david1701
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Bude, Cornwall
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
numbnuts
Legendary Member
- Location
- Gone over the hill and far away
Zoiders
New Member
- Location
- Ice Station Zebra
Well Raleigh must have made about 50k on these helmets so their now tiny little sales office will have hit the target this month.
Do you think the AA payed for them or is someone else behind all this?
Do you think the AA payed for them or is someone else behind all this?
asterix
Comrade Member
- Location
- Limoges or York
Not even the sodding Gendarmes wear high vis in France! Round here it's quite common to see cyclists with all the gear, a fancy bike, no helmet and wearing black from head to foot. Drivers don't hate cyclists round here, they give them a friendly wave!
Better than an Argos cheapie?
Was your Argos one less than £7? http://www.jjbsports.com/pws/ProductDetails.ice?ProductID=9296
Would you trust your life to a free £7 helmet? (insert more tedious helmet-related cliches here)
Davidc
Guru
- Location
- Somerset UK
I've never understood the logic of those who object to cyclists wearing hi viz and reflectives. Wearing them isn't anything at all to do with passing blame, or suggesting that cycling's dangerous, it is entirely to do with helping other road users by making yourself quicker and easier to spot. So is decent lighting. so is using lights in daytime when sensible to do so. It's simply a senible thing to do as a responsible road user. Many people who walk on rural roads also wear hi viz for the same reason.
Helmets are a different issue, as there is as much evidence to suggest that they worsen brain injuries as there is to suggest they help. Anyway there's precious little evidence for either and far too much anecdote. I suspect the AA are doing this for some good publicity, suggesting that they are promoting road safety. The chances of it being part of some conspiracy to make cycling look dangerous is about the same as that of winning a lottery jackpot. After all a three level calculation of that sort is asking a bit much of them.
There's just too much paranoia on the part of some cyclists.
Might as well, no piece of plastic and polysyrene is going to make much difference in a real crash.
The best protection is by avoiding crashing in the first place, and given the statistics you have to be very unlucky to be in a serious accident on a bicycle, so any one individual is unlikely to find out.
Helmets are a different issue, as there is as much evidence to suggest that they worsen brain injuries as there is to suggest they help. Anyway there's precious little evidence for either and far too much anecdote. I suspect the AA are doing this for some good publicity, suggesting that they are promoting road safety. The chances of it being part of some conspiracy to make cycling look dangerous is about the same as that of winning a lottery jackpot. After all a three level calculation of that sort is asking a bit much of them.
There's just too much paranoia on the part of some cyclists.
Might as well, no piece of plastic and polysyrene is going to make much difference in a real crash.
The best protection is by avoiding crashing in the first place, and given the statistics you have to be very unlucky to be in a serious accident on a bicycle, so any one individual is unlikely to find out.
numbnuts
Legendary Member
- Location
- Gone over the hill and far away
I wear a helmet, but I'm dammed if I will wear a hi viz vest if people can't see me they shouldn't be on the road
The AA's President has spent the last 2 days doing just that:
http://twitter.com/AAPresident
@thecyclingjim Gabby Roslin's partner was not in a race @brillmentor was not in a race. Helmets saved them.
Just done BBC London on cycle helmets. Gaby Roslin says helmet saved her partner David's life. James Cracknell agrees. Free AA helmets today
@gregorymarler CTC stunt back-fired as they forgot Highway Code is free on-line. Rule 59 YOU SHOULD WEAR A CYCLE HELMET. Did they read it?
@wwwicked It all depends where you are cycling and what risks you perceive. Wearing of seat-belts hasn't put off drivers
- @gregorymarler We have sent Norman Baker a helmet but respect that it is his choice if he wears it. http://twitter.com/AAPresident/status/58662173781667840
- @wwwicked It is a free choice. I have a helmet, I have an air bag but it doesnt mean I think everyone wants to crash into me. Safety for all
Rhythm Thief
Legendary Member
- Location
- Ross on Wye
That is, with due respect, a ridiculous attitude. After all, we all know that there are plenty of motorists out there who shouldn't be on the road, and the fact that they should have seen you is going to be very little consolation if one of them does drive into you. I respect the right of people to ride in what they want to ride in, but I can say as a driver that hi viz makes cyclists easier to spot from further away and (more importantly) easier to identify as a road user, rather than as a distant house security light or red traffic light.
Davidc
Guru
- Location
- Somerset UK
I have a helmet. I sometimes wear it. It is useful on the canal path where there are low bridges. It keeps my head warmer in cold weather. I take it off in hot weather.
I do not think it likely that the helmet will help if I have a serious crash. It keeps my wife happy.
If I have a serious crash the helmet is as likely to increase as decrease my injuries. I do not know as there is no evidence either way. Lots of worthless anecdote but no evidence at all that I am aware of.
If and when someone does some research, rigorously conducted and controlled, that demonstrates a real advantage or disadvantage I will take notice of it.
Unless that research is done and shows a clear benefit from helmet wearing I will be one of the helmetless thousands riding through London in protest if there is any law proposed to make the things compulsory. If they become compulsory I will stop wearing a helmet at all, and if stopped will be prepared to go through every court and appeal, provided I can find someone to back me financially, in order to overturn the law.
Cycling is extremely safe, and on the basis of relative safety of activities let's see protective clothing for pedestrians and people inside their homes, before cyclists
I agree, hi-vis is good. I was driving along an A-road at around 60mph recently in bright sunshine, spotted some hi-vis and slowed down as a result. It turned out to be a jogger on the pavement on the other side of the road.
Smokin Joe
Squire
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
A jogger, eh?
You should have swerved across the road and hit him with an open door.
The bastard.
OI!
I am a CTC member, and I have an anorak.
Frankly I dont care what you wear on your head
.... I also have a beard and sandals........
More seriously ......
The problem is not looking or simply not responding appropriately to what you see. Most accidents are nothing to do with whether the driver has seen the cyclist or not, it is the fact that they have overtaken inappropriately, failed to stop at a junction, or left hooked.
HiViz is totally ineffective in the scenarios where most accidents occur.
In my humble experience I find an AirZound a much more effective safety aid han HiViz
The problem is not looking or simply not responding appropriately to what you see. Most accidents are nothing to do with whether the driver has seen the cyclist or not, it is the fact that they have overtaken inappropriately, failed to stop at a junction, or left hooked.
HiViz is totally ineffective in the scenarios where most accidents occur.
In my humble experience I find an AirZound a much more effective safety aid han HiViz
danphoto
New Member
- Location
- East Sussex
- Status
