Cavechat.org

I don't blame them for taking stabs at the Scurion... after all, Rude Nora is a clone, so they are directly competing with them. However, I must admit the word-for-word stealing is tacky at best. Could be an attempt at making fun of themselves for following in the footsteps of the Scurion, but I wager this is probably just sloppy copying.

As far as the statement itself goes, technically speaking the RN is indeed more efficient on its highest setting at about 20 more lumens per watt when compared to the Scurion 1500 at its max setting. Of course, you're getting A LOT more light from the 1500 at its max setting, and don't forget that the Scurion has lower (and thus more efficient) modes which would then be comparable in terms of efficiency to that of the RN.

In the end, when you are comparing lights with the same emitter (or in this case emitters), talking about efficiency vs. current is pretty much pointless... unless one or both have only one power level. Comparing the efficiency of certain components such as the driver, on the other hand, is something I find to be much more revealing.

Personally, regardless of how the Rude Nora is going to turn out or how many sentences it copies from Scurion, I am happy to see a new caving light emerge. The more the better, as hopefully competition brings prices down and new features emerge. Lord knows Scurion has a LOOOOONG way to drop before I consider buying one of their lights, even if they are very well made and the brightest on the market.

My guess would be that driving the LEDs at a lower max current is a cost cutting measure allowing the use of cheaper components. Not a bad consideration at all, and if bif is basically copying the Scurion design, how else could he differentiate other than with price? I would say thermal considerations, but Scurion is managing that so perhaps not. Otherwise, why not drive at the max rated current as you said?

The whole "you don't need that much light" sentiment comes off a bit patronizing. How would he know? Maybe I'm planning on lighting my photos with it like many Scurion users do and need as much light as I can get. Maybe I go caving in New Guinea and it would be a lot easier to survey 150m high passages if I had a 1500 lumens at my disposal. Like Ryan said, having a higher max setting doesn't preclude having all the lower, efficient settings as well.

I can't wait for more details regarding the Power settings(lumens/hrs). I think they really have something here with this. I don't do big caves(yet) but I love technology and bright lights. I don't know why so many people settle for a duo.

Caver John wrote:I don't know why so many people settle for a duo.

Oh no, NOW you've done it!!

rlboyce wrote:

Caver John wrote:I don't know why so many people settle for a duo.

Oh no, NOW you've done it!!

Lol just speaking my mind.

John, maybe this explanation will help. The Duo is the Honda sedan of headlamps. Nothing fancy, just very reliable and well built for it's price range. It's also easy to fiddle with yourself, and after-market upgrades are available that greatly increase it's abilities. The fact that it's so common means pretty much everyone is familiar with it and can help you out if you need advice. Even though I don't plan on owning one, I definitely understand why people go for it.

I swear I'm not starting another which headlamp is best discussion! :)

Well, if a Duo is a Honda sedan, then...

LukeM wrote:John, maybe this explanation will help. The Duo is the Honda sedan of headlamps. Nothing fancy, just very reliable and well built for it's price range. It's also easy to fiddle with yourself, and after-market upgrades are available that greatly increase it's abilities. The fact that it's so common means pretty much everyone is familiar with it and can help you out if you need advice. Even though I don't plan on owning one, I definitely understand why people go for it.

I swear I'm not starting another which headlamp is best discussion! :)

That is putting it in way I can understand. Makes sense to, although I agree a Honda is a user friendly, reliable car, I'm the type of person who drives a Sti ! I guess it's my personality. I just love fast cars and bright lights!

LOL! Is that thing cave-legal?

Derek wins. When you cant look straight at people with your Scurion on at the lowest setting, you are doing it correctly

Yep, that's the American spirit! The bigger, the better! : )

To continue with the production car analogy, the Duo is the family sedan, the Rude is the midlife crisis sports car, and the Scurion is the millionaire's exotic car. What's the fastest? You bet your ass the exotic car is. What's the most fun? The exotic car. What's the car everyone envies and dreams about? The exotic car. How many people actually buy the exotic car? Very few. Similarly, very few buy the midlife crisis sports car in comparison to the family sedan. That's why there are so many damn Duos out there. That's also why, as much as I respect the Rude's stats, I probably won't buy it. I'm a sedan man (or purchaser of an equivalently priced alternative). This means anything over $200 is way over my price range.

I was trying to think of an analogy for my DIY headlamp and all I could come up with was a kit car.

Caver John, if you want an STI equivalent headlamp you'd have to look for something keeps up with the big boys, but costs much less.

LukeM wrote:I was trying to think of an analogy for my DIY headlamp and all I could come up with was a kit car.

Caver John, if you want an STI equivalent headlamp you'd have to look for something keeps up with the big boys, but costs much less.

I think I may have found that balance with rude Nora. She's way more powerful than the daily drivers, and not as expensive as the exotic sports car. Rude Nora will be my Sti of caving lights!

Whitewaterrunner wrote:If you want more info, go to the Rude Nora faqs at http://littlemonkeycaving.co.uk/faq.aspx
I don't think you can get to it from a link on the Custom Duo site but you can google it and find it. Lots and lots of good info. I can't wait to see it, too!

Doug Duncan

Oh Dear. Literally just walked in from 3 weeks caving in Pyrennees.

My apologies. I'm afraid that this page (which I though was well buried) was basically a brainstorming exercise to help me formulate my thoughts on the new lamp. I was going to loosely use it as a reference source when putting the webpages together for the new lamp, so that I dont miss out anything important. Consequently, said page includes a lot of innapropriate rott and bad witt that would have needed heavily censoring before use. This is high up the 'to do' list, but first I'm under orders to remove a mountain of wet potholing kit from the house. In the meantime, I think I've managed to remove the 'FAQ' page.

Note to self, learn how to write webpages offline.

Ho hum, such is life.