http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: High-viz vests a must for cyclists? en Mon, 01 Jun 2026 00:41:55 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81408 Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:14:50 +0000 Uberuce 81408@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>When arrested, claim your clothes are so high-visibility that only cats and dolphins can see them.</p> <p>Back OT, I noticed this morning that hi-viz isn't, if it's foggy. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81394 Wed, 15 Aug 2012 10:38:37 +0000 alibali 81394@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Sumdge Good idea, should liven up the "Spotted" thread and will be especially useful if I forget to wear visible clothes to complete the full Godiva look. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81347 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:37:30 +0000 Smudge 81347@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Uberuce, I'm particularly looking forwards to your next appearance at PY now, serial 5 onwards should be particularly impressive!<br /> @Alibali, so do you think blonde wigs could serve as a useful CCE "badge" and thus aid spots of forumites? :-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81345 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:19:57 +0000 alibali 81345@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I plan to learn from the Team GB cyclists: seek incremental improvements: and apply it to road safety.</p> <p>Model good practice when driving<br /> Wear a helmet<br /> Signal my intentions when practicable<br /> Wear visible clothes HiVis in the day, reflective at night.<br /> Ride defensively and anticipate bad driving<br /> Wear a blond wig</p> <p>Well, you get the idea. All these have downsides but so do all safety measures, and it's likely the downsides of most of these are less than the benefit so the overall effect is likely to be positive. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81343 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:36:37 +0000 gembo 81343@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I was on train to stirling late this pm and at Larbet I noticed the Network Rail Training Centre a large black building with some weathered timber. Next to it I noticed a lot of people in orange boiler suits and hard hats, one of whom was on a winch hanging slightly off the ground. maybe I am quite good at noticing things? Hi viz is more visible in many circumstances. it doesn't stop blind drivers hitting you. I also noticed in the letters in the herald a person commenting that he had NEVER seen a cyclist making a hand signal, when pressed he stuck to his guns but also stated he was an occasional cyclist, I conclude by syllogistic style reasoning that he doesn't make hand signals.</p> <p>I have lost any idea of trying to make a point but wonder if some drivers ask for cyclists to be in the gutter area and wearing hi viz. rather than more visible but in the middle of the carriageway therefore holding them up? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81340 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:01:56 +0000 sallyhinch 81340@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oh I'm sure I could have been wearing a purple clown costume with a sparkly mirror ball helmet and the bus would have behaved the same way - it's just wearing the yellow jacket acts as a comfort blanket and enables me to tackle London's traffic... I'm sure much of what we do as cyclists is for our own peace of mind and nothing to do with the effect on cars</p> <p>That said, on a Boris bike you're somehow perfectly visible whatever you wear and everyone gives you an enormously wide berth. Most refreshing. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81332 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:37:16 +0000 Dave 81332@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Since then I've ridden in London without the yellow jacket and promptly almost got wiped out by a bus which overtook me and then forgot all about me.</em></p> <p>But since he overtook you (didn't drive over the top of you) you were clearly visible. More likely that he either didn't care to check, or decided you were competent enough to get out of the way, than having pulled around you was suddenly unable to distinguish you from grey tarmac in the mirrors*.</p> <p>This morning I was drafting a nippy chap who'd overtaken me along the Bridges, when a taxi pulled out of the bus lane, came up alongside us, put his left indicator on and tried to turn through us (he didn't actually, but I think he was trying to force us to stop so he could). Cue amusing double rude gesture from two cyclists! </p> <p>Of course, neither of us was wearing hi-viz so in some quarters we'd deserve everything we got if, having pulled into the other lane, the taxi driver suddenly 'couldn't see us' any more and ran us over...</p> <p>* source - I've now been in the driving seat of a real service bus, and you can see everything down the inside :) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81330 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:14:43 +0000 sallyhinch 81330@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>oh, and when we bought our car I made sure it was a VERY bright colour. I never fail to be amazed at how invisible silver cars can be on a dull winter's day. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168&page=2#post-81329 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:12:22 +0000 sallyhinch 81329@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>You might be onto something with item 10 there ...</p> <p>FWIW I would never ever have cycled in London without my hi vis yellow jacket - mainly because I felt that nothing says 'cyclist' quite so quickly. Given that there's a lot going on on London's streets, having something on that quickly flags you up as a bike (and hence likely to behave in certain bikey ways) made for an additional safety measure. I also thought that it would mean that if someone hit me and said 'sorry, love, I didn't see you' I could have a good laugh before expiring. </p> <p>Then I moved up here (rural Dumfriesshire) where frankly there's not a whole lot going on on the roads and if anyone can't see me then they're not going to see the deer, sheep or loose cows either and they need removing from the gene pool, or at least the roads. And more to the point, it's just not frightening. Even in Dumfries, the traffic is lighter and the drivers while not exactly better seem perfectly capable of seeing bicycles. The scary yellow jacket got put away within about a month and only now gets worn when I'm cycling down to choir of an evening and I know that there will be a lot of elderly drivers on the roads, and it would be bad form to have them hit me. </p> <p>Since then I've ridden in London without the yellow jacket and promptly almost got wiped out by a bus which overtook me and then forgot all about me. So I'll probably continue to wear hi vis on London's roads while continuing to campaign to make it entirely unnecessary everywhere. That said, I never wear a helmet wherever I ride so go figure. Nobody said we had to be entirely consistent and rational ... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81327 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:43:40 +0000 Uberuce 81327@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>My take:</p> <p>Methinks that at the point we begin moving in any transport device, from our own skin to an oil tanker, we take on a duty of care to our fellow Universe resident.<br /> At all times, competent persons are responsible for ensuring that this duty to them can be carried out with only reasonable skill and attention.<br /> If the operator of any given mode of transport is incapable of the emergent reasonably expected level of skill and attention, then they should stop using it.</p> <p>That just gives us the headache of deciding what's reasonable or not in any given context. Just.</p> <p>In this context, to support mandatory hi-viz use, I'd have to consider it unreasonable to expect motorists to see drably clad cyclists in daylight, and I don't.<br /> Compare and contrast that with unlit cycling at night in all dark attire, where I think it requires exceptional circumstances before it's ever reasonable to expect to be seen.</p> <p>At dawn and dusk, I think it's asking a bit much to make out my lights* against the first or last of the sun, so I don my brickie's vest** unless I have a white top on. The latter is also fluorescent thanks to the wonders of modern detergents, and I find knightly-clad cyclists to be comfortably visible in the gloaming to my eyes. </p> <p>*although I do plan on winterising wee blue floofy further by copying Dave's front wheel concept, so I'll have a beefier light up front too.</p> <p>**I also have a pair of fluorescent overbreeks and wore riggers boots in the few bad winter days we had, and may have noticed that I got more room than usual. I say 'may' since I might just be confirmation biasing, but I theorise it's because I was mistaken for a burly workman who'd steel-toe your car door and/or cranium into oblivion if you cut him up. Sort of like the blond wig in reverse, or possibly just the novelty factor forcefield like you get with trailers and 'bents.</p> <p>Plainly this needs further research. I'll ride in:</p> <p>1) My normal casual office/sproglet-wrangling clothes<br /> 2) Commuter warrior lycra<br /> 3) Brickie's mate garb<br /> 4) A dinner jacket, pair of Docs, radio earpiece and mocked up SIA badge strapped to arm<br /> 5) Full drag and wig large enough to obscure beard from behind(need to borrow a helmet mirror)<br /> 6) Oversized shorts, laced up high boots and boxing gloves. Might need to ride the fixed that day, little hope of using the brakes.<br /> 7) Romper suit, frilly bunnet and dummy.<br /> 8) Unfastend straightjacket soaked in fake blood, green lower-face mask and slicked back hair.<br /> 9) Baby otter disguise, while I try to wallop open a clam, fail and look sad<br /> 10) Flowing black robe with scythe</p> <p>...and see what gets the widest berth. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81312 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 18:02:30 +0000 crowriver 81312@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Interesting discussion on the 'POLITE' hi-viz vests on <a href="http://www.policespecials.com/forum/index.php?/topic/119770-horse-riders-hi-viz/#entry2057899">this Police forum</a>... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81311 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:48:43 +0000 Darkerside 81311@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Blimey, that was a dull post... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81310 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:48:00 +0000 Darkerside 81310@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>From memory, restrictions on batternburg solely relate to the colouring rather than the pattern. The reflectives are treated for all intents as a light of the same colour, so reflective blue may only be used by police (or any emergency vehicle), green by ambulance, red by fire or at the rear of any vehicle, etc.</p> <p>There's a recovery service called 911 that are not affiliated with the police, but are allowed to use battenburg with reflective yellow and standard paint because of this. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81309 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:44:17 +0000 crowriver 81309@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Better put in small letters below 'cyclist'. Just to remove any confusion and the possibility of arrest for impersonating an officer... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81308 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:34:22 +0000 wee folding bike 81308@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>How about a reflective jacket which says POLITE? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81296 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:30:34 +0000 kaputnik 81296@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>There are regulations governing "Battenberg" reflective patterns on cars - as in, I don't think your'e allowed to use them unless you are one of the relevant emergency / officialdom services. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81263 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 13:04:02 +0000 Dave 81263@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Reflectives at night are certainly in a different ball-park to hi-viz during the day (even moreso if you ride outside built up areas). Stick a top-quality white retro-reflective band on your right ankle and you can practically stop worrying about whether your rear light is working.</p> <p>I have however considered putting reflective chequered body wrap on our car after noticing the highway patrols down south are black/hi viz - put a damper on the speedophiles in the mayhem through the midlands on the M6 anyway ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81249 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:09:23 +0000 chdot 81249@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“<br /> Defensive cycling courses for adults should be part of the package so that they understand the problems of visibility from large vehicles and speed differentials on rural roads.<br /> "</p> <p><a href="http://m.local.stv.tv/edinburgh/magazine/149405-cyclists-call-for-fitting-legacy-to-sir-chris-hoys-olympian-success" rel="nofollow">http://m.local.stv.tv/edinburgh/magazine/149405-cyclists-call-for-fitting-legacy-to-sir-chris-hoys-olympian-success</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81248 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 12:07:06 +0000 steveo 81248@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Then you need more/better lights :D </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81246 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:55:29 +0000 Roibeard 81246@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>fleuro colours are of debatable value</p> <p>I was lead to believe by some article or another that at night time, white is far more visible than yellows. It stands to reason, being that it reflects the whole of the light spectrum, not just part of it.</em></p> <p>Ah, but fluorescent colours "pop" in sunlight because they absorb UV light and emit visible light - hence even better that white - check out a fluorescent colour on a dull day, it still shines...</p> <p>As for the retro-reflectives versus lights argument, how many LED lights now emit in a very narrow cone, being blindingly/distractingly bright on axis (or when cycling behind), but off axis being rather dim? At least the retro-reflectives work from whatever angle the light source is approaching.</p> <p>I'd sooner ditch my helmet (and may well do so until I need rain/cold protection again - currently it's only just staying on as a camera mount!), than drop the fluorescent/retro-reflective at night.</p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81244 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:54:44 +0000 alibali 81244@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>+1 Baldcyclist</p> <p>It stands to reason....</p> <p>Yes, but it's not quite as simple as that for flourescent materials. They can convert light from one wavelength (maybe invisible) into another.</p> <p>Since the eye has a variable response to different wavelengths, an object with a flourescent coating can be brigher than a white one in the same environment.</p> <p>There's a number of new roadsigns around that exploit UV light to produce a bright yellow in daylight: very effective, so don't dismiss flourescent clothing in the day. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81242 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:44:02 +0000 crowriver 81242@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>if we want to redce smidsy's we need to preach defensive riding and primary position</em></p> <p>Yep. I'd much rather the driver was beeping the horn and yelling at me for being 'in the middle of the road', no matter how socially 'unacceptable'. Far better than lying in a pool of my own blood by the side of the road as the driver mumbles 'Sorry mate, I didn't see you.' Apparently though that is socially 'acceptable'. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81238 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:32:35 +0000 kaputnik 81238@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>fleuro colours are of debatable value</em></p> <p>I was lead to believe by some article or another that at night time, white is far more visible than yellows. It stands to reason, being that it reflects the whole of the light spectrum, not just part of it.</p> <p>As Smudge says, at night, it's reflectives that work best. Apparently they work best when applied to moving parts of the body (i.e. legs / ankles) as peripheral vision is sensitive to moving points of light more than static ones. But you only need to catch a retroreflective road sign, tyre sidewall or similar in a bicycle headlight to see just how effective they are at even say 100m away. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81237 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:22:20 +0000 Dave 81237@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I object to the whole idea of 'take responsibility for your own safety', at least when it's used to justify a fairly arbitrary choice of safety measure like a hi-viz suit.</p> <p>For instance, we already know that wearing a blonde wig leads to drivers giving significantly more passing space in at least some circumstances. Why does nobody argue that "all cyclists should take responsibility for their own safety and wear blonde wigs - after all, you'll come off worse if you're hit by a car whoever's at fault"? </p> <p>It's just because of a social construct that makes it acceptable to think that wearing a luminous suit is a reasonable course of action but wearing a wig is ridiculous (in the same way that pedestrian and driving helmets are ignored despite offering huge safety benefits in absolute terms over cycling lids). </p> <p>It wouldn't surprise me to learn, if such things could be measured, that useless-in-the-wet rim brakes contribute to a large proportion of cyclist injuries, to take one example. Should insurers be able to reduce compensation because cyclists refuse to upgrade to discs, negligently contributing to a higher accident rate (regardless of who is to blame for the actual collisions)? </p> <p>Should we even take the minimal step of "taking responsibility for our own safety" by fitting upgraded brakes?</p> <p>You can play this game with almost anything, but the bottom line remains that until someone can demonstrate a population-level reduction in casualties amongst wearers of hi-viz versus ordinary cyclists I'll be highly sceptical. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81230 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:45:47 +0000 crowriver 81230@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>In short, my view, if you buy black car, you're probably more likely to get hit by another motorist, same if you wear black clothing at night on your bike, make your choice...</em></p> <p>It depends on the context. In many parts of southern Europe, people avoid 'black cars' as they are afraid of who might be inside and the consequences for themselves and their family if they do anything rash like scratching the paintwork of the black S-class, 7 series, Bentley, etc.</p> <p>To put it another way, don't the police wear black? Does that make them more likely to be hit by members of the public? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81229 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:44:34 +0000 Smudge 81229@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Baldcyclist, I follow your reasoning, however at night retro-reflectives are definitely useful, fleuro colours are of debatable value.<br /> However what I am wearing at night is surely a moot point, good led lights make me visible to any driver who cares to pay attention, the ones who don't will continue to fail to look/notice unless there is somethin unsual to attract their attention. In broad daylight, what's the point?<br /> I have nothing against people wearing hi-vi/dark clothes/pink tutus, but if we want to redce smidsy's we need to preach defensive riding and primary position, I honestly believe those are the areas where rapid safety gains are available just now </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81227 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:39:43 +0000 crowriver 81227@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I find it hard to believe the same people can also fail to distingush between a drably-clad cyclist and and empty stretch of tarmac.</em></p> <p>I was speaking to a friend who just bought a new car (she also cycles, but not as much now she has a new shiny vehicle). She had in my view ruined her fairly new bike by spray painting it fluoro pink badly. She claimed this was to make her 'more visible' on the road. I opined that if a driver fails to look, no amount of spray paint or hi-viz will help. To which the response was that cyclists in ordinary clothes 'blend into the background' for drivers. At which point I began to question her driving... Anyway, this is someone who has cycled most of her life. I was a bit shocked that popular myths about cycling can colonise someone's consciousness to such an extent purely due to taking 'the driver's perspective'. </p> <p>This, and other discussions with drivers have made me realise that the whole driver/cyclist dichotomy is really mostly a question of identity politics: joining one camp or another. It has relatively little to do with visibility, etc. Clearly for some folk having a foot in both camps is an intolerable pressure, leading to strange schisms in attitudes and beliefs bordering on the schizophrenic.</p> <p><em>Length? I'd have been worried about how you would have been edited down if you had been published.</em></p> <p>@Kim, you linked to another letter that was published. It took a slightly different, but related angle to your reply: but it was brief and to the point. Easy choice for the editor! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81226 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:36:40 +0000 Smudge 81226@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Uberuce, spot on, the difficulty is not being "visible", the difficulty is being allocated the category "relevant" or "important" within the observing drivers subconscious.<br /> Splitshift got a good demo of this one day on the bikeability training recently when I chose to wear a white crash helmet and my first aider pattern hi-viz vest, instant and highly noticeable difference in the behaviour of nearby traffic as I was classified under "look out! Might be Police!" :-/</p> <p>Nothing to do with visibility, everything to do with attracting a second look. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81225 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:34:53 +0000 Baldcyclist 81225@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I don't agree with 'obliged to wear', but I also take issue with a lot of cyclists view that all high vis and safety gear does is take the blame, and shift it onto the cyclist, it doesn't.</p> <p>High vis or not, motorists will always hit each other, stationary objects, cyclists, and pedestrians, as will cyclists (albeit with less consequence). People are people, and no matter their mode of transport they will hit things. I've even seen pedestrians walking into things, done it myself!</p> <p>So we need to take responsibility for our own safety too, and if we accept that motorists, even the careful and well meaning ones, are going to hit things (because there is no way to stop it), then wearing something that is going to make you more visible, especially in the dark doesn't seem unreasonable to me.</p> <p>Someone on here once mentioned a study where accident rates based on colour of vehicle was studied (can't remember thread), and it turned out light coloured cars were hit less. There was a bit of a 'no sh*t sherlock' reaction to that, and lets make all cars yellow, but to suggest light, or high viz clothing might have the same effect? ...No evidence, rubbish, make cars floupink etc etc</p> <p>In short, my view, if you buy black car, you're probably more likely to get hit by another motorist, same if you wear black clothing at night on your bike, make your choice... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8168#post-81212 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 09:33:04 +0000 Kim 81212@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@cb yes it probably was length, but I have had letters of a similar length published in the past. It such depends on what else is getting attention at the time. </p>