Most overated cycle products

[Fiona N]

Perhaps you haven't bought enough Shutt VR to realise how $hit it is .......

Now this suggests you've bought a lot because it's also taken you a long time

But more seriously - what's you beef? I find the material does what it says - wooly on the inside, harder-wearing synthetic layer on the outside, versatile in a range of conditions, seaming it good, length good, great pockets, adequate zip, maybe could use a bit more reflective piping but then again I'm buying them because I like the retro look (reminds me of my first cycling jerseys back when then came in itchy wool and more itchy wool - which isn't a problem with my new Shutt jerseys). Not the cheapest but then I tend to buy fairly carefully and then keep stuff in good nick for quite a few years so I've got several 10+ year-old jerseys (main problem is I've got too fat for the sleeker fitting ones ) and I can see the Shutt ones will be in the same vein...

 

[threebikesmcginty]

A Brooks lets me ride long distances (for me) without padded shorts...For me, well, I'll ride a plastic saddle when I start wearing plastic shoes and gloves.

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZkXFIf2iow[/media]


Not only a song, but written for this very situation. Probably.

"don't give me no plastic saddle, I like to feel the leather when i ride"

 

[youngoldbloke]

Oversocks - just not tough enough to allow any walking off the bike. You can wreck a pair in seconds.

 

[barongreenback]

Bless. I'm so touched by the attitudes of drivers who 'notice' things like me. It seems like an implicit admission that a driver isn't actually actively looking for cyclists but is bimbling along concentrating, if it can be called that, on the important stuff, like HGV's, who else in the jam has a better car, the legs on the pedestrian passer by, or the driver's mobile phone call, etc.. But I'm sure that is not what you meant.

~Turing to your main point. The little available research suggests otherwise. Some even suggests that in the dark black+reflectives on moving parts of body/bike is more effective. Some even suggests that in certain light conditions low sun, wet road, hi-viz is part of the problem.

Either way, if they ain't looking they ain't goinna see you, no matter what, and if they are looking you don't need hi-viz. Seeing someone a mile off in their flourescent outfit is no guarantee you'll remember them once they are within your effective stopping distance or give them 3ft as you pass them. ime anyway.

Greg, with all due respect it sounds like you're so utterly anti-motorist that you can't see the wood for the trees (or the hi-viz dressed cyclist for the ninjas ) I drive 35,000 miles a year and I consider myself a considerate motorist. I cycle to work when I can in Birmingham, which I don't consider to be a cyclist friendly city by any means. Cyclists are a smaller object and therefore more difficult to spot. And whilst if you're lucky you get nice drivers like me who are prepared to hang back or overtake with a decent amount of space, cyclists aren't in the active thought of many motorists. Can you point me towards this research? It's very much at odds with my own experience.

Anyway, this is in danger of turning into a helmet debate!!!