What's the point of hi viz?

Given that the Test group had twice as many accidents not involving another road user (80) as multi party ones (43), (and pretty much as many single party ones as the control group (96)), I'd reach the conclusion that hi viz makes you unable to ride a bike properly.

I came here to help me decide:

Buying a jacket, comes in fluro yellow or a mid grey. Like the jacket, not keen on either colour ...

It's fine if you don't buy either and continue looking for another jacket.

Almost took out a cyclist this evening. I was rolling slowly, waiting for a car to pass so I could turn right. When I started the turn the rider popped up right in front of me. Black helmet and top, crouching over the handle bar, drafting the car so close that his lights were not visible to oncoming traffic.

Umm, weird thought. Instead of trying to appropriate blame for your actions, perhaps you should have looked where you were turning? He didn’t just pop out of nowhere, he had priority going straight on. The gentleman’s clothing doesn’t remotely come into it, why did you assume there was nothing behind that car?

Not blaming them and I was looking. My point is it is difficult to see a person dressed in black against a black background when their light is covered.

A working lights is a legal requirement in the dark... I would argue covered is not working...

I'm not sure I quite understand why everyone is so against high vis?

Because it is so far down the list of things that improve safety and enforcing it encourages a culture of victim blaming.

If it was so fucking effective why aren’t all cars hi viz?

"It's really hard to notice people!"

say the drivers who collided with railway bridges 1800 times last year.

I use a high vis tabard fairly regularly and it's so easy to pack it away and use that even if it has a marginal effect on your safety that considering the potential repercussion to a cyclist of a fairly minor collision with a car (even if is his faulty) it's kind of makes sense.
I have worked in construction where it's mandatory and I can tell you first hand that when it's dark the reflective area is remarkable effective... however still not sold on flouro either in day or night.

^ This. I don’t understand why you’d want to be less visible by choice.

I think fluro works well around sunrise/ sunset.

1 Attachment

Because it's uncool and anything that makes cycling look uncool at this point is a climate crime.

I can see all of those people.

What about the one you can't?

But the ones in fluro stand out more...

Not particularly, the lights do a good job when it's actually dark, and when it's too light for lights, you can see everyone. Fluro is so prevalent it's like camouflage now anyway, best way to stand out is to look different, that's why I ride naked.

The one taking the photo?

If you look carefully they are all visible. If you look up quickly between sending texts only the fluoro is visible. So, yes, if you want to make it easier for texting drivers, wear the bright stuff.

Appears the trend has caught on

1 Attachment

I see it's only the men that have helmets...

But surely if drivers have a responsibility to not crash into cyclists, you also have a responsibility to be as visible as possible? Yes, if you look closely enough at that image all the cyclists are visible, and I totally sympathise with the frustrations you have about shitty drivers and poor cycling roads. But I just don't understand why you'd consciously reduce how visible you are to drivers. Shit drivers are always going to exist, and I don't see that magically disappearing before self driving cars become the norm or we get a network of beautiful bicycle motorways across the nation

Why aren’t all cars hi viz?

Actually paint everything hi viz and no more crashes will ever occur.

Fuck you have solved all road safety issues, claim yourself a medal.

Because they're inherently easier to spot due to their size and noise. Why don't all bicycles have flags on the back like recumbents?

If what you're getting at is that high vis isn't cool, then that's totally fair. If you don't want to wear it then that's fine, I just don't understand the opposition to it here that seems to go a bit further than "looks shit"