Why wear black?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Post Reply
mattsccm
Posts: 5101
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: Why wear black?

Post by mattsccm »

Interestingly enough the latest advice given to the school I work at was that hi viz isn't needed when walking along pavements any more. It was. Wonder if some one has decided that it offers no advantage or just that a crocodile of kids is conspicuous.
It would be nice if the more vociferous posters could just keep to single sentence answers. Something like " I disagree and you are wrong" would be enough as by no both sides of the argument have been spouted way to many times. It's like listening to 5 year olds. :lol:
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Why wear black?

Post by niggle »

Hi vis green/yellow can be camouflage in some rural situations, I saw two police motorcyclists parked next to a junction on the A30 once with a grassy bank behind them, the hi vis they and their bikes were adorned with blended perfectly with the background, only the black bits on them like boots and gloves stood out, plus the blue chequer pattern on the bikes (probably why the latter exists). OTOH, as I suggested on a motorcycle forum, a background that pink does not contrast with must be a pretty rare thing... Hi vis at night is also useless IMO, unlike retroreflectives, as are commonly found on even black cycling gear.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11009
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Bonefishblues »

mattsccm wrote:Interestingly enough the latest advice given to the school I work at was that hi viz isn't needed when walking along pavements any more. It was. Wonder if some one has decided that it offers no advantage or just that a crocodile of kids is conspicuous.
It would be nice if the more vociferous posters could just keep to single sentence answers. Something like " I disagree and you are wrong" would be enough as by no both sides of the argument have been spouted way to many times. It's like listening to 5 year olds. :lol:

I saw a kid crocodile only this last week in Leighton Buzzard. It too wasn't wearing Hi Viz, which was noteworthy
tim-b
Posts: 2091
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 8:20am

Re: Why wear black?

Post by tim-b »

Hi
Loughborough University Motor Vehicle and Pedal Cycle Conspicuity: part 3 - Retro-reflective and Fluorescent Materials, final report (https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/2736982.pdf) is worth a read, "Combined performance fluorescent-retro-reflective materials should be permitted under ECE104 since they are likely to be of benefit to daytime conspicuity and some night-time aspects, whilst imposing no significant disbenefits"

Loughborough University Transport Technology Ergonomics Centre (formerly ICE Ergonomics) published ICE Ergonomics Report “Considerations of Conspicuous Markings for Police Vehicles" One of their findings was to use fluorescent colours in daytime

Hi vis at night is also useless IMO

Fluorescent colours are better than non-fluorescent, however, retro-reflective is obviously better than either

None of this solves the problem of a motorist who doesn't look, but for those that do hi-viz and reflectives should increase your chances of being seen

Regards
tim-b
~~~~¯\(ツ)/¯~~~~
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Why wear black?

Post by niggle »

Bmblbzzz wrote:Reasons to wear black, in no particular order:
Chic
Anarchist
Priest
Goth
CBA colour matching
Garment unavailable in other colours
Time triallist with nostalgia
Cultural prescription
Mourning (subset of cultural prescription but for specific occasion or period)

I like colours but not everyone does.

You missed out that black stays looking nice while hi vis and other lighter colours soon become grimy in regular winter use, which with hi vis leads to a conundrum as you are not supposed to wash it too often for fear of reducing the flouresence.
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Why wear black?

Post by niggle »

tim-b wrote:Hi
Loughborough University Motor Vehicle and Pedal Cycle Conspicuity: part 3 - Retro-reflective and Fluorescent Materials, final report (https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/2736982.pdf) is worth a read, "Combined performance fluorescent-retro-reflective materials should be permitted under ECE104 since they are likely to be of benefit to daytime conspicuity and some night-time aspects, whilst imposing no significant disbenefits"

Loughborough University Transport Technology Ergonomics Centre (formerly ICE Ergonomics) published ICE Ergonomics Report “Considerations of Conspicuous Markings for Police Vehicles" One of their findings was to use fluorescent colours in daytime

Hi vis at night is also useless IMO

Fluorescent colours are better than non-fluorescent, however, retro-reflective is obviously better than either

None of this solves the problem of a motorist who doesn't look, but for those that do hi-viz and reflectives should increase your chances of being seen

Regards
tim-b

If the study only looked at conspicuity, and not whether it reduced actual risk of death or injury then it is pointless. As pointed out previously no studies have found a benefit and some have found an association, if not a causal link, between hi vis and increased risk. IMO those that do look will see you whatever you are wearing and those that don't look will not see you regardless of what you are wearing.

Meanwhile I have found one device that greatly increases passing distances (IME): a trailer. The effect seems even greater at night, possibly due to the flashing BS6102/3 light on the right rear corner, triangle reflector in the middle and Spanninga Elips tail light above on the bike being an unknown combination leading to caution.
User avatar
gazza_d
Posts: 453
Joined: 30 Oct 2016, 8:20am

Re: Why wear black?

Post by gazza_d »

A little late to this party but...

I have a view that whilst there are a lot of distracted and careless drivers out there for whom nothing can really work other than luck as they are just not reading the road ahead properly, there are a good number who for whatever reason seem to have an irrational and almost psychotic view towards people on bikes.

I wore hiviz and reflective tops and multiple flashing lights when I started commuting again. It was only when I switched to steady lights (dynohub) and ditched a lot of the reflectives (too much faff for a short hop) that I found I wasn't getting as many close passes.

I developed a theory that this was probably cos from a distance they just saw lights and nothing that identified me specifically as a cyclist.

A couple of years ago the shortish track and bridleway I use between 2 A19 junctions was closed for most of the winter. So I needed to use the road diversion which was often used as a ratrun by drivers to avoid a roundabout notorious for delays. Although I dreaded it I found that whilst it was dark though It was fine with patient drivers passing wide. As soon as I as making trip in daylight the passes became closer. Drivers were probably largely same people making same journey every day.
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Cunobelin »

Marcus Aurelius wrote:‘Cos it’s en flique innit. Black also ‘slims’ you. Once you’ve had black, you never go back, apparently.

All black gear, in dark / foggy conditions is just pure Darwinism in action though. Black with high reflect bits on anything that moves, is great because moving high contrast things do get you noticed.


I have asked this before...

Is having a dark cloured car with a proven increase in accident rate "Darwinism in action"?

Is walking across a Supermarket car park, where risk assessments for staff require HiViz "Darwinism in action"?
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Cunobelin »

Also anecdotal.....

On Friday coming into Fareham, there is a junction at Cams Hall. To access the North of Fareham you leave the motorway and this ake the A27


Coming round the Roundabout are an Ambulance and Police car, both Blue lights and sirens. They also have "Right of Way" yet still two cars pulled out in front of them, causing them to stop!

Perhaps if these vehicles had HiVis, obvious lights and perhaps even an audible signal?

Wait - they did... it is again down to the real issue of DRivers failing to look, failing to see, and failing to react correctly
tim-b
Posts: 2091
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 8:20am

Re: Why wear black?

Post by tim-b »

Hi
I have asked this before...
Is having a dark cloured car with a proven increase in accident rate "Darwinism in action"?
Is walking across a Supermarket car park, where risk assessments for staff require HiViz "Darwinism in action"?

No, surrounded by a tonne of metal and all-manner of safety features as compared to 10kg of bike
No, at slow speeds (see the twentys plenty campaign for stats on this)
Regards
tim-b
~~~~¯\(ツ)/¯~~~~
tim-b
Posts: 2091
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 8:20am

Re: Why wear black?

Post by tim-b »

Hi
Wait - they did... it is again down to the real issue of DRivers failing to look, failing to see, and failing to react correctly

Which is nothing to do with wearing black, or any other colour...
Regards
tim-b
~~~~¯\(ツ)/¯~~~~
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Cunobelin »

On Datrmoor, farmers are now expetcted to have HiViz livestock!

Where do we stop?

Should this house have been HiViz?

Image

On the A3, an arcade of Maples (a memoria to Canadian troops who served locally in WW2)was replanted as despite being 12 feet from the edge of the road they were hazardous to vehicles. LOok at Streetlights, they are now placed at the back of the pavement because bing by the riad is .... a hazard to motor vehicles.

Imagine how much time we could save if drivers just accepted responsibilty and drove appropriately
Mike Sales
Posts: 7882
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Mike Sales »

tim-b wrote:Hi
I have asked this before...
Is having a dark cloured car with a proven increase in accident rate "Darwinism in action"?
Is walking across a Supermarket car park, where risk assessments for staff require HiViz "Darwinism in action"?

No, surrounded by a tonne of metal and all-manner of safety features as compared to 10kg of bike
No, at slow speeds (see the twentys plenty campaign for stats on this)
Regards
tim-b


People nevertheless die in cars and car parks. Surely Hiviz cars and shoppers would save lives?
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Cunobelin »

tim-b wrote:Hi
I have asked this before...
Is having a dark cloured car with a proven increase in accident rate "Darwinism in action"?
Is walking across a Supermarket car park, where risk assessments for staff require HiViz "Darwinism in action"?

No, surrounded by a tonne of metal and all-manner of safety features as compared to 10kg of bike
No, at slow speeds (see the twentys plenty campaign for stats on this)
Regards
tim-b


Thank you, it does not answer the question though.

All that this does is imply that cyclists have to wear HiViz because they are failing to protect themselves. Injuries and deaths due to the same lack of visibility is acceptable for car drivers though

As for Supermarket car parks, the same applies, why when there are formal risk assessments in place, requiring HiViz for pedestrians, should pedestrians not have to wear them. As for comparing the slow speed manoeuvring in car parks with open roads, it is not the same. According to the RAC Insurance, 16 % of damage accident claims occur in car parks. They are far from safe. They were chosen because of the increased danger
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 5430
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Why wear black?

Post by Cugel »

gazza_d wrote:A little late to this party but...

I have a view that whilst there are a lot of distracted and careless drivers out there for whom nothing can really work other than luck as they are just not reading the road ahead properly, there are a good number who for whatever reason seem to have an irrational and almost psychotic view towards people on bikes.

I wore hiviz and reflective tops and multiple flashing lights when I started commuting again. It was only when I switched to steady lights (dynohub) and ditched a lot of the reflectives (too much faff for a short hop) that I found I wasn't getting as many close passes.

I developed a theory that this was probably cos from a distance they just saw lights and nothing that identified me specifically as a cyclist.

A couple of years ago the shortish track and bridleway I use between 2 A19 junctions was closed for most of the winter. So I needed to use the road diversion which was often used as a ratrun by drivers to avoid a roundabout notorious for delays. Although I dreaded it I found that whilst it was dark though It was fine with patient drivers passing wide. As soon as I as making trip in daylight the passes became closer. Drivers were probably largely same people making same journey every day.


As you intimate, there are several factors at work when there are interactions of the less pleasant kind between a cyclist and a motorist. One factor is certainly that apparent umbrage taken by some motorists towards what they seem to see as the cycling types who (so they believe) claim a special status by dressing in cycling clothing of various specialist kinds; and who have lights designed to flare "cyclist" rather than just "other road user".

There is a marked difference, also, in the "average" motorist attitudes depending on where you're cycling geographically. Some parts of the country have a lot of loonies, or so it seems, as any cycling journey tends to include incidents such as close-passing, impatient tailgating or hooting; and similar anti-cyclist modes i' the motorist. In other locales it's rare to have such an incident. I'll contrast mid-Lancashire (loon country) with West Wales (full of considerate drivers with rare exceptions).

Again as you mention, time of day makes a difference - in loon-land at least. Certain times of day seem full of motorists "on a mission" - going to/from work or actually working to some timetable perhaps. Impatience with cyclists rises at such time, I feel.

****
There was (I think) a CUK or CTC article I vaguely recall looking at some sort of summary of investigations into cyclists in hi-viz clothing and it's effects on motoring behaviours. Can't find it now. As I recall (maybe wrongly) it found that roughly one third of motorists said they did notice hi-viz clad cyclists earlier which allowed an earlier consideration. One third didn't notice as they weren't paying attention to their driving. And another third noticed but still treated the cyclist as a third rate road user.

Personally I tend to wear clothing with a lot of white and red in it, but not primarily to be more visible. It does seem to actually be more visible in many different circumstances, though. I also use bright flashing lights. My theory is that those who notice me earlier and are a bit more circumspect when going past as a result of having more time to think about the manoeuvre outnumber the loons who take agin' me because I am flaring "special road user" at them - at least in West Wales. Elsewhere those lights might just provide a stimulus to the driving loon who fate provides to run you over in a fit of self-righteous rage.

Cugel
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
Post Reply