Further questionable evidence of the alleged safety benefits of
Daylight Running Lights for bicycles are the anecdotes and claims of being detected much sooner and/or at much greater distances than without DRL.
Just how much sooner and at what distance does it really have any significant effect on reducing collision events under normal cycling conditions?
Perhaps on those sun dappled forest and canopy shrouded paths that some cyclists find themselves on so frequently sharing with speeding cars these lights really do prove their worth.
I suspect for some hyper safety conscious cyclists, more is always better which also explains the quest for mega-lumen flamethrower lighting used by some bicyclists to allegedly enhance safety. And they are still here to tell all, providing all the anecdotal evidence they need to convince themselves of the value of blindingly powerful headlights.
Originally Posted by
Jim from Boston
+ 1 dittoes. I’m a decades long commuter through Metro Boston. Some additional comments I might add after skimming the thread:
One of my safety aphorisms is “Make yourself as visible as possible visible and assume nobody sees you.” Another one is “When riding at night, look for cars, not just headlights.” As a corollary to that, active illumination IMO is preferable to reflective gear. Indeed, I think the driver without headlights on is more likely a distracted driver.
Regarding overkill, the few instances I have encountered have been on MUPS with oncoming cyclists with blazing, blinding headlights. I often think that they believe a cone of light is a force-field that will protect them, even from oncoming cars, so the more the better. Here in Boston, most of my route is visible even with just ambient street illumination.