[Closed] Why do runners wear hi viz?

marketing

Cos we don't wear lights 😉

To keep them safe from cyclists

it's very annoying on shared paths when a runner is all in dark clothes and appears suddenly out of the dark

They are sick of being confused with Ninjas

So that car drivers can say sorry I didn't see you after they have turned left at a junction without bothering to indicate

Even if you have only seen them on pavements, they might also run on roads. I do. Though I haven't got any hi-vis yet - but I agree it seems to be the new fashion.

Peds are generally blind to us runners, that may be a reason

That's a valid observation that they may have been previously running on a rural country lane previously and now on the pavement, but I commute through a city to the train station. Shared paths is a good point also. ie parks.
Reminds me of the time I was cycling through the park, saw the dog, saw the owner, didn't notice the retractable lead though!!! That was a sore one for all involved. Maybe animal leads should be hi viz!!

There's a general drift to wearing high viz in almost every situation now in the UK. Its almost unstoppable.

Cars coming out of driveways is quite a risk. More chance of being seen, and therefore not being driven into when running in the dark.

Why do runners wear hi viz?

How long before a 'I nearly hit/crashed into/tripped over/bumped into a runner who wasn't wearing any hi viz' thread appears

please don't feed the troll

A lot of roads don't have pavements, especially the lanes with less traffic and less pollution that are more inviting to run down.

If you're running along well lit streets they're not really needed.
On unlit or poorly lit roads, especially without pavements, they offer unparalleled protection against nasty super-villains

I wear a head torch as well!!!!

There's a general drift to wearing high viz in almost every situation now in the UK. Its almost unstoppable.

I think this mostly. Seems people can't step out their house these days without donning a high viz vest.

I know this thread isn't about cycling, but this seems to be cycling in the uk...

[img] [/img]

And this is cycling in holland...

[img] [/img]

Which looks more accessible and fun?

[img] [/img]

but this seems to be cycling in the uk...

It's a bunch of young kids under adult supervision, presumably to learn road skills, hardly typical 'cycling in the uk'

And cycling wearing flipflops doesn't appeal to me btw.

It's compulsory at my running club training nights. (In winter)

I do tend to anyway, because even if I'm not running on roads I am crossing them, it costs me nothing to wear it (i've picked up enough free hi vis tops from races that i don't need to buy any more) and it may help one day.

Fashion

mr blobby, which of your pictures shows the most cars?

What I want to know is why aren't they wearing helmets or have a bell on a velcro band on their wrist?

I don't wear hi-bis when running, I always wear black because it makes me look slimmer

Not me.
Full on Ninja for me.
I only run early mornings though, about 5am.
Not many folk about at that time of the day.

Perception innit? Coz it's safe.

Just like why in that there America they all drive 4x4s 'coz they're safe...

Because they'd look silly wearing a helmet?

I run, never wore hi-viz though!
If however I was in the habit of running on roads or on unlit streets I probably would. Common sense and all that jazz.
Some running gear is just generally brightly coloured though, as opposed to actual proper hi-viz. 😀

I live in the country. Almost all the runners (and there are plenty) wear hi-viz when they run on the lanes at night. It's absolutely bloody useless! How come none of the manufacturers of these vests have worked out that reflective stuff is what you need at night and that hi-viz is more use than a white shirt?

i buy my kit based on functionality and value. if its pink, green, orange or black matters not a jot. often its green.

Thing is, if you run on a quiet rural road at night you know there's a car coming for miles before it gets to you. Plenty of time to jump in the hedge or onto the verge if needed.

Plenty of time to jump in the hedge or onto the verge if needed.

I always find that jumping into a hedge is a lot more desirable than wearing clothing which makes you easy to see.

I think you answered your own question in the first sentence of your post.

On my commute home tonight I [b]noticed[/b] a lot of runners wearing hi viz clothing.

Maybe the ones he didn't notice are lying in a crumpled heap slowly bleeding to death?

My running club is encouraging hi-vis now. They didn't ten years ago.
I guess it's partly fashion but probably also driven by a general perception that driving skills are on a pretty steep downward trend so you need to do something to give yourself a chance of survival!

I live in the country. Almost all the runners (and there are plenty) wear hi-viz when they run on the lanes at night. It's absolutely bloody useless! How come none of the manufacturers of these vests have worked out that reflective stuff is what you need at night and that hi-viz is more use than a white shirt?

Spot on!!

When I am running at night it is my responsibility to stay out of the way of vehicles when crossing roads, not the vehicle drivers to avoid me when I run into their path. For those that run on country lanes, reflectivity is the way, not hi-viz. Oh, and I recommend seeking off road routes.

I'm afraid its just a result of the world we now live in.Everybody wants to be seen.

Our club do a lot of night runs from 7pm all year round everyone wears hiviz and most wear some form of lighting .We run round town and quite often in the road as the pavements are full of bins, trees and parked cars and have a worse surface than our much maligned roads

When I am running at night it is my responsibility to stay out of the way of vehicles when crossing roads

its the vehicles turning into carparks, drives, officeblocks, eateries petrol stations etc especially coming from behind that gets me - I like to think that a bit of high viz means they will see me before turning and yes I do look when it is obvious but it isn't always

live in city now so no country lanes but used reflective bands and one of those red flashers on my arm for night time and getting to off road stuff

not complacent I know it doesn't matter what I'm wearing if I get hit but I like to think giving drivers an early opportunity to spot you makes their driving behaviour more predictable

as a driver I appreciate running clubs using high viz / reflective at night especially large groups on narrow pavements with cars parked on them means I see them early and keep an eye out for possible moves into the traffic stream

I wish more would, or would wear a light of some sort. Our local running club use the road and pavement randomly. Some are lit some aren't, but I find a reflective band that's moving far easier to see.

Locally unlit or totally dressed in black runners using roads and lanes at night are causing much complaint.

didn't notice the retractable lead though!!! ... Maybe animal leads should be hi viz!!

Dunno oldgit the onus should be on the driver not to hit people\things pushing it onto everyone else is buying into car is king mentality and erring on victim blaming. But I will admit if you're going running in full on ninja gear at night on unlit roads some reflective syrips might be a good idea.

I run on road. I run off road. Sometimes I might wear something bright. Sometimes I wear black.

So there.

If you read the highway code

[img] [/img]

Anything to remove responsibility from drivers, same as all cyclists should wear helmets, hi viz etc.

My local running club are a PITA they should wear something bright and preferably not dart across the road in groups. Bloody hazard

My other half runs on the lanes where we live. I drove past her one evening when she was head to toe in black. She was pretty much invisible. Bought her a load of day-glo with lots of reflective stuff on it and now she shows up clearly and early to drivers. In an ideal world it wouldn't be necessary as all drivers would be careful and attentive. However, I'm pretty sure the world is not ideal so this seems a sensible way to reduce her risk at minimal cost and zero inconvenience.

I think you need to give folk a chance to see you before they kill you.
in saying that, the one time I was walloped by a car when on the bike, I was wearing reflective gear.

I have an orange Howies DyFi shell that I wear . Really because it's a multi use thing.

Anything to remove responsibility from drivers

despite sometimes choosing to wear reflective/high viz can't agree more - i hope to survive to the day when driving a vehicle in way that has no or only limited concern for pedestrians or cyclists is considered by the majority as anti-social - sadly today it is accepted as the norm - dressing kids in high viz and telling old folks not to cross the road because other folks have some far more important things to do seems very odd

in saying that, the one time I was walloped by a car when on the bike, I was wearing reflective gear.aye the amount of people mown down while brightly dressed and using lights - or just in broad daylight with good visibility - shows hi viz won't save your arse so it's a bit messed up when it's wheeled out as a defense/mitigation so often.

The more people who wear reflective and highviz the easier it is for people to drive faster without hitting anyone. Eventually the only people outside will be a few hard core people in highvis whilst everyone else cowers inside or can't be arsed to dress up like an electric satsuma to walk 5 mins to the shop.

Anything to remove responsibility from drivers

I understand the arguments abour risk compensation but they are contested.

Also, not sure traffic is any faster than when I started driving 30 years ago. Tbh I think people stick to speed limits more because maybe volumes, speed cameras, or fuel costs.

Increased traffic volumes may well be making drivers more distracted and that's a problem?

On the original question, I think it's because lots of exercise clothes and all running stuff has reflective bits on it even if it isn't day glo. Doesn't bother me that my clothes have some reflective stuff on, although I avoid dayglo.

Weird how people actively want to delegate their safety to a total stranger.

ex ravers innit

[img] [/img]

antigee - Member
Anything to remove responsibility from drivers
despite sometimes choosing to wear reflective/high viz can't agree more - i hope to survive to the day when driving a vehicle in way that has no or only limited concern for pedestrians or cyclists is considered by the majority as anti-social - sadly today it is accepted as the norm - dressing kids in high viz and telling old folks not to cross the road because other folks have some far more important things to do seems very odd

This thread comes across like a bunch of petrol heads discussing cyclists.

I have every right to be able to drive along those lanes at a reasonable, legal speed, with respect to the prevailing conditions, but I can't be expected to assume there's going to be someone dressed head to foot in black in the middle of the road round any random corner.

scott_mcavennie2 - Member

STW comes across like a bunch of petrol heads discussing cyclists.

ftfy

Well to add to my comment earlier my Ron Hill hi viz fillet does have a teeny red flashing light on its back pocket, nowt on the front though, but then I running mostly off-road so I'm kinda lucky.

If your headlights illuminate only a certain length of road, then you should be driving so you can stop within that distance. This may mean going slower than the "hoping the road is empty" technique many use.

The only exception is when saving a few seconds of your time is more important than the remainder of someone else's about to be shortened life.

The same with running or walking along narrow twisty country lanes in the dark; as a driver, I have every right to be able to drive along those lanes at a reasonable, legal speed, with respect to the prevailing conditions, but I can't be expected to assume there's going to be someone dressed head to foot in black in the middle of the road round any random corner.

I go faster than posted limits, when safe to do so, because many local ones are political rather than based on actual road hazards;

Don't worry, he's a good driver though..

Don't worry, he's a good driver though.

I think its an example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

For starters, it's the responsibility of a pedestrian to look both ways, and only cross the road when it's clear to do so.
Walking out in front of a moving vehicle who has every right to be there

News bulletin - some roads have such high volumes of traffic (travelling at the maximum legal speed) that finding a clear time to cross requires judgement that a lot of kids and some older people lack
adjusting speed and driving to be considerate to other road users is an appropriate way to use the right given to drive a vehicle rather claiming drivers rights to exclusive use of road space

News bulletin - some roads have such high volumes of traffic (travelling at the maximum legal speed) that finding a clear time to cross requires judgement that a lot of kids and some older people lack
adjusting speed and driving to be considerate to other road users is an appropriate way to use the right given to drive a vehicle rather claiming drivers rights to exclusive use of road space

Punctuation?

So you are saying that hi-viz is actually there for those who aren't able to cross roads properly? I would argue that those people shouldn't be allowed out of the house unsupervised.

no I think what I was trying to say higher up in the thread was that its seems very sad that to have kids wearing hi-viz is considered an acceptable alternative to drivers being more considerate towards other road users - as you argue there is an alternative which sadly is what happens

sorry about the lack of punctuation I'll stop reading the classified on pinkbike and get out my economist style guide

antigee - Member
...and driving to be considerate to other road users is an appropriate way to use the right given to drive a vehicle rather claiming drivers rights to exclusive use of road space

Shame a few more don't understand this, but I suppose the rules of common decency don't apply to our self-appointed road warrior SMIDSY elite.