Cab said:
High viz common? In every city and town I've ridden in, in every place I visit but don't ride too, I rekon its less than 10% of cyclists wearing such things. Ain't that common.
As for a cyclist holding traffic up... Well, no. You're not delaying traffic by being in primary and few motorists get upset by it, but that small number does matter. But the fact is that you're trading a safe location for irritating a small minority of road users; you're safer there because you're visible and close overtaking is hard, you're making people actually go around you as they're meant to do.
Which takes me back to the questions I put to you; are you familiar with the TRL report I put to you? If you're in a visible location and thinking your way through traffic by maintaining visible locations anyway, whats the advantage in wearing bright colours that (according to said report) do reinforce a negative view of cyclists?
Where the heck do you get given three and a half feet of space by all of the overtaking vehicles when you're in secondary?
Like i said,in my experience,i see a lot of hi viz on cyclists now,and more helmets too,i would say a lot more than 10% on viz vests,but i couldnt say by how much.but not on helmets,they havnt caught on as much it seems.
Whether primary is the right thing to do doesnt matter,but like it or not,when a cyclist is in the middle of the road,it does annoy drivers,they see it as unnecassary delay,and its that that causes reaction from drivers,not what we wear.
Any form of hi viz or bright colours do help to be seen,i dont understand how it cant help in some way?An accident a week or so ago,when a taxi pulled out into the side of a car,whos colour was dark brown,may have been avoided if the cars colour was brighter,the way it seemed was the taxi looked left before pulling out of a side road,but failed to notice the car that was nearly in front of him,the only thing that could explain this,is that the taxi driver looked left ,behind the car,Where he expected there might be something,and failed to notice it,due to its colour.The only thing that helped cause this ,is it seems ,the fact that the cars colour camoflaged it into the background,so making it less noticeable to the taxi.I know this is assumption,but i think its a fair assumption,when the car was just to the left of and nearly in front of the taxi as it pulled out,parked cars wont have helped,but i think a brighter coloured car would probably have been noticed.
My point is,on a bike,if we dont wear noticeable colours,and rely on being in,what we see as ,visible positions,then we are taking risks,because sometimes things can be right in front of us ,and they are less noticeable, when a driver is looking where they expect something to be,not where it actually is.So there has to be some advantage to more noticeable colours?
I thought that was the report in the link you gave,which is where i got the three and a half foot thing from?
