[Closed] MTB clothes getting brighter and Roadies clothes getting darker?! UK

Sky.....
Rapha.....

There are any number of studies that demonstrate that the colours cyclists wear have little impact. As a driver you're either actively looking out for cyclists and peds, or you're not.

Improve your attentiveness.

Rapha have always done subdued colours in winter, some of them look fabulous in the promo shots and wide open spaces or mountains, however in the real world maybe they are too dull.
They have tried to incorporate reflective segments, which you can't really see until a light is shone on it, still keeps the overall look subtle but adds more visual impact too.

I'll agree though, dark colours are even darker in these grey foggy evenings..

My van has a bulk head and with only three windows to look out of the world out side can look like a dark place in the daylight hours.

Were you driving backwards?

My van has a bulk head and with only three windows to look out of the world out side can look like a dark place in the daylight hours

So you couldn't see someone on the road because your van doesn't have enough windows? And it's their fault?

Have you had your eyes tested recently?

I'm amazed you missed all the black cars.

I hope that the OP's van is bright yellow. 🙂

Kettle's on, leftover christmas Stollen anyone? Or there's a few Roses at the bottom of the tub.

as a general fashion trend 'roadie' clothes are getting brighter and brighter, although some still like to wear darker shades, it's their choice

as a frequent road rider over many many years it makes little difference what colour clothing i wear, drivers will still not see me no matter how many windows their vehicle has, or any other excuse they choose for not paying attention to other road users

It's obvious that clothing colour makes little difference to noticeability. That's why road workers all over the world wear camo and the military all wear dayglo.

as a general fashion trend 'roadie' clothes are getting brighter and brighter, although some still like to wear darker shades, it's their choice

Yep. Look at the Ale range.

It's personal choice. I'm a fluro guy, though I try not to wear the shorts and jersey of this outfit together.

[img] [/img]

I hope that the OP's van is bright yellow

Nah more likely white.

It's obvious that clothing colour makes little difference to noticeability. That's why road workers all over the world wear camo and the military all wear dayglo.

Exactly

meh. Camo is there to allow an individual to be indistinguishable against a particular background.
From a driver's persepective, other than at dusk or maybe riding through really dense forest, a rider's background isn't black. Regardless of what they're wearing, in daylight hours a driver should easily be able to spot a figure on the road ahead of them well before it's dangerous. Fluoro might get me seen sooner but I'm lucky enough never to have been nearly run over by a vehicle that's 200 yards away

... and many of my daytime conversations with motorists start with "was it the bright jacket that stopped you seeing me, or the flashing lights ?" I'm not sure they matter as much assome suggest (I mostly wear them in preparation for the potential conversation with an insurer or defence lawyer)

and many of my daytime conversations with motorists start with "was it the bright jacket that stopped you seeing me, or the flashing lights ?

Of course it's every road users responsibility to look out for everyone else, but it's churlish to deny that bright colours and lighting make it easier.

Of course it's every road users responsibility to look out for everyone else, but it's churlish to deny that bright colours and lighting make it easier.

All road users to wear dayglow in their dayglow cars, vans and trucks ? After all they seem to hit each other a lot

Do you also speak to all the drivers that did see you to ask what they noticed first?

Massive flashing superbright offroad lights in the dark would get you noticed from half a mile away by drivers but that's unnecessary

IMHO bright clothing helps, however lots of the motorists I work with appear to believe that cyclists, peds and horse riders should wear lots of dayglo colours. However when I say fine I'll back that as long as your car is painted a statistically safe colour then they tend to start ranting about personal choice?

It's the age of austerity init ...!!

Know fact .... in economic down turns clothes get brighter.

And as most roadies are contrarian in nature ... that's a little cr4p joke but may well be true.... their clothes do the opposite .

I'm a dark kit roadie 😳 only ride daylight hours though ..

I did have few colourful bits but winter grime ruins them 🙄

But yeah attentive driving is the main thing for motorists

There are any number of studies that demonstrate that the colours cyclists wear have little impact.

Got any links?

[url= https://www.reference.com/vehicles/color-car-accidents-35bc1c8e7f375cd6 ]Black cars have more accidents[/url]

I bet this transfers to bikes.

It's obvious that clothing colour makes little difference to noticeability. That's why road workers all over the world wear camo and the military all wear dayglo

Well said!

There are any number of studies that demonstrate that the colours cyclists wear have little impact. As a driver you're either actively looking out for cyclists and peds, or you're not.

Of course you can supply links to these many studies. You can, can't you?

Camo is there to allow an individual to be indistinguishable against a particular background.
From a driver's persepective, other than at dusk or maybe riding through really dense forest, a rider's background isn't black.

But in low light or fog, it's arguably quite dark.

As a sidenote, the Vietcong wore black too, as did the SAS when assaulting the Iranian embassy. And ninjas. Just saying.

[i]Edit:[/i] did it really take me 18 mins to write that?

But yeah attentive driving is the main thing for motorists

I do agree, but which is the easier option?

1. Wear bright clothing and use lights to make yourself more visible to motorists in low-light conditions
2. Make every driver in the world more attentive, all the time while driving.

But in low light or fog, it's arguably quite dark.

As a sidenote, the Vietcong wore black too

as did the SAS when assaulting the Iranian embassy

And ninjas. Just saying.

This study looked at whether drivers overtaking a bicyclist changed the proximities of their passes
in response to the level of experience and skill signalled by the bicyclist’s appearance. Five outfits
were tested, ranging from a stereotypical sport rider’s outfit, portraying high experience and skill, to
a vest with ‘novice cyclist’ printed on the back, portraying low experience. A high-visibility
bicycling jacket was also used, as were two commercially available safety vests, one featuring a
prominent mention of the word ‘police’ and a warning that the rider was video-recording their
journey, and one modelled after a police officer’s jacket but with a letter changed so it read
‘POLITE’. An ultrasonic distance sensor recorded the space left by vehicles passing the bicyclist on
a regular commuting route. 5690 data points fulfilled the criteria for the study and were included in
the analyses. The only outfit associated with a significant change in mean passing proximities was
the police/video-recording jacket. Contrary to predictions, drivers treated the sports outfit and the
‘novice cyclist’ outfit equivalently, suggesting they do not adjust overtaking proximity as a function
of a rider’s perceived experience. Notably, whilst some outfits seemed to discourage motorists from
passing within 1 metre of the rider, approximately 1-2% of overtakes came within 50 cm no matter
what outfit was worn. This suggests there is little riders can do, by altering their appearance, to
prevent the very closest overtakes; it is suggested that infrastructural, educational or legal measures
are more promising for preventing drivers from passing extremely close to bicyclists

this time of year I use a rear light all the time, much more useful than coloured clothing IMO (though I tend to wear colourful stuff anyway) as it's attention grabbing.

There are any number of studies that demonstrate that the colours cyclists wear have little impact

you know, I did mention forests (and I'm not sure that most of them wore a recognisable uniform anyway)

I'll carry a brightly coloured reflective top to quickly pop on for the wooded sections of any road ride then, but otherwise wear hi-definition black. Sorted!

I would go into the Vietcong uniform and whether it is technically one or not, but we should probably save it for another day. 😉

Dark colours only really make much difference if the bike also has no lights, IMO. So it's shame the two seem to go hand in hand really.

Some interesting points of view there. I just think that surely wearing some sort of colour other than a dark colour on a grey day might improve your visibility and possibly be seen sooner rather than later it would be worth it. Regardless of any studies I think if I still rode on the road for long periods of time I wouldn’t dress in black head to toe.

My van has a bulkhead too, I don't notice any problems - but then I don't drive in town much. How did your near miss happen?

There are any number of studies that demonstrate that the colours cyclists wear have little impact

I don't buy that. Another thing that irritates me is those 'road grey' coloured cars, flipping heck they really are a danger.

I think another way of presenting the results in question could be "most drivers are surprisingly good at spotting cyclists" and the ones that are shit are shit anyway.

There was similar data for close passes IIRC. Some drivers are just dicks.

I don't often ride in dark clothes myself, but I get angry when I see a defence lawyer trying to make lack of hi-vis clothing an issue when someone's been killed by a driver in broad daylight.

I not suggesting that we all walk around in hi-viz jackets, just simply wear zummit bright on the road. What has anyone got to lose. As for the bulk the head I’m just a wear that the light emitted into the cab is not as good as a vehicle with more windows on dull days. By the way the above issue is out on the open road not the in town.

Years of riding have taught me that attire makes no difference to the wilful blindness of some drivers - I had someone exit a dual-carriageway onto a empty roundabout and missed broadsiding me by a foot, despite me wearing a dayglo jacket, which I'd only reluctantly put on because of the foggy conditions.

"training aircraft are to be painted black to make them stand out more clearly against the sky"

Much like a cyclist from the PoV of a seated car driver.

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/safety-first-as-raf-paints-planes-black-1146643.html ]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/safety-first-as-raf-paints-planes-black-1146643.html[/url]

raymeridians - Member

"training aircraft are to be painted black to make them stand out more clearly against the sky"

Much like a cyclist from the PoV of a seated car driver.

That might apply after you've been run over and you're on the windscreen, but it's a bit late then.

raymeridians - Member
"training aircraft are to be painted black to make them stand out more clearly against the sky"

Much like a cyclist from the PoV of a seated car driver.

Yeah assuming zero buildings or other things by the side of the road.

Now admittedly not from a seated view inside of a car, but yeah, these two guys are like silhouettes compared to the lovely blue background of the sky:

[img] [/img]

[quote=raymeridians ]"training aircraft are to be painted black to make them stand out more clearly against the sky"
In WW2 the USAF fitted powerful lights to the front of their ASW aircraft so that they couldn't be seen against the bright Pacific sky.

Now admittedly not from a seated view inside of a car, but yeah, these two guys are like silhouettes compared to the lovely blue background of the sky:

I'm with the OP in this, to some extent. I drive a van with a bulkhead (it's red, FWIW) and [i]some[/i] cyclists are hard to see. while we can all be high and mighty, when it's raining and all you can see out of is a drop covered side window and a rain covered mirror, unless a cyclist has lights on, they can be very, very difficult to see, especially if cars behind have lights on. even with the best will in the world, and by being very, very attentive, some cyclists can very suddenly appear alongside you.

the easiest way to avoid this from a cyclist point of view is to have lights on, but having brighter clothes on does make a difference. I've never hit anyone, and I've only ever been hit once on a bike, but I'm incredibly aware when i'm driving just how difficult it [i]can[/i] be to see cyclists.

at night it's even worse, in the wet, when car lights can obscure all but the brightest bike lights in a wet mirror - this is where flashing lights make a massive difference, as they're not seen on other vehicles.

even on dry country roads in murky conditions cyclists can be hard to see.

I'm not trying to defend every driver who hits a cyclist, but i don't think cyclists can blithely ride around without a care in the world.

even as a van driver, other cars can be incredibly difficult to see - motorways in poor weather are very tricky to drive on when there's heavy spray, wet windows and mirrors, and cars without lights. it's pretty stressful, especially if you have to change lanes as your vision is very limited at times, and it's hardly like you can stop, lean over and wipe the windows clean. sometimes i don't think other road users appreciate what it's like to drive other types of vehicle, whether that be van, lorry, tractor etc. today along the M4 in dense fog it was surprising just how many people either didn't have their fog lights on, or any lights at all.

If vans really are this unsafe to drive maybe we need some new legislation that demands a better field of view for the drivers of all road going vehicles? I'm sure cars and vans could be redesigned with larger mirrors, increased areas of glass etc. much like some of the prototype HGVs that are being developed?

perhaps that's the case. maybe at the same time they could legislate that cyclists should have flashing lights on constantly and wear bright clothes (arguably cheaper and easier to implement...)*

as i said, I'm not blaming anyone here, but giving a point of view from both sides of the argument. vision is more restricted in a van than in a car, and drivers of vans need to recognise that they need to take even more care. cyclists also need to be aware that drivers of vans have less vision than cars (which they themselves may drive), and therefore need to take more care around them.

given that bulkheaded panel vans are legal on the road, there has to be a recognition that in certain conditions visibility is impaired and the driver can do little about it. ultimately accidents happen, often they're avoidable, but it's rarely 100% one party's fault, so it's up to everyone to do what they can to minimise the risk - drivers (obviously) and cyclists (also, obviously).

*i don't actually support either of these

Be safe - be seen

I wear bright orange or yellow tops mostly and I hardly get any near misses. Leaving aside punishment passes I could count dangerously close passes for the last 10 years on both hands. Is it because I'm more visible, the roads I ride, or just luck. Who knows.

My theory is that if I'm visible, ride far enough out to have escape room and be in the part of the road drivers look at, and use a mirror I can avoid most accidents.

All that said I think the number of times hi-viz matters is pretty small. Too small to measure. It's only got to prevent one accident though. Most times a driver that looks will see you. But as it costs nothing to be more visible rather than less visible I'll go for it.