[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.

There are plenty of people who don't notice a well lit brightly coloured car, so in my mind riding around in stealth mode isn't going to help with potential lifespan.
Yes everybody driving should be giving full attention but life isn't like that, so I make sure I'm colourful and well lit when riding on the road.
As for vans and visabity it constantly amazes me the number of people who walk behind a reversing van with no rear windows.

This article is worth a read.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2013/jan/10/cycling-high-visibility-safe-fluorescent

Two interesting points:

- It's not the brightness of your clothing, it's the contrast. So black clothing can be extremely visible if you're against a light background. Consider also how a fluoro yellow jacket looks under orange sodium street lights.

- Bright colours become useless at night, which of course is when a lot of collisions happen.

There's also a lot of very strange magic involved in the way human eyes work, with the brain "filling in" blank spots and working on assumptions. Maybe the past 200,000 years of evolution haven't prepared us for the last 200 years of driving vehicles with internal combustion engines?

Most of my roady kit is black - bibtights, jacket, Gillet, gloves, shoes, over shoes. The majority of it, however has some sort of reflective property to it which, as a car driver, I find is far more noticeable than any colour - especially as reflective piping moves with the rider as your lights shine on it.

I also have seatpost light, bar light and f+r helmet lights. I would hope that the combination of both would get me noticed.

Of course day and night have separate needs. Dusk and night - lights and reflectives. Spoke reflectors are good for huge side visibility.

During the day standout clothing. Or rather tops. No wearing anything but black on the legs. Not the visible part and the most likely to catch oil and dirt.

Then forget you are wearing and assume that driver won't see you and have a plan B

it constantly amazes me the number of people who walk behind a reversing van with no rear windows.

Oh yes.

My dad even did this the other day while seeing me off his drive, and he drove vans for years.

There is a lot to be said for wearing trade team kit on the road. Because it is advertising, the kit is designed to catch the eye and make team riders stand out and easily identifiable, and the most awful looking team kits are often the most eye catching. If you come across someone wearing this sort of kit on the road, you may think they look like a fashion disaster or a pathetic poseur, but while you are mentally ridiculing them, that also means you are actively thinking about them, and consequently you are probably more likely to take account of their presence if you are driving. The cooler rider wearing the all black ensemble may be more stylish, but is much less noticiable

Another advantage of the trade team kit, is that it often gets heavily discounted. I think the purchasers of trade team kit tend to fall into two polar opposite groups: the old school tight fisted road cyclist who thinks it's ridiculous to pay more than £10 or £20 for a road top vs. the wannabe fans who shell out full retail price on full Sky kit. The latter are the same sort who previously would have worn US Postal kit in Armstrong's heyday.

Like the idiot riding through thick fog this morning dressed in all black Castelli kit. Wearing probably £300 of clothes he obviuosly ran out of cash to buy a £6 flashing rear light from Aldi .
There is also a range of jerseys by Morvelo which is as close to urban camo as you can get , and its road biased . Near the top of dumbass scale if you ride round in an urban area earing grey urban camo based clothes.
SMIDYS.
no s**t
[img] [/img]

STW in blaming the victims shocker.

"I shouldn't have to make any effort to make sure I don't drive my hugely powerful, heavy vehicle into things that are plainly visible in front of me, often for 100's of metres, in broad daylight, or at night with my powerful headlights. No, that 'other' person should change their clothes. They certainly shouldn't be allowed to just wear their normal winter coat, or their suit jacket, or whatever. And that 'other' person should have to carry their hi-viz awkwardly around with them when they reach their destination so that I don't have to pay attention and make sure I don't kill anyone."

I mostly buy black because it's interchangeable. Although a lot of it will have fluorescent or reflective panels on it. However, I do always use lights F&R even in daytime. I could harp on about my rights and personal choice but as a soft squishy thing I take the pragmatic approach

STW in blaming the victims shocker.

STW in not reading what's actually been said shocker...

(if you're referring to me, that is)

WRT vans, the issue in traffic, esp in dusk or at night in poor weather, is that the limited visibility on offer from a van makes it very much harder to see cyclists who've decided that they aren't interested in maximising their own safety. Sure, if a collision happens, it may well be the primary fault of the driver who may have turned across them, having not seen a non-lit, dark clothed cyclist hidden in the dazzling lights of the car behind the van, shone through a rain soaked mirror, but we live in an imperfect world where mistakes DO happen, whether or not they're supposed to. While humans drive vehicles, there will always be accidents. fact. it is, of course, up to the van driver to do their utmost to make sure their manoeuvres are safe, but is there any harm in hoping that cyclists will take it upon themselves to at least help them out a little bit?

It's been said on other threads that cycling should be part of a driving test, and I fully agree, but I also feel that (as impracticle as it probably is), that everyone should get some sort of impression of what it's like to drive any other vehicle on the road, so there's at least some resemblance of understanding how relatively difficult it is to drive larger vehicles. If, when turning, all one had to do was look in the mirror, that would be awesome, but in a busy urban environment there is an awful lot to take in when driving, even in a car will 360 degree visibility.

If the above comment is aimed at me, I am in no way victim blaming - i ride to and from work in the centre of bristol, and drive a van there too. I'm being realistic in saying that road safety is a two way thing - everyone on the road should be aware of the dangers, and everyone should, at the very least, try and minimise dangers, either for themselves or for others. we're human. sadly, accidents happen.

everyone on the road should be aware of the dangers, and everyone should, at the very least, try and minimise dangers, either for themselves or for others

muddylegs - Member
I had a near miss the other day with a roadie, day light hours, covered in black clothing. He/she was completely covered head to toe in the stuff (helmet included). 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 your pupils are dilated to let in more light because of the dark interior, yet the outside world is darker? Smells a bit like bullshit

Hard to believe people are so keen on defending their choice of lo-viz clothing for road cycling 😕

It's just plain weird. You don't look cool, you won't ride like Wiggins, you'll simply be more likely to get hit by a car as well as further antagonising already unfriendly drivers.

I'm being realistic in saying that road safety is a two way thing - everyone on the road should be aware of the dangers, and everyone should, at the very least, try and minimise dangers, either for themselves or for others. we're human. sadly, accidents happen.

I hear you, but the issue with this seemingly sensible, balanced comment, is that like everything around "road safety", it is always the more vulnerable who must change their behaviour. You say you are not blaming the victims, but you are in fact clearly apportioning blame on cyclists for wearing dark clothing. I would argue that if you can't see properly, you should slow down to the point where you have enough time to take in all the obstacles and dangers in that busy urban environment, to make sure you don't kill anyone.

Drivers, especially those in large vehicles, are those who pose the most danger on the roads. Drivers should take a commensurately greater proportion of responsibility for the safety of other road users, especially those most vulnerable.

They've been teaching motorcyclists the basis of defensive riding for years. Yes there are twunks everywhere that need to pay more attention, but really there is little point getting on your self-righteous soapbox from a hospital bed. Why not take some steps to appreciate that you are vulnerable, even if it's not your fault? If you don't want to do hi-vis, fine, but chuck a flashing light on the back particularly if you are going to be on country lanes.

I find my red top gets noticed well in an urban environment, might be the contrast to the grey and black background I suppose! Too many others do the whole disappearing thing, even from my viewpoint so they have no chance of being seen by an inattentive driver.

It constantly amazes me the number of people who walk behind a reversing van with no rear windows.

My works van has a bloody loud siren telling you I'm reversing and people still walk behind it!

Wear what you like, I don't care.

Given a choice, given that a lot of drivers don't give their [i]full[/i] attention to the world outside their metal box, I like to wear clothes you can see from a distance. When I'm driving, I notice that riders in dark clothes are much harder to see. Yes, even when I've seen them, it's harder to *see* them.

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

Solid black is a pretty poor camo, it creates a solid object that is noticable to the human eye - even under low light situations. Camo is less about blending into the background and more about breaking up defined lines, that the subconcious mind picks up more easily against a background of foliage.

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?

It won't happen until the HSE take an interest, they can put Directors in jail. The police will only tackle the driver or driving offences except in major fatale

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-38066824

There is no 'victim blaming' on this thread, because we have not as yet been discussing anyone who has actually been a 'victim'. Saying [u]after an accident[/u] that an actual cyclist, who has been injured by a driver who failed to see and avoid them, should have worn different clothing, would indeed be victim blaming.

What we are discussing are the things that are within our control which may influence the liklihood of a theoretical accident occurring or its outcome (since we do not have control over drivers with whom we share the roads). In that respect, choice of clothing is simply one of a number of factors over which we do have some control, and it is not victim blaming to express concern that others may be making poor choices. If an accident occurs due to a SMIDSY, then the driver is legally and morally to blame, but we would all rather the accident did not occur in the first place. So advising others to think about what they can do to reduce the risks to them is not 'victim blaming', even if it does mean that we (relatively speaking [i]slightly[/i]) modify our behaviour in ways that we do not like, whether that means not wearing your favourite black jacket or equally avoiding cycling on a very busy dangerous A road.

I think a lot of the blame for the dark clothing lies with the manufacturers: high tech softshell jackets and the like are relatively expensive products, and the manufacturers can probably be confident of much higher sales and profitability if it's black than any other colour, e.g. Rapha's softshell was originally only available in black. That said, most of the high end kit is now available in colours other than black, so we do have a choice.

So today at about midday I came on to a roundabout in the car and saw a roadie about 50 m ahead, going round the roundabout. He had a clearly visible fluoro top. Next thing I know, some arse in a van comes tonking up to the roundabout, shoots straight over the give way line and almost takes the cyclist out. There was nothing more the rider could do- bright clothing, reasonable daylight for December, sensible road position. The cyclist only got away with it because he dived right into the next lane where he was fortunate there was no traffic. That's just shit driving.

I wear black clothing frequently. We'll black and white mainly. But I reckon it's pretty visible?

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

The SAS didn't wear black when storming the Iranian Embassy to hide, it was to scare the shit out of the terrorists. After all blowing all the windows out with frame charges and using thunder flashes tends to signal your approach.

There was an article on roadie clothing recently and the reasons why it's all going towards dark colours. Apparently the higher end fabrics are made only in black or white and everything else has to be superimposed on to it, which significantly adds to cost. The Ale stuff is a good example, it costs a packet but it's higher end stuff so you don't mind paying for it because the performance is there.

Darker stuff is also easier to keep cleaner in winter, or at least it doesn't show the dirt as much for stops etc.

I only roadie occasionally but I find there are a lot drivers out there who basically treat you as dispensable, you're not a living human being to them, this attitude makes me very defensive on the road bike, same as I am on my motorbike. Your life v their vehicle = no contest. I recently rode in Spain, where they have an "assumed liability" law, we had not one close pass nor was there any aggression or frustration shown at any time.

I understand the OPs point about people not really helping themselves but I think as a country we need to change our attitude towards bikes on the road, if they're hard to spot in your vehicle, do something differently in your vehicle or your driving style to ensure you see them. Far too many people are killed because someone simply didn't see them. I've twice been hit by cars when I was on a bright red motorbike with headlights on, because someone did not see me, so colours may not make much difference to that.

Darwinism at it's best

that Morvelo top up there isn't urban camo at all, it's a disruption pattern inspired by the Dazzle Ships of World War 1 where the intention was the exact opposite of camouflage and that of causing visual confusion, and as a complex geometric shape that's out of context of most road riding situations actually extremely visible, jussayin

and..

bedmaker - Member
Hard to believe people are so keen on defending their choice of lo-viz clothing for road cycling

It's just plain weird. You don't look cool, you won't ride like Wiggins, you'll simply be more likely to get hit by a car as well as further antagonising already unfriendly drivers.

would this be the same people saying that choice of clothing colour, in their experience, makes no difference at all?

Using disruption pattern to break up your shape makes you look less like a person on a bike. I'm failing to see how that can be a benefit (though it does look kinda cool). One of the advantages in applying it to ships was that it made aiming torpedoes difficult as it was hard to ascertain speed and direction of travel.

WRT vans, the issue in traffic, esp in dusk or at night in poor weather, is that the limited visibility on offer from a van makes it very much harder to see cyclists who've decided that they aren't interested in maximising their own safety.

I don't understand this. Unless you're turning left - which means you overtook but didn't see the cyclist - how can you argue that your forward visibility is reduced? If anything it's better thwn that of a car thanks to larger windscreen and elevated driving position.

I usually wear a bright orange jacket but am coming to the conclusion that the brightness of it simple helps shit drivers judge their distance so they can pass closer.

Never bothered me when I drove a van in a previous life.

that pattern isn't about making you look more or less like a person on a bike it's a 'what's that?' weird moving blob, which draws attention to you, coincidentally on a bike, visibility job done

I don't understand this. Unless you're turning left - which means you overtook but didn't see the cyclist - how can you argue that your forward visibility is reduced

I understand the OPs point about people not really helping themselves but I think as a country we need to change our attitude towards bikes on the road, if they're hard to spot in your vehicle, do something differently in your vehicle or your driving style to ensure you see them.

Yes to this!

It's just so endemic to shift the emphasis for 'road safety' away from the people who create road danger - motorists.

And anecdotal "well he was wearing dark colours and I couldn't see him" is very easy to say. But I could talk about the time a motorist drove into me, as I rode down a dead straight road, in broad daylight, on a bright orange bike, with my dynamo lights on (as they always are). I happened to be wearing a blue merino t-shirt. It wouldn't have made a fig of difference if I'd been dressed like a sith lord or a christmas tree: the driver simply didn't have enough regard for the fact that they were using an extremely dangerous vehicle and they needed to take more care.

I personally find buying cycling clothes difficult. The choices are all too often understated, or really garish and lurid.

The latter isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I find many of the designs horrible. I'm sure it's possible to create something that looks tasteful, but with functional high viz, rather than looking like you've been puked on.

And when you have all kinds of other criteria to fill (budget, fit, pockets, warmth, aerodynamics, etc), there is always a compromise somewhere.

If you balance it. Yes, of course, it's sensible to make yourself as visible as possible on the roads. And there is some responsibility to do so, especially during the winter months and at night where it is apparent that many people don't think they even need functional lights... But for the most part, during the daylight hours, the responsibility really is with the motorist to ensure they see any other road users. The biggest problems I see on the roads are a complete lack of attention and/or general care. Exceptional circumstances aside, such as where someone may suddenly appear out of a blind spot, I think most accidents can be attributed to driver inattention or carelessness, or even aggression. And that needs to be the primary focus. It's not just cyclists that fall victim to it. What next, high-vis for pedestrian's crossing the road? That's not a world I want to live in.

Who cares what roadies get up to. This is an mtb forum, isnt it?

[quote=butcher ] What next, high-vis for pedestrian's crossing the road? That's not a world I want to live in.Too late. Lots of schools have a "walking bus" and the kids wear hi-viz vests.

In my experience it makes bugger all difference what colour clothes you wear when riding on the road. If someone doesn't look they'll hit you whatever you're wearing.