High-viz jackets.

[ChrisKH]

Unpick the velcro, and sew on a few poppers, or hooks and eyes? Easy to get at any haberdashery or craft type shop.

That would involve work, Arch.

You're right of course. Alternatively I could just get a few strips of velcro hooks/eyes and cover it up

 

[Eat MY Dust]

I'm with BM. I find that wearing hi-viz has no benefit when riding. When I say no benefit I mean that drivers don't give you any more room. A lot of the time I wear all black clothing and this has never resulted in more "near" misses etc. Saying that I would never argue against wearing hi-viz as I do wear my Nathan running vest some of the times on my bike.

 

[HF2300]

Oh come on HF2300 - do you really mean to suggest that at night Hiviz is better than decent lights?

But that implies seeing high vis as an alternative. I don't think anyone pro-visibility would suggest high vis is an alternative to decent lights. Equally, I'm sure that's not what I said. Perhaps I misread the intent of your original comments. I'm convinced, though, that high-vis is a useful addition to good lights, bike reflectors, etc.

There's no way hiviz can possibly perform as well as lights at night, because it's passive

If we're talking the brightness the viewer will perceive, I'm not sure that's the case. It will depend on the luminance of the reflective material, the power of the light shining on it, angle of incidence etc. vs. the brightness and beam pattern of the light - but that's probably a fairly esoteric debate.

...and it doesn't always work - eg the fluo doesn't work at night, and the reflectives won't in a side-road example.

Agreed with the fluorescent, though it's still better than black / dark. I don't see why the reflectives won't work in a side-road example, though perhaps we're thinking of different types of high vis or different examples.

Any time visibility is reduced, our lights should be on as per the highway code.

Oh, absolutely, but have I said they shouldn't? Or perhaps that's just a general comment.

Given that only the reflectives are useful at night, then the on-bike reflectors are plenty. Lights are much more effective, and if your lights have no side-on visibility, that's a failing you should be fixing asap. OTOH I don't think side-on visibility plays much part in collision prevention, at least nothing by comparison with most collision types.

Again, I think we see things differently (I haven't got the patented Bent Mikey supervision (TM)!) Yes, that's why the bike reflectors are there, but I don't think they're plenty and I think a good bit of high vis is a useful adjunct. Side on visibility - well, OK, most decent rear lights work to the sides, but I'm not so sure many of the front lights do from what I see, and even the rear lights IME tend to be focused and much more visible to the rear.

...but having drivers look in the first place, notice...

Just to go back to this a minute, yes, in an ideal world, everybody (cyclists and drivers) would observe fully and act on what they've observed. In the real world for a million reasons it ain't like that. If I get noticed because a half asleep driver's caught a flash of yellow or reflective in the corner of his eye I'll take that, thanks.

Sh1t, I seem to have rushed in where EMD and others fear to tread and taken on BM in a high vis debate. Oh well...

 

[Maz]

Hiviz is a rabbit's foot - it might make you feel better, but if you have decent legal lights and bike reflectors, it's a waste of time for improving your safety. Spend the effort instead on cycle craft, lessons if need be, and you'll get 100 times the improvement in safety.

You seem to be suggesting that wearing hi-viz and using the sound advice offered by cyclecraft are mutually exclusive.

I think there's no substitute for good road sense, whether you choose to wear hi-viz or not.

 

[MacB]

Just to go back to this a minute, yes, in an ideal world, everybody (cyclists and drivers) would observe fully and act on what they've observed. In the real world for a million reasons it ain't like that. If I get noticed because a half asleep driver's caught a flash of yellow or reflective in the corner of his eye I'll take that, thanks.quote]

That's enough for me, I'll stick to the hi viz plus my lights, I agree it shouldn't be needed but.....just in case......

 

[Arch]

That would involve work, Arch.

You're right of course. Alternatively I could just get a few strips of velcro hooks/eyes and cover it up

Ah, I've re-read your post, anyway, and realised I had the problem wrong in my head - it's the material sticking to some other velcro, not the fastening of the waistcoat you have trouble with.

I was almost ready to offer to do the velcro removal and replacement for a small fee! But your idea of masking it with velcro strip is probably better....

 

[BentMikey]

You seem to be suggesting that wearing hi-viz and using the sound advice offered by cyclecraft are mutually exclusive.

I think there's no substitute for good road sense, whether you choose to wear hi-viz or not.

I think we both agree on that - it's at least 100 times more effective and important.

 

[BentMikey]

HF2300, the side road issue is this:

Driver at minor side road, you travelling down major road. Driver won't see any reflection from any of your retro-reflectives because there is no light shining from where he is towards you. That's why hiviz provides unreliable visibility, and why you really only need good lights and legal reflectors.

Whilst hiviz fluo might give good contrast some of the time, so does black clothing some other times, it all depends on the background. Sometimes the yellow fluo of hiviz has very little contrast at all - such as in daylight against yellowed grass, or at night against urban street lighting.

Maybe now you can see why I *roll eyes* when someone comes on moaning about black clothing on cyclists? Bad or no lights, sure, but then that is both sensible and a legal requirement.

 

[purplepolly]

HF2300, the side road issue is this:

Driver at minor side road, you travelling down major road. Driver won't see any reflection from any of your retro-reflectives because there is no light shining from where he is towards you. .

Cyclist turning left out of side road, both rear and front lights angled away from oncoming traffic, hi-viz perfectly visible in the beam of my distant bike light

Turning on bike lights at works cycle parking, the indirect light of the hope vision beam lit up the hiviz jacket of a pedestrian (parcel force van driver) about 10 meters to my right and 20 meters ahead

 

[BentMikey]

That cyclist must have properly crap cycle lights then, if you can't see them when he's waiting at a side road.

Then again, in that situation, it's him that needs to see you, and much less so you him.

 

[pwh91]

The issue of hi-viz or not - for me - is most important during dusk when the *fluorescent* properties of hi-viz material actually add to the visible light seen by other road users. So not sure I can agree with the logic of BM unless he rides completely in pitch black conditions, when I'd agree a mix of reflective material and good lights are the only important factors. So the question is - "why not Hi-viz?" - which I can only put down to concern over self-image on the bike. If that's the reason then all well and good, since we all make our own judgments on safety... just I'd prefer if that was the reasoning, we could be more honest about it.

So,
Hi-viz / reflective for me
2x decent but not blinding lights each end

Pete

 

[BentMikey]

Dusk - there's no UV around then, so the fluorescent part won't be working. In urban riding, once the streetlights come on the yellow is washed out to a dull orange that's very similar to the road.

 

[pwh91]

Without wanting to go and split hairs on the details of UV levels against solar elevation (assuming you have, for a minute) I think everyone will be aware of the significant value of fluorescent material in low light conditions common in the UK for 2/3rds of the year. The point stands.

 

[pwh91]

My points are simple
- Hi-Viz increases visibility in some - not all - light conditions, over dark kit. But rarely does is do *worse* than dark kit.
- Drivers can't avoid you if they can't see you
- All other points made by Lee and BM are valid, I salute them... cyclecraft, lights, the lot.... but they are additiive to the Hi-viz question
- I have to wear some type of jacket or top to commute in, unless I was a naturist...
... so why not wear something Hi-viz...?

 

[threebikesmcginty]

I would have thought it comes down, more, to the skill of the motorist and there ain't many with skill. After all, no motorists - no cyclists getting knocked off.
A high-viz jacket is more visible than a black one - and if you don't see you can't react.
Lee is spot on with lane positioning and confidence, wobble about in the gutter and you're for it but I can't see anything wrong with doing whatever you can to make yourself be seen.