Hi-Vis OR Lights

[tyred]

I would use both but without a doubt, lights are the most important.

 

[ianrauk]

Hi Viz is not that effective at night anyway. Under sodium street lighting it just get's washed out just as normal colours do.
If he thinks he's safe cycling at night without lights then he's heading for a Darwin award.

 

[I like Skol]

The reflective tape only reflects light from a certain angle, basically the light you shine at it is only shined back in the same plane it came from. So street lights don't reflect their lights to car drivers behind or in front of him.

^^^^^^^ this is the right and scientific answer^^^^^^^^^

When I began commuting by bicycle I ordered an expensive hi-vis water proof with reflective strips as the nights began to draw in. To test it I pranced around my poorly lit street while my wife sat in our car watching. As suspected, she couldn't really see me very well until the reflective strips were directly within the lights beam pattern (which, considering properly adjusted headlights should shine no higher than hip level, isn't very good) and hi-viz is only hi-viz in broad daylight, something to do with using the UV element of daylight to enhance the brightness I think. At night under typical artificial light those bright yellow hi-vis garments are no more use than any other light coloured clothing.

I quickly returned my expensive cycle jacket and decided to stick with bright flashing lights to get noticed. Hi-vis is good during the day and reflectives are only good when they are in a direct light beam coming from the same direction as the viewers point of view.

Tell your mate he is an A1, 1st class, fully paid up, prize winning muppet!

 

[jonny jeez]

I only ever wear Hi viz in the rain or the dark. I accept that in the dark the soduim lights do wash everything with the same orage tint, but under car lights a high viz jacket does stand out. For that small reason, I opt to play the odds in my favour a little.

During the day (when some will say High viz works best) I opt not to wear it.

I dont really know why.

My lights never come off the bike and I happily switch them on during the day if it gets a little overcast, starts to rain or the road becomes very empty and fast.

 

[BentMikey]

There is a hiviz vest behind the white light on the right, and it has a similarly powerful light pointed at it:

This photo shows the same reflective jacket with illumination only from ambient light and the car at the t-junction. It's a fail:

 

[Kestevan]

Should hi-vis ever be used as a replacement/instead of lights for night time cycling. Is there any possible argument that due to street lighting, lights are not required?

The only possible argument for it is that it will eventually act as chlorine in the gene pool, and remove an idiot from the species.

 

[jonny jeez]

There is a hiviz vest behind the white light on the right, and it has a similarly powerful light pointed at it:

This photo shows the same reflective jacket with illumination only from ambient light and the car at the t-junction. It's a fail:

You need to shine a headlight at that jacket to give a true comparrison. I do understand the chap that "feels" he stands out more in a hiviz jacket...as BM's shots show, the option with a light seems to add to the general light pollution (in a photo...not a moving light/image) and, at a junction could be dismissed as something else. That said, at a junction the car driver would not get the effect of hi viz as their lights would not be pointing in the right direction.

Self illumination is the key!...I tried it...looked a total plonker but got a few comments and tons of strange looks

 

[GrasB]

I'd concur with what jonny jeez said. Really we need 3, possibly 4 shots:
Hi-vis without a light directed at it
Hi-vis with light directed at it
Hi-vis with light directed at it plus a decent light.
No hi-vis with a decent light

 

[PpPete]

The only possible argument for it is that it will eventually act as chlorine in the gene pool, and remove an idiot from the species.

My point exactly - just a little more forcefully put.

 

[PpPete]

I'd concur with what jonny jeez said. Really we need 3, possibly 4 shots:
Hi-vis without a light directed at it
Hi-vis with light directed at it
Hi-vis with light directed at it plus a decent light.
No hi-vis with a decent light

Define "decent light"

 

[John the Monkey]

The person that got me asking the question feels that because he's wearing a hi-vis vest & the street lighting means he doesn't need lights. He passed me on his way to work about an hour ago, doing over 30, downhill, approaching roadworks.

Tried telling him, but he's of the opinion the vest is sufficient.

Under streetlight, Hi Viz just looks sort of grey. Reflectives help some, but lights are better.

Hi Viz works nicely when the weather is murky (fog, mist) or daylight is still present but dim.

 

[Jezston]

NO!
Lights are what make you look like a vehicle and are only a good thing. Lights are also a legal requirement when cycling in darkness, where as you are not required to wear Hiviz
I personally think hiViz in cities is pointless as every Tom dick and Harry has it and you don't stand out.
My 3 front lights and 4 rear lights are working for me.

While I agree that the bloke is a muppet (why does he refuse to use lights anyway? Does he have a phobia of them or something?) I disagree strongly about hivis being pointless.

Maybe on certain commuter routes in london the roads are awash with dayglo yellow, but in daylight - and particularly early morning or late evening where there is still daylight to catch the yellow but not dark enough to let lights really be visible, dayglo stands out like a beacon.

Another area where Gaz (and I believe BentMikey) and I disagree is the 'looking like a cyclist' thing. Hivis reflector panels give you a greater definition at night and make it clearer to other road users that you are a cyclist, and I feel this would mean them behaving more appropriately around you. I'm not keen on the 'wtf is that avoid it' approach as I fear that confusing other road users would lead to unpredictable and potentially dangerous behaviour.

 

[tyred]

I won't comment too much on urban areas but as a rural dweller who often drives/walks/cycles on pitch black roads, there is no doubt in my mind that hi-vis jacket makes people a lot more visible than they would otherwise be. But I consider it just more than that. It gives the person a shape as a human being. Something like the rear mudguard reflector on a bike caught in the car headlights can be very bright in the right set of circumstances, even if it's a fair distance away, but apart from telling you that there is something there, it gives little information as to what. It could be many things. A lot of people around here put red reflectors on the pillars at the end of their driveways. But if the cyclist is wearing a jacket with reflective strips, it instantly tells the driver that there is a person on the road.

 

[BentMikey]

You need to shine a headlight at that jacket to give a true comparrison. I do understand the chap that "feels" he stands out more in a hiviz jacket...as BM's shots show, the option with a light seems to add to the general light pollution (in a photo...not a moving light/image) and, at a junction could be dismissed as something else. That said, at a junction the car driver would not get the effect of hi viz as their lights would not be pointing in the right direction.

Self illumination is the key!...I tried it...looked a total plonker but got a few comments and tons of strange looks

I am shining a headlight at that jacket in the picture with mboy shining the bright white light back at me. That first picture is designed to show how highviz (or rather the reflective portion) is mostly invisible behind a decent light.

That light would never be mistaken for general light pollution. It's often mistaken for a motorcycle, which can be slightly embarassing as a driver waits at a t-junction for ages when I'm approaching slowly uphill.


Here's one with only the high-vis jacket, and my shining the bright headlight towards it. It's decently visible now, but this is the best possible viewing of a high-vis jacket.

 

[Davidc]

When driving at night I've never had a near miss with a cyclist using properly working lights. I've had them with bikes with no lights or very poor lights. That applies with and without street lights. Hi-Viz (i.e. reflectives) helps in pitch darkness but in street lighting not much. Lights don't need to be very bright to be seen by a driver who's paying attention.

Like Gaz I use lots of lights, and they're bright. Only 3 at the back though, and usually only 2 at the front. I also wear reflective clothing and loads of 3M reflective products on the bike. If anyone hits me in the dark it's because they're blind/ asleep/ looking at something else/ on the phone.

The dynamo ones have negligible running costs, the battery ones (which I also use a lot in daylight) cost an estimated 1p per month to run the rechargeable batteries. If just one driver avoids hitting me during my lifetime because they've seen my lights then going to the trouble of lighting up the bike will have been worth it.

The suggestion in the OP is IMO insane.