Surface should not be a problem: surely they are big enough. I think I have seen one or two in lime daylight fluorescent, but I will need to look again. None with big enough reflective stripes to meet the EN471 standard, I think.
Willem
High viz jackets
allen-uk wrote:What happened to cycle capes? Are they as outdated as Sturmey-Archers?
And if they ARE still approved clothing, can you get high-viz versions?
Allen.
If you've got the Oct- Nov copy of Cycle, there's one on page 58
carradice pro-route cape sold by www.bikeplus.co.uk
-
willem jongman
- Posts: 2750
- Joined: 7 Jan 2008, 4:16pm
Wow, and then something - I knew I had seen them. I don't think anyone will overlook you in these. This really is excellent, and all the more so since they do spats and a helmet cover as well. There is also reflective tape, but probably not quite enough (however, one can do something about that, of course). Does anyone have weights?
Willem
Willem
allen-uk wrote:What happened to cycle capes? Are they as outdated as Sturmey-Archers?
And if they ARE still approved clothing, can you get high-viz versions?
Allen.
They have cropped up in Lidl in the past - excellent modern (European everyday cycling) quality with reflective patches in grey or orange.
Fine in the wet when its not windy. You certainly seem to get noticed!
-
michael Bloxham
- Posts: 70
- Joined: 3 Sep 2007, 4:55pm
Why do clothing manufacturers presist in producing cycling clothing in black ? Which is possibly the worst colour for visibility in day time let alone at night. I wear Altura Night vision windproof and waterproofs in the day to aid my visibilty, at night arm bands/leg bands and vest. I should add I wear the bright yellow version rather than the black version. Is a night vision jacket in black a contidiction in terms ?
I was looking at a site called 'roadcyclinguk.com' or similar, the other day (just out of interest) at a thread about clothing.
One burke there said that he(or she) would wear whatever they chose as it was their human right (or some such tosh) and no-one was going to tell them to wear colours that didn't suit them, and that anyway it was up to car drivers to avoid them....
I kid you not.
(No, I didn't bother replying).
Allen.
One burke there said that he(or she) would wear whatever they chose as it was their human right (or some such tosh) and no-one was going to tell them to wear colours that didn't suit them, and that anyway it was up to car drivers to avoid them....
I kid you not.
(No, I didn't bother replying).
Allen.
allen-uk wrote:I was looking at a site called 'roadcyclinguk.com' or similar, the other day (just out of interest) at a thread about clothing.
One burke there said that he(or she) would wear whatever they chose as it was their human right (or some such tosh) and no-one was going to tell them to wear colours that didn't suit them, and that anyway it was up to car drivers to avoid them....
I kid you not.
(No, I didn't bother replying).
Allen.
I can understand where he (or she) is coming from, the onus is on the motorist to make sure they drive in a safe manner. observing the hazards ahead .... instead of playing with their mobile phone or fiddling with the in-car entertainment.
Cyclist shouldn't have to dress like a 1970's playschool presenter in order to be safe, if motorists obeyed the highway code (and didn't exceed speed limits like 99% of them do) then cyclists would be at very little risk, no matter how fluorescent (or lack of|) their clothing was, cyclist should not have to compensate for the appalling standards of driving we see on our roads.
Have to agree on both counts - I 've manged to see ninja cyclists on badly lit roads so it shouldn't be necessary, but unfortunately there's a lot of people who lack basic driving skills or get distracted, and plenty who drive when their eyesights not up to the legal minimum. These people really annoy me. Speaking as someone who during the day regularly switches between very good eyesight (with contacts) and borderline legal for driving (with glasses) I can report that borderline is not adequate.
Yes and no.
I'm a driver. I've got the Institute of Advanced Motorists cert. to prove that I'm more bothered than most. But give me a dark drizzly evening in a built-up area with traffic coming from all directions, lights flashing from shops and garages, etc., etc., and I tell you that a cyclist dressed in dark clothing with a tiddly little light back and front CANNOT be easily seen.
I expect cyclists to try as hard as I do to keep the roads safe.
Allen.
I'm a driver. I've got the Institute of Advanced Motorists cert. to prove that I'm more bothered than most. But give me a dark drizzly evening in a built-up area with traffic coming from all directions, lights flashing from shops and garages, etc., etc., and I tell you that a cyclist dressed in dark clothing with a tiddly little light back and front CANNOT be easily seen.
I expect cyclists to try as hard as I do to keep the roads safe.
Allen.
Urban:
Certainly. The only reason my car isn't yellow is because it was green (I think, I'm colour-blind) when I bought it second-hand.
But I think a more serious answer is that cars have powerful lights front and rear, probably 1000 times more powerful than bike lamps. And when you're out on the road (behind a wheel) it's just a question of perception. Car lights stand out, bike lights don't.
I'd like pedestrians to be more aware of their incredible vulnerability, too!
Allen.
Certainly. The only reason my car isn't yellow is because it was green (I think, I'm colour-blind) when I bought it second-hand.
But I think a more serious answer is that cars have powerful lights front and rear, probably 1000 times more powerful than bike lamps. And when you're out on the road (behind a wheel) it's just a question of perception. Car lights stand out, bike lights don't.
I'd like pedestrians to be more aware of their incredible vulnerability, too!
Allen.
