is what is used in accident reconstructions to see, process and start reacting to an issue, but 2 seconds is probably more correct, and from there you still have to get your extremities to start moving to do something about it, and then the heavy bike you're on still has to shed all that inertia via the brakes. It's an issue in the nighttime, but it's also one in the daytime - gotta leave space between yourself and the rest of traffic in order to have a shot at reacting to avoid any situations.

 

[1olbull]

Indeed, and most people seem to think they actually have quick reaction times. They don't, because no human does. 1.5 seconds is what is used in accident reconstructions to see, process and start reacting to an issue, but 2 seconds is probably more correct, and from there you still have to get your extremities to start moving to do something about it, and then the heavy bike you're on still has to shed all that inertia via the brakes. It's an issue in the nighttime, but it's also one in the daytime - gotta leave space between yourself and the rest of traffic in order to have a shot at reacting to avoid any situations.

Well, I am a collision reconstructionist by trade (40+ years).
There is NO rule of thumb PRT (Perception Response Time) like 1.5 seconds!
Each case and driver must be individually assessed. Many scientific human factors studies have consistently shown PRT at night to be at least 2 seconds and likely more, depending on variations of the multiple factors involved.

 

[cr0ft]

I stand corrected, can only recall reading somewhere that 1.5 was considered something used for accident reconstructions but I can't point to any actual source. Seemed reasonable to me though as a minimum in the real world.

Also that anywhere up to 3 seconds was perfectly possible if someone wasn't paying full attention.

 

[1olbull]

I stand corrected, can only recall reading somewhere that 1.5 was considered something used for accident reconstructions but I can't point to any actual source. Seemed reasonable to me though as a minimum in the real world.
Also that anywhere up to 3 seconds was perfectly possible if someone wasn't paying full attention.

You are correct here.
Some do (incorrectly) use a 1.5 sec rule of thumb. Twas based upon an old UMTRI (U of Michigan) test around 1980.
It was a daylight only test and not really designed for actual PRT. It did get everyone off the real old and previous 1 second assumed PRT bandwagon.
More comprehensive human testing over the past ten to fifteen years has greatly refined PRT evaluation.

 

[warp9.9]

M8, I would respectfully offer . . .
If you were to actually test how far in the dark you can perceive and identify a low contrast object (Deer/Roo) in the roadway with your lights, I would bet it would be MUCH farther than you could see and avoid at 80 mph.
80 mph is 117.4 feet per second. At a minimum of 2 seconds perception response time that is 235 feet you travel before you even react to the brakes. It would take at least another 305 feet and 5 seconds for you to stop.
Therefor, a minimum of 540 feet and 7 seconds is required for you to identify an object in the road and come to an EMERGENCY stop from 80 mph.
I seriously doubt your lights cast 3.2 lux (.3 foot candles) of light that far or farther!

Testing of my Daymakers, which are indeed bright, has shown sufficient light (3.2 lux / .3 foot candles) to identify an object in the roadway is cast downstream 300 feet.
This distance is just enough to perceive, respond and come to an emergency stop at 50 mph on a dark roadway with no ambient light.

Just saying . . . all of us think we can see farther than we actually can at night and most of us overrun our headlights. There has been much scientific testing proving this.
BE CAREFUL RIDING AT NIGHT!!!

Bull 2 seconds is what it takes for the signal to reach your brain. Mean while in less then 1.5 seconds your arse has filled your britches. This is the secondary signal to the brain telling you there is something in the road. So do you fill your britches before your brain realizes you need to kiss your arse good bye ?

 

[ponters]

Hey, this is a cool conversation.

I have been tested and my daytime alert mental processing time was .8 seconds with a movement time of .2

I remember one of the guys, I think it was Dave Reynolds was the only one with better processing time on the day.

Couldn't believe it when they compared it to Mark Weber whose processing time was .2

Apparently Senna had a processing time of .15 and movement of .1

Can you confirm, does this mean Senna's total reaction time was .25. If so, he really was a freak. He could have, braked, manoeuvred and reaacilirated in less time than it takes me to hit the brakes!

 

[1BigDog]

Brain signals and reaction times and PRT and stuff......and here I thought you all were just plain ol' run of the mill rocket scientists.