# how would you react?



## tommaguzzi (6 Sep 2018)

Today I am riding back home from visiting my old mum i am on my pub bike at 11.30 in the morning, visibility is perfect 
I am wearing normal clothes.
Black sports jacket ( unzipped)
Blue tee shirt
Black jeans. 
I am riding in the suburbs the roads are almost empty but i slow for a junction a man abuses me on a passive aggressive manner for not wearing hi_viz.!
I am used to the no plastic hat thing but no hi viz in broad daylight?

I know what I did what would you do.

Bloke was a 40 year old hippy with ruck sack sat on a church wall when every one else was working


----------



## classic33 (6 Sep 2018)

I have, in very simple english, told them it's not a legal requirement, and I'll wear what I want.


----------



## Dave 123 (6 Sep 2018)

I’d have got off my bike, gone up to him and licked his face.

That would freak him out.


----------



## mgs315 (6 Sep 2018)

Probably just ignore him. Not worth the oxygen. Some people just can’t help but moan about something.


----------



## gbb (6 Sep 2018)

I usually aim to go for something along the lines of....
Just as well your opinion counts for nothing mate.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (6 Sep 2018)

Ignore.
Like I did with the Policeman that said the same to me, on a bright sunny day, on a segregated path.
I was wearing a bright red tee, he wanted to see a hi-viz something.
I just gave him _the look_


----------



## Drago (6 Sep 2018)

I'd tell him to mind his own foxtroting business, and carried on my merry way.


----------



## iandg (6 Sep 2018)

Ignore


----------



## iandg (6 Sep 2018)

12 months ago my mental state would have told me to argue.


----------



## NorthernDave (6 Sep 2018)

No hi-viz, but yet he still saw you? 

I'd have told him to go away, but not necessarily using those words.


----------



## Moodyman (6 Sep 2018)

A sarcastic thanks and nothing more. Life is too short to allow imbeciles to spoil it.


----------



## slowmotion (6 Sep 2018)

Just say " You're absolutely right. I hate cyclists too."


----------



## ColinJ (6 Sep 2018)

I'd have suggested that he is either smoking too much weed, or not enough!


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (7 Sep 2018)

Look around and say 'Where did that voice come from? Must be someone not wearing hi viz!'.

Or ask him if he should be wearing a helmet say up on that wall.


----------



## ozboz (7 Sep 2018)

Reminded him about Humpty Dumpty ,


----------



## mustang1 (7 Sep 2018)

I would continue on my way but remember for next time that akthalth hi coz is not a legal requirement, it really improves other road users being able to notice you .

Most of the time I wear bright stuff but on the odd occasion I berate myself for wearing black even if I have flashing lights. That's why I've made it a point to have reflective panniers.

Other than that, I wouldn't have done anything. I I would just assume a stranger was looking out for me.


----------



## jayonabike (7 Sep 2018)

I would of told him to effing do one.


----------



## cyberknight (7 Sep 2018)

I was dressed in white on a white bike with reflectives and someone still knocked me off, tell them to do one .


----------



## screenman (7 Sep 2018)

What annoyed you more, the fact he was a hippy type, he appeared to not be at work where as everybody else was or he offered an opinion on your clothing? I would have said thanks and wished him a good day.


----------



## alicat (7 Sep 2018)

Give him a cheery wave and think 'There's nowt so queer as folk'.


----------



## raleighnut (7 Sep 2018)

As a mid/late 50s hippie type myself I'd have told him he was a F&%$&g T"*t.


----------



## Drago (7 Sep 2018)

mustang1 said:


> I would continue on my way but remember for next time that akthalth hi coz is not a legal requirement, it really improves other road users being able to notice you .
> 
> Most of the time I wear bright stuff but on the odd occasion I berate myself for wearing black even if I have flashing lights. That's why I've made it a point to have reflective panniers.
> 
> Other than that, I wouldn't have done anything. I I would just assume a stranger was looking out for me.



It makes one more conspicuous. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to lessen the tendency for other road users to run you over - motorised fools run you over because of their stupidity and inappropriate behaviour, not because they didn't see you.

I would have condensed that explanation to a 2 word reply, reattached my monacle, and carried on.


----------



## Accy cyclist (7 Sep 2018)

tommaguzzi said:


> I am wearing normal clothes.
> Black sports jacket ( unzipped)
> Blue tee shirt
> Black jeans



Wearing black is scary enough,but not even black cycling gear either!


----------



## Phaeton (7 Sep 2018)

"Good Morning, Lovely day isn't it"


----------



## Globalti (7 Sep 2018)

I'd have ignored him. He probably posts on a bike forum about people who don't wear hi-viz.


----------



## Alan O (7 Sep 2018)

tommaguzzi said:


> Bloke was a 40 year old hippy with ruck sack sat on a church wall when every one else was working


He wasn't wearing an "I shot JR" t-shirt, was he?


----------



## Drago (7 Sep 2018)

Was he wearing a duffel coat and carrying a thermos?


----------



## matiz (7 Sep 2018)

I had the same thing happen a while ago but the guy was with a girl it was a ego thing he was looking for a reaction ,he didn't get one he just stood there looking stupid in front of her.


----------



## Illaveago (7 Sep 2018)

Although I am not in total agreement with the chap you met but there have been times when I have been out cycling and have seen riders wearing all black cycling gear plus a black bike. I call it "stealth mode!" It may be alright for fighter planes but cyclist's need to be more conspicuous. Some bright colours would help. If you think about it motorcyclist's were in a similar situation to cyclist's by not being seen and adopted the idea of riding with their headlights on.


----------



## Drago (7 Sep 2018)

Exdept that research by Suzuki demonstrate that daytime running of normal headlights actually increased a motorcyclists chances of getting wiped out - what seems sensible actually rarely is. Only dim-dip, or appropriate low wattage lighting should be used during daylight.


----------



## Pale Rider (7 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> Although I am not in total agreement with the chap you met but there have been times when I have been out cycling and have seen riders wearing all black cycling gear plus a black bike. I call it "stealth mode!" It may be alright for fighter planes but cyclist's need to be more conspicuous. Some bright colours would help. If you think about it motorcyclist's were in a similar situation to cyclist's by not being seen and adopted the idea of riding with their headlights on.



A 'like' for the sentiment if not the apostrophe abuse.

The nearest I've come to wiping out a roadie was driving behind one in stealth mode riding through a road with tree cover.

The dappled shade and his no doubt very smart grey/black outfit made him all but invisible until I was dangerously close to his back wheel.

A splash of colour would have made a difference.


----------



## Twizit (7 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> Although I am not in total agreement with the chap you met but there have been times when I have been out cycling and have seen riders wearing all black cycling gear plus a black bike. I call it "stealth mode!" It may be alright for fighter planes but cyclist's need to be more conspicuous. Some bright colours would help. If you think about it motorcyclist's were in a similar situation to cyclist's by not being seen and adopted the idea of riding with their headlights on.





Pale Rider said:


> A 'like' for the sentiment if not the apostrophe abuse.
> 
> The nearest I've come to wiping out a roadie was driving behind one in stealth mode riding through a road with tree cover.
> 
> ...



So I assume you're both also against black cars, motorcycles, vans, lorries etc being allowed on the road for similar reasons?


----------



## Illaveago (7 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Exdept that research by Suzuki demonstrate that daytime running of normal headlights actually increased a motorcyclists chances of getting wiped out - what seems sensible actually rarely is. Only dim-dip, or appropriate low wattage lighting should be used during daylight.


I do not like it when motorcyclist's ride around on main beam especially now that headlight bulbs are a lot brighter.


----------



## Illaveago (7 Sep 2018)

Twizit said:


> So I assume you're both also against black cars, motorcycles, vans, lorries etc being allowed on the road for similar reasons?


You forgot grey, and silver as these can disappear in fog.


----------



## Alan O (7 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> You forgot grey, and silver as these can disappear in fog.


And yellow, which can disappear in custard.


----------



## Drago (7 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> I do not like it when motorcyclist's ride around on main beam especially now that headlight bulbs are a lot brighter.



Indeed. They think it makes them safer, but to an oncoming observer the bright light breaks up the riders outline. The human brain calculates the speed on an oncoming objects by the rate at which it's size increases in relation to its background, and breaking up their outline deprives the observers brain of the necessary datum required to make an accurate calculation. Hence Suzuki discovered that's why they were actually more likely to get smacked, not less. From this research came proper low wattage daytime marker lights and dim-dip systems.

Every time I see a motorbike with its normal headlights on, or a cyclists with stupid bright lights, during the daytime I think back on this, and thank my lucky stars that I'm not into knee-jerk safety reactions. If I do something in the name of safety, I do so because there's a reasonable weight of evidence proving it's efficacy. I do not do so based upon lore, 'common sense', or the word of Ill educated strangers in the street. The British Government and the EU would both do well to take the same approach.


----------



## Twizit (7 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> I do not like it when motorcyclist's ride around on main beam especially now that headlight bulbs are a lot brighter.


Motorcyclists have no choice in this - headlights permanently hard wired on and can't be switched off (unless we're talking main beam which obvs can) - been that way for at least 12 years now on all new bikes


----------



## glasgowcyclist (7 Sep 2018)

I've had similar, latterly from other people on bikes, and I tell them to fark off.
However, the words that come out of my mouth turn out to be "Mind your own business".


----------



## Speicher (7 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> It makes one more conspicuous. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to lessen the tendency for other road users to run you over - motorised fools run you over because of their stupidity and inappropriate behaviour, not because they didn't see you.
> 
> I would have condensed that explanation to a 2 word reply, reattached my monacle, and carried on.



Would you also raise your eyebrows in a quizzical manner, and glance sideways at him?


----------



## Milkfloat (7 Sep 2018)

If I have time for more than an 'f off, then I often tell people to do a bit of research and hopefully educate themselves.


----------



## biggs682 (7 Sep 2018)

Smile and wave just like the Penguins in Happy Feet


----------



## tommaguzzi (7 Sep 2018)

[QUOTE 5374110, member: 9609"]mean[/QUOTE]
He said " that's really nice hi-viz that you are wearing "

At first I only heard the " really nice " bit so stopped and thought he wanted to talk about the electric conversion I fitted to the bike( quite a few do).
The he repeated "really nice hi-viz you are wearing" in a sacastic voice.
So i told him to do one and rode off.
​


----------



## Crackle (7 Sep 2018)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> Look around and say 'Where did that voice come from? Must be someone not wearing hi viz!'.
> 
> Or ask him if he should be wearing a helmet say up on that wall.


Yeah something like that. The presence of mind to say, "who said that!" In truth, my response would be unpredictable, depending on mood, circumstance etc...


----------



## Drago (7 Sep 2018)

Project forward another 20 years the inexorable rise of hi vis, and no one will leave the house without it.


----------



## classic33 (7 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Project forward another 20 years the inexorable rise of hi vis, and no one will leave the house without it.


Nah, LED street lighting will render it useless.


----------



## guitarpete247 (7 Sep 2018)

cyberknight said:


> I was dressed in white on a white bike with reflectives and someone still knocked me off, tell them to do one .


Where you hit by a snowplough .


----------



## Lonestar (8 Sep 2018)

Should have gone to Specsavers.Although it would help if these people did actually look or look properly before crossing and not rely on their ears...if that.


----------



## Levo-Lon (8 Sep 2018)

raleighnut said:


> As a mid/late 50s hippie type myself I'd have told him he was a F&%$&g T"*t.



And "have you got any more of that mate"?


----------



## davidphilips (8 Sep 2018)

I use both ears for nits like that one for in and the other for out and dont even try and remember silly/rude comments, so i would just cycle away.


----------



## tommaguzzi (8 Sep 2018)

I am not very bright!

Bloody he'll I wish I had thought of that, your contribution has made this thread worthwhile I will certainly be using this if it ever happens again. Thank you.


----------



## raleighnut (8 Sep 2018)

meta lon said:


> And "have you got any more of that mate"?


Nah, I'd bet my own money that I've got better 'gear' than him.


----------



## Levo-Lon (8 Sep 2018)

raleighnut said:


> Nah, I'd bet my own money that I've got better 'gear' than him.


----------



## Drago (8 Sep 2018)

You can't reason with these fools. A simple "Foxtrot off you unwanted, ignorant, interfering twot"


----------



## si_c (8 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> You can't reason with these fools. A simple "Foxtrot off you unwanted, ignorant, interfering twot"


Possibly adding a comment about uncertain parentage.


----------



## dantheman (8 Sep 2018)

ozboz said:


> Reminded him about Humpty Dumpty ,


This made me laugh.. That would really be a great reply and fire his sarcasm straight back at him . 

Maybe a donkey jacket would have saved humpty? 

-sorry, the donkey jackets a private joke.


----------



## ozboz (8 Sep 2018)

dantheman said:


> This made me laugh.. That would really be a great reply and fire his sarcasm straight back at him .
> 
> Maybe a donkey jacket would have saved humpty?
> 
> -sorry, the donkey jackets a private joke.



Oh , you have to lets us in on the joke now !

As for Humpty Dumpty , 
He was a proper Big Head !


----------



## suzeworld (9 Sep 2018)

Hilarious thread! 

Lost in custard ....


----------



## Andy in Germany (10 Sep 2018)

I had a similar comment from a driver coming towards me of "your


tommaguzzi said:


> He said " that's really nice hi-viz that you are wearing "
> 
> At first I only heard the " really nice " bit so stopped and thought he wanted to talk about the electric conversion I fitted to the bike( quite a few do).
> The he repeated "really nice hi-viz you are wearing" in a sacastic voice.
> ...



I usually say "Thanks" in a slightly overdone manner and carry on. But then I wave and smile at drivers whi give me the finger...


----------



## Alan O (10 Sep 2018)

suzeworld said:


> Hilarious thread!
> 
> Lost in custard ....


I do sometimes wonder if custard factory workers have to wear high-viz black.


----------



## DCBassman (10 Sep 2018)

Alan O said:


> I do sometimes wonder if custard factory workers have to wear high-viz black.


There's such a factory near me, I'll try and find out!


----------



## Edwardoka (11 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> there have been times when I have been out cycling and *have seen* riders wearing all black cycling gear plus a black bike.


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

I always wear a high visibility jacket or t shirt, but that didn't stop an old chap walking out in front of me one day. I braked sharply stopping inches from his nose. When asked politely why he walked out without checking for traffic he replied he had, but hadn't seen me as my bike was too small.

It was the Brompton, lights flashing even though it was noon on a clear, bright, summer's day by the med, plus I was wearing the aforementioned clothing. In fact, the chap was luckier than he knew, because I had seen him, thought he was about to do something silly and was preparing to brake and swerve before he stepped out. He hadn't checked beforehand, of course.

The coast road in Cannes does get extremely busy and narrows a lot because cars park illegally on both sides of it, so he was lucky it was only me on a bike. I pointed this out, he shrugged, and we both continued our respective journeys.

Nevertheless, I think high visibility clothing is a must for cyclists, and black is not a good idea.


----------



## Phaeton (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Nevertheless, I think high visibility clothing is a must for cyclists,


Everybody is entitled to their opinion, just please do not spread that one around


----------



## Alan O (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Nevertheless, I think high visibility clothing is a must for cyclists...


I have a high visibility body - if you look at it, you see it.


----------



## Randomnerd (11 Sep 2018)

Find out where he lives by stalking him in all black catsuit. Break into his house while he’s out sitting on walls. When he comes home and goes to hang up his donkey jacket in the cupboard under the stairs, jump out at him in an entirely reflective outfit covered in blinkies.
In my experience, these people will never bother you again.


----------



## Milkfloat (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I always wear a high visibility jacket or t shirt, but that didn't stop an old chap walking out in front of me one day. I braked sharply stopping inches from his nose. When asked politely why he walked out without checking for traffic he replied he had, but hadn't seen me as my bike was too small.
> 
> It was the Brompton, lights flashing even though it was noon on a clear, bright, summer's day by the med, plus I was wearing the aforementioned clothing. In fact, the chap was luckier than he knew, because I had seen him, thought he was about to do something silly and was preparing to brake and swerve before he stepped out. He hadn't checked beforehand, of course.
> 
> ...




If they don't look properly then what you wear makes no difference at all. Your entire post is an example of this.


----------



## Accy cyclist (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Nevertheless, I think high visibility clothing is a must for cyclists, and black is not a good idea.



I tend to agree with that,but i'm also now swaying towards the argument that no matter how high viz you are,if they aren't looking they won't see you. The other week i cycled into a black parked car. It was my own fault as i had my eyes on the tarmac for too long. The other year i did the same thing,but the vehicle i hit was a big VW camper van in i think either white or fluoro' green. So me not looking meant i didn't see it,even though in theory i couldn't fail to see it.


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

Well, that was my point, which is why I said nevertheless... some people may not see you at all, but that's not a reason why you shouldn't attempt to be seen.


----------



## Phaeton (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Well, that was my point, which is why I said nevertheless... some people may not see you at all, but that's not a reason why you shouldn't attempt to be seen.


Although I agree with you & in general I go out wearing bright colours, my tops are usually red or lime green, but no way do I want to be riding around in a hi-vis vest. I get the impression that everybody thinks a hi-vis vest is a placebo for everything safety, my son has just got a job at a retail store, that if there is a big customer order they are allowed to come to the back door, but before they open the door thay have to put on the hi-vis vest, they are not leaving the building, no vehicle is entering the building but the vest must be put on, sorry just crazy.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (11 Sep 2018)

It's an attempt to push the responsibility away from people who don't want the responsibility.
If I step away from this desk I know to look left and right for the forklift or the artics. I don't demand the artic is painted bright pink to get my attention.


----------



## Andy in Germany (11 Sep 2018)

One of the principles of local traffic law is that by using a bike I'm causing potential risk, so when riding I'm responsible for not hitting pedestrians. By the same token a car driver, by using a faster, heavier vehicle, is considered to cause greater potential risk, and is responsible for seeing me and not hitting me _or _a pedestrian.

I once heard it expressed that "If a cyclist falls out of the sky and hits your car and is injured, it's your fault unless you can prove otherwise".

"SMIDSY" would get the response from the insurance (and the police who are always called out in a road traffic accident) "Why not?". As far as I know pedestrians are not expected to have lights (although dogs are) and I simply have to be aware of them regardless of what they are wearing. In practice I have the same instincts as @avole and can predict what a pedestrian is likely to do. Most of the time.


----------



## Milkfloat (11 Sep 2018)

Around here the unwritten law seems to be - "you were on a bike, therefore you were asking for it". Just last night I had the temerity to take up the right hand side of my lane whilst waiting to turn right. This incensed the driver who had to wait to continue his important journey whilst he berated me for not pulling off to the left of the road and I assume doffing my cap. I believe my last two words were "ignorant pizzle".


----------



## steveindenmark (11 Sep 2018)

If I was not in a rush I would go and ask him what he meant. I would then explain about hi viz, helmets and road tax. I would bore him so much he would never complain again.


----------



## Twizit (11 Sep 2018)

Andy in Germany said:


> "SMIDSY" would get the response from the insurance (and the police who are always called out in a road traffic accident) "Why not?"



This ^^^ How do we get this into the British psyche / culture?!


----------



## Andy in Germany (11 Sep 2018)

Twizit said:


> This ^^^ How do we get this into the British psyche / culture?!



I'm not sure, but in the EU it is only the UK and Romania that don't have this written into law.

It helped us at least once in Germany.


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

I think people miss the point here. If high visibility clothes reduces the chances of an accident even by as low as 1%, it's worth it.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think people miss the point here. If high visibility clothes reduces the chances of an accident even by as low as 1%, it's worth it.




What if it increased the chances by even 1%?


----------



## raleighnut (11 Sep 2018)

Twizit said:


> This ^^^ How do we get this into the British psyche / culture?!


Presumed Liability, the british 'government' refused to implement it saying it would lead to Cash For Crash claims by Cyclists.


----------



## Twizit (11 Sep 2018)

raleighnut said:


> Presumed Liability, the british 'government' refused to implement it saying it would lead to Cash For Crash claims by Cyclists.


----------



## Phaeton (11 Sep 2018)

Andy in Germany said:


> It helped us at least once in Germany.


The first part of that story is most confusing, I'm not sure who hit who, who was driving what, whether a pedestrian, cyclist or what was involved apart from an expensive car.


----------



## Milkfloat (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think people miss the point here. *If* high visibility clothes reduces the chances of an accident even by as low as 1%, it's worth it.



I fixed that big 'if' for you.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (11 Sep 2018)

I doubt it. Drivers seem conditioned by default to look for something car shaped, and now of course to try to see 10,000,000,000,000,000 candlepower daytime LEDs.

(Note: May contain exaggeration of LED brightness).


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

I think you'll find it does make you easier to see. You do realise it's compulsory to have at least a high visibility jacket in your car if you drive in Europe, don't you? 

Unless, of course, you think it unnecessary after brexit as everyone in the UK 's eyesight will improve, they will become good drivers and mindful of other road users


----------



## glasgowcyclist (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think you'll find it does make you easier to see.



What hi-vis aid are you talking about here? Yellow jackets?


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think people miss the point here. If high visibility clothes reduces the chances of an accident even by as low as 1%, it's worth it.


Now the darker nights are creeping in, check your Hi-Vis under led lighting. Only the reflective strips will work if your choice is Saturn Yellow.


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think you'll find it does make you easier to see. You do realise it's compulsory to have at least a high visibility jacket in your car if you drive in Europe, don't you?
> 
> Unless, of course, you think it unnecessary after brexit as everyone in the UK 's eyesight will improve, they will become good drivers and mindful of other road users


I don't drive, but I'll go with contrast over Hi-Vis any day.

And Hi-Vis isn't compulsory in all Europe or even all of the EU.


----------



## steveindenmark (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think people miss the point here. If high visibility clothes reduces the chances of an accident even by as low as 1%, it's worth it.


No you are missing the point. I agree with you and I do wear high viz gear. In fact I have just made another light weigh harness for the winter commute. . The point is that helmets and viz vests are personal choice, not law. It is not for other people to try and and inflencd what you do or wear.


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

Two questions for those who advocate compulsory Hi-Vis.
How often do you wash yours?
When do you replace yours(On what frequency)?


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

You missed the first question, which is
Who is advocating compulsory high visibility clothing ?

I may think it is silly not to, and the arguments against are specious, but it is your choice, just as it was the luddites to smash their machines.

Now helmets, that's a different issue.


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

The arguments for are often equally specious.


----------



## Andy in Germany (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I may think it is silly not to, and the arguments against are specious, but it is your choice, just as it was the luddites to smash their machines.









This is one of our local trams. You'll notice the colour.

According to Wikipedia these trams are 3.7m high, 2.6m wide, and 38m long. They are, as you can see, bright yellow and have 3 headlights, as well as indicators and rear lights, and being rail vehicles they tend to follow the same route every time they pass.

And yet frequently car drivers completely fail to see them, and pull out in front of them, or drive into them.

If drivers in Stuttgart are managing not to see this, I reckon they'll have no problem missing a hi-vis vest.

And Luddites did a lot more than smash machines...


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> You missed the first question, which is
> Who is advocating compulsory high visibility clothing ?
> 
> I may think it is silly not to, and the arguments against are specious, but it is your choice, just as it was the luddites to smash their machines.
> ...


The Luddites never smashed their machines.


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

I it ain't because people don't see, it's because they don't look. In most cases you could be on fire and they'd still run you over. That's why the DfT found no decrease in casualty rates among roadworkers attributable to the garments.


----------



## Venod (11 Sep 2018)

tommaguzzi said:


> He said " that's really nice hi-viz that you are wearing "



He could have thought you were wearing really nice viz man, that acid plays hell with the eye sight.


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

Drago, I refer you back to my original post. You cannot guard against lapses in concentration, but you can against people not seeing you because you are wearing black at night.


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

Surely you'd be displaying lights at night, in the same manner the drivers of black cars are required to?


----------



## tommaguzzi (11 Sep 2018)

i wasnt wearing black at night it was mid morning on a sunny day


----------



## Andy in Germany (11 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Surely you'd be displaying lights at night, in the same manner the drivers of black cars are required to?



Or indeed grey cars are supposed to in fog. They don't as a rule but you know, the principle is there...


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

I like Meet the Ancestors. They archaeologists dig a 6" deep hole, and then make the presenters stand in it. Insanity of the first order, but fear not! They wear hard hats to protects against (presumably) unexpected meteoritic impact, and thank God for their hi viz else we wouldn't even know they were there. Wonderful material.



tommaguzzi said:


> i wasnt wearing black at night it was mid morning on a sunny day



No distress flares, flags, or sirens? You fool! No wonder the chap that couldn't see you was so irate.


----------



## Alan O (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Drago, I refer you back to my original post. You cannot guard against lapses in concentration, but you can against people not seeing you because you are wearing black at night.


It's not all or nothing, high-viz or black at night.


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

Going a full 180 degrees from the hi viz discussion, black isn't the best camo at night. A very dark grey, or a blotchy black and very dark blue are more effective.


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Drago, I refer you back to my original post. You cannot guard against lapses in concentration, but you can against people not seeing you because you are wearing black at night.


What colour for days then?
Black can stand out better than a light yellow. At night, under LED lighting you're relying on the 2 plus 2 to get you seen.


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

Research by scientists and supported by Mountain and Lowland Rescue has found standard yellow hi vis to make you less conspicuous against a rural background. MR reverted to red, and LR to a dual colour hi vis as a result of the research.

What seems obvious, actually rarely is...


----------



## tommaguzzi (11 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> No wonder the chap that couldn't see you was so irate.



but he did see me, thats why he called out from about 10 yards away. bloody hell i've opened a can of worms here, if this goes on it looks like it will get it's own special section like the plastic hat debate.


----------



## User66445 (11 Sep 2018)

Drago, do you understand what high visibility is all about?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Drago, do you understand what high visibility is all about?



I'm going to to go out on a limb here and say yes.


----------



## Drago (11 Sep 2018)

Erm, making oneself highly visible would be my guess? Do I win a prize? Please let it not be something in hi viz...


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (11 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Erm, making oneself highly visible would be my guess? Do I win a prize? Please let it not be something in hi viz...



Maybe you win a helmet?


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

_*To be effective HV clothing should be of a colour that will allow the wearer to stand out against the ambient background found in the working environment.* In practice the best colours for this purpose are likely to be day-glo, or fluorescent yellow. Where necessary the clothing should also incorporate retroreflective material to make the wearer visible when seen in headlights in poor lighting conditions or during darkness._
I've worn dark red, red, fire orange, green, signal green, aurora pink & Saturn yellow. What the drivers found easiest to see was the contrasting colours


----------



## Milkfloat (11 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> You missed the first question, which is
> Who is advocating compulsory high visibility clothing ?



Your very first post in this thread “Nevertheless, I think high visibility clothing is a *must* for cyclists, and black is not a good idea.”

You posted this including a tale about a bright sunny day and the fact you were wearing high vis when you were nearly hit. A bright sunny day along the coast of Cannes would be one of the worst place ps for high vis to be seen, it would get lost in the sun. You would have been far better off wearing black.


----------



## classic33 (11 Sep 2018)

[QUOTE 5378597, member: 9609"]have you got a source for that ?
seriously, i'm not trying to ctch you out, would genuinely love some study to show its not universally needed 100% of the time.

I do also think it has its uses in some conditions[/QUOTE]
http://www.roadsafetyknowledgecentre.org.uk/help-forum/252.html


----------



## tommaguzzi (11 Sep 2018)

even though it only deals with cycling at night, you might want to read and discuss this 

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/38338/1/c38338.pdf

i'm off to bed now.


----------



## Lonestar (12 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Drago, do you understand what high visibility is all about?



Don't bother arguing...If you are happy wearing it,wear it...If not,don't.


----------



## User66445 (12 Sep 2018)

Milkfloat said:


> Your very first post in this thread “Nevertheless, I think high visibility clothing is a *must* for cyclists, and black is not a good idea.”
> 
> You posted this including a tale about a bright sunny day and the fact you were wearing high vis when you were nearly hit. A bright sunny day along the coast of Cannes would be one of the worst place ps for high vis to be seen, it would get lost in the sun. You would have been far better off wearing black.


Wrong on every level - you seem to have some problems here, not just with comprehension. Hint: the clue is in the expression.

Have you ever been to Cannes, or, more significantly, crossed the road there? The man was crossing the road from the beach side towards a background of a green park, cafés and a grey coloured hotel, nicely matching the road I was cycling on. Black would have been a stupid colour to wear at any level, unless you enjoy getting really hot.

I was not nearly hit, by the way, I nearly hit someone. 

By the way, to my knowledge the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. This was late summer, so have a think where the sun would be at that time. I’m assuming you know the topography of Cannes near the quay where the boats from the cruise ships come in. Mind you, I did get a chuckle from your lost in the sun comment, you couldn’t be more wrong


----------



## Andy in Germany (12 Sep 2018)

classic33 said:


> I've worn dark red, red, fire orange, green, signal green, aurora pink & Saturn yellow.



That must have been quite an outfit.


----------



## Edwardoka (12 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Have you ever been to Cannes, or, more significantly, crossed the road there? The man was crossing the road from the beach side towards a background of a green park, cafés and a grey coloured hotel, nicely matching the road I was cycling on. Black would have been a stupid colour to wear at any level, unless you enjoy getting really hot.


I rode pretty much the entire length of the French Riviera and I never at any point came close to hitting anyone who stepped out in front of me regardless of what they were wearing and the only times I was nearly taken out by someone else was a dangerously impatient coach driver in Sète, a twot on a moped overtaking me on a blind corner, and the horrendous narrow eastbound road that leads out of Monaco which nearly killed me through sheer terror.

As an aside, research suggests that contrast combined with motion that our reptilian brains interpret as biomechanical (e.g. a strip on your shorts/socks/shoes moving up and down as a result of pedalling) makes one far more conspicuous than any stationary (relative to the observer) item of fluorescent clothing.


----------



## Alan O (12 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Black would have been a stupid colour to wear at any level, unless you enjoy getting really hot.


A lot of folk in the Middle East (where it gets pretty hot) seem to remain cool enough wearing black... https://io9.gizmodo.com/5903956/the-physics-that-explain-why-you-should-wear-black-this-summer


----------



## Phaeton (12 Sep 2018)

Just catching up


----------



## Randomnerd (12 Sep 2018)

When alighting at a cafe stop of a weekend, I find myself talking by choice to people / cyclists dressed in regular visibility clothing. Dayglo seems to affect the wearer’s capacity to keep me remotely interested in what they are saying. Maybe the glare hurts my ears? 
Motons have this same problem. The clothing gives the wearer this sense of authority - look at me, I’m special, it’s saying. Be careful round me.
For what it’s worth - probably very little, since tribes will believe what they believe - my old Dad taught me to ride a bike, and he drummed into me the benefit of craning your neck round in traffic to glare at the opposition. Motons seem to give me more room because I turn a lot before any manoeuvre, do a few fake wobbles and make sure they can see me. Or so I believe. 
Contrast colour is useful in work safety. I worked in forestry contracting for years, and without bright hard hats, the next feller would be invisible. That’s my reasoning for spending a fortune on jaunty cycling gear, although I stop short at pink hoops.


----------



## raleighnut (12 Sep 2018)

I seem to get noticed in this


----------



## Phaeton (12 Sep 2018)

raleighnut said:


> I seem to get noticed in this


Are the ribs fluorescent? I was driving the other week & & picked up somebody wearing one of these in the headlights, for a split second it was a real WTF moment


----------



## Edwardoka (12 Sep 2018)

woodenspoons said:


> my old Dad taught me to ride a bike, and he drummed into me the benefit of craning your neck round in traffic to glare at the opposition. Motons seem to give me more room because I turn a lot before any manoeuvre, do a few fake wobbles and make sure they can see me. Or so I believe.


I remember reading a study (although I couldn't find it just now) that said that drivers gave the closest passes to cyclists they perceived to be "experienced". That is, hi-vis, helmets, no wobbles. Throwing fake wobbles and shoulder checks will apparently make them perceive a rider to be more vulnerable and inexperienced and so they will give you more space. Keep on doing it!



woodenspoons said:


> Contrast colour is useful in work safety. I worked in forestry contracting for years, and without bright hard hats, the next feller would be invisible.


Absolutely - but PPE is at the bottom of the hazard hierarchy for a reason - in forestry I'd hope that there's a whole bunch of safety checks in place to stop someone taking a chainsaw (or one of those terrifyingly-efficient tree-cutting trucks) to a tree without everyone in the crew accounted for and the certain knowledge that the felling area was clear. Your hard-hat would ideally only ever be needed if every single item in the safety checklist was ignored or somehow failed.


----------



## Milkfloat (12 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> Wrong on every level - you seem to have some problems here, not just with comprehension. Hint: the clue is in the expression.
> 
> Have you ever been to Cannes, or, more significantly, crossed the road there? The man was crossing the road from the beach side towards a background of a green park, cafés and a grey coloured hotel, nicely matching the road I was cycling on. Black would have been a stupid colour to wear at any level, unless you enjoy getting really hot.
> 
> ...



You stated it was "noon on a bright sunny day" on your OP, now you seem to changing the story. However, none of that matters, you were wearing high vis and were not seen, there is no conclusive evidence that high vis makes a difference and if you look at countries with the lowest per kilometer death and serious injury rates, high vis is not something a cyclist would ever use. To say that you 'must wear' it is missing the point entirely.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

Now, a question for avole.

There is little doubt that hi-vis can (when an appropriate type is worn for the environment) aid in conspicuity. This has been researched and demonstrated fairly well.

However, among vulnerable road users the evidence is less clear cut. It has not been reasonably established that the wearing of hi-vis translates to a lower casualty rate. This has been researched at Government level, most notably by the DfT as previously cited by myself, and they failed to identify any reduction in the casualty rate attributable to the wearing of hi-vis among their own employees. 

So I must ask you, do _you_ actually understand what hi-vis is _actually_ all about? It is failing to make vulnerable road users safer, so why do you think it is such a good idea?


----------



## Randomnerd (12 Sep 2018)

Edwardoka said:


> Your hard-hat would ideally only ever be needed if every single item in the safety checklist was ignored or somehow failed.


The colour of the hat - bright orange, yellow, white - would allow you to see where the next worker was, and you’d be able to calculate safe felling distance. His helmet-wearing only saved him from a rogue branch falling from his own tree when working, and certainly would do nothing in the event you felled a tree on him, except to help you find his corpse.


----------



## Edwardoka (12 Sep 2018)

woodenspoons said:


> The colour of the hat - bright orange, yellow, white - would allow you to see where the next worker was, and you’d be able to calculate safe felling distance. His helmet-wearing only saved him from a rogue branch falling from his own tree when working, and certainly would do nothing in the event you felled a tree on him, except to help you find his corpse.


Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at. That's a context in which hi-vis makes a ton of sense, where controlled circumstances mean that you're looking out for people wearing bright hard hats against a green background. The hard hat enables the safety checks further up the chain to be done more efficiently, and as you say, they don't provide any functional protection in the event of a breach in safety protocol.

Contrast that controlled situation with Johnny B. Random walking out in front of a cyclist where both people's outlines may be broken up by all manner of backgrounds/lighting conditions/colour clashes that call into question any single strategy for maximum visibility.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (12 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I think high visibility clothing is a must for cyclists, and black is not a good idea.



In the context of someone arguing that hi-vis for cyclists was a must, this was the reaction from the West Midlands Traffic Police on their Twitter account:

_"...[If you] want to be seen, go for contrast, concentrate on road position & add lateral movement towards hazards, these are the things that will get you noticed. It's all in here https://trafficwmp.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/junction-malfunction-and-a-new-dawn/ "
_​


----------



## glasgowcyclist (12 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> This has been researched at Government level, most notably by the DfT



There's also this study which showed no protective effect:

http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/12855/


_*Conclusion* 

This study was designed to assess the effect of conspicuity aid use on the risk of crash for commuter and utility cyclists. A slightly greater proportion of cases than controls reported using conspicuity aids. There was therefore a raised odds ratio of collision crash involvement for those using conspicuity aids even after adjustment for a large number of important confounders. The study results do not demonstrate a protective effect as expected given previous work testing the effects of such aids on drivers’ awareness of cyclists and pedestrians. This study demonstrates the importance of understanding why many cyclists remain at risk of collision crash resulting in injury despite the use of conspicuity aids._​


----------



## classic33 (12 Sep 2018)

Andy in Germany said:


> That must have been quite an outfit.


Not all at once!


----------



## Phaeton (12 Sep 2018)

@glasgowcyclist very good article


----------



## raleighnut (12 Sep 2018)

Phaeton said:


> Are the ribs fluorescent? I was driving the other week & & picked up somebody wearing one of these in the headlights, for a split second it was a real WTF moment


No but the jacket is white with the black being printed on so the white really stands out in headlights, it also does have 'retro reflective' flashes sewn in.


----------



## User66445 (12 Sep 2018)

Milkfloat said:


> You stated it was "noon on a bright sunny day" on your OP, now you seem to changing the story. However, none of that matters, you were wearing high vis and were not seen, there is no conclusive evidence that high vis makes a difference and if you look at countries with the lowest per kilometer death and serious injury rates, high vis is not something a cyclist would ever use. To say that you 'must wear' it is missing the point entirely.


It was noon on a bright sunny day - no story change, just your trying to avoid the truth, that's all.

Also, you're is taking two words out of context - naughty, naughty. Let me try to explain.

Do these two statement mean the same:

I think noise cancelling headphones on aircraft are a must.
Noise cancelling headphones on aircraft are compulsory.

If you think they are the same, then its back to school for you !

Also, read my first post carefully. You seem to have missed the sense of it entirely.


----------



## Milkfloat (12 Sep 2018)

@avole I think we just need to agree to disagree and in some cases agree to agree. We are just going around in circles.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

Just for the record, I quite often wear it when out on the bike. not because I think it keeps me safer (it doesn't), but because if some chump isn't looking and runs me over that's simply one less stick for an insurer to try and beat me with for a spot of light hearted victim blaming. It is sad that I feel I have to do that, but as long as ill informed people insist on bandying around pre-conceived notions based upon little or no evidence, then then insurers will use is as an excuse on their ill informed clients behalf.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (12 Sep 2018)

I wear an orange jacket so rescue helicopters can find me in the snow at Winscar Reservoir when my energy bars run out.
It int as glamorous as Cannes up theer!


----------



## Alan O (12 Sep 2018)

Actually, I wear camouflage when I'm out in the country, so all those big lorries can't find me to run me over.


----------



## User66445 (12 Sep 2018)

I wouldn't. That nearly happened to me the other day. Blind Z bend, narrow country road, disused railway crossing, huge semi-trainer hurtling round on my side of the road coming towards me. He certainly saw me heading into the nearest ditch, but wouldn't have been able to take evasive action himself without toppling over. He didn't look to be in complete control when I dived off the road.

I rang the company concerned just after, and guess what? They were all in a meeting and would be unavailable for the forseeable future.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

[QUOTE 5378847, member: 9609"]you cannae where head phones when cycling lad - that be worse than no hi-viz[/QUOTE]

It's more socially acceptable to fart at the dinner table than it is to wear headphones on a bicycle. Even worse if you're not wearing your hi-vis at the table.


----------



## Andy in Germany (12 Sep 2018)

classic33 said:


> Not all at once!



ooooooooooooohhhhh...

I'm disappointed now.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (12 Sep 2018)

Milkfloat said:


> @avole I think we just need to agree to disagree and in some cases agree to agree. We are just going around in circles.



At least you're getting the courtesy of a response.
Maybe I should try typing in neon yellow....


----------



## roadrash (12 Sep 2018)

As already stated , it matters not one jot what you wear , if someone isn't looking then they wont see you , simple as that,
and just to raise the stupidity stakes a little , a friend of mine while riding on the canal bank fell off his bike and broke his wrist, at hospital once he had said he fell off his bike he was asked was he wearing a helmet or high vis , his response was …just so I know for future reference , which of the two would prevent me breaking my wrist in the event of a fall from my bike


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

Was your friend not wearing knee and elbow pads? Maniac!


----------



## roadrash (12 Sep 2018)

nor was he wearing wrist guards


----------



## tommaguzzi (12 Sep 2018)

yep i had that when i came off on black ice and broke my hip first thing they asked me if i was wearing a helmet.


----------



## alicat (12 Sep 2018)

I was treated to the helmet conversation when I was knocked off by a motorist. I asked the consultant if that would have improved the driver's concentration. The student doctors around me started tittering and the consultant decided that I could be discharged that day.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

Here's a scary thought, one which I'm frightened to google for myself. Are there any hi-vis cycle helmets out there, combing the 'best' of both Worlds?


----------



## Phaeton (12 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Here's a scary thought, one which I'm frightened to google for myself. Are there any hi-vis cycle helmets out there, combing the 'best' of both Worlds?


https://www.halfords.com/cycling/bike-helmets/adult-bike-helmets/hardnutz-hi-vis-road-mtb-helmet even better turn any plastic container into a helmet https://www.amazon.co.uk/Altura-Vision-Waterproof-Cycling-Helmet/dp/B014V21TGQ


----------



## Profpointy (12 Sep 2018)

tommaguzzi said:


> yep i had that when i came off on black ice and broke my hip first thing they asked me if i was wearing a helmet.



Didn't thr Rivera Thompson Rivera paper show a correlation between helmet wearing and reduction in leg injuries ? I seem to recall it was an even better correlation than the reduction in head injuries


----------



## classic33 (12 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I wouldn't. That nearly happened to me the other day. Blind Z bend, narrow country road, disused railway crossing, huge semi-trainer hurtling round on my side of the road coming towards me. He certainly saw me heading into the nearest ditch, but wouldn't have been able to take evasive action himself without toppling over. He didn't look to be in complete control when I dived off the road.
> 
> I rang the company concerned just after, and guess what? They were all in a meeting and would be unavailable for the forseeable future.


Send a letter via recorded delivery, or phone the chairman/CEO at home. Works for me.


----------



## classic33 (12 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Here's a scary thought, one which I'm frightened to google for myself. Are there any hi-vis cycle helmets out there, combing the 'best' of both Worlds?


Yes, which colour do you want?


----------



## Rockn Robin (12 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> I'd tell him to mind his own foxtroting business, and carried on my merry way.



Tempting, but I just ignore and go on my way. There are too many lunatics out here that carry handguns, and some are insane enough to use them for even the slightest of provocation. It's a gun crazed society in which I live. I avoid any kind of confrontation, especially on our roads.

Best thing is to leave him be and ride on.


----------



## Drago (12 Sep 2018)

classic33 said:


> Send a letter via recorded delivery, or phone the chairman/CEO at home. Works for me.



Chap I grasssed up on Monday is in some right do do...

"Good morning Mr Faquhar,

We are very sorry for the conduct of our engineer this morning. All our engineers are fully aware of our policy regarding the use of mobile phones while driving and in the work place. The Engineer has been informed that he needs to come to the office later today.

We will then launch an investigation which could result in dismissal if it is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Atlas has a zero-tolerance policy on the use of hand held devices while driving and we take it very seriously."

So some companies will act proactively when us punters grass up their employees for their road misdeeds.


----------



## classic33 (12 Sep 2018)

Rockn Robin said:


> Tempting, but I just ignore and go on my way. There are too many lunatics out here that carry handguns, and some are insane enough to use them for even the slightest of provocation. It's a gun crazed society in which I live. I avoid any kind of confrontation, especially on our roads.
> 
> Best thing is to leave him be and ride on.


Would he have said it to you though, given that you might just be carrying one?


----------



## Rockn Robin (12 Sep 2018)

classic33 said:


> Would he have said it to you though, given that you might just be carrying one?[/QUOTE



Oh, there are idiots enough around here that would say and do more whether the thought of the other carrying or not. I don’t carry and never will. Hate guns.


----------



## Edwardoka (12 Sep 2018)

Rockn Robin said:


> Tempting, but I just ignore and go on my way. There are too many lunatics out here that carry handguns, and some are insane enough to use them for even the slightest of provocation. It's a gun crazed society in which I live. I avoid any kind of confrontation, especially on our roads.



Sorry to hear that. Glad you're on the side of sense.
In before


E.R. Triage nurse said:


> Were you wearing your flak jacket?


----------



## srw (13 Sep 2018)

User3094 said:


> WTF?


It's called stalking, and is in no way at all a prelude to a criminal record.


----------



## DCBassman (13 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Here's a scary thought, one which I'm frightened to google for myself. Are there any hi-vis cycle helmets out there, combing the 'best' of both Worlds?



Well....one of my lids has a rear red light, steady or flashing as required. .


----------



## rugby bloke (13 Sep 2018)

Drago said:


> Here's a scary thought, one which I'm frightened to google for myself. Are there any hi-vis cycle helmets out there, combing the 'best' of both Worlds?


Saw a fellow cyclist wearing just the thing riding home last night - Full high Vis, including what looked like a water proof cover that fitted over the helmet.


----------



## C R (13 Sep 2018)

rugby bloke said:


> Saw a fellow cyclist wearing just the thing riding home last night - Full high Vis, including what looked like a water proof cover that fitted over the helmet.


I have one of those covers, keeps my hair dry during rainy rides. All the ones I have seen ate hi visibility colours and have reflective strips. Last time I saw helmets in Lidl one of the models was fluorescent green.


----------



## User66445 (13 Sep 2018)

My high visibility helmet is exactly the same as the Halfords one, only it has the word "Scott" emblazoned on it so it costs a lot more.


----------



## subaqua (13 Sep 2018)

cyberknight said:


> I was dressed in white on a white bike with reflectives and someone still knocked me off, tell them to do one .


But it was blowing a blizzard ....


----------



## C R (13 Sep 2018)

User13710 said:


> I sometimes ride with a person who wears one of those hat covers all the time, rain or shine. He looks like a gigantic yellow mushroom, what a twerp. I should think he's more likely to get hit by motorists blinded by uncontrollable tears of laughter.



That's just your envy talking because your hair gets all wet, so there, that's you told .


----------



## mybike (14 Sep 2018)

Illaveago said:


> Although I am not in total agreement with the chap you met but there have been times when I have been out cycling and have seen riders wearing all black cycling gear plus a black bike. I call it "stealth mode!" It may be alright for fighter planes but cyclist's need to be more conspicuous. Some bright colours would help. If you think about it motorcyclist's were in a similar situation to cyclist's by not being seen and adopted the idea of riding with their headlights on.



In my motorcycle commuting days, when it was a new thing to ride with your headlights on, I found that after a while people were pulling out in front of me even more. So I stopped using my headlight.


----------



## pjd57 (15 Sep 2018)

Still makes me laugh


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2018)

pjd57 said:


> Still makes me laugh
> View attachment 430221


Platform 3, Bradford Interchange?


----------



## Randomnerd (16 Sep 2018)

News from Edinburgh Zoo today made me chuckle: their potentially rutting pandas are sensitive to both hi-viz and leaf blowers, which are both now banned.
I must’ve been a rutting panda in another life.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (17 Sep 2018)

I don't wear neon yellow on the bike; I wear black, red and white, on a white bike with black and white panniers. These are all highly contrasting and suit all of the conditions I ride in. Given that this is 98% in 30mph areas and 1% in each of 20mph and 40mph areas, there's really no excuse for a driver not seeing me other than failing to look properly.


----------



## Rockn Robin (17 Sep 2018)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I don't wear neon yellow on the bike; I wear black, red and white, on a white bike with black and white panniers. These are all highly contrasting and suit all of the conditions I ride in. Given that this is 98% in 30mph areas and 1% in each of 20mph and 40mph areas, there's really no excuse for a driver not seeing me other than failing to look properly.



Yes, the last part of what you say is so true. Too many things to distract drivers today, and text messaging being the post problematic where I live, second to drunks. There should be an automatic GPS tracking system that shuts the phone off when someone is text messaging while the phone is in motion. My sister-in-law drives for a living, and if she is caught using her cell phone (hand held) for any reason other than hands free through the companies blue tooth communication system, she will be instantly dismissed.

I just found out that the city I live in has the distinction of being the 3rd worst cities in the US for road fatalities, behind LA and NY (I believe them to be the two worst). In 2016, there were 115 fatal accidents on our roads, and 50 of those were because of drunks. On our major roadways within the city limits, the speed limit is 45mph (72kph), and most push 50 to 55. Ridiculous, and add that to the fact that many drivers here drive huge pick-up trucks and SUVs. Two months ago my wife was sitting at a traffic light. A huge pickup truck went barreling through the red light going from left to right in front of her just shortly after the light turned green for her. He demolished a small car killing the driver while he was making a legal turn. I'm glad that my wife has the good sense to delay moving off when the light turns green just to make sure traffic going across her path has stopped. It annoys drivers behind her, but too bad for them, poor diddums. She still has nightmares because of that accident. For the next week, I drove her back and forth to work, and even while doing that she was a nervous wreck. "Watch out for that car, etc.," she would keep saying. I wish I had a small Star Trek transporting devise in my car, if the technology was available. By the time I'm done during the day of driving, I would have caused a major traffic jam in Antarctica, because that's where I would have transported the bozos I would have encountered on the roads.

So when it comes to riding my bike, I stick to less traveled roadways that have bike lanes, and also bike trails, which fortunately we have plenty of both.

Stay safe out there.


----------



## Milkfloat (17 Sep 2018)

Rockn Robin said:


> . There should be an automatic GPS tracking system that shuts the phone off when someone is text messaging while the phone is in motion.



This would prevent the responsible people on public transport using their phone.


----------



## Globalti (17 Sep 2018)

Rockn Robin said:


> Yes, the last part of what you say is so true. Too many things to distract drivers today, and text messaging being the post problematic where I live, second to drunks. There should be an automatic GPS tracking system that shuts the phone off when someone is text messaging while the phone is in motion. My sister-in-law drives for a living, and if she is caught using her cell phone (hand held) for any reason other than hands free through the companies blue tooth communication system, she will be instantly dismissed.
> 
> I just found out that the city I live in has the distinction of being the 3rd worst cities in the US for road fatalities, behind LA and NY (I believe them to be the two worst). In 2016, there were 115 fatal accidents on our roads, and 50 of those were because of drunks. On our major roadways within the city limits, the speed limit is 45mph (72kph), and most push 50 to 55. Ridiculous, and add that to the fact that many drivers here drive huge pick-up trucks and SUVs. Two months ago my wife was sitting at a traffic light. A huge pickup truck went barreling through the red light going from left to right in front of her just shortly after the light turned green for her. He demolished a small car killing the driver while he was making a legal turn. I'm glad that my wife has the good sense to delay moving off when the light turns green just to make sure traffic going across her path has stopped. It annoys drivers behind her, but too bad for them, poor diddums. She still has nightmares because of that accident. For the next week, I drove her back and forth to work, and even while doing that she was a nervous wreck. "Watch out for that car, etc.," she would keep saying. I wish I had a small Star Trek transporting devise in my car, if the technology was available. By the time I'm done during the day of driving, I would have caused a major traffic jam in Antarctica, because that's where I would have transported the bozos I would have encountered on the roads.
> 
> ...



Yes my brother lives in Michigan and says cycling on the road is a bad idea as you are likely to be mown down by a drunk redneck in a pickup or a texting driver in an SUV. He sticks to mountain biking. Same in South Africa too except that there it's mini bus taxis whose drivers are often stoned.


----------



## Rockn Robin (17 Sep 2018)

Milkfloat said:


> This would prevent the responsible people on public transport using their phone.



Yes, that is true. The solution, who knows.


----------



## Rockn Robin (17 Sep 2018)

Globalti said:


> Yes my brother lives in Michigan and says cycling on the road is a bad idea as you are likely to be mown down by a drunk redneck in a pickup or a texting driver in an SUV. He sticks to mountain biking. Same in South Africa too except that there it's mini bus taxis whose drivers are often stoned.



The city I was mentioning in my comment was Phoenix. Me, I live in one of those satellite cities of Mesa, which, by the way, was voted number 1 redneck city in the US. I can sure pickem. We do indeed have our fare share of rednecks in pickup trucks. You can spot many of them because they hang a rifle on the back window. If you go to some of their homes and cut their grass, you might be surprised at what you find. HAHAHAHA!!!

Most of the texting drivers in SUVs here are what we refer to as "Soccer Mom's."


----------



## User66445 (17 Sep 2018)

I was cycling through Paris today. Hotter than expected, and a black shirt under my high visibility jacket when removed seemed to be asking for trouble. I dropped into Decathlon and bought a nice, bright yellow, high visibility T shirt. Crossed the busy points of Paris - Concorde, Malesherbes, République, Bastille rue de Rivoli etc with the confidence borne of the knowledge people could see me. 

OK, you could argue that the effect was purely psychological, but, given I'm used to Parisian traffic, where weaving in and out of traffic is almost obligatory; knowing I could be seen made a tremendous difference. I even had taxis and a bus give way to me going round Bastille, where you have to cut across several lanes to get on the road leading to Gare de Lyon.


----------



## raleighnut (17 Sep 2018)

avole said:


> I was cycling through Paris today. Hotter than expected, and a black shirt under my high visibility jacket when removed seemed to be asking for trouble. I dropped into Decathlon and bought a nice, bright yellow, high visibility T shirt. Crossed the busy points of Paris - Concorde, Malesherbes, République, Bastille rue de Rivoli etc with the confidence borne of the knowledge people could see me.
> 
> OK, you could argue that the effect was purely psychological, but, given I'm used to Parisian traffic, where weaving in and out of traffic is almost obligatory; knowing I could be seen made a tremendous difference. I even had taxis and a bus give way to me going round Bastille, where you have to cut across several lanes to get on the road leading to Gare de Lyon.


Had they run out of stripy T-shirts


----------



## Edwardoka (18 Sep 2018)

raleighnut said:


> Had they run out of stripy T-shirts
> 
> 
> View attachment 430486


Once I'd have said "that's just a lazy stereotype" but that was before I saw someone wearing a stripey top and a beret smoking gauloises in Cerbère and the hotelier at another place I stayed kept saying "ooh la la" when I talked about my travels


----------

