Hope Vision District 3 rear light

I have a hope district and yes they are bright. Lots of negative comments about that. But the adjustable light level is great for different times of day. I get a lot of comments from motorists, at work, to ask what light I have. They often want to buy one for their kids or themselves, until I mention the price. However, what price do you put on your safety?

Also, angle of the light is v easy to adjust.

I start using mine around September, because I'm very visible in low light conditions from about 2 miles. That is what people at work tell me. We knew it was you about two miles back, that's a Great light what is it etc! I have not had one complaint from any motorist that I know.

Now all I hear is there is, I saw a woman with the same light as you. That woman is my wife, we're a two light family. Great light - if you think your life isn't worth the money. Buy another light.

However, I have had one problem with splitter cable. I would suggest that a spare cable is a good idea, if you run a hope vision4 front light that is. It was the V4 front light that made me consider the district. Don't think the wife will be getting one of those any time soon! Not unless she pays for it herself. But, I always think the rear light is the most important light on the bike. I'm always surprised when I see cyclists with great front lights and some piece of cr@p on the back.

I have along list of lights that cost less but failed to stand the test of time. Also, had an exposure flare and a lezyne, what a waste of money they turned out to be, looked good new...but all failed miserably within a year. The hope district still looking good in year 3 and if it did give up soon I'd buy another ASAP!

I have to echo the comments of handlebar cam, if a rear light output is so high as to dazzle motorists then it is doing the opposite of what is required.

I think one of the best lights out there is the Fibre Flare because it doesn't so much 'emit' the light as... well it kind of keeps it all bottled up inside. It's extremly good as a visibility aid without blinding people!

all those commenting that lights like this may be too bright need to consider the following:

1/ these uber bright rear lights are intended to be angled down onto the road in order to cast a very large pool of red light behind the bike.

see this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9OED8P9ybE

this provides visibility of the bike around blind corners even before the car knows what sort of vehicle it is approaching (light is cast onto the opposite side of the corner. I have followed my wife riding my bike with me driving behind her to test this out and it is **VERY** effective at slowing a car down before they encounter a bike round a blind corner.) this way they do not blind vehicles coming from behind either. Best mounted under a saddle bag so they are partially obscured when close to them, but visible from a distance and still casting light downwards.

2/ I have stood my dinotte 300r (300 lumens!) next to my car with its brake lights on, and it is objectively less bright than my car's brake lights. I don't think thats unreasonable. We owe it to ourselves to have lights at least as bright as a car's in any case.

Maybe i am just unlucky but I get through a lot of rear lights. Whether its the rain or bumpy roads I broken and lost quite a few £20-30 lights in the last couple of years. So I am pretty happy to see a high quality light that has a decent mount. Hopes build quality is worth paying a bit for.

A bright light if well designed is a massive benefit, especially in towns. The Dinotte for example puts a massive glow on the ground that is much more useful than those 1w flashing lights that are popular at the moment.

There must be a point of diminishing returns with regard to money spent on lights (or indeed on pretty much anything to do with a bike). I use Cateye rear-lights on all (ok, both) my bikes. Can't remember what I paid. Around twenty-five squidoons I think. I can see the sense in paying more for a front-light if riding unlit roads or tracks - purely from the 'able-to-see-where-I'm-going' point of view. But my Cateye surely provides ample safety coverage from behind. Can anyone convince me otherwise?

as I've said, it just doesn't happen. my dinotte is probably one of the brightest rear lights you can get and I do notice drivers giving my more room when Im using it.
only problem is I can't use it on group rides....no one can sit behind me
if I'm honest it only goes on the winter bike when I'm on my own and it's grotty, my rear of choice is a smart 1/2 watt and an exposure flare (awesome light btw)

dunno about you, but in car or on bike if I'm dazzled by a light I don't have an over-powering urge to drive towards it, I slow down/take evasive action. These days lots of car lights are so bright even on dipped that being dazzled by them is a fairly regular occurence + in this case this is a rear light so it's red… one of those in front of me is automatically going to make me slow down.

That's what we do with front lights, we haven't done it with rear lights though - because we've always regarded them as "be seen" devices rather than aids to help you see where you are going. When Mat gets back from Italy we'll give this one a go with the beam pattern test.

http://road.cc/content/feature/28312-how-bright-your-beam-shedding-some-...

As for enraging drivers by using overly bright lights surely the point is that if a driver finds your lights too bright he or she should simply slow down to safely negotiate the 'hazard' in his or her path.

I've got a 1w BLT which has a very clear beam and has to be angled carefully to avoid dazzling people behind. I imagine that the Hope requires similar care. When 1w lights like the BLT came out I started to wonder if the rear light arms race was getting a little out of hand.

I'd love to see a big, old-fashioned rear light but with an LED instead of a crappy bulb. Big enough to have road presence and bright enough to look like the rear light of a car but without the ability to fry eggs from twenty yards.

Rear lights need to be bright enough to be seen, but don't need to be any brighter. This has been discussed on "other" bike forums. Its too bright!
I'd really like to know Hope's thoughts on why they've made this.

handlebarcam+1

I wonder if the testers sat in a car behind the light & tried to see past the rider to see if it's safe to overtake?

ever been stuck behind a car with it's rear fog light on in dark clear conditions? similar but far worse blinding effect with these lights I imagine.

Quote:

It's going to get you seen.

It's going to get you a queue of cars lined up behind you, chewing their steering wheels in sheer boiling hatred for you, unable to overtake safely because they cannot see past your light. Eventually, one of them will risk it, and "to teach you a lesson" will side-swipe you off the road.

I'm the last person to put appeasing motorists over cyclists' safety, but this is just dumb. Why not zip-tie frickin' laser beams on your seatpost if you want to get yourself seen from miles away? And it is such an incredible rip-off. You can get something verging on annoyingly bright, quite enough to be seen from half a mile away, for a tenth the price. Still, I'm sure there are lumentards out there who are willing to pay 165 quid so they can brag on club runs that their rear light emits more light than many people's front lights.

Holy sunglasses Brettman!

When are Lumi going to bring out a new rear light, hmmm?