Steeler_fanatic

I use daytime running lights (front and back) on every ride. I typically ride on secondary and rural roads and feel it is just as important to highlight my presence with those traveling in the opposite direction as behind me. I can think of two instances in the past year where the light caught the attention of drivers who had started to drift into my lane of travel. Just my opinion but I won't ride without them. Everyone has to make their own decision about what is discretionary regarding their safety.

bgross

I dress to be seen, but I *assume* that drivers are too blind, distracted, or stupid to see me. Further, I’m constantly scanning my surroundings and imagining the worst thing that someone could do. And preparing my response.

Ardrid

I'm not completely sold on the necessity of daytime riding lights. If you can't see a 6+ ft object, in bright clothing, in your direct field of vision, then you're likely too distracted to see a flashing/solid light. I don't doubt that they can help but I suspect the amount they do is probably minimal in the grand scheme of other safety measures.

dimini

I promise that I'm not a troll...

However, as a 59yr old lifetime cyclist as well as sports car enthusiast, while driving my car I see evidence every day that flashing daytime front and rear lights on bicycles are a hell of a lot more noticeable than cyclists who do not use daytime lights. There are remarkable LED lights that cost as little as $15 a pair that can offer significant day light visibility. Most of my cycling is on urban and suburban streets mixed with some bike lanes and a few dedicated bike trails. If I plan to ride out on public streets, in Kansas City, which is still in its infancy of accepting and accommodating bicyclists, I will use my portable LED lights.

I'm curious about the quote above... who is annoyed by the lights? The cyclist using them, other cyclists or those driving cars? I for one, am not annoyed while driving and see a cyclist, or group of cyclists 2-4 blocks blocks ahead me with flashing lights. I see the lights long before I see the riders--and that's a good thing for both parties.

JanMM

Eye contact, whether between two humans or two other animals, has to involve seeing each others eyes.


I do use flashing lights, front and rear, when cycling in the daytime. Not strobing.

kingston 

I should have been clearer. I don't think steady DRL's are annoying. It's the blinking ones I can't stand. Especially the headlights.

RC71

I'm guilty of running daytime (head light) and twin tail lights all the time. One taillight uses g-force to trigger flashing to constant as a stop light and the other is a flashing super bright.

Originally I got some complaints on the bike trail about the super bright but now that they have gained in popularity there are no complaints.

bikemig 

It's unnecessary. You might want to be considerate and to think about the people on the path who have to deal with your lights but it's your call if you prefer not to.

Jbarcs

I've grown increasingly tired of the constant negativity here. No... nothing will keep you alive better than luck. But why not let a few things increase our odds for another day or two? Are you worried about not looking cool? Or about the extra 2 ounces? I'll take increased likelihood of healthy limbs and a brain case intact all day over the alternatives.

To the OP... thanks for your post. I wouldn't leave home on any of my bikes without front and rear in erratic display mode.

I-Like-To-Bike

Apparently you are not yet tired of excessive drama of the Danger, Danger! hyperbole posted about bicycling on BF.

jpdemers

What do 100% of drivers who run down a cyclist say? "I didn't see him."
Add my vote for lights at all times - anything to ensure that drivers notice me before they're on top of me.

The things are already on the damned bike (plus one clipped to the back of my helmet), so flipping a couple of switches is hardly a burden. You'd be an idiot not to do it.

313Biker

I used to ride a motorcycle, and daytime running lights changes other vehicles actions. That's my experience.

Leisesturm

You obviously believe them. Well I don't. Chances are good you also drive. How many cyclists have you not seen and hit?

Leisesturm

I make a distinction between a motorcycle and a bicycle. When bicycles have 50 watt alternators that power their electronics using superfluous mechanical energy from an internal combustion engine I will revisit the issue. For now charging a battery pack every other day works for me. I don't need or want to do it more often than that. Hi-Viz (or not) by day, and steady (front) and flashing (rear) lights at night. I'm good with that.

Leisesturm

Which then begs the question: how much MONEY is it reasonable to spend on what has already been acknowledged as a crapshoot? Because my spouse also rides, I have more license than many to over-indulge in profligate expenditure of domestic treasure to satisfy bicycle related goals and attainment. Even so, we keep it simple: Planet Bike flasher (rear) and MagicShine headlight (obvious) and neither run during daylight. I've seen dual and triple Dinotte 400R outfitted bikes. That's $600 in rear lighting alone. That is what my bike cost. I think I can point to that as an example of unreasonable. Especially if you are going into debt to do it.

jpdemers

So you think they see the cyclist and decide, "Screw it, I'm gonna hit him. What could go wrong?"
If I ever hit a cyclist, it will be because I didn't see him.

Jim from Boston

Obviously night time lights are a necessity, but I think calling day time lights a crapshoot is begging the question. Personally, I run daytime lights, that I don’t think are overly bright, anddaytime oncoming drivers’ or cyclists’ eyes are pretty well accomodated to sunlight.

I posted on this thread, f you believe in dayttime lights (independent of the cost of lights since they are a nighttime necessity ayways), you win with possibly increased safety, you lose with perhaps battery wastage and increased incremental costs; if you don’t believe daytime lights, you lose by possibly diminished safety, but win by conservation of your battery life.

However, incredibly bright lights are a losing proposition to oncoming traffic, though they win if they are alerted.

So IMO, unreasonable use of lights is determined not by cost, but by inconvenience to oncoming vehiclesProbably to such true believers, cost is no object to energizing their force field to keep them safe.

Rollfast

Unca_Sam

Sign me up! A driver's license is a privilege, not a right.
There will be many more folks just driving without licenses.

Metieval

^ that's already bad enough here. :'( and we know they don't have insurance either, We have to drive very defensively here. I have not ridden in C'bus, but down in Ross County ( Was just down there Mountain biking), I wouldn't even want to be on the roads on a bicycle.
As far as Road riding. Western Ohio North of I-70 is really nice road riding. but most of those people are people that were driving farm stuff from age 12.

Unca_Sam

That's a shame about Ross county, those long farm roads and rolling hills beg for a ride. It's typical in Columbus, poor folks don't bother with licensing or insurance. Think they're good drivers because they've never hit anybody then get bent over when they're hit or finally make a mistake.
Lights in the day help drivers decide how to get around you. On tree shaded streets you'll blend in unless you use lights. Some asshats in traffic will be asshats, but their road positioning can point them out for you, same as if you're driving.

What we need as a state is a dedicated component on an exam and periodic PSAs about how to handle a much slower vehicle. Folks get frustrated thinking they can't pass you in a double yellow when they can if traffic allows.

Metieval

I have not road ridden down there, and maybe I haven't spent enough time on the back roads down there. So my judgment of drivers may be bias.

yeah perfectly legal to pass slow moving traffic on a double yellow. However I have seen people do it on blind curves and hills and it scares me. Once I heard a car coming head on and also behind me. I took my lane. and did the Slowing signal to car behind me. a car popped the hill, I then went to the white line, and got the biggest thank you wave ever.

biketocamp

My pleasure. Thank you for tuning in. I've had a really bad accident several years ago. Big advocate of visibility and these lights are small enough with enough power to not be overwhelming motorist and passerbys, all the while keeping you safe out there.

Jaackil

First of all there is mountains of evidence. In 2012 there was a study in Denmark there have been other studies in the U.K. and Germany that show a significant reduction in accidents with the use of day time lights. There is also another study done by the US dept of transportation that shows a reduction of daytime accidents between cars and motorcycles that use daytime lights specifically flashing lights. Motorcycles are bigger and louder this more visable to begin with than bicycles so it doesn’t take much to extrapolate that they would increase safety of cyclists. Your own statement that they are annoying is proof also? If they annoy you you obviously notice them and that is the point. To each their own as far as if you choose to use them or not but you can not ignore the fact that they will in fact help make a rider safer

kingston 

There is literally no evidence to support your claim. The choice to run DRL’s on a bicycle is emotional not logical, but I’ll try to present some facts anyway. I've read most of the studies you mention, and the closest one is the Danish study, which is actually a study of permanent running lights vs no lights, not DRL’s specifically. I remember reading the study when it came out and most of the measured benefit IIRC was from night-time collisions in the control group, so not really any evidence for a safety benefit of DRL's. I’ve also read much of the British and German research, and while there is plenty of evidence to support the benefit of night-time bicycle lights, I still haven’t seen anything on DRL’s. I am genuinely interested in the topic, but just haven't come across anything that has convinced me there is any benefit to DRLs on a bicycle. Even theoretically, I can't imagine the type of accident that a blinking headlight (which is by far the most annoying type of bicycle light) would ever prevent. If DRL’s were as beneficial as some of you claim, it doesn’t seem like it would be that hard to measure a benefit, yet it has never been done as far as I know.

The best cycling safety research I have seen is coming out of the UK. From the British research, by far the biggest danger to cyclists is a left hook (right hook in the US), which is easily avoidable by the cyclist who knows not to pass trucks and busses on the right at intersections. Head on collisions basically never happen unless the cyclist is drunk and rear-end collisions where a car runs into a bicycle travelling the same direction are almost non-existent in the data. As mentioned above, a high-vis vest (which I frequently wear) is the most visible to drivers, so I just don't see the benefit of a blinking tail light that attracts drivers' attention from a mile away that has become so common for cyclists in the US.

I also ride motorcycles and have read some of the safety research on that topic. The most common accident there is cars pulling out in front of motorcycles where the driver is not able to judge the distance and/or speed of the oncoming motorcycle, and the rider doesn't have enough distance to slow the motorcycle enough to avoid a collision. Daytime headlights provide some safety benefit for that type of accident, but rider awareness, training, and speed have a much larger effect on safety. Obviously, this type of accident just doesn't happen on a bicycle where speeds and stopping distances are much lower.