You answer that yourself later: "not from as far away". By the time they can see pedal reflectors, they've probably already set themselves up on a wider line and most will continue along it because it's less effort.
I'm still not convinced: as I said, I noticed no deterioration in passing behaviour when starting or abandoning usage of a rear supplementary flashing lamp).
mjr wrote:I think that's <flashing ....benefit...cyclists...alone.in faster traffic..> assuming that all motorists think flashing = cyclist = vulnerable = steer wider, which I don't feel is true for a significant minority. I prefer a steady rear with a sufficiently large illuminated area that that minority will think it's a slow motorcycle that could seriously dent their precious and steer around it.
Surely a driver would need to be spectacularly unobservant not to associate red flashing lamps with cyclists etc by now? And surely mopeds are no longer that slow compared to cyclist: 50cc one s can do 30mph. But I do like a large steady rear lamp
Actually it was not roubaixtuesday but me, SA_SA_SA, who wrote:Given white power LEDs Flashing front lamps seem entirely pointless and annoying now compared to their feeble progenitors....
But I do sometimes meet people on towpath who still flash their full power MTB lamp which is their sole front lamp.....: how they avoid falling in....and of course no good for epileptics no matter what frequency given that a large area is flashing.....
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------
You answer that yourself later: "not from as far away". By the time they can see pedal reflectors, they've probably already set themselves up on a wider line and most will continue along it because it's less effort.
I'm still not convinced: as I said, I noticed no deterioration in passing behaviour when starting or abandoning usage of a rear supplementary flashing lamp).
As I said, I'm not aware of any research evidence either way. I wouldn't be surprised if this varied by area.
SA_SA_SA wrote:
mjr wrote:I think that's assuming that all motorists think flashing = cyclist = vulnerable = steer wider, which I don't feel is true for a significant minority.
Surely a driver would need to be spectacularly unobservant not to associate red flashing lamps with cyclists etc by now?
To be clear, I think the problem isn't with the flashing = cyclist step, but more that some meanies then think either we're no harm to them so they don't need to do anything, or that skimming cyclists is a fun game - possibly the same people who think startling walkers by cycling fast and close past them is funny.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
simonhill wrote:Just for info - the term "flasher" means something very specific in UK English. To quote wiki "A person who displays his or her body in a form of indecent exposure ".
I thought flashing only referred to the front portions,,not the rear?
simonhill wrote:Just for info - the term "flasher" means something very specific in UK English. To quote wiki "A person who displays his or her body in a form of indecent exposure ".
I thought flashing only referred to the front portions,,not the rear?
Yep rear flashers are known as Mooners and I don't mean supporters of brexit.
At the last count:- Peugeot 531 pro, Dawes Discovery Tandem, Dawes Kingpin X3, Raleigh 20 stowaway X2, 1965 Moulton deluxe, Falcon K2 MTB dropped bar tourer, Rudge Bi frame folder, Longstaff trike conversion on a Giant XTC 840
I would just point out that the OP is from the other side of the pond. Hence my explanation. Didn't want him wandering around asking where he could find a flasher.
