Cycling UK Forum

On the picture above I can equally see the more muted red topped cyclist. And they're still a hell of a long way off, a motorist only needs to see them from a "reasonable" distance, not low earth orbit.

I am not advocating camouflage, but dressing up as a stabilo is not required, and only serves to make cycling look like a fringe activity.

Last night I was driving home in a light drizzle at about 12:15 and quite clearly could see the cyclist 200 yards ahead of me. He no lights, no reflectors and was in all dark clothing - it's really not that hard to see a person shaped object, our brains are wired to spot people (well, after spotting human faces). Oh, our street lights get turned off at midnight.

I don't *need* to see a cyclist at range of more than a mile.

But yes, I would still encourage that person to get some lights...

Maybe the tops should have a giant face on the ba..... runs off to Dragon's Den.

tatanab wrote:

Michael R wrote:Why are cycling tights and trousers invariably black? It is almost impossible to get anything else

Lovely colours here, discounted too - http://www.assosfactoryoutlet.com/t-rx- ... -2010.html

They are on the cheap side

[XAP]Bob wrote:On the picture above I can equally see the more muted red topped cyclist. And they're still a hell of a long way off, a motorist only needs to see them from a "reasonable" distance, not low earth orbit.

I am not advocating camouflage, but dressing up as a stabilo is not required, and only serves to make cycling look like a fringe activity.

Last night I was driving home in a light drizzle at about 12:15 and quite clearly could see the cyclist 200 yards ahead of me. He no lights, no reflectors and was in all dark clothing - it's really not that hard to see a person shaped object, our brains are wired to spot people (well, after spotting human faces). Oh, our street lights get turned off at midnight.

I don't *need* to see a cyclist at range of more than a mile.

But yes, I would still encourage that person to get some lights...

Equally, last evening after dusk there was a young man in all black with not a single reflector on his bike or his clothes, and I can tell you it was difficult to spot him. Betting on the chances of him being hit versus someone in yellow, I would bet heavily on him.

Given the number of ambulances that get hit I'd not suggest it's as clear cut as that.

The complaints about ninjas far outweigh their presence in accident stats...

tatanab wrote:

Michael R wrote:Why are cycling tights and trousers invariably black? It is almost impossible to get anything else

Lovely colours here, discounted too - http://www.assosfactoryoutlet.com/t-rx- ... -2010.html

Super sexy...

There do seem to be a lot of people with poor night vision. Perhaps it should be part of the test and there should be an exclusion for driving at night.
We wouldn't after all condone driving during the day with uncorrected dodgy vision...

[XAP]Bob wrote:Given the number of ambulances that get hit I'd not suggest it's as clear cut as that.......

Chatting to a paramedic he told me how a car ran into the back of his ambulance(big square one,not the fast response estate car type) whilst he had blue lights flashing and was driving slowly down a residential street looking for the house number.
The driver of the car tried to blame him for being there and insisted she hadn't seen the flashing lights or yellow and green reflective covering all over the rear of the vehicle
There are none so blind as them that will not see!

My personal feeling is that I want to see cyclists as early as I can, that way I can make any allowances for myself other road users.
I want time to be able to make decisions and not be rushed by the person overtaking and driving towards me or the idiot tailgater and the fool rushing up behind me at an inappropriate speed.

So with those thoughts I prefer colours that stand out and am not really interested in the reasoning about looking funny or a strange activity.

Edwards wrote:My personal feeling is that I want to see cyclists as early as I can, that way I can make any allowances for myself other road users.
I want time to be able to make decisions and not be rushed by the person overtaking and driving towards me or the idiot tailgater and the fool rushing up behind me at an inappropriate speed.

So with those thoughts I prefer colours that stand out and am not really interested in the reasoning about looking funny or a strange activity.

To paraphrase the Bard of Avon,

"There's nothing funny or unfashionable but thinking makes it so"

Gearoidmuar wrote:

Edwards wrote:My personal feeling is that I want to see cyclists as early as I can, that way I can make any allowances for myself other road users.
I want time to be able to make decisions and not be rushed by the person overtaking and driving towards me or the idiot tailgater and the fool rushing up behind me at an inappropriate speed.

So with those thoughts I prefer colours that stand out and am not really interested in the reasoning about looking funny or a strange activity.

To paraphrase the Bard of Avon,

"There's nothing funny or unfashionable but thinking makes it so"

Sir it is indeed an honour to have something I have written linked to the Bard.
Thank you

Gearoidmuar wrote:Forewarned is forearmed.

Immediately on seeing a cyclist like this in the distance, I'm already thinking cyclist as I drive.

I'm afraid that what you see and how you drive is pretty irrelevant. You are a cyclist, thus when you drive you are especially careful and mindful of cyclists (I hope). The majority of the driving population are not cyclists and so they will often treat cyclists in a different way to you or I.

For example, in gloomy or dark conditions they may see the hiviz cyclist from a distance but as soon as the cyclist has registered they may well forget all about him or her, having filed said cyclist under the banner of "not a threat". The ninja cyclist, on the other hand, plays a game of a different kind where the risk is higher but the benefits are also higher. If they are not seen at all (is there a spate of news reports of dark clothed cyclists being hit? - a single anecdotal case proves nothing) then they are in greater danger, but if they are noticed then the driver will be much more likely to label them as "potential threat" - after all they are mad enough to ride with out a bin-man jacket on and so might do anything; thus the driver keeps an eye on them, gives them more room, etc.

Personally, not being a gambling man, I dress to suit the conditions. If it's gloomy I'll wear something that stands out (often but not always hiviz or bright yellow), if it's good light conditions I just wear a solid colour. If it's dark I'll use lights. I will try to engage brain and workout the best thing to wear rather than blindly following the doctrine of hiviz=safe.

Another thing that I've noticed about hiviz jackets is: at work I sometimes wear a plain one, other times I wear one with "Road Safety Education" on the back. I can often get quite different responses from drivers depending upon which I'm wearing - but both should be just as visible....so it's not just about being seen.

so it's not just about being seen.

Yes but being seen is a very important first step.

Also there is for a lot of us, the desire to make it undeniable (in a court of law for example) that we were clearly visible and the fault was totally with the other party. I can see it shouldnt be that way, it should be their responsibility and that it doesnt do much good with a car-centric, Police, CPS, Jury and Judge anyway.

Also the OP was quite specifically trying to demonstrate how visible bright coloured jackets can be out in the countryside.

Same can be said of car colours.

meic wrote:Also the OP was quite specifically trying to demonstrate how visible bright coloured jackets can be out in the countryside.

Or rather how noticeable they are in certain lighting conditions against certain backgrounds at a certain distance. And then went on to consider extrapolating this to drivers encountering cyclists in very close proximity, in many road contexts, against varying backgrounds and conditions.

I don't think that anyone is arguing that the yellow isn't visible in the static examples supplied (unless of course, there are other yellow clad cyclists in the photos that we can't see)

Si wrote:having filed said cyclist under the banner of "not a threat".

I've often felt that the most successful clothing to be visible in is clothing that doesn't break up the human form. In other words solid coloured, not patterned.

But yesterday Si's point was brought home to me. I was driving on A-roads near Cambridge, light traffic, moving with the flow, comfortably under the speed limit and plodding along. There was a cyclist up in the distance and what brought him to my attention was not is nondescript dark clothing but he had one of those rain covers over his rucksack. The cover was old and its once fluorescent yellow was long faded to beige but it happened to be fitted over a square-shaped rucksack, perhaps he was carrying books. To my motorist's mind a yellow-ish square-shaped thing on the side of the road might be a SPEED CAMERA.

I was comfortably under the speed limit but motorists' minds are so conditioned to see yellow box shaped objects as THREATS that he jumped into my attention clearly and loudly.

So forget all your h-viz. Go and get a plastic yellow square with shoulder straps and motorists will see you from a mile off.