Idiot cyclist - Beeston road, Leeds

[Jacomus-rides-Gen]

I can't add much here apart from my personal experience.

Cycling in London I sometimes wear my HV singlet, much of the time I don't, but I always have it in my jersey as it is so small and light.

I have found in dusky light in the early mornings and evenings wearing the singlet gets me treated better, but during normal daylight I find drivers respond more predictably when I'm not wearing HV.

Part of this I do suspect to be down to my speed, it is easy to travel at around 22mph and over. HV in daylight seems to make drivers assume I am approaching more around the 12mph mark, without it I either get taken at first glance to be a scooter, so they spend longer working out how fast I am approaching.

Out here, riding around the Surrey Hills, I always carry the singlet with me, but wear it more - like I said before, in dappled shade I find it lets drivers know I'm there sooner. Also there are a lot of fast roads, that cars really scream along, and wearing the HV definitely cuts down the number of cars that suddenly brake, or overtake at such speed you know they just trusted to luck.

There are also a huge number of tipper trucks (the cyclist killer type) around these parts, and their drivers definitely respond to HV (possibly because they are used to looking out for blobs of HV when they are on site).

So in esscence - in city riding during the day I find no HV to be better, but at dusk the HV does good, and at night it is pretty superlative.

Out here in the country HV has a wider application, with traffic speeds easily doubling common city speeds, it seems to show up further in the distance, and as bonj has said - I defnintely want drivers to know I'm a cyclist and that they will close on me very fast.

 

[Arch]

Ergo there's no point in having your own light illuminating your own reflector, unless you can contrive to place that light directly between the observer and your reflector. I would also say it's perhaps not the cleverest thing to do to have lights permanently shining towards you and thus affecting your night vision.

Hence my assertion that you may as well have proper legal lights and reflectors only, and not all that hiviz stuff.

Why not have proper lights, and reflectors, and hi-viz?

The light I'm thinking of is a little clear plastic backupz light, with a single LED protruding from the switch casing. It's already in my line of vision on the bars, even facing forward, and the whole casing glows, and I've never noticed it affecting my night vision - but I am talking about city cycling here, with street lighting, not unlit roads, so that might make a difference. Obviously, I have proper forward facing lights as well. And I don't intend to shine the thing straight into my eyes, I'm not that daft.

If it was on my bars, and pointing at my waistcoat, I think it would be directly between me and the eyeline of most car drivers. But as I said, it's not just the refectives, it would light up your whole front to some extent, providing better visibility for any light coloured garment, and even for some not so light. I'm going out to a friend's house tonight, I'll try it and get him to tell me if it makes me more visible.

 

[BentMikey]

Why not just put on a down-low glow? I'm sure it would be more effective, as well as being out of your direct line of sight.

 

[gambatte]

Why not just put on a down-low glow? I'm sure it would be more effective, as well as being out of your direct line of sight.

Yeah, bling it up, innit

 

[Cab]

Ergo there's no point in having your own light illuminating your own reflector, unless you can contrive to place that light directly between the observer and your reflector. I would also say it's perhaps not the cleverest thing to do to have lights permanently shining towards you and thus affecting your night vision.

Hence my assertion that you may as well have proper legal lights and reflectors only, and not all that hiviz stuff.

Of course if you had a bright, poorly collimated light shining at a retroreflector then you'd be illuminating a wide area with it (although you would be better pointing that light outwards...). That is of course why you can see cats eyes on the road, the light is reflected back towards where it came from, but because its a spreading beam enough goes towards the driver (and not the headlamps) such that the object is highly visible.

Same goes with the corner cube array strips that you might choose to wear. And of course with the tape that has little glass sheres in it (more old fashined now, but you can get it still), same principle.

Now, can pedestrians see retroreflectors without a light of their own... Depends really on whether theres any other traffic around, you'll often see cyclists show up very brightly in car headlights if they're wearing such things, even if you're a good number of degrees off angle from it. Hardly surprising really; I find it quite a help.

I'm a big fan of retroreflector strips; they seem to improve visibility, they're easy to stuff into a pocket or bag out of the way, and I believe that I get better treatment cycling wearing such stripes at night than I do without. I don't much see the need for them in broad daylight, but at dusk I think that they're quite valuable.

 

[Cab]

If it was on my bars, and pointing at my waistcoat, I think it would be directly between me and the eyeline of most car drivers. But as I said, it's not just the refectives, it would light up your whole front to some extent, providing better visibility for any light coloured garment, and even for some not so light. I'm going out to a friend's house tonight, I'll try it and get him to tell me if it makes me more visible.

You would probably find that something 'dayglo' would work better for this than a retroreflector strip.

 

[BentMikey]

I think you've missed the important point there that the retroreflector returns light parallel to its original direction. Of course there'll be a little spread as you've observed with a car and cats eyes, but I think that will be quite a small angle if you work it out. Much outside this angle and the reflectives will disappear.

Essentially I think the strategy of having lights shining on your hiviz would be completely useless without at least a halo of lights shining on your vest, and roughly between the horizon and the reflective part of your vest. Even that halo wouldn't really work well when you take into account hills, and that being so close to your bike only a small part of the reflective strips will shine out at drivers. I think you'd be far better off having proper lights pointing the proper direction, rather than trying to be some sort of attention seeking martian spaceship.

I think reflectors do help, hence the requirement for legal reflectors on your bike. I don't think they help nearly as much as lights on the bike do, though. Decent quality bright lights that is, not the sort of dim flashing thing that so many cyclists seem to use.

You would probably find that something 'dayglo' would work better for this than a retroreflector strip.

This bit is probably wrong, unless your light source has UV in it. No UV, and the bright colour will be dull and hard to observe.

 

[bonj2]

It happens more easily than you would think. What about a driver at a side road? He wouldn't get any reflection from you traveling along the major road because his lights aren't shining at you.

that's why you need lights aswell.

I take your point on the higher speeds of a more rural road, but I still am not sure hiviz would improve safety in this situation. I would prefer to rely on lights, myself. It's not as though I only ride in London, I live way out in Biggin Hill and have done a fair bit of country riding even when I lived further in towards London.

Hi-viz (i.e. dayglo yellow) might not noticeably improve safety, but imho it certainly won't hamper it. for me it's not about 'relying on' something, it's about doing as much as I (feasibly) can. I don't ride in a more slapdash manner because I 'assume' that people will see me just 'cos I've got a high-viz vest on, I ride as safely as I can all the time, but wear a high viz vest with reflective strips aswell because I know that when I see cyclists wearing them as a driver I can see them well in advance of those that don't, and when I'm a cyclist I would rather be seen as in advance as possible.

 

[BentMikey]

It seems quite a few people do rely on being seen, however. Note the outraged topics all over internet about "I had 4 lights and bloody great hiviz and the stupid driver still didn't see me" type posts. I'm sure it's only a small factor, but risk compensation must also operate with hiviz to negate any improvement in safety.

 

[bonj2]

The answer to this being, fit a front light on your bars facing back towards your chest, to illuminate your reflective stripes. I remember a while back there was a light prototyped that cast a light forward and one back at the riders chest, but I don't know that it took off. Just as simple to have a backupz type light mounted rearfacing... Angle it right, and it won't dazzle you.

Not knocking it - it may work, I believe you'd have to do some subjective tests to know for sure, but the question that has to be asked, Arch, is the same question that has to be asked of a lot of things: If it was that good an idea, why don't more people do it?

 

[bonj2]

It seems quite a few people do rely on being seen, however. Note the outraged topics all over internet about "I had 4 lights and bloody great hiviz and the stupid driver still didn't see me" type posts. I'm sure it's only a small factor, but risk compensation must also operate with hiviz to negate any improvement in safety.

That's despite having all those lights and hi-viz, not because of them!
it's a bit like saying: "I crashed while i was only going quite slow and hurt myself! How can I make sure I don't hurt myself again? Answer - don't go slow then!"

 

[BentMikey]

No, I think the lesson is don't rely on being seen, even if you're driving a red double decker [1]. Hiviz leaves open the temptation to assume that the hiviz ensures others have actually seen you.


[1] Although then perhaps it doesn't matter nearly as much if some moton does pull out in front of you.

 

[bonj2]

Right, well perhaps some people unwisely give in to that temptation. I personally don't though. I don't want to "feel dangerous" when I'm cycling any more than it's a good idea to create bends and visibility obstructions in roads to "put uncertainty into the minds of drivers".

 

[Arch]

Not knocking it - it may work, I believe you'd have to do some subjective tests to know for sure, but the question that has to be asked, Arch, is the same question that has to be asked of a lot of things: If it was that good an idea, why don't more people do it?

Why didn't more people use electric light bulbs, before they were invented?

Sometimes, people just haven't thought of doing something. Actually, having a light point back at you, isn't new, I saw the idea years ago in a specially designed light, and only recently thought of trying it out with the lights I use anyway. Bearing in mind the number of people who don't seem to have cottoned on to the idea that any lights at all are a good idea after dark, and the number who think a single weak flasher is enough, and so on, I suspect the number of people who'd think "I'll try shining a light back at myself" is pretty small. As a matter of fact, of the 4 others, all cyclists, I mentioned it to last night, only one had seen the same light design I had, and the others all said "oh, that's an interesting idea...." For an idea to take off, without hefty marketing, it needs to be seen and copied by a lot of people - probably more people than I'd ever influence.

In terms of testing: A quick straw poll last night, (So not a scientific test, I agree) suggested that no, it didn't illuminate the reflective strip from the POV of a pedestrian of average height. However, it did illuminate the hi-vis yellow of the vest, making that more eyecatching. I don't really encounter enough traffic to tell if it made a difference to drivers. And I think is the brightly lit city centre, the effect would be lessened. However, it didn't affect my vision adversely, and I still had two forward facing lights, so there wasn't really any downside, for a possible small upside.

(and I think you mean objective - IE non-biased by personal feelings - testing)

I think people are getting too hung up on specific definitions of hi-vis here - perhaps we need to make our own definitions clear. To me, hi-vis is something is a bright colour, probably fluorescent, but at the least a bright yellow or orange, with some reflective patches or stripes. Each 'part' works best in different situations. It's never a replacement for lights at night, and personally, it doesn't make me cycle any differently if I'm wearing it, I'm pretty sure of that.

 

[Arch]

No, I think the lesson is don't rely on being seen, even if you're driving a red double decker [1]. Hiviz leaves open the temptation to assume that the hiviz ensures others have actually seen you.


[1] Although then perhaps it doesn't matter nearly as much if some moton does pull out in front of you.

Never driven a double decker, but I've driven some pretty big vehicles, and I'm well aware of the capacity of all sorts of people to not see things... I used to mutter, when on my bike, "would you have stepped/pulled out like that if I was a bus?". Soon after driving a bus for the first time, I realised the answer was 'yes'.