New sub category: Hi-Vis Ninjas

[Rhythm Thief]

I'm not quite sure what a ninja is, maybe someone will explain (or shall I google it?). Heard of 'teenage ninja' something, but I though that was a sort of cartoon tortoise - perhaps an apt word for me after all since I've got very slow of late...

Anyway I shall continue with the hi-viz - and the lights - regardless, care not a whit for the sneers if anyone on this thread is sneering. Can't oblige with the full-suss halfords, sorry! Best of all would be if there were no half-blind motorists on the road, but we can't have it all our way. And I crave to be still alive after that half-blind motorist has passed me by.

Besides, it helps to keep me warm, and keeps the rain off - and the snow.

Hi vis and lights is fine. The thread is all about people who use hi vis as a substitute for lights. Which I'm sure you'll agree, is misguided.

 

[marinyork]

Nonsense. I've never paid that much for a set of lights, and mine are perfectly adequate for urban riding. I think the last set I bought was about £15 (for a 5 LED white front light, and 3 or 4 LED red rear), and you can get perfectly decent back up red LED lights in the pound shop - a pound for two, I noticed today. I have little single LED backups, for about £5 a pair.

Lights for reliably seeing by might be more expensive, but for normal visibiltyby others on the road, a tenner is plenty, and a fiver would do at a pinch. To just be seen from behind - 50p if you split a pack with a mate.

I think what rh100 said is true enough in the sense of hunting them out. There are certainly some great rear lights for very little money, but due to the nature of where they are sold they might be there tomorrow gone the next day. I've seen some perfectly workable ones in pound shops that were there and then sold out, didn't have any for a while and then got something else in. Front lights are a lot more of a problem. My smart 7 LED rear light I got for £4, fantastic bit of kit but they aren't that price everywhere (they were considerably more) and you have to know about them.

I think people think lights are expensive because you go down to a local bike shop and it'll be this basic front light costs £15 and this rear light costs £15 (although that'll be better relatively). £30 will appear quite a lot of money for what people will consider occasional use. You then have to factor in battery costs, rechargeable costs, buying a charger etc and it starts to look quite daunting for an occasional user. If you're not some kind of night time nutter like me it can seem like a lot. Of course once someone is kitted out properly, they then may want to go out more at night think that's not so bad but it's getting them over the first stage.

 

[rh100]

What price would you put on your life though?

Priceless of course - doesn't mean people have bottomless pockets for lights though.

if you can afford a bike, you can afford £30 for a pair of cateyes.

Don't agree - how much is a bike in the first place? A wide range of different budgets out there.

Nonsense. I've never paid that much for a set of lights, and mine are perfectly adequate for urban riding. I think the last set I bought was about £15 (for a 5 LED white front light, and 3 or 4 LED red rear), and you can get perfectly decent back up red LED lights in the pound shop - a pound for two, I noticed today. I have little single LED backups, for about £5 a pair.

Lights for reliably seeing by might be more expensive, but for normal visibiltyby others on the road, a tenner is plenty, and a fiver would do at a pinch. To just be seen from behind - 50p if you split a pack with a mate.

As I said, just my opinion. I started with a set of Aldi specials, the kind that people on a small budget would go for - the rear was ok'ish but the front green one was fine in a dark garden when testing but an absolute waste of time on the road to be seen by. I've seen a few of these green led's on bikes and in heavy traffic they don't stand out against the bright glare of headlights. I'll take your word that there may be other bargains out there.

I think people think lights are expensive because you go down to a local bike shop and it'll be this basic front light costs £15 and this rear light costs £15 (although that'll be better relatively). £30 will appear quite a lot of money for what people will consider occasional use. You then have to factor in battery costs, rechargeable costs, buying a charger etc and it starts to look quite daunting for an occasional user. If you're not some kind of night time nutter like me it can seem like a lot. Of course once someone is kitted out properly, they then may want to go out more at night think that's not so bad but it's getting them over the first stage.

I upgraded once it was getting dark on my commute, and indeed it was the cheapest reasonable looking set from the LBS.

 

[Browser]

If you take a gander on this page of the Argos catalogue you'll see a set of cheapo flashers for £7.99. Anyone who doesn't value their life for not much more than the price of a packet of fags deserves to not get seen IMHO.

661-Pete, the term ninja as used on here is a derogatory reference, shortened from 'cycling ninja' to the eekits one occasionally gets a fleeting glimpse of out on the highways and byways of this fair country at night, wearing unirorm black clothing and having no lights or hi-viz. It's a back-handed reference to the black pyjama-clad ninja assassins of lore and legend who wore black so they'd be near-invisible.
I started the thread as a half humorous look at the cyclist one sometimes sees travelling to/from their workplace and, as Rhythm Thief said, using hi-viz as a lighting substitute.
I myself have a front flasher, Niteflux Enduro 8, Smart rear flasher, 1/2W Smart rear-mounted retina-welder, 3M Sekuclips on the spokes and either a hi-viz tabard or dayglo Endura rainproof. Being seen is smart, thinking you dcan be seen when you're actually nigh-on invisible isn't.

 

[orbiter]

"What about all those cyclists without lights?"

"What's wrong with that? "

"You can't see them so you might hit them"

"How do you know there are cyclists without lights?"

"You see them all the time"


Problem?
Looks like not - cycling-bike-accidents-study

 

[Rhythm Thief]

"What about all those cyclists without lights?"

"What's wrong with that? "

"You can't see them so you might hit them"

"How do you know there are cyclists without lights?"

"You see them all the time"


Problem?
Looks like not - cycling-bike-accidents-study

That's fine. If you're convinced it's not a problem, I'll buy your lights off you and use them on my bikes.
But, as I explained earlier, there's a world of difference between seeing a well lit cyclist from four or five hundred yards away and factoring him or her into your driving, and seeing an unlit cyclist ten yards ahead of you and having to brake or swerve to avoid him or her. And you have to allow for the fact that motorists don't stare at the road ahead of them all the time: a good driver will be moving his/her gaze around all the time - doing mirror checks, sweeping the dashboard, and so on - and an unlit cyclist may well not be noticed until the last minute. And of course, an unlit cyclist is very much harder to spot in an HGV mirror than one with good lights. In short, riding your bike without lights is not only a bit silly, but is also downright discourteous to other road users. Including cyclists, since we all get lumped in with "those idiots who don't have lights". Given the amount a set of half way decent lights costs, and the minimal effort inviolved in hanging them off your bike, there's no excuse whatever for not having lights, no matter what your study says.

 

[stowie]

That's fine. If you're convinced it's not a problem, I'll buy your lights off you and use them on my bikes.
But, as I explained earlier, there's a world of difference between seeing a well lit cyclist from four or five hundred yards away and factoring him or her into your driving, and seeing an unlit cyclist ten yards ahead of you and having to brake or swerve to avoid him or her. And you have to allow for the fact that motorists don't stare at the road ahead of them all the time: a good driver will be moving his/her gaze around all the time - doing mirror checks, sweeping the dashboard, and so on - and an unlit cyclist may well not be noticed until the last minute. And of course, an unlit cyclist is very much harder to spot in an HGV mirror than one with good lights. In short, riding your bike without lights is not only a bit silly, but is also downright discourteous to other road users. Including cyclists, since we all get lumped in with "those idiots who don't have lights". Given the amount a set of half way decent lights costs, and the minimal effort inviolved in hanging them off your bike, there's no excuse whatever for not having lights, no matter what your study says.

I like the point made by orbiter, but understand where you are coming from. I don't think that riding without lights has been proven to cause many accidents, but it is inconsiderate, and daft. Why not use some lights? I wear high-viz and lights to give motorists every chance to see me. It just seems common sense.

I don't tend to agree with the argument that "idiots with lights" give cyclists a bad name. Idiots without lights give another excuse to those motorists too blinkered to think past their own convenience, and probably don't think cyclists belong on the road in the first place. If everyone rode with lights, they would just find another excuse to not change their behaviour to be more civil to cyclists.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I don't tend to agree with the argument that "idiots with lights" give cyclists a bad name. Idiots without lights give another excuse to those motorists too blinkered to think past their own convenience, and probably don't think cyclists belong on the road in the first place. If everyone rode with lights, they would just find another excuse to not change their behaviour to be more civil to cyclists.

I think you're right there. Why give them that excuse?

 

[661-Pete]

Hi vis and lights is fine. The thread is all about people who use hi vis as a substitute for lights. Which I'm sure you'll agree, is misguided.

Bear in mind, though, that there are plenty of times when I'm wearing the hi-viz, and have the lights ready on the bike, but the lights are not on. Consider my morning commute, which is around 8 am. At this time of the year, at 8 am the daylight condition varies enormously from one day to the next, so sometimes I have the lights on, and sometimes not. It is after all broad daylight, and in good conditions my lights would make little impact on already good seeing conditions. But I retain the hi-viz jacket, seeing as I'm going to need it for the trip home anyway.

Cars, on the other hand, invariably have their headlights on at that time of the morning, regardless of conditions. I suppose it's a herd instinct thing: they set out, they see that other cars have lights on, a quick twist of a knob and there you are! This is worrying (the same as the proposals for DRLs are worrying) because motorists are conditioned to look out for lights and not for road users. I do not know the full answer in the cyclist's interest, short of investing in expensive HIDs. But I keep the hi-viz on, 'just in case'...

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I think the OP was about cyclists who ride at night, in full darkness, with Hi vis instead of lights. Personally, in the circumstances you describe I'd do exactly the same as you; a hi vis vest in "dull daylight" can help you be seen.

 

[Debian]

Cars, on the other hand, invariably have their headlights on at that time of the morning, regardless of conditions. I suppose it's a herd instinct thing: they set out, they see that other cars have lights on, a quick twist of a knob and there you are! This is worrying (the same as the proposals for DRLs are worrying) because motorists are conditioned to look out for lights and not for road users. I do not know the full answer in the cyclist's interest, short of investing in expensive HIDs. But I keep the hi-viz on, 'just in case'...

Sorry, DRLs?

 

[Origamist]

Sorry, DRLs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daytime_running_lamp

 

[Debian]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daytime_running_lamp

Ah, OK, I get the gist now.

Thanks.

 

[brokenbetty]

hi vis ninjas is a great name for a band