# Rear lights on helmets.



## johnnyb47 (30 Oct 2017)

Hi to all. 
Its only me again and hope you've all had a good day.
This coming winter I'm determined to try and continue to cycle in the dark evenings after work. There's nothing worse than coming home to an empty house and just sitting there all night vegetating in front of the tv. Cycling has been great this summer and its a shame for it to simply end because the dark nights have arrived. The one though that puts me off about night time rides ,is the fear of not being seen by motorists. I'm not concerned about what goes one in front as I feel I have some control if a situation arises. Its more of a fear of will the car behind see me , especially on some fast A roads that I use from time to time. Tonight was a good example when a bus made a close pass scaring me witless. I feel that my lights are plenty bright enough and very noticeable but after tonight,s little scare I'm thinking of upping the Aunty with another rear light.I would be quite happy to dress my bike in an array of christmas light if it were to ease my paranoia of not being seen, but we all know this is not really the right way forward. Looking in my box of bike spares I've dug out a moon comet rear light and it fits rather nicely to my helmet. Would you agree or differ that a rear light on a helmet is a good safe guard to use in conjunction with my seat post mounted light.
All the very best,
Johnny :-)


----------



## classic33 (30 Oct 2017)

Lights on the head could give a false indication of your direction of travel.

You look behind you and the red light no longer faces the rear.

Higher up can equate to closer to, but not guaranteed.


----------



## Slick (30 Oct 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> Hi to all.
> Its only me again and hope you've all had a good day.
> This coming winter I'm determined to try and continue to cycle in the dark evenings after work. There's nothing worse than coming home to an empty house and just sitting there all night vegetating in front of the tv. Cycling has been great this summer and its a shame for it to simply end because the dark nights have arrived. The one though that puts me off about night time rides ,is the fear of not being seen by motorists. I'm not concerned about what goes one in front as I feel I have some control if a situation arises. Its more of a fear of will the car behind see me , especially on some fast A roads that I use from time to time. Tonight was a good example when a bus made a close pass scaring me witless. I feel that my lights are plenty bright enough and very noticeable but after tonight,s little scare I'm thinking of upping the Aunty with another rear light.I would be quite happy to dress my bike in an array of christmas light if it were to ease my paranoia of not being seen, but we all know this is not really the right way forward. Looking in my box of bike spares I've dug out a moon comet rear light and it fits rather nicely to my helmet. Would you agree or differ that a rear light on a helmet is a good safe guard to use in conjunction with my seat post mounted light.
> All the very best,
> Johnny :-)


I'm not exactly sure what I look lime to other drivers but I'm lit up lime a Christmas tree so as long as your lights are steady and not dazzling I think the more the better. I always tell my mates, if anyone hits me they are going down for it as there is no way they could argue they couldn't see me.


----------



## Tim Hall (30 Oct 2017)

If the driver isn't looking or doesn't give a stuff, the number or brightness of lights doesn't have much effect. I was riding home from a festive lunch a couple of years back, my bike decorated with tinsel and a string of flashing lights. I was literally lit up like a Christmas Tree and still got close passes.

Oh,and it's"up the ante" (raise the stakes) rather than "up the Aunty", which sounds a bit to Freudian to be healthy.


----------



## Slick (30 Oct 2017)

I know more people on here will be against it than not, but I use this. 


https://uk.lumoshelmet.co


----------



## Drago (30 Oct 2017)

A red triangle denotes a trailer.


----------



## Slick (30 Oct 2017)

Drago said:


> A red triangle denotes a trailer.


Not anymore.


----------



## r04DiE (30 Oct 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> I've dug out a moon comet rear light


Mount that on the back of the bike and you'll get a lovely red pool of light behind you. Seems to work for me.


----------



## pjd57 (30 Oct 2017)

What's the legal requirement re rear lights ?

I know there was confusion a few years back.
Is it still a static red , rather than flashers ?


----------



## johnnyb47 (30 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I know more people on here will be against it than not, but I use this.
> 
> 
> https://uk.lumoshelmet.co


That looks neat. Thanks for the link buddy.


----------



## johnnyb47 (30 Oct 2017)

Thanks for all your posts and views. Early start tomorrow 4am urggg so I catch up on this tomorrow if any more words of wisdom have been spoken. 
Have a good night all. 
:-)


----------



## Slick (30 Oct 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> That looks neat. Thanks for the link buddy.


It certainly won't be everyone's cup of tea, but I like it. I think I made up my mind to try it one morning as I signalled on a roundabout for as long as i could before going back on the bars to steady the ship. A woman looked right at me and still pulled out in front of me. I don't expect it will put an invisible shield round me but it will give me a better chance.


----------



## classic33 (30 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I'm not exactly sure what I look lime to other drivers but I'm lit up lime a Christmas tree so as long as your lights are steady and not dazzling I think the more the better. I always tell my mates, if anyone hits me they are going down for it as there is no way they could argue they couldn't see me.


I got one of these from my neighbour, horse rider & instructor.





I'll be honest and say that it didn't make any real difference. Drivers still said they couldn't see me.

Best thing I had that I know was seen was a simple lightstick. The sort that you snap before use. Hung on the draw cord of the rucksack. The erratic movement was what caught the eye.


----------



## classic33 (30 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> What's the legal requirement re rear lights ?
> 
> I know there was confusion a few years back.
> Is it still a static red , rather than flashers ?


The confusion is still there. You can use flashing lights if they meet a standard for a non-flashing light.

It applies to lights fitted to the bike, not the rider.


----------



## Slick (30 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> I got one of these from my neighbour, horse rider & instructor.
> View attachment 381026
> 
> I'll be honest and say that it didn't make any real difference. Drivers still said they couldn't see me.
> ...


Got to say more about the drivers than the cyclist. I've still had drivers pull out on me, but to be honest, I reckon most of them see me but underestimate my speed and pull out anyway. The last guy actually made me laugh as he desperately tried to ignore me as I overtook him again.


----------



## Tim Hall (30 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> What's the legal requirement re rear lights ?
> 
> I know there was confusion a few years back.
> Is it still a static red , rather than flashers ?


I expect such information is readily found in the highway code.


----------



## classic33 (30 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> Got to say more about the drivers than the cyclist. I've still had drivers pull out on me, but to be honest, I reckon most of them see me but underestimate my speed and pull out anyway. The last guy actually made me laugh as he desperately tried to ignore me as I overtook him again.


They can look but not see as @Tim Hall suggested.


----------



## Tim Hall (30 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I know more people on here will be against it than not, but I use this.
> 
> 
> https://uk.lumoshelmet.co


A helmet. With indicators. With brake lights. With a one hundred and sixty pound price tag. Include me out.


----------



## Slick (30 Oct 2017)

Tim Hall said:


> A helmet. With indicators. With brake lights. With a one hundred and sixty pound price tag. Include me out.


Ok.


----------



## Jason (30 Oct 2017)

The moon meteor is a seriously bright light. Probably a bit too bright for helmet use. I know as I use two on the bike.

I have something similar to this wedged (and cable tied) to the back of my commuter helmet and gives me that feeling of security.

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/cateye-orb-rear-light/

But if the numpties don't see you or still close pass .....


----------



## Shaun (30 Oct 2017)

As per @Slick's post, the Lumos helmet has a red rear triangle embedded - a chap passes me daily with one of these going day / night / all seasons: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lumos-Kickstart-Helmet-Charcoal-Black/dp/B01N273KZT







I doubt a rear bike light randomly attached to your helmet would work very well though - you're likely to run the risk of dazzling drivers if the angles are wrong (or as you are moving your head to look around).

If your rear light(s) aren't well positioned to be seen from a good distance, think about fitting an extender to your seatpost to move the position using something like this:

https://www.tredz.co.uk/.Topeak-Bar-X-Tender_4995.htm






I have a similar one on my commuter to bring the light out from under the saddle and raise it above the arc of the rear mudguard. 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## classic33 (31 Oct 2017)

Shaun said:


> As per @Slick's post, the Lumos helmet has a red rear triangle embedded - a chap passes me daily with one of these going day / night / all seasons: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lumos-Kickstart-Helmet-Charcoal-Black/dp/B01N273KZT
> 
> View attachment 381031
> 
> ...


How steady is the extender in use. I removed a similar one from the front because it seemed to "bounce" whilst in use.


----------



## Randomnerd (31 Oct 2017)

Just one steady red light is enough. Please stop littering yourself with lights. You are not safer. 
The current trend for more lights is just telling the car user the wrong story. "Look out, driver! I'm really special! You need to pay loads of attention to me and whatever you do don't knock me into the hedge! Beware! I'm a cyclist!" 
All the flashery and ultra-white bulbery just annoys the car-user, makes him unsure how to take in all the info, and makes him more likely to make a bad decision and run you into the hedge. And meanwhile, cyclists dress up more and more like some hi-vis freak show circus act, looking less and less part of the flow and more and more "special".
We need to reverse this nonsense before it gets out of hand and just follow the Highway Code's suggestions.
Plenty of evidence from around the world that less lighting is better. Try cycling in Japan, where there are narrow city roads littered with telegraph poles and other obstacles. After dark, most bikes only have a red reflector on the back, even if the law requires a small red light. Car users know how to share the road with the cyclists, and accidents are remarkably few.


----------



## classic33 (31 Oct 2017)

woodenspoons said:


> Just one steady red light is enough. Please stop littering yourself with lights. You are not safer.
> The current trend for more lights is just telling the car user the wrong story. "Look out, driver! I'm really special! You need to pay loads of attention to me and whatever you do don't knock me into the hedge! Beware! I'm a cyclist!"
> All the flashery and ultra-white bulbery just annoys the car-user, makes him unsure how to take in all the info, and makes him more likely to make a bad decision and run you into the hedge. And meanwhile, cyclists dress up more and more like some hi-vis freak show circus act, looking less and less part of the flow and more and more "special".
> We need to reverse this nonsense before it gets out of hand and just follow the Highway Code's suggestions.
> Plenty of evidence from around the world that less lighting is better. Try cycling in Japan, where there are narrow city roads littered with telegraph poles and other obstacles. After dark, most bikes only have a red reflector on the back, even if the law requires a small red light. Car users know how to share the road with the cyclists, and accidents are remarkably few.


In Japan you have to prove that you have somewhere to park a car before a permit is issued allowing you to buy one.

And at present the law is tilted against the cyclist not making themselves visible to drivers. "Make yourself visible" works only if the drivers actually see you and realise that you're on a bike. If being lit up like a christmas tree annoys them, at least I know they then can't turn round and say "they never saw me". They can either have the onus put firmly back in their laps for failing to see cyclists or they can say we should make ourselves more visible. They can't have it both ways, no matter how much they shout.

If they, as drivers, cannot take in the information in real time whilst driving, should they be driving?

*Backed up by the Highway Code*
_Section 59 of the Highway Code explains the appropriate *clothing cyclists should wear in order to make it easier for other road users to spot them* and help to keep them protected in the case of a collision._


----------



## Shaun (31 Oct 2017)

Let's not get sidetracked into another general safety debate - there's a separate forum for that. Please stick to directing advice or suggestions to the OP.

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## summerdays (31 Oct 2017)

I've noticed (when sitting in a car), that in a stream of heavy traffic you can notice/pick out a cyclist ahead earlier when they have a helmet light on to the rear. Also noted that if it was too bright and badly adjusted that you avoid looking that direction. I don't tend to cycle much at night and rarely in that heavy traffic so I don't have one myself.

Look at the cyclists locally that you see and what makes some of them stand out more than others in the conditions you ride in.


----------



## biggs682 (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I know more people on here will be against it than not, but I use this.
> 
> 
> https://uk.lumoshelmet.co



not seen those before


----------



## Heltor Chasca (31 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> What's the legal requirement re rear lights ?
> 
> I know there was confusion a few years back.
> Is it still a static red , rather than flashers ?



I stand to be corrected but I believe you can have just a flashing red light on your bike now. Previously you could in ADDITION to an approved rear light or the flasher had to be in your person or bag. I could be wrong about this though.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

biggs682 said:


> not seen those before


I think they are good. The odd driver still appears to try his best to pretend not to see you but I think it seems to happen less. The first 20 minutes of my commute is unlit country roads, and I feel even oncoming drivers are now more prone to dipping their headlights as they usually are for "Just a Cyclist".


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

User said:


> I've seen one 'in the wild'. Most of the lighting was redundant at the rider was on the drops.


Yeah, that could be an issue for some, there is one section on my commute as I come out the country lanes and into town that is downhill and I do go on the drops, but it's no more than 5 minutes probably a bit less of a 60 minute ride. If you spend your entire commute attacking hills and on the drops this one might not be for you. I have it adjusted to give me what I feel is best visibility in relation to my riding position.


----------



## Grendel (31 Oct 2017)

Watch out for ALDI selling bike helmets. They crop up regularly and have a built in rear light (with a battery which many shops don't stock, but can be bought on Amazon, etc).
https://www.aldi.co.uk/bikemate-adult's-bike-helmet/p/094575151852500


----------



## BoldonLad (31 Oct 2017)

Mrs @BoldonLad has a built-in light at rear of helmet. Helmet came from Lidl. 

We were in Spain at time of purchase, about 15Euro, so, no need to spend silly money, just need to wait until the next Lidl "cycling gear special", and hope it includes helmets with lights built in. 

Difficult to comment objectively on it's effectiveness, it is certainly bright, and "should" make her more visible, when combined with "on bike" lights. 

Without accurate statistics on accident numbers and lighting modes, anything else is simply an opinion.

So, for what it is worth, my opinion is, you cannot be "too visible". However, the "he/she MUST have seen me" argument is of little use, if you are lying on the ground with broken bones or worse.


----------



## pjd57 (31 Oct 2017)

Tim Hall said:


> I expect such information is readily found in the highway code.


Section 60 leaves it open to interpretation with its use of "recommended " and " permitted"


----------



## Drago (31 Oct 2017)

Recommended by those renowned road safety experts, Her Majesty's Stationery Office.


----------



## furball (31 Oct 2017)

If you intend fixing any light to your lid it needs to be something that won't affect the integrity of the helmet.
If you have good rear lights there isn't really a need for a rear helmet light, it would be an addition, perhaps used in flashing mode with the main one steady.
I find that a front helmet mounted light (small and doesn't affect the helmet) is more useful than a rear mounted one particularly at roundabouts because the light can be made visible to traffic to my left and right by turning my head.
There are small helmet front and back lights on the market that come as single unit.


----------



## Sharky (31 Oct 2017)

As well as rear light, reflective slap bands round the ankles are extremely effective.


----------



## biggs682 (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I think they are good. The odd driver still appears to try his best to pretend not to see you but I think it seems to happen less. The first 20 minutes of my commute is unlit country roads, and I feel even oncoming drivers are now more prone to dipping their headlights as they usually are for "Just a Cyclist".



At first glance it look's expensive but what price do you put on trying to stay alive , will have to do some investigation


----------



## Welsh wheels (31 Oct 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> Hi to all.
> Its only me again and hope you've all had a good day.
> This coming winter I'm determined to try and continue to cycle in the dark evenings after work. There's nothing worse than coming home to an empty house and just sitting there all night vegetating in front of the tv. Cycling has been great this summer and its a shame for it to simply end because the dark nights have arrived. The one though that puts me off about night time rides ,is the fear of not being seen by motorists. I'm not concerned about what goes one in front as I feel I have some control if a situation arises. Its more of a fear of will the car behind see me , especially on some fast A roads that I use from time to time. Tonight was a good example when a bus made a close pass scaring me witless. I feel that my lights are plenty bright enough and very noticeable but after tonight,s little scare I'm thinking of upping the Aunty with another rear light.I would be quite happy to dress my bike in an array of christmas light if it were to ease my paranoia of not being seen, but we all know this is not really the right way forward. Looking in my box of bike spares I've dug out a moon comet rear light and it fits rather nicely to my helmet. Would you agree or differ that a rear light on a helmet is a good safe guard to use in conjunction with my seat post mounted light.
> All the very best,
> Johnny :-)


I wear a hi-viz jacket with the words "Hard and I knows it" emblazoned on the back. I rarely get close passes.


----------



## vickster (31 Oct 2017)

Welsh wheels said:


> I wear a hi-viz jacket with the words "Hard and I knows it" emblazoned on the back. I rarely get close passes.


Probably everyone else does too if you wear Lycra Cycling shorts


----------



## Welsh wheels (31 Oct 2017)

vickster said:


> Probably everyone else does too if you wear Lycra Cycling shorts


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

biggs682 said:


> At first glance it look's expensive but what price do you put on trying to stay alive , will have to do some investigation


Investigate whether you'd be spending your money on making yourself less safe. Some of these "common sense" safety measures actually seem to reduce safety, while most have no evidence... and why would they if the manufacturers can sell them as "common sense"? Why risk killing the goose by discovering scientifically that it's detrimental?


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> Section 60 leaves it open to interpretation with its use of "recommended " and " permitted"


It does refer to the Road Vehicles Lighting Regs which you can piece together with amendments to find that flashing lights are permitted as long as they're regular flashes (not varying length) of 1 to 4 times a second of at least two Ronnies brightness... sorry, 4 candela. If the light has steady modes then it must meet the regs in those modes too, which usually means German K marking (aka StVZO) as there's fewer than ten BS marked lights still on sale. In practice, as long as a flashing light isn't obviously obnoxious (strobing or dazzling), I'd be amazed if it was challenged by traffic police or insurers.


----------



## Jody (31 Oct 2017)

I have a Knog Blinder 4 on my lid, set on eco flash to compliment the one on my seat post and also act as a back up should the batteries go. Great on run times and not too bright. It might just be my take but cars do seem to pass wider when a light is used on the lid.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

woodenspoons said:


> Just one steady red light is enough. Please stop littering yourself with lights. You are not safer. […]
> Plenty of evidence from around the world that less lighting is better. Try cycling in Japan, […]


Try cycling in the UK, where unlit cycling is a factor in fewer than 3% of collisions which even after correcting for other factors seems disproportionately low compared to the numbers cycling without lights. IMO the most plausible theory is that drivers not looking properly is a big factor and unlit cyclists ride assuming they've not been seen so give way even when it shouldn't be necessary, whereas lit cyclists will generally assume motorists will give way when they ought.

A special circle of hell should be reserved for people walking and cycling with lights on their heads, misleadingly showing red to the front or white to the rear when they turn their head. Please at least use amber lights or something.


----------



## Bazzer (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I'm not exactly sure what I look lime to other drivers but I'm lit up lime a Christmas tree so as long as your lights are steady and not dazzling I think the more the better. *I always tell my mates, if anyone hits me they are going down for it as there is no way they could argue they couldn't see me.*



Good luck with that argument. The police have failed to take any action against drivers who have taken me out (twice), in broad day light, the first of which I was wearing a hi viz jacket. And there are many others on here who will have had similar experiences and had far more serious injuries than I suffered.

The OP referenced a bus making a close pass. Personal opinion, but if a driver can't see a modern LED bulb or array mounted to a seat post or seat bag and pass the rider accordingly, I don't see that distracting them by being lit up like a Christmas tree is going to make any difference. - Particularly when commonly there are other reflective elements on the bike or on your person, whether they be seat post reflector, mudguards, pedals, rain jacket, back of your shoes, back of your leggings etc, all which are designed and incorporated into the item to bring a cyclist to a driver's attention.

The same lack of attention by some motorists to cyclists, can also be experienced by oncoming traffic. For example, there are sections of road on my commute which for quite long stretches have very little street lighting and a long section with no street lighting at all. IME, whether I have illuminated one front light, or two, (one with 5 LEDs which produces a light scatter and one with a powerful single bulb, with a directed beam), or one with a flasher and one fixed, makes no difference to the oncoming tw@ts, who decide that my retinas should feel the force of their headlight full beams.


----------



## steveindenmark (31 Oct 2017)

If there is one thing that I have learnt by being on here is that you will never get everyone to agree on lights, helmets or vis vests. For that reason, the best thing to do is please yourself and do what you want.
What I would say is that it is wise to have at least 2 rear lights on at the same time. You cannot see when one goes out. Hopefully, both of them failing at the same time would be unusual.


----------



## Drago (31 Oct 2017)

Its not that drivers don't see you.

Its that they either don't look, or don't care.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

steveindenmark said:


> What I would say is that it is wise to have at least 2 rear lights on at the same time. You cannot see when one goes out.


You'll see within a minute, when you next look back, as long as you've not put it somewhere silly like under the saddle. It's wiser to have one good light than two shoot ones.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> I'm not exactly sure what I look lime to other drivers but I'm lit up lime a Christmas tree so as long as your lights are steady and not dazzling I think the more the better. I always tell my mates, if anyone hits me they are going down for it as there is no way they could argue they couldn't see me.


Yeah, they'll just argue that all your lights confused them.


----------



## Drago (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5020653, member: 9609"]you would love me, bright colour during the day, hi-viz vest after dark and THREE rear flashers, two on the bike one sewn into my wooly hat. I reckon they can spot me from half a mile back, even an avid texter will have looked up 6 times before they goe for the overtake[/QUOTE]

But there's a difference between looking and actually seeing.


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Oct 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> old-style metal cycling trouser clips . . have retro-reflectives on them! They must be a collector's item.


Nope. An e-boy item.


----------



## Arjimlad (31 Oct 2017)

I run 2 rear lights having had the experience of riding three miles on an unlit fast country road to find my back light had fallen to bits. Of course I was visible to drivers but not from so far away. Having some reflective bands around the ankles also makes you stand out well in lights.

Lidl do a helmet which has a built-in LED taking 2 CR2025 batteries which you can get in a Poundshop. They're not mega bright but they do stand out in the dark.

My front wheel has a set of Monkeylights which are brilliant fun and eye-catching for side visibility when on a roundabout, for example.

At the end of the day if the feckless idiots don't look properly then no amount of lighting is going to make them see you. There comes a point where it takes too long affixing everything to the bike & turning it on.


----------



## Threevok (31 Oct 2017)

Ajax Bay said:


> Nope. An e-boy item.



Nice, but I prefer the Shimano ones listed in the alternatives.

If I am going to be noticed, I need to be noticed wearing the right gear


----------



## Hacienda71 (31 Oct 2017)

I clip a second light onto my rear jacket pocket as a backup. It is a bit higher than the seatpost mounted one and I don't worry it wont be seen which I think would be more of an issue if on the helmet and I was on the drops.


----------



## summerdays (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> You'll see within a minute, when you next look back, as long as you've not put it somewhere silly like under the saddle. It's wiser to have one good light than two shoot ones.


I wouldn't notice (I know from experience... I'm happier using two lights.) I'm looking back down the road, not down at the back of the bike.


----------



## Threevok (31 Oct 2017)

User3094 said:


> Followed a chap only last night with one and thought how noticeable it looked.
> 
> I've got a very bright Knog Blinder V on my seat post, but it points down slightly and is partially obscured by the seat pack so have always been wary of visibility.
> 
> Think I'll get one, do you just cable tie them to the helmet?



Depending on your helmet - you can fit a Knog Frog on your helmet


----------



## Chris S (31 Oct 2017)

If you've got a rear mudguard then paint a white patch on the back. It really stands out in the dark.
These are my bikes, the white patches are much more noticable in reallity than in the photograph.


----------



## Sixmile (31 Oct 2017)

I rode through last winter using a flashing see sense, which adapts to flash quicker and brighter when it senses headlights, I wore this attached to the rear of my helmet. I then had a Fibre Flare on constant on one of the downstays on the rear. Both lights emit light more than 180 degrees. I've upgraded my overshoes this year and went for Sealskin Halo with the little constant led heel in both shoes. Four lights to some may be overkill but it also gives a range of lighting options and cover if one isn't charged or fails along the way (which hasn't happened!)


----------



## Dogtrousers (31 Oct 2017)

Chris S said:


> If you've got a rear mudguard then paint a white patch on the back. It really stands out in the dark.
> These are my bikes, the white patches are much more noticable in reallity than in the photograph.


Way back in 1953 this matter was debated in parliament. From Hansard 
_LORD LEWELLIN: The comparatively small areas of white surface involved now appear, after experiment, not to give any effective extra safeguard, and I am told that the technical advisers of the Ministry have come to the conclusion that that is an unnecessary provision. If it gives a false sense pf security, it is better repealed rather than that people should be put to the trouble of painting these surfaces white when, in effect, they do no good._​
This was the repeal of the something or other act that required white patches on mudguards. Very useful in the blackout.


----------



## Jody (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> A special circle of hell should be reserved for people walking and cycling with lights on their heads, misleadingly showing red to the front or white to the rear when they turn their head. Please at least use amber lights or something.



It's not very often someone cycling turns their head 180 degrees for any length of time so rear facing shouldn't cause any confusion.


----------



## Threevok (31 Oct 2017)

I can't turn my head that much anyway. I use the mirrors


----------



## glasgowcyclist (31 Oct 2017)

Chris S said:


> If you've got a rear mudguard then paint a white patch on the back. It really stands out in the dark.
> These are my bikes, the white patches are much more noticable in reallity than in the photograph.
> 
> View attachment 381047



Are those metal or plastic mudguards, and what paint did you use?


----------



## Ajax Bay (31 Oct 2017)

Hacienda71 said:


> I clip a second light onto my rear jacket pocket as a backup.


I had a good 0.5w rear light the clip on which failed (fatigue). I now pop it inside the rear pocket of my gilet (translucent material) where it glows/double flashes all the way to the pub, and back. This augments my standard frame fixed light.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (31 Oct 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> Hi to all.
> Its only me again and hope you've all had a good day.
> This coming winter I'm determined to try and continue to cycle in the dark evenings after work. There's nothing worse than coming home to an empty house and just sitting there all night vegetating in front of the tv. Cycling has been great this summer and its a shame for it to simply end because the dark nights have arrived. The one though that puts me off about night time rides ,is the fear of not being seen by motorists. I'm not concerned about what goes one in front as I feel I have some control if a situation arises. Its more of a fear of will the car behind see me , especially on some fast A roads that I use from time to time. Tonight was a good example when a bus made a close pass scaring me witless. I feel that my lights are plenty bright enough and very noticeable but after tonight,s little scare I'm thinking of upping the Aunty with another rear light.I would be quite happy to dress my bike in an array of christmas light if it were to ease my paranoia of not being seen, but we all know this is not really the right way forward. Looking in my box of bike spares I've dug out a moon comet rear light and it fits rather nicely to my helmet. Would you agree or differ that a rear light on a helmet is a good safe guard to use in conjunction with my seat post mounted light.
> All the very best,
> Johnny :-)



In my experience, drivers who commit close passes don't do it because they haven't seen you but because they have and don't give a shoot.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5020818, member: 9609"]Or they don't have enough room to do so![/QUOTE]

Like I said, they've seen you and don't give a shoot.


----------



## ozboz (31 Oct 2017)

Go with it , I have two rear lights on bike and one on lid ,yep still get close passes , but also get those in broad daylight , in winter early mornings are to me the time we are most vulnerable , so the more visibility the better.


----------



## steveindenmark (31 Oct 2017)

Drago said:


> But there's a difference between looking and actually seeing.



We cannot make people look. But we can at least do our bit.


----------



## steveindenmark (31 Oct 2017)

I have 2 steady lights on the bike. A flashing light on the back of my viz vest and a flashing light on my helmet which flashes red to the back and white to the front. I find vehicles from behind give me plenty of space.

But twice this week already, I have had cars overtaking and coming at me head on at speed in broad daylight. I am going to start keeping my lights on during daylight hours from now on.


----------



## Chris S (31 Oct 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Are those metal or plastic mudguards, and what paint did you use?


Metal mudguards. The bike on the left is Dutch and came out of the factory like that. 
I just used a Poundland aerosol on the other, it's stayed on with just minor touching up for few years.


----------



## Chris S (31 Oct 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> Way back in 1953 this matter was debated in parliament. From Hansard
> _LORD LEWELLIN: The comparatively small areas of white surface involved now appear, after experiment, not to give any effective extra safeguard, and I am told that the technical advisers of the Ministry have come to the conclusion that that is an unnecessary provision. If it gives a false sense pf security, it is better repealed rather than that people should be put to the trouble of painting these surfaces white when, in effect, they do no good._​
> This was the repeal of the something or other act that required white patches on mudguards. Very useful in the blackout.
> View attachment 381051


I suppose it's like hi-viz vests. I've been told that there is no statistical evidence that they reduce accidents but they do make you more noticable.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

Arjimlad said:


> There comes a point where it takes too long affixing everything to the bike & turning it on.


Lights should be bolted on, unless it's a bike you don't ride in the dark much.



summerdays said:


> I wouldn't notice (I know from experience... I'm happier using two lights.) I'm looking back down the road, not down at the back of the bike.


I find the lack of red reflected light a dead giveaway but maybe it's less obvious for townies. On the dynamo-lit bike, the headlight gets brighter if the tail light goes out, which is also a hint.



Sixmile said:


> I rode through last winter using a flashing see sense, which adapts to flash quicker and brighter when it senses headlights, I wore this attached to the rear of my helmet. I then had a Fibre Flare on constant on one of the downstays on the rear. Both lights emit light more than 180 degrees.


...which is doubly illegal, with a variable flasher as well as vehicle-mounted lights showing a red light to the front: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/regulation/11/made - as I mentioned earlier, you're unlikely to be stopped for the variable flasher unless it strobes (more than 4 flashes a second) but red light to the front may attract police attention if they're doing a crackdown.



Dogtrousers said:


> Way back in 1953 this matter was debated in parliament. From Hansard
> _LORD LEWELLIN: The comparatively small areas of white surface involved now appear, after experiment, not to give any effective extra safeguard, and I am told that the technical advisers of the Ministry have come to the conclusion that that is an unnecessary provision. If it gives a false sense pf security, it is better repealed rather than that people should be put to the trouble of painting these surfaces white when, in effect, they do no good._​


Sadly parliamentarians aren't always correct, so was that noble Lord correct (was the technical advice published?), or was he talking out of his woolsack like that one a few years ago who claimed people were being sued for clearing snow off paths near their home?



steveindenmark said:


> But twice this week already, I have had cars overtaking and coming at me head on at speed in broad daylight. I am going to start keeping my lights on during daylight hours from now on.


 I bet that's not going to work - by increasing your brightness, you decrease your contrast with the background even further and thereby reduce your perceived size - basically, headlights are very slimming. If I was having trouble and really wanted to stop daylight close passes, I'd carry a gun-shaped shotgun case over my back, set high enough that it's obvious to the front.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5020653, member: 9609"]you would love me, bright colour during the day, hi-viz vest after dark and THREE rear flashers, two on the bike one sewn into my wooly hat. I reckon they can spot me from half a mile back, even an avid texter will have looked up 6 times before they goe for the overtake[/QUOTE]
It's not that they don't see you - it's that they don't care about your safety.

Also, only half a mile? Even that 5 LED poundshop light that's often recommended will do that on fresh batteries. Not that you actually need any more, as 30 seconds at 60mph should be plenty of time for a motorist to react.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> Just by the by, while going through a box of bits at the weekend, I came across a pair of old-style metal cycling trouser clips. But these are special - they have retro-reflectives on them! They must be a collector's item.


Yeah. No. https://www.wilcodirect.co.uk/produ...user-clips-reflective-bands-we-07343/WE-07343


----------



## classic33 (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> It's not that they don't see you - it's that they don't care about your safety.
> 
> Also, only half a mile? Even that 5 LED poundshop light that's often recommended will do that on fresh batteries. Not that you actually need any more, as 30 seconds at 60mph should be plenty of time for a motorist to react.


Bit of a problem when the vehicle behind is less than 10 seconds behind you. Then they've to actually slow or stop.


----------



## Mugshot (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> On the dynamo-lit bike, the headlight gets brighter if the tail light goes out


Back in the days when I had dynamos the front light would get brighter if I pedaled harder.


----------



## crazyjoe101 (31 Oct 2017)

I used to use a low power rear light on my helmet but it doesn't really add anything imo, I now have a few very small pieces of red reflective tape there to to reflect back a few dots of light which can conceivably aid in judging distance.

Stuff like this tape is very versatile and can be used in extremely small pieces so as not to make you look ridiculous but still provide a good passive source of light when headlamps are hitting them.

A bit off topic now, but what I _feel_ is useful is one of these mounted on the front using one of these and a rubber shimmy. On low, it is easily dim enough to use in an urban environment without dazzling and can be briefly pointed towards risks like vehicles waiting to turn, whilst in rural unlit areas you can use it on high to see with so long as you avoid pointing it at anyone.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Bit of a problem when the vehicle behind is less than 10 seconds behind you. Then they've to actually slow or stop.


Where's the problem? If the lights can be seen from 30 seconds away, they've had 20 seconds where they could see you and should have already decided on an appropriate course of action, such as slowing to wait for a safe chance to overtake. 



Mugshot said:


> Back in the days when I had dynamos the front light would get brighter if I pedaled harder.


The regulators must be much better now then, as the system reaches maximum brightness at about walking speed.


----------



## ozboz (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> Where's the problem? If the lights can be seen from 30 seconds away, they've had 20 seconds where they could see you and should have already decided on an appropriate course of action, such as slowing to wait for a safe chance to overtake.
> 
> 
> The regulators must be much better now then, as the system reaches maximum brightness at about walking speed.



@Mugshot got that right !
Had one on an old bike years ago ,
I actually had an Austin A 35 van that was the same , as a raced 0 to 60 mph in 10 mins the lights got well better. !!


----------



## Heltor Chasca (31 Oct 2017)

Chris S said:


> If you've got a rear mudguard then paint a white patch on the back. It really stands out in the dark.
> These are my bikes, the white patches are much more noticable in reallity than in the photograph.
> 
> View attachment 381047



In much the same way that dry hyaena poo appears to glow in the dark. Used to mark territory. Seriously. 

Well for other hyaenas. But only the ones with torches.


----------



## RoubaixCube (31 Oct 2017)

I suppose you can add me to the handful of those that do.


















I tend to finish work just as the evening rush hour starts to die off and around that time there seems to be more HGVs passing through my part of the city with cabs so high my hand would probably just about touch the rim of their windscreen if i reached up from my bike so it helps to be seen above the rest of the traffic etc etc etc.

Other than the odd cyclist giving me a slight bump from behind when i stop at a set of lights, I havent been rear-ended by car yet so I must be doing something right. Though with how blind some drivers can be whilst on the road maybe they dont even notice me at all.


----------



## spen666 (31 Oct 2017)

Try one of these 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Helmet-Wireless-Signal-Handlebar-Remote/dp/B0711N3L2B?th=1

They get noticed


----------



## glasgowcyclist (31 Oct 2017)

spen666 said:


> Try one of these
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Helmet-Wireless-Signal-Handlebar-Remote/dp/B0711N3L2B?th=1
> 
> They get noticed



TMN for Shaun and Slick!


----------



## summerdays (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> I find the lack of red reflected light a dead giveaway but maybe it's less obvious for townies. On the dynamo-lit bike, the headlight gets brighter if the tail light goes out, which is also a hint.


As I said I'm not looking down behind me.... and I aim not to blind motorists by pointing it very high. The two light option means even if you notice the other light has gone out that you have a light on and you can have one flashing and one constant if you want.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5021262, member: 259"]Wow, that's a thing of rare hideousness![/QUOTE]

Yeah, and now it's one of your Amazon "Recommendations for you"!


----------



## Arjimlad (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> Lights should be bolted on, unless it's a bike you don't ride in the dark much.
> 
> 
> ..



Mine clip on & off for USB recharging & theft prevention.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

summerdays said:


> As I said I'm not looking down behind me.... and I aim not to blind motorists by pointing it very high. The two light option means even if you notice the other light has gone out that you have a light on and you can have one flashing and one constant if you want.


The glow's not that high or blinding, but it is noticeable, especially if there are any road signs. Two shoot lights are still shoot and they might both fail. As you may remember, I dislike flashing lights because I don't often want to give motorists that much notice it's only a bloody cyclist ahead of them.



Arjimlad said:


> Mine clip on & off for USB recharging & theft prevention.


I've heard of one bolted-on light getting damaged (not thieved) in 20 years and that was probably someone being careless when parking next to it. Bolted-on bike lights get nicked about as much as car lights - very very rarely.

As for charging, just take the battery pack indoors. It's mostly pathetically low capacity batteries that are built-in, isn't it?


----------



## Arjimlad (31 Oct 2017)

These lights have battery life of over 6 hours which is enough for my purposes.


----------



## mickle (31 Oct 2017)

In a human's field of perception (and I include drivers in this) 'high up' is perceived as _far away_ and 'low down' is perceived as _closer to_. We tend to scan an area between the horizon and the ground in front of us - (the area described by the beam of a car's headlights) so it's entirely possible that, to a beseated driver, a helmet light appears _above_ the horizon and therefore outside of this envelope. Retailers know that an awful lot of the stuff on their shelves is seen less because it's outside of this zone. Obviously a _very _low rear lamp is easily obscured in traffic conditions - so they work best in combination with a second seat post mounted lamp. 

If what you're trying to achieve is to communicate: 'CYCLIST!!' to other road users - my favourite attention grabbing method is to use squares of reflective tape stuck to the rim between the spokes and covering just 50% of the rim. You create an eyecatching stroby three-dimensional moving image which helps them to easily establish your speed, location and your direction of travel. At the point they need to plan to overtake you the reflective whooshes are at their brightest. This stuff is widely and cheaply available these days from ebay and Halfroads (car dept) - and best of all it uses the power of the approaching car's own lights, activates as soon as you appear in their beam and it works from (almost) 360 degrees.

If you really want them to notice you - get some wheel lights. The easiest is just to attach a rear light to the centre of your rear hub. But other dedicated sets are available. Monkey Lights are crazy good but cost fortunes. Avoid the cheaper Chinese ebay junk.

The trick is to make them sit up and take notice - and you can only do this by painting a picture of a cyclist that they haven't seen.


----------



## johnnyb47 (31 Oct 2017)

This has been a really interesting read and thank you all on the diverse opinions you have shared with me and amongst yourself,s. As I've already got this light and that it fits well on my helmet I think I will use it for the dark evenings. I know some of you will disagree and I fully respect your views, but I suppose where all different and I personally think a helmet rear light is right for me. 
Whatever you feel about this have yourselves a good night and stay safe out there whilst on your bikes,,
Johnny :-) :-)


----------



## sight-pin (31 Oct 2017)

This one even has built in speakers.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Livall-Blu...1GHHXLX2/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_sims?ie=UTF8


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

User3094 said:


> Think I'll get one, do you just cable tie them to the helmet?


Please don't cable tie unapproved shoot to your helmet. Use a proper mount from the manufacturer. If you're going to use a helmet, don't compromise it else it could be worse than useless in a fall. You don't want your light to be the last thing to go through your mind.



Arjimlad said:


> These lights have battery life of over 6 hours which is enough for my purposes.


Which would mean I'd be charging them a few times a week. I couldn't be doing with that faff!


----------



## gibgrth (31 Oct 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> Hi to all.
> Its only me again and hope you've all had a good day.
> This coming winter I'm determined to try and continue to cycle in the dark evenings after work. There's nothing worse than coming home to an empty house and just sitting there all night vegetating in front of the tv. Cycling has been great this summer and its a shame for it to simply end because the dark nights have arrived. The one though that puts me off about night time rides ,is the fear of not being seen by motorists. I'm not concerned about what goes one in front as I feel I have some control if a situation arises. Its more of a fear of will the car behind see me , especially on some fast A roads that I use from time to time. Tonight was a good example when a bus made a close pass scaring me witless. I feel that my lights are plenty bright enough and very noticeable but after tonight,s little scare I'm thinking of upping the Aunty with another rear light.I would be quite happy to dress my bike in an array of christmas light if it were to ease my paranoia of not being seen, but we all know this is not really the right way forward. Looking in my box of bike spares I've dug out a moon comet rear light and it fits rather nicely to my helmet. Would you agree or differ that a rear light on a helmet is a good safe guard to use in conjunction with my seat post mounted light.
> All the very best,
> Johnny :-)


I bought myself a small cat eye handlebar mirror so I can watch (to a certain extent ) what's coming and how it's coming behind me!


----------



## classic33 (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5021686, member: 9609"]yes - I don't think the yellow material is that much use at night, probably better than dark colour- but the hiViz reflective strips always stand out well at night[/QUOTE]
Under sodium lighting, Hi-Vis washes out.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

Bazzer said:


> Good luck with that argument. The police have failed to take any action against drivers who have taken me out (twice), in broad day light, the first of which I was wearing a hi viz jacket. And there are many others on here who will have had similar experiences and had far more serious injuries than I suffered.
> 
> The OP referenced a bus making a close pass. Personal opinion, but if a driver can't see a modern LED bulb or array mounted to a seat post or seat bag and pass the rider accordingly, I don't see that distracting them by being lit up like a Christmas tree is going to make any difference. - Particularly when commonly there are other reflective elements on the bike or on your person, whether they be seat post reflector, mudguards, pedals, rain jacket, back of your shoes, back of your leggings etc, all which are designed and incorporated into the item to bring a cyclist to a driver's attention.
> 
> The same lack of attention by some motorists to cyclists, can also be experienced by oncoming traffic. For example, there are sections of road on my commute which for quite long stretches have very little street lighting and a long section with no street lighting at all. IME, whether I have illuminated one front light, or two, (one with 5 LEDs which produces a light scatter and one with a powerful single bulb, with a directed beam), or one with a flasher and one fixed, makes no difference to the oncoming tw@ts, who decide that my retinas should feel the force of their headlight full beams.


I'm really sorry to hear you have been involved in more than one incident, even worse that the police saw fit to do nothing about it, that must have been horrible. I can't help but think your theory that I'm somehow distracting drivers by my helmet lights a tad ridiculous when you consider the sheer amount and positioning of lights on something like a modern artic or even the average moving signs we see in our cities now. Also, I've already stated that more cars seem to dip their headlights for me so as they are obviously not exactly sure what's coming towards them. If you don't rate it, that's fine, but in my area I feel it gives me the best chance of success.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> Yeah, they'll just argue that all your lights confused them.


Yeah, I would be interested to hear what your average city dwelling judge made of that.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5021597, member: 9609"]I did a omparison test at the end of the nights ride - the HiViz is def worth it after dark
View attachment 381156


here is the vid, first 30 seconds going and coming back with hiviz, the last half repeated without
the van lights are on dip

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCgH92sG5Ng[/QUOTE]

The thing is you can see your lights a long long time before the reflectives. So they do not add anything in terms of being seen earlier. So I am not sure what they add.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5021769, member: 9609"]I wonder if I am using the wrong terminology here - I'm thinking Hi-Viz refers to the reflective strips, but I'm now thinking hiviz is just the bright colour and the reflective strips are reflective strips.[/QUOTE]
It's both. 

http://www.siteking.co.uk/blog/importance-of-hi-vis/


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> Yeah, I would be interested to hear what your average city dwelling judge made of that.


IIRC, if it gets to a judge, the driver loses as long as the bike has lights and its rider didn't do anything illegal, pretty much, because they're meant to drive so they can stop within what they can see to be clear. The problem is it might not get that far.


----------



## Bodhbh (31 Oct 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> The thing is you can see your lights a long long time before the reflectives. So they do not add anything in terms of being seen earlier. So I am not sure what they add.



Potentially a bit of insurance when both of your back lights go on the blink at once. I know it's not very likely, but I've had enough problems with loose connections, things falling off and things going out out of power over the years to know it's not completely ridiculous. The other thing, if the reflectives are on panniers at least they give a hint that you're a 'wide load'.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> IIRC, if it gets to a judge, the driver loses as long as the bike has lights and its rider didn't do anything illegal, pretty much, because they're meant to drive so they can stop within what they can see to be clear. The problem is it might not get that far.


If that's the case, surly your earlier point is moot?


----------



## Tim Hall (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> It's both.
> 
> http://www.siteking.co.uk/blog/importance-of-hi-vis/


Hurrah! Someone else who agrees with me on HiVis terminology.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

Tim Hall said:


> Hurrah! Someone else who agrees with me on HiVis terminology.


I wouldn't celebrate too much, it usually means your wrong.


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> If that's the case, surly your earlier point is moot?


I don't see why. It might not get to a judge.


----------



## Slick (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> I don't see why. It might not get to a judge.


What would be the point of arguing my lights confused them if it wasn't in front of the beak?


----------



## mjr (31 Oct 2017)

Slick said:


> What would be the point of arguing my lights confused them if it wasn't in front of the beak?


Persuade the police not to pass it to the CPS, persuade the CPS not to pursue it, persuade a jury not to convict, persuade your insurer or your bereaved family to settle, ... oh and I'm not saying it'll succeed often. Just that they'll try.


----------



## classic33 (31 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> Persuade the police not to pass it to the CPS, persuade the CPS not to pursue it, persuade a jury not to convict, *persuade* your insurer or *your bereaved family* to settle, ... oh and I'm not saying it'll succeed often. Just that they'll try.


How would you manage that one?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (1 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5021978, member: 9609"]...hopefully the hiviz and reflective tape would distinguish me from an empty coal sack blowing about, and hopefully there would be less chance of being drove over[/QUOTE]

I have a colleague who uses that logic to wear all his lighting on his head & body, rather than on the bike.


----------



## Johnno260 (2 Nov 2017)

Many of the walkers near me use a high vis jacket that also has lights on it.

My self, I use standard rear light, there is a button light on my saddle bag, and I use an Endura Luminate jacket that has a light in it as well.

I also picked up some snap on wrist bands from amazon (red and green) that I use so people can see hand signals.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Namsan-Bra...&ie=UTF8&qid=1509624162&sr=1-5&keywords=BSeen


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5021978, member: 9609"]the reflective tape greatly increases the area lit up, so hopefully more noticeable. It gives definition and makes it clearer earlier that it is a human being (I would hope that would help but may be not), and if all my lights were to fail without me knowing then I am still sort of lit up to cars and trucks that may pass me.

And also, and I was just thinking this the night as I was going along unlit roads with a near useless front light that does not highlight large stones ot pot holes; If i was to come off and left lying on the road away from my bike and its lights, hopefully the hiviz and reflective tape would distinguish me from an empty coal sack blowing about, and hopefully there would be less chance of being drove over.[/QUOTE]

It would be better if you had a decent front light mounted correctly on the bike rather than relying on teflected light. After all, all orher vehicles rely on their lights. I rely cannot see that hiviz adds anything over good effective lights correctly mounted on your bike.


----------



## SuperHans123 (2 Nov 2017)

I have an Abus Hyban+ Helmet with a rear light on it, a light on my Altura Night Vision jacket and 2 COB LED lights; one steady one flashing on the seatpost.


----------



## summerdays (2 Nov 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> It would be better if you had a decent front light mounted correctly on the bike rather than relying on teflected light. After all, all orher vehicles rely on their lights. I rely cannot see that hiviz adds anything over good effective lights correctly mounted on your bike.


Reflective material is good when lit by headlights, and so can add to your visibility from the side. Some lights really only project light in a narrow beam, and none to the side.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Nov 2017)

summerdays said:


> Reflective material is good when lit by headlights, and so can add to your visibility from the side. Some lights really only project light in a narrow beam, and none to the side.



But surely if they are pulling out as you pass it is too late as they did not see you from the front and have already entered your road space?


----------



## pjd57 (2 Nov 2017)

The flashing lights that people are putting on dogs are good on unlit paths.
Along the canal in the dark last night and it made life a bit more comfortable.


----------



## classic33 (3 Nov 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> But surely if they are pulling out as you pass it is too late as they did not see you from the front and have already entered your road space?


One reason it's required by law for people working on/near the roads, sometimes in poor light, is down to the reflective material in use.


----------



## summerdays (3 Nov 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> But surely if they are pulling out as you pass it is too late as they did not see you from the front and have already entered your road space?


Who says they did pull out? I'm not asking you to wear them.... it's for you to look on the road and see for yourself which things help you to identify a cyclist better/sooner. I've felt I've noticed the reflective material therefore I'm happy to wear it.


----------



## Will Spin (3 Nov 2017)

Regarding helmet lights; When I was working I spent several years commuting by car about 35 miles each way on mainly single carriageway country roads, which were mostly unlit. Once or twice I was momentarily confused by a cyclist's helmet mounted rear light, the reason for this is that the light appears higher in the windscreen and at about the same level as a car's light would appear if that car was much further down the road. So initial reaction is- not cyclist but car or motorbike much further away than the cyclist.


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Nov 2017)

The OP gives context.


johnnyb47 said:


> I'm thinking of upping the Aunty with another rear light.. . . . Would you agree or differ that a rear light on a helmet is a good safe guard to use in conjunction with my seat post mounted light.





Will Spin said:


> Once or twice I was momentarily confused by a cyclist's helmet mounted rear light,


Didn't the (hopefully higher power and maybe flashing) red light that you could also see immediately below the helmet mounted red light make that a fleeting moment of confusion. Or are you saying this as a concern for those who think a helmet light alone is rear lighting enough?


----------



## Will Spin (3 Nov 2017)

Ajax Bay said:


> The OP gives context.
> 
> 
> Didn't the (hopefully higher power and maybe flashing) red light that you could also see immediately below the helmet mounted red light make that a fleeting moment of confusion. Or are you saying this as a concern for those who think a helmet light alone is rear lighting enough?


On each occasion the cyclist only had the helmet light and I that the helmet mounted rear light is not enough and that it should be used along with another lower mounted light. The same confusion could occur with a helmet mounted front light as I think motorists will be expecting a light to be mounted lower down.


----------



## Slick (3 Nov 2017)

Will Spin said:


> Regarding helmet lights; When I was working I spent several years commuting by car about 35 miles each way on mainly single carriageway country roads, which were mostly unlit. Once or twice I was momentarily confused by a cyclist's helmet mounted rear light, the reason for this is that the light appears higher in the windscreen and at about the same level as a car's light would appear if that car was much further down the road. So initial reaction is- not cyclist but car or motorbike much further away than the cyclist.




I'm not being funny or anything, but have you seen how far off the ground some of these trucks have lights? You don't see many drivers going in to the back of them.


----------



## Slick (3 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5025738, member: 9609"]Hmmm - I have two lights side by side on my bike, an inch apart, may be someone might think I'm a distant car and accelerate to catch it up.[/QUOTE]

I'm not following. (Pardon the pun)


----------



## Slick (3 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5025777, member: 9609"]as a car in front gets further away the lights appear closer together - I was taking the logic of the post you were answering a bit further.

anyway, flashing lights should identify a cyclist as a cyclist - i hope.[/QUOTE]
I'm not being obtuse, but I honestly can't see the correlation in a real life scenario, even after reading NickNick post.


----------



## classic33 (3 Nov 2017)

Slick said:


> I'm not being obtuse, but I honestly can't see the correlation in a real life scenario, even after reading NickNick post.


Two street lights, viewed from 100 yards will appear further apart than when viewed at four - five times the distance.

The distance between them hasn't changed, but the distance between you and them has.


----------



## Slick (3 Nov 2017)

classic33 said:


> Two street lights, viewed from 100 yards will appear further apart than when viewed at four - five times the distance.
> 
> The distance between them hasn't changed, but the distance between you and them has.


To be honest, I get the theory, I just don't get how any driver is going to confuse the difference.


----------



## johnnyb47 (3 Nov 2017)

As a driver myself I think the thing that catches my attention at night are something that's out of place on the road. Things that you don't expect to see or uninformed. Most car lights are are symmetrical ,and although you notice them and take heed of there presence they generally look all the same. On a bike though,a cyclist is much more vulnerable in the event of a collision ,and think lights that can grab a motorist attention by being unusually positioned makes a driver look twice by wondering what's going on ahead. Flashing lights that are not synchronised , coloured lights on wheels that are popular with children and dare I say it helmet lights. As a rider naturally turns his head checking the road ahead, a rear helmet light will fluctuate in intensity, From a distance, I as a driver will see a bright light one second then a faint light ,as well as looking unusual in proportion to the steady seat post light. It immediately grabs my attention and will the focus my attention on the cyclist. With all things said though, if everybody were to light there bike up like Christmas trees, and use unusual lights in cycle heavy areas like London they would not stand out anymore. Out here in the country though were cyclists are less common at night I think it would be affective. When cars first started using high level third brake lights they stood out a mile compared to the older cars without them. Nowadays though virtually all cars have them, and they don't generally grab you now like they once did. Only the expensive cars with their crazy futuristic led designs grab my undivine attention by they unusual appearance.


----------



## Bazzer (3 Nov 2017)

Slick said:


> I'm not being funny or anything, but have you seen how far off the ground some of these trucks have lights? You don't see many drivers going in to the back of them.



The ones I recall seeing do not go from bumper level to the top of the lorry with nothing in between, but rather are in sequence with others. Also, as I recall, the lights are in parallel with those on the opposite near/opposite side. Both of which I would imagine, although I am not an ocular expert, would allow the brain to "fill in the gaps", as it were.

IME high level lights are difficult to judge. For example, by cycling a mile or so I can see the Winter Hill transmitter, At night, with its illuminated mast, it looks a couple of miles away. It is in fact many more than that.



johnnyb47 said:


> As a driver myself I think the thing that catches my attention at night are something that's out of place on the road. Things that you don't expect to see or uninformed. Most car lights are are symmetrical ,and although you notice them and take heed of there presence they generally look all the same. On a bike though,a cyclist is much more vulnerable in the event of a collision ,and think lights that can grab a motorist attention by being unusually positioned makes a driver look twice by wondering what's going on ahead. Flashing lights that are not synchronised , coloured lights on wheels that are popular with children and dare I say it helmet lights. As a rider naturally turns his head checking the road ahead, a rear helmet light will fluctuate in intensity, From a distance, I as a driver will see a bright light one second then a faint light ,as well as looking unusual in proportion to the steady seat post light. It immediately grabs my attention and will the focus my attention on the cyclist. With all things said though, if everybody were to light there bike up like Christmas trees, and use unusual lights in cycle heavy areas like London they would not stand out anymore. Out here in the country though were cyclists are less common at night I think it would be affective. *When cars first started using high level third brake lights they stood out a mile compared to the older cars without them. Nowadays though virtually all cars have them, and they don't generally grab you now like they once did.* Only the expensive cars with their crazy futuristic led designs grab my undivine attention by they unusual appearance.



I may be mistaken, but I thought this came from Scandinavia. I don't think the purpose is to grab your attention, but to allow you to see the car in front of the car in front of you braking. The time, from a split to few seconds, might save you from rear ending the car immediately in front of you.


----------



## Slick (3 Nov 2017)

Bazzer said:


> The ones I recall seeing do not go from bumper level to the top of the lorry with nothing in between
> 
> Actually, some of them do, in fact a lot of them do.


----------



## snorri (3 Nov 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> lights that can grab a motorist attention by being unusually positioned makes a driver look twice by wondering what's going on ahead.


Yes,I agree and whilst the driver is distracted and irritated by your amazing light array, he fails to spot me with my legal lights and crashes into me.
Could it be that you wish to be engaged in the lighting equivalent of an arms race?


----------



## Slick (3 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5026191, member: 9609"]I don't think my joke has been widely understood, I'll get my coat  - it made me laugh though [/QUOTE]
Ha ha, as long as you laughed. 

Sorry I missed it. Lol


----------



## Ming the Merciless (3 Nov 2017)

summerdays said:


> Who says they did pull out? I'm not asking you to wear them.... it's for you to look on the road and see for yourself which things help you to identify a cyclist better/sooner. I've felt I've noticed the reflective material therefore I'm happy to wear it.



Because you talk about reflectives being good for side visibility. But it will only reflect back at them once you are caught in their headlights. Which means you are passing the junction they are at. So if they are only seeing you as you pass the junction. It is too late to stop their manuever as they did not see you approaching along the primary road despite your high viz and lights. They are not going to react in time when you appear in their lights only a few feet in front of them.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (3 Nov 2017)

classic33 said:


> One reason it's required by law for people working on/near the roads, sometimes in poor light, is down to the reflective material in use.



Fine but they do not have lights mounted. The question is, what benefit does it have if you are already lit up correctly?


----------



## classic33 (3 Nov 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> Fine but they do not have lights mounted. The question is, what benefit does it have if you are already lit up correctly?


If there's no lights being used how are they "lit up correctly"?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (3 Nov 2017)

classic33 said:


> If there's no lights being used how are they "lit up correctly"?



Well they are not. A reasonably static worker in the road wearing reflectives is not the same need as a correctly lit up cyclist moving quickly along the road. So one does not lead to the other and vice versa.


----------



## classic33 (3 Nov 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> Well they are not. A reasonably static worker in the road wearing reflectives is not the same need as a correctly lit up cyclist moving quickly along the road. So one does not lead to the other and vice versa.


Often moving onto the road via parked traffic. Both are still people, and in the case of "a reasonably static worker", they'll be the one to come off worse.


----------



## mjr (3 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5026378, member: 9609"]here is a direct comparison, if you don't think one is more visible than the other then fair enough, but this little experiment has convinced me.
View attachment 381631
[/QUOTE]
Why's it convinced you? Would you really run one of them over?

Isn't this "more visible" misleading ploy the equivalent of using hitting oneself on the head with a hammer to promote a certain other so-called safety measure that doesn't reduce casualties significantly?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Nov 2017)

classic33 said:


> Often moving onto the road via parked traffic. Both are still people, and in the case of "a reasonably static worker", they'll be the one to come off worse.



But they do not wear lights do they? Not comparable to a bike heading in the direction of the road, clearly visible from a long way via their lights.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Nov 2017)

[QUOTE 5026378, member: 9609"]here is a direct comparison, if you don't think one is more visible than the other then fair enough, but this little experiment has convinced me.
View attachment 381631
[/QUOTE]

What do you mean by more visible? Either they are visible (as in you notice them) or you do not. Seem equally visible to me.


----------



## Levo-Lon (4 Nov 2017)

I pass a guy most mornings who has a light on the back of his lid and the usual saddle light.
I think it works well.

What does make me chuckle is the rear light on the seat post and a nice long coat covering it.
Idiots ride bikes and drive cars..sometimes they even walk


----------



## Suddabym (26 Jan 2019)

sight-pin said:


> This one even has built in speakers.
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Livall-Blu...1GHHXLX2/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_sims?ie=UTF8


I've just ordered that same helmet :-)


----------

