Get some f*****g lights!!!!

[Rhythm Thief]

What one thing makes a cyclist look like a cyclist from far away? certainly not hi-viz, as many people wear hi-viz on the road, be them police or people working on the road.

Good flashing LEDs are about the best thing, in my opinion. They shout "cyclist" like nothing else. Hi viz helps because it gives a shape to whatever is behind the lights. Hi viz on its own could be anyone - pedestrian, roadworker, whatever - but coupled with reasonable lights it helps identify a cyclist.

 

[ufkacbln]

Of course there is a real question as to whether I actually want to be identified as a cyclist anyway!

Lots of motorists will react inappropriately as soon as they see a cyclist. If you keep them confused then they have to slow down, observe and make decisions.

 

[asterix]

If they choose by their own free will to ride on public roads without lights during the hours of darkness and they get kncked off, then as far as I am concerned that is just hard luck.

Don't tell Jeremy Claxon!

 

[Alien8]

I have never heard of a cyclist being stopped/fined for not have reflectors/reflective-wear.

I have never heard the baying-mob demand the heads of cyclists because "they all ride at night without reflectors/reflective-wear".

I have never heard anyone say to a cyclist "Get some f*****g reflectors/reflective-wear".

This suggests to me that the roll of reflectors (and reflective-wear) are very much secondary to lights in terms of a cyclist's visibility.

[Yes, legislation still demands reflectors in a pre-described form - but it's not obvious to me why.]

All this business about being identifiable as a cyclist, as opposed to just another road user, deflects the responsibility of all road users to be responsible for themselves, their vehicle and how they use that vehicle on the highway.

If you see a white or red light it is your responsibility to take appropriate action, eg slow down, until you can clearly identify the source of the light and act accordingly.

As long as your lights satisfy any legislative requirements that is enough. There will always be an argument that extra lights, reflective this and that etc, can in certain situations be beneficial but this will all be minor compared to having a set of lights that satisfy the requirements of the law.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Alien8 I can pretty well guarantee that if I rode my commuter with my full ninja outfit inc. reflectives without lights on an urban commute no one would shout anything at me about the lack of lights such is the WTF? effectiveness of multiple moving reflectors/reflectives. Impossible to miss, if you're looking, when driving a car and following or approaching me more or less head on.

But the lights need to be present for the junctions, and on the rural unlit part of the commute, when I want to be visible and identifiable as a (vulnerable) road user, well before a vehicle's headlights act on the reflective surfaces.

 

[Norm]

I had my first daytime ride with the new Exposure Flare today. I had it placed fairly high on my rucksack. All vehicles, except one bus, gave me noticeably more room, both behind me before pulling out, and when they were overtaking.

I know I shouldn't attribute the space I was left to the new light, and a sample size of one journey wouldn't stand up to much scrutiny, but I was wondering all the way into town why I was getting more space, it was only when I caught the reflection of myself in a shop window that I remembered the Flare was on there.

 

[ufkacbln]

I have twin Dinottes, each about 8 times the brightness of the Flare, and drivers cannot see (or rather react appropriately)

 

[BentMikey]

Hiviz is also known as urban camoflage, LOL!


I'm also very sceptical of being seen as a cyclist, especially at night. It's an invitation for drivers to be less careful than they would otherwise be.

 

[summerdays]

I've been in the car a couple of times more than normal recently and been thinking about this thread and so I've been noticing the cyclists and how they have caught my attention, everything from the all in black on the pavement, to the motorcyclist who actually had more lights (red/yellow/blue/red) than my Christmas tree - he got the most WTF reaction and we slowed right down... partly out of curiosity as well. There was the one I spotted with a yellow not really bright top but spotted them before noticing the light - which was of medium brightness I guess. Then last night going around a slight bend in a road noticed a cyclist ahead through the tree trunks as the car caught their builders jacket type hi-vis well before noticing the light. And I guess that is one of the plus points for hi-vis - usually lights are at their brightest when directly in line with the lights.

I think you have to look yourself at how you spot cyclists and remember that we as cyclists are probably better at it than non-cyclists. Look at your route/conditions - it will differ depending on whether you are riding in town with lots of lights and conflicting bits of information, to in the countryside which I don't tend to do as a townie. It also probably varies whether you are cycling in a place with lots of cyclists verses being the only one for miles around. I prefer them to realise I'm a cyclist as I'm not the fastest of cyclists and they will quickly catch up from behind and so use the not fully hi-vis coat - pink rather than yellow and add the reflective ankle straps which I think are really good at catching the attention with the movement. But in the same way that I don't want to see a helmet law, I don't want to see a law saying we must wear hi-vis.

 

[asterix]

From October 1, 2008, French cyclists have been required to wear high vis at night or when visibility is poor else they will incur a fine.

It's also the case that motorists must carry high vis for use when broken down. Ironically IME it very rare to see a gendarme wearing one!

 

[Jezston]

By 'hivis' do they mean luminous or reflectives?

 

[BentMikey]

Hiviz has always meant both together. They are supposed to counter each others' weaknesses.

 

[Glow worm]

I'm also very sceptical of being seen as a cyclist, especially at night. It's an invitation for drivers to be less careful than they would otherwise be.

Drivers always bang on about us lot being inconspicuous through lack of lights/ high-viz, yet today, travelling by car down from Fakenham to Newmarket through dense freezing fog this morning, it was just incredible the number of cars driving without any lights on at all. They were almost completely invisible in the gloom.

 

[gaz]

Hiviz has always meant both together. They are supposed to counter each others' weaknesses.

And cycling specific clothing, like jackets, rarely come with enough reflective material

 

[Debian]

I think you have to look yourself at how you spot cyclists and remember that we as cyclists are probably better at it than non-cyclists. Look at your route/conditions - it will differ depending on whether you are riding in town with lots of lights and conflicting bits of information, to in the countryside which I don't tend to do as a townie. It also probably varies whether you are cycling in a place with lots of cyclists verses being the only one for miles around. I prefer them to realise I'm a cyclist as I'm not the fastest of cyclists and they will quickly catch up from behind and so use the not fully hi-vis coat - pink rather than yellow and add the reflective ankle straps which I think are really good at catching the attention with the movement. But in the same way that I don't want to see a helmet law, I don't want to see a law saying we must wear hi-vis.

This is what I said in my summary a couple of pages back.

I've been in the car much more than usual recently and I too have been analysing what helps me spot cyclists best which resulted in my previous summary. This works for me.