Hi-Viz / reflective - pros & cons.

[classic33]

But even then,careful looking and done with good intent might still mean the driver has trouble spotting the grey cyclist. Why not just wear something to make that driver's job a little easier? While the driver is analysing/looking carefully he's not looking elsewhere, which reduces his all round vision

Do you go for contrast or a bright colour though?

 

[derrick]

Are you lot not reading what is being posted

 

[Accy cyclist]

Do you go for contrast or a bright colour though?

Yes i find fluoro yellow and red or fluoro yellow and black are easier to see when i'm driving. I'm not saying all fluorescent is best. A black or any dark coloured top with fluorescent marking to me works just as well if not better.

 

[growingvegetables]

Anything that helps you be seen cant be bad

Sorry - but yes, it can. There is a tiny (how tiny?) minority who will use your improved visibility to "improve" their close-pass technique.

 

[biggs682]

Sorry - but yes, it can. There is a tiny (how tiny?) minority who will use your improved visibility to "improve" their close-pass technique.

you are right no matter how lit up you are some dum ass drivers still like to scrape the skin of your elbow

 

[ufkacbln]

It would i

If it is overcast I just put my rear light on.

Mine is on the bike

 

[ufkacbln]

If drivers can see yellow more easily and from a distance ... Why can't they see double yellow lines when they park?

 

[ufkacbln]

But even then,careful looking and done with good intent might still mean the driver has trouble spotting the grey cyclist. Why not just wear something to make that driver's job a little easier? While the driver is analysing/looking carefully he's not looking elsewhere, which reduces his all round vision

I do..... It is called a GoPro

You will be surprised how more visible you are, and how driving improves when they see they are being recorde

 

[Ajax Bay]

As said before if they are looking they will see you, if they are not looking they will hit you. simple.

Are you lot not reading what is being posted

@derrick Second part - you are right "if they are not looking they will hit you" but most drivers are 'looking' nearly all the time. So "if they are looking" they will see you earlier if you're wearing clothing which increases your visibility. And this thread surely seeks to explore whether there are optimal ways of doing that using hi-viz or reflective clothing and peripherally otherwise, and the extent to which cyclists should adopt such an approach - the pros and cons.

"if they are not looking they will hit you" that is a fatalistic approach as you cannot influence this, other than lobbying for greater society/community efforts to eradicate use by drivers of mobile communications devices, to improve other driving quality thresholds, and to design roads with cyclists in mind (list by no means complete or exclusive). One could add to make the use of (dipped) car headlights a legal requirement at all time: this would make the cyclists' reflective option more effective in daytime.

Why things are seen (with the most important last):
Shape - Shadow - Shine (texture) - Spacing - Silhouette - Movement

 

[steveindenmark]

When you look at how many tens of thousands of cycle rides are taken each day and how many accidents involving cyclists happen each day, the percentage is very small.

So this old chestnut that most drivers are not looking out for cyclists just does not make any sense but it is an something people come up with time and time again because they cannot think of anything else.

I am sure there are more car/car accidents than car / bike accidents. Does that mean they are not looking out for cars either. Or lorries, or buses?

Ajax are you an old military man :0)

 

[Drago]

It's an old chestnut, mainly because It's true. Drivers, like the rest of us suffer human frailties at best, are lazy at worst. It doesn't take long behind the wheel before driver lapse into a kind of autopilot and look without actually seeing. This is why advanced driving teaches drills that force the driver to look properly and register what they are seeing and not just go through the motions.

 

[ufkacbln]

In many cases it s not whether you are seen(or not) but the drivers inappropriate response

The classic is a "left hook" where the driver moves out to overtake and then turns across your path

Nothing is going to prevent these types of stupidity

 

[Arjimlad]

Part of my reasoning for putting on some bright clothing or a Sam Browne belt, is not wishing to give any negligent drivers an easy cop-out if I should be unfortunate enough to come a cropper.

I don't have any illusions that it will make me stand out to those who don't look properly.

 

[Ajax Bay]

@User "if", "could" "give and take". If you had a teenager who sought your advice (maybe your child or another's), would you recommend that they dress themselves generally in dull drab coloured clothing (let's allow black to be a colour for this purpose) or would you recommend that they consider and wear a brighter top and socks (say). Would you recommend that they avoid buying hi-viz items and/or clothing with reflective 'stripes' or logos on? Would your advice vary if the weather is bright or dull? Why? Because you don't like 'giving in' to the threat posed by careless drivers or because it's not aesthetic? I understand your argument: "nature of taking responsibility for cyclists' safety on our roads. Anything we give is taken as a norm" but I don't think wearing 'ninja invisibility' kit is going to help make the case. But I do think that, on the balance of probability and rationality, that the less visible cyclists are generally the more will get hit, because the hazard is not going away. The risk can be mitigated in a number of ways: clothing and lights are just two (the first being subject of this thread). @Accy cyclist and @biggs682 express this with admirable brevity.

 

[Drago]

There's a difference between everyday clothing in common colours, and wearing colours or tones that could be construed as camouflage. This is in much the same way there's a difference between a pink T shirt and 'hi vis' clothing.

I can't recommend hi vis on the basis that it works, but that doesn't mean that I - and others - recommend wearing clothes that could function as camouflage in the riding environment. In this case there's a fairly large middle ground, and not wanting to be at the hi vis end of the argument does not automatically mean we support the camouflage end of the subject.