hi-viz gone mad....

[Miquel In De Rain]

Oh well.

 

[GrasB]

I'm with Jezston on this. When driving, I do find it easier both to spot and to identify earlier cyclists who are wearing some sort of Hi-Viz.

I am in favour of lamps too, but I find that the cyclists I see in really good time tend to be wearing Hi-Viz or bright colours.

The earlier a motorist sees cyclists and identifies them as such, the safer and more predictable that motorist's response will be.

As Jezston implies, there are myriad other signals and identifiers; but to discount Hi-Viz seems eccentric. To my mind it is one of the key ones.

I do not write this as Mr Flouro-Cyclist. Little of my cycle clothing has true Hi-Viz properties. I write it as a motorist who appreciates being able to see cyclists early and identify them early.

Some of the negatives I've faced as a cyclist have involved motorists who've failed to see me in time. I'm all for giving them any help I can.

In my experience all road users who say high vis make cyclists more visible make HUGE miss-judgments is speed of cyclists at the extremes of a cyclists the speed range... eg. consistently waiting for ages for a cyclist doing little more than walking pace or cutting up cyclist who are at high speeds. In short you're not seeing the cyclist more easily you're makeing a per-concived judgment based on typical parameters. I there for say stop making assumptions & start observing properly for the sake of all road users.

 

[Miquel In De Rain]

In my experience all road users who say high vis make cyclists more visible make HUGE miss-judgments is speed of cyclists at the extremes of a cyclists the speed range... eg. consistently waiting for ages for a cyclist doing little more than walking pace or cutting up cyclist who are at high speeds. In short you're not seeing the cyclist more easily you're makeing a per-concived judgment based on typical parameters. I there for say stop making assumptions & start observing properly for the sake of all road users.

That's your opinion.I don't really have too much of a problem,the only problem I had yesterday was with a motorist who was (texting?) on his phone and had not idea I was behind him and by his side watching him,obviously hi-vis was no good in this situation.

 

[Boris Bajic]

In my experience all road users who say high vis make cyclists more visible make HUGE miss-judgments is speed of cyclists at the extremes of a cyclists the speed range... eg. consistently waiting for ages for a cyclist doing little more than walking pace or cutting up cyclist who are at high speeds. In short you're not seeing the cyclist more easily you're makeing a per-concived judgment based on typical parameters. I there for say stop making assumptions & start observing properly for the sake of all road users.

Your experience seems to tell you a lot. I'm not sure how you reach your conclusions on the basis of your hypothesis, but I find them flawed.

As a driver I make the judgement (based on experience) that Hi-Viz and bright colours are an advantage. I therefore fall into the group you identiy in your first sentence. By your judgement therefore, I make HUGE misjudgements about cyclist speed.

I'm also a keen, relatively high-mileage cyclist. On occasion a motorist emerging at a junction, changing lanes or overtaking misjudges (or appears to misjudge) either my speed or their and my relative speed. This is just as true when I'm driving a car. I do not see this failure in judgement as a function of their (unknown to me) view on Hi-Viz.

As it happens, I have hardly any cycle clothing that could be described as Hi-Viz, but I am strongly in favour of bright colours.

I see that your post has picked up a couple of 'likes' from sensible and thoughtful members, but I find that it makes invalid assumptions and unhelpful generalisations.

I am in favour of cyclists making themselves more visible by wearing clothing that stands out a little. This view does not suddenly dump me in an imagined group of road users who make assumptions about speed and fail to observe properly, although you suggest this is the case. There may be a few road users who fall into the group you identify - and some of those may be in favour of Hi-Viz. I draw no connection between one group and the other and cannot see how you do. Clearly, it is the responsiblity of all road users to be alert and observant. There are times when some of us are not, but this is not because of our views on Hi-Viz.

To my (albeit limited) mind none of the connections you draw above on the basis of your experience is valid. Some of them may be accurate in some cases, but not for the reasons you give.

 

[just jim]

See these "stealth" cars with their dark paint jobs? I don't! I like cars painted a colour which maybe not bright, makes them stand out a little. Motorists do themselves no favours by driving around in black, brown, grey or browny-grey cars.

 

[Alun]

I thought of wearing green or a sandy yellow, the same colour the army paint their armoured vehicles. Bet the average motorist can see them, "txting" or not !

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Hi-vis is so commonplace nowadays that it is disregarded to the extent of uselessness. Someone robbed an auction room near me a few weeks ago, relieving it of over £300,000 worth of jewellery. What was he wearing to go unnoticed in his approach and escape? Yep, a hi-vis jacket.
It's modern-day urban camouflage.

Whilst I agree with some of the arguments against using fluorescent clothing, I always find this particular argument rather strange. It's not about standing out from the crowd; it's about standing out from the background.

 

[Miquel In De Rain]

See these "stealth" cars with their dark paint jobs? I don't! I like cars painted a colour which maybe not bright, makes them stand out a little. Motorists do themselves no favours by driving around in black, brown, grey or browny-grey cars.

Not good for me because in some dismal lighting positions motorcyclists (and sometimes cars) can be hard to see,for me that is.Obviously it has to be a double take which isn't always easy.Perhaps I just take note of what I see when I am a pedestrian.I do tend to watch cyclists,some have great lights and some dont.No more specsavers jokes please mikey as it really isn't funny.

 

[just jim]

I thought of wearing green or a sandy yellow, the same colour the army paint their armoured vehicles. Bet the average motorist can see them, "txting" or not !

Sandy yellow? I get "Sue Pollard's 1980's Macintosh Coat" in my head. Damn you "Hi-De-Hi"!

 

[Miquel In De Rain]

Clearly these people are not serious cyclists...

You are right,no lycra.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You are right,no lycra.

if that is your conclusion you are welcome to it.

 

[Maz]

I can resist no longer...it's time for one of these...

 

[Miquel In De Rain]

if that is your conclusion you are welcome to it.

You brought it up.

 

[Jezston]

all road users who say high vis make cyclists more visible make HUGE miss-judgments is speed of cyclists at the extremes of a cyclists the speed range...

... I there for say stop making assumptions & start observing properly for the sake of all road users.

And I'm out.

 

[Trickedem]

Will Hi viz become the discussion item that gets banished to its own sub forum?

Anyway Hi viz is essential according to Halfords. So there!
http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/...1_catalogId_10151_categoryId_228860_langId_-1

"Sometimes called hi viz clothing, these brightly coloured accessories reflect light and make sure drivers and other road users know you're there. It's essential to wear hi vis clothing when riding at night or in dull weather, to help keep you safe"