do hi viz vests/jackets work ?

[hackbike 666]

Cant really answer ATM waffly as im posting from a mobile phone and am finding it difficult.

 

[Eat MY Dust]

EMD we all know that Hi-Viz can be inneffective in certain situations and is no guarentee you have been seen.

That was the point I was trying to make. The irony is that on one occasion last week I had a very close night time SMIDSY where further down the road I had a driver have a go for my lights being too bright. You can't win sometimes.

 

[summerdays]

One thing I know is that I keep getting people tell me how visible I am ... this week alone at least 2 people have commented on my hi-vis (fluro and reflective) jacket and how I can be seen from afar - one comment was in day time and one at night and I didn't know either of them.

 

[wafflycat]

Yup - I've had folk tell me how visible I am day & night, due to daytime fluorescent jacket & night time lights + reflectives. But there's no guarantee if you have an ultra myopic moron behind the wheel of a vehicle. They do, however, assist in ensuring an errant motorist has absolutely no excuse of "SMIDSY, if only you'd been wearing..." even though they should not been able to used as a way of excusing bad drivers.

Edit: watching a prog some time ago about plod following up 'accidents' there was one about a cyclist who was hospitalised by driver of HGVwhilst cycling in the dark. Driver was doing the full SMIDSY saying cyclist had no lights, no reflectives etc., etc. During the examination of the cxase by plod, it came to light that the cyclist was wearing high vis + reflectives and had working lights. I got the distinct impression that if this wasn't *proved* that the driver would have had his word taken over and above that of the cyclist and that the driver would have got off with it. As it was, he was able to avoid going to court as he went on a driver retraining course. No points on licence... no fine... nada. It was disconcerting.

 

[tyred]

I find it hard to believe there is anyone who would think Hi-Viz is a bad idea. As I go around the place, on foot, on bicycle or by car, anyone in a hi-viz jacket with reflective stripes is always much more visible than someone who isn't.

Not a cycling issue as a bike should have lights at night but I live in the country and am constantly amazed at the amount of people who walk/jog on unlit roads while wearing black. They are very difficult to spot if you're driving.

 

[hackbike 666]

Im agreeing with you,

Sorry col i just meant in general.

 

[hackbike 666]

Perhaps you can show where I stated wearing black & having no lights was the only alternative to fluorescents and reflectives? You can't - because I didn't. Nor did I say or imply that the wearing of high-viz or reflectives is a bad thing. Indeed when I cycle at night I am lit up like the proverbial Christmas tree due to the number of lights & amount of reflectives on self and bike. And I have a few fluorescent tops I wear for daytime cycling. So don't twist what I said.

Fluorescents (high-visibility) require ultraviolet radiation to work - funnily enough, the main source of this, the sun, tends not to be working during hours of darkness. To be seen bright colours are *not* high-viz, fluorescents are. But flourescents do *not* work as high-visibility clothing when worn at night. Reflectives do work during hours of darkness by reflecting back.

By all means wear high viz (fluorescent) at night if you want but don't think it is going to work properly at night - it can't. Reflectives are what work at night. And don't think that non-fluorescent colours are high-viz, because they aren't, they may be bright, but they are not high-viz

Ok fair enough and apologies if I offended.

Yup - I've had folk tell me how visible I am day & night, due to daytime fluorescent jacket & night time lights + reflectives. But there's no guarantee if you have an ultra myopic moron behind the wheel of a vehicle. They do, however, assist in ensuring an errant motorist has absolutely no excuse of "SMIDSY, if only you'd been wearing..." even though they should not been able to used as a way of excusing bad drivers.

Yes,I think there is a bad attitude out there and everyone is in such a hurry.

 

[HJ]

My experience is that wearing black and using seriously bright lights is more effective than wearing Hi-Viz and using bog standard cycle lights. If you really want to be seen buy really bright set of lights, yes they are expensive but they are also much more effective...

 

[hackbike 666]

Halogen I assume?

 

[purplepolly]

So there I was cycling through the hospital grounds in the dark this morning (it is recommended on the council cycle maps), with a hope vision 1 on high setting, a cateye on flash and a 2-tone hi-viz waistcoat with reflective stripes. Got smidsy'ed by an ambulance pulling out of a&e but just avoided a collision. When it started off it was facing me before turning onto the road so the headlights must have been on my jacket.

On the other hand, I've often observed the local buses cutting it really fine when overtaking cyclists but they've always given me loads of room.

 

[hackbike 666]

Perhaps the ambulance was after his next client,im always tempted to say this to them when they tit about..Bet they heard it before though.

On the other hand, I've often observed the local buses cutting it really fine when overtaking cyclists but they've always given me loads of room.

Yeah I have a mixed bag really.

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

They definitely work, I spend my working day crossing roads running in the road behind vehicles, working as a banks man on busy main roads, and then cycling to and from work and around locally in high viz gear and as yet have come no where near to being hit when in full view of vehicles, previous to this I worked as a HGV driver (and the next bit is why I always wear hi viz) I can say that someone in high viz can be noticed at least 4 times or more ( not a scientific measurement) as far away as someone wearing normal clothing, you just see high viz as a hazard immediately it doesn't blend in as any normal colour in the landscape and you know it’s a person, exactly as it is designed not to blend in , anti camouflage so to speak.

Living proof is the fact that you never as a rule remember the incident when you came no where near hitting someone as you saw them miles before hand but always remember the person /car you nearly or did hit when you didn't see them ! In that way high viz is invisible because of its high visibility, you just never remember seeing it.

It still never fails to amaze me the amount of serious cyclists who think that black or dark colours are acceptable on a bicycle. The way I see it is if you don’t protect yourself how can you expect anyone else to!

Of course if the driver/ped, cyclist ain't looking your way their not gonna see ya!

Remember the average car driver drives first and looks second!

 

[hackbike 666]

Saw quite a few cyclists tonight and it's surprising how many have poor lights if any lights at all.Some wear some sort of Hi-Viz.

I meant to ask my workmate if he could tell me how all my hi viz stuff was like as he travelled by taxi to work last week.

 

[summerdays]

I was out in the car last night as a passenger which gave me a chance to look at other cyclists... you are right that some have some pathetic lights... some don't ... at one point I looked around for an emergency vehicle due to a strong flashing light... then realised it was a cyclist going the opposite way on a dual carriageway

One thing I did notice was that a lady who was wearing dark clothing who filtered ahead at traffic lights almost disappeared when you couldn't see her light because of the cars between us, whereas a man with a high vis vest (flu/reflective), was visible in the gaps between cars. It made a point for having a light on your body or helmet and/or hi vis.

 

[botchjob]

I love the hi-viz and/or helmet debate. Each to their own. In my younger days, with the wind in my hair and sun on my back, I used neither, and am still around to tell the tale. But now that I’m a little older, perhaps wiser, with a Mrs Botchjob and kids in tow, I err on the side of caution. However marginal and debatable the benefits, I would feel a right twunt if I cycled into the afterlife simply because of something I could have done but didn’t.

I’d also lay money that most of the loudest anti-helmet/viz brigade don’t have kids. It’s hard to argue against helmets if you make your kids wear them. And Mrs Botchjob would have a few words to say if I tried to argue that our kids shouldn’t wear helmets because a study in Tasmania by Dr Quack-Quack had provided marginal evidence that in some cases in some accidents it might just be debatable that wearing a helmet has little benefit. But as I say, each to their own. Helmetless ninja cyclists in dark clothing look so cool, after all.