ogmtb

Ogsarg

Out of curiosity, how many people following this thread would seriously consider a $1200.00 light?

DrIsotope

I'm 99% sure I'm gonna get myself a $99 Monteer 1400 for Xmas, which will be the most expensive single light I've ever purchased.

2manybikes

That means it will take bumps and wet weather. There is no reason you can't put it on a road bike. When needed turn it down, Has no one heard of different settings on a light? Go to the lupine pages and read about their lights. I guess it's more interesting to try and think of things wrong with the light than going to the web site and learning about it. However, this is normal BikeForums behavior. I might have done it myself, I guess I should not complain.

2manybikes

Go to the Lupine web site and see one.

2manybikes

If I thought I could find better lights out there I would have one. I suspect Trekmogul ,and some others, would do the same.

ogmtb

cthenn

You suspect wrong. If there was something more expensive he could brag about, he would do that. It's not complicated.

Racing Dan

Has any of the outrageous claims been independently verified?

Zaskar

Yes. I claimed the OP paid too much for a bike light. OP verified he paid $1,200 for a bike light.

;-)

radroad

You're a man of your word: you posted a video. As I suspected, the results are very disappointing, especially for a $1,200 light. There is a distinct circular hotspot and then brightness washes out on the periphery.

Was this video shot with the battery nearly drained? Was the light on it's lowest setting? Can you compare a lower lumens model from any other brand: say a 700 lumens?

That looks really nice. Far better than the lupine.

Highest setting I assume?

trekmogul 

Less then a month and ...? Umm ok

trekmogul 

..

Show me one more expensive..? Please

trekmogul 

Who said it was to much may I ask..? Did you buy one yourself..? I did and happy with it.. your claim is not mine i can say as i own one..

trekmogul 

When you cough up the $1200..00 to to see you will find out as I did.. Paid in full and quite content with its 200 Lumens ability.. Typical for here...

Zaskar

You missed the joke - I made the claim and you verified it. Get it. ;-)

trekmogul 

It is a $1200.00 light that works ok for me..

trekmogul 

$1700.00 with 2 extra batteries more then a bike )

Zaskar

Well, I guess we're even... 'cause I don't get your joke.

Am I the $50.00 head lamp buyer in this one? If so, you're not terribly far off - my Cygolite 850 was around $80. But, from the videos/pics I've seen, apparently it's cranking out 7,200 lumens. Sweet deal really.

rm -rf

That video didn't show the Lupine very well, the camera adjusts the exposure way down. A more "normal" bike headlight beam next to it would be a good comparison, or a car headlight on "bright". I bet this Lupine could light up the stands all the way across a football stadium, or trees on a hillside far across a pasture.

trekmogul, make a video with your car headlights on normal, then on bright, aimed at a building across a parking lot. Aim the Lupine to the side of the headlight beam.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dimming
Any decent bike headlight doesn't get dimmer as the battery drains. It has voltage regulation, so it stays evenly bright until the battery can't sustain it anymore, and then the light drops to a lower output, then finally goes out.

Photo comparison
You can't compare lights unless the camera is set to manual, so that all the photos use the same exposure. Otherwise the camera tries to adjust exposures to make them all the same brightness.
The mtbr beam photos below had to make a short exposure so the brighter lights wouldn't over expose. So the lower lumen lights look very dark. All these lights would seem brighter to your eye than their photo shows.

Actual brightness
A lot of these lights have been tested by mtbr.com, using an "integrating sphere" that measures the lumens quite accurately.
The beam spread does make a difference on how far the light projects out, of course.
And some lights are a lot smoother than others -- which can have bright spots or sharp cutoffs at the edge.
The 2016 beam patterns thumbnails page -- there's a lot of differences.

From mtbr.com's 2016 tests, same camera, same exposure, same location.

Cygolite 450. Measured 405 lumens.
That's a lot less light than the others. (remember, these are all the same exposure.)



Lupine Betty. Claimed 5000 lumens, actual 4989 lumens.
This older light does seem to have somewhat sudden cutoff at the edges. But you could go 40 mph downhill and see far ahead (not that I'd want to do that at night, though.)




L&M 850. Claimed 850 lumens, actual 810 lumens.
Yes, 810 lumens isn't as bright -- who could have guessed?
Looks like more light is concentrated in the center of the beam, for distance coverage. The edges don't have a sharp cutoff--good.





Dinotte XML-3. Claimed 1600 lumens, actual 1573 lumens.
I have this light, a little newer version at 2000 lumens. It has a very wide, very smooth beam -- great for riding, but with a tradeoff of less reach far ahead on fast downhills. It works great for me, and the very long runtimes with the big battery are nice.

I run this at the 2000 lumen setting in the city, to compete with the mixed bright streetlights and dark shadows, and glaring car headlights. That's too bright for my night vision on dark country roads, where 500 or 1000 lumen settings work much better. (reflective signs are painfully bright at 2000 lumens!)

ogmtb

No doubt it has made your MUP cruises so very much more enjoyable. Sometimes, it's the simple things.

Still really goofy to tout it as a "road light" when even the manufacturer won't do that.