- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
forum
Conspicuity and safety
So high viz isn't the boost to safety some believe...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753518309871?plat...
If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.
Latest Forum Topics
Latest Comments
- Rendel Harris 0 sec ago
Yes...and no. Of course no bike can turn a bad climber into a good one and a heavier bike will climb just fine, but as you mention, the heaviest...
- SamSeed 3 hours 1 min ago
My 6KU, replaced everything but the front chainring over the past 5 years.
- Hirsute 8 hours 19 min ago
Radar tells me their closing speed, if they are slowing and how far away. Then I decide to say a prayer. The change of light pattern is incidental.
- lonpfrb 8 hours 39 min ago
Quite so, which is why our village 20mph zone covers the whole residential extent. Of course, enforcement is another thing..
- lonpfrb 9 hours 5 min ago
No, that's very doubtful while proper testing would be fully destructive.
- don simon fbpe 10 hours 19 min ago
What's wrong with dropping down on to the Millenium Bridge, or the swing bridge, then the brief, but satisfying climb back up the hill? #training....
- chrisonabike 11 hours 20 sec ago
The relatives might of course disagree, but in general I'd countenance a relatively light sentence* if only we could fix it so that those who...
- ktache 11 hours 39 min ago
Id forgotten that I got a second hand set of project two's for my getting to work bike over twenty years back.
- Veganpotter 12 hours 36 min ago
My bet is that all these tires popping off are from people with bad pressure gauges or they're simply just putting too much air in on purpose. ...
Add new comment
45 comments
Some years ago, I was invloved in research into the conspicuity of emergency vehicles - particularly fire engines & smaller command vehicles. The research assessed several colour variations of vehicles in situ over a period of about 12 months. These included red, white, yellow (lime green) and some combinations of these colours. As part of the research, we also tested different types of reflective material & various types of flashing lights. Key criteria included feedback from firefighters using the vehicles (the vehicles were rotated through several busy fire stations), response times, and accident rates.
The research concluded that colour didn't make as much difference as did contrasting colours. It also concluded that highly reflective tape with contrasting colours & flashing lights with contrasting colours also made a significant difference. Interestingly, it was found that red flashing lights were more visible in daylight while blue was more visible at night.
As a result, these vehicles (around 1000 of them) are now fitted out in red & white paint, along with highly-reflective red & white tape or red & yellow/lime green tape along the entire bodywork of the vehicles. Contrasting red & blue high-intensity flashing lights are fitted at several locations on the vehicle(s) (including at bumper bar height, a height on the front that is visible in rear view mirrors, the roof, & all leading edges front & rear).
Many other fire & emergency services have since done the same.
I use these findings to guide the ways in which I make myself more conspicuous while I'm cycling because I know it's based on evidence. I wear contasting colours, have more than one flashing light at more than one height front & rear, & use some highly-reflective tape on my bike(s).
Hope this helps.
Fire Engine.jpg
.... and an extendable ladder strapped to my helmet
Srchar: "Hi vis and lights are just another stick to beat cyclists with"
Really? Does one have to pay extra for that?
When I am being a car driver I appreciate when cyclists and pedestrians make an effort to increase their chances of visibility in the environment. Not because I want to see them in time to stop but so that I can adjust speed, road position and plan for their presence in the general flow of traffic at the earliest opportunity.
Not sure how other peoples sense of vision works but hi viz, reflectives and lights get my attention.
When I am a cyclist I generally wear some clothing. Really makes no difference to me if it is camo roadkill or luminous yellow. I generally choose the luminous yellow though. Not aware that doing so makes me immortal or immune from being run over by a driver determined to look at their phone rather than the road, but I have no control over that.
Presumably you've also counted all the people - on black bikes, dressed head to toe in black, without lights, or otherwise - that you've not seen ?
No, I usually just shovel them all off my bonnet into a ditch when I get to my destination.
Hi vis and lights are just another stick to beat cyclists with. Personally, at night, I use lights. However, when driving at night, I see many people on black bikes, dressed head to toe in black, without lights, from quite some distance. Not wearing hi vis and not using lights doesn't make you invisible.
You must have exceptional eyesight. I remember being on holiday and driving down an unlit dual carriageway. There was a guy all in black on a bike with no lights. Doesn't matter what the bike colour was - it was really dark. If it wasn't for his reflectors on the pedals I'd never have seen him. Seems crazily dangerous to me.
People travelling at a speed they can stop well within the distance they can see to be clear can do this easily. You should try it some time.
Does anyone else use the tactic to move latterally across the road when approaching a car at a junction?
My theory is that: 1) the different axis of movement give the driver's brain another movement to detect, movement being the thing that brains are more developed to sense.
And 2) I think that being more towards the middle of the road gives me better scope for avoiding them if they do pull out, perhaps I have a better angle to turn left and skirt round their backside.
I do that whenever it looks like they might not stop or are going unusually fast.
You have to be careful that you don't suddenly veer into the path of someone behind you, though, so I don't do it if I'm not sure what traffic is behind me (tiny mirror for the win).
My thinking is that I'm increasing the time for me to brake/evade them if they do pull out and I can give them a hard stare whilst doing so (see picture a few posts above).
Like this ?:
Marty_Feldman.jpg
So you're the guy who's been following me, then?
[Fenix: “As the studies don't seem to be conclusive - I'm carrying on with wearing bright colours and running lights. It's no extra hardship or cost to me.”] = Sensible.
An observation re visibility: Last autumn I was out ridding on one of those late year sunny days where the contrast between light and shade seem particularly high. As I rounded a corner a pair of cyclists where just disappearing around the following corner which was under tree cover. They were ridding side by side. One of the pair was wearing a high viz jacket, the other ninja black. I saw both of them but the high viz gentleman was the one that registered. (I was keeping an eye out for cyclists and I’d seen one - job done)
If I’d been Ronnie Runt, the boy racer, yacking away to the unfortunate Waynetta* & keeping ½ an eye on the road, I might well have ticked off ‘High Viz’ as ‘cyclist seen’ and once having done that subconsciously stopped looking & thus missed ‘Ninja Road Warrior’ (until the point of impact)
Summmerised as:
A second tedious observation: Some boldly patterned cycling jerseys can make for effective dazzle/disruptive camouflage at a moderate distance.
* With apologies to any Waynetta’s who may read this.
Just an observation, but when I changed from standard blackish sunglasses on my commute into London to a pair with gold mirror lenses people didn't pull out on me as much - 'eye' contact seemed better
It's well worth trying to make eye contact with drivers who are about to pull out. If you can make eye contact, then they've definitely seen you and hopefully won't pull out anyway (I've never had a driver pull out on me when I've made prior eye contact).
Sorry but this is absolutely untrue, do not ever, ever rely on this bit of misinformation. So many times people including myself have looked at drivers (and indeed pedestrians) and thought they were looking at you but far too often you've got your invisibility cloak on and they don't see you at all.
NEVER believe that a person has seen you because you've 'eyeballed' them!
Maybe my stare is intimidating enough to stop them in their tracks, but so far it has worked for me. I don't assume that they won't still pull out, so I do maintain caution.
It wouldn't surprise me if some drivers see cyclists and yet don't care at all and still pull out despite making eye contact, so you make a valid point. I still think it's worthwhile trying to make eye contact, though.
I've had a pedestrian once look both ways and then walk into the side of me... OK: nearly walk into the side of me, because I had my doubts about them.
To be fair, I think it's probably the squirrel suit rather than the intimidating stare
The "definitely" is untrue, but otherwise there's not much wrong with what hawkinspeter said.
In any case, you say not to rely on it, but what else are you going to do? If you're riding along a road where you have right of way, you're not going to stop just in case they decide to pull out; unless you have good reason to think they haven't seen you you're going to keep going anyway.
I'm not convinced that these studies are of much use.
There's a cognitive theory that basically says that brains are always running predictive models and things that don't fit the predictions cause spikes in brain activity and presumably attract more attention. This would suggest that it's the unexpected that will draw attention rather than specific colours, so if everyone wears hi-viz, people will just expect to see it and thus not focus attention on it.
(Here's a nicely readable summary of the ideas: https://www.quantamagazine.org/to-make-sense-of-the-present-brains-may-predict-the-future-20180710/)
The trick to being seen is thus to behave erratically. The number of car drivers that will complain about cyclists weaving dangerously would re-enforce this view as they can't usually spot cyclists that behave predictably.
That's the rationalisation that I use for wearing a squirrel suit and cutting up as many cars as possible.
subtle but constant reminders like in Australia
20180801_090648.jpg
I ride on rural roads in daylight and my observation is that I see cyclists in bright colours earlier than those in black, particularly when they are riding between high hedges or under cover of trees.
Last week I actually lost sight of a rider in black when he entered an avenue of trees.
As the studies don't seem to be conclusive - I'm carrying on with wearing bright colours and running lights. It's no extra hardship or cost to me.
When I'm driving - I'm looking out for cyclists. I'll not hit someone I've seen.
Out on the bike - brighter colour cyclists are more visible in the distance than someone blending in with a hedge.
I've actually missed my cycling pal one dull morning - he was riding towards me and under the tres all in black. I was riding and looking out for him so we can begin. He didn't stand out at all and ended up chasing me for about a mile. He had a bit more colour on him the next time we rode.
The two studies aren't necessarily contradictory.
In an experiment Cyclists wearing yellow jackets seem to have less accidents
In a different experiment drivers seem no more likely to see a cyclist in a yellow jacket under their normal driving conditions
The first experiment shows a correlation, the second experiment independantly is looking for a causative link. It seems that drivers seeing a yellow jacket sooner / better may not be the reason people in yellow jackets have less accidents.
The second experiment does not show that wearing a yellow jacket doesn't reduce your accident rate. It simply shows that yellow jackets do not seem more visible to that group of drivers.
Isn't there an argument that pink is the best colour?
I've had someone say they couldn't see me because of the lights of the cars coming the other way !
I once had a woman pull out of a side-road and into my front wheel on a dark morning despite my flashing front light. Her excuse was that she was looking for distant lights and I was too close!
You can do all the surveys, studies etc but you will never know if wearing hi-viz has saved you.
You cant record it, its impossible.
Is it worth making yourself as visible as possible? yes is the common sense answer
the alternative is to wear full black and suddenly appear out of the darkness to surprise the willing participant in your own demise.
That’s why we have stats. At the individual level it’s hard to see, but over a large sample the effects are more visible. A large sample size and a long observation period should make the study powered enough to find an effect if one exists, and it seems to have done so here.
needs a few more graphs though.
Pages