Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Daytime Running Lights - Get Them! Video

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Daytime Running Lights - Get Them! Video

Old 09-24-19, 07:06 AM
  #101  
Milton Keynes
Senior Member
 
Milton Keynes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,947

Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 1,710 Times in 936 Posts
Originally Posted by jpdemers
What do 100% of drivers who run down a cyclist say? "I didn't see him."
Having a bright flashing light on the front & back of your bike ought to negate the "I didn't see him" excuse somewhat. Why couldn't you see the cyclist wearing brightly colored clothing with flashing lights on his bike?
Milton Keynes is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 07:16 AM
  #102  
Metieval
Senior Member
 
Metieval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857

Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by Milton Keynes
Having a bright flashing light on the front & back of your bike ought to negate the "I didn't see him" excuse somewhat. Why couldn't you see the cyclist wearing brightly colored clothing with flashing lights on his bike?
lights isn't the answer, a stiffer consequence is the answer!

people that are blind shouldn't be driving !! driving is a privilege, if someone is too lazy to use their eyes and vision, then the State can revoke their privilege. Once that starts happening, "change" will happen!
Metieval is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 07:31 AM
  #103  
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Posts: 12,474

Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, Catrike Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1511 Post(s)
Liked 733 Times in 454 Posts
Daytime running lights probably won't hurt; but I'm not convinced they help - at least not in urban conditions where visual overload is already an issue. That said, I have started using a rear blinkie on the premise that it makes me more visible from behind on bright days when I ride into deep shade.
BlazingPedals is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 07:38 AM
  #104  
bobwysiwyg
Senior Member
 
bobwysiwyg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 961' 42.28° N, 83.78° W (A2)
Posts: 2,344

Bikes: Mongoose Selous, Trek DS

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 941 Post(s)
Liked 319 Times in 189 Posts
Personally, if riding in traffic, I always ride with lights front and rear, blinking. My evidence is everyone's perceived response. Call the evidence empirical if you must, but if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and acts like a duck, it's probably a duck.
bobwysiwyg is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 07:40 AM
  #105  
Unca_Sam
The dropped
 
Unca_Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,406

Bikes: Pake C'Mute Touring/Commuter Build, 1989 Kona Cinder Cone, 1995 Trek 5200, 1973 Raleigh Super Course FG, 1960/61 Montgomery Ward Hawthorne "thrift" 3 speed, by Hercules (sold) : 1966 Schwinn Deluxe Racer (sold)

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1739 Post(s)
Liked 1,014 Times in 696 Posts
Originally Posted by Metieval
lights isn't the answer, a stiffer consequence is the answer!

people that are blind shouldn't be driving !! driving is a privilege, if someone is too lazy to use their eyes and vision, then the State can revoke their privilege. Once that starts happening, "change" will happen!
You know as well as I do that a revocation isn't always a revocation. I'm sure you've seen the Drunk Driver (tm) plates that our state issues to OVI convicts. All you have to do is tell the judge you're sorry and agree to a curfew, and you'll have limited driving privileges during your license suspension with the scarlet letter plates. If we can't revoke driving privileges for being selfish and careless enough to drive while impaired, we certainly won't simply because you're a poor driver/can't see.

As a community, we keep returning to the fact that American road culture is toxic and dangerous for all road users, and we're addicted to it. Building our communities around the car is a mistake that we'll be rueing for decades.

Suburbs as far as the eye can see...
Unca_Sam is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 07:42 AM
  #106  
Jaackil
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
Your Logic is flared, it’s based on proof or lack of proof of events that do not occur. That is your whole argument show me proof that an accident did not occur. So therefore day time running lights are not safer. It is a totally made up fantasy. SMH. So the reduction in accidents is a result of what? Climate change? It was only about 600 years ago 99% of scientists said the world was flat
too. Some people will always choose to believe what they want. Based on your logic what is the argument against using them? Where is the mountains of data against using them. Do they make you less safe? Will having DRL’s make you more likely to have a crash with a car? Where is the mountains of Data supporting your position? Has there been a single study that shows having lights will make you more likely to collide with a motor vehicle? But like I said to each their own as to whether the use them or not. I will keep mine on big and bright.
Jaackil is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 07:43 AM
  #107  
Unca_Sam
The dropped
 
Unca_Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,406

Bikes: Pake C'Mute Touring/Commuter Build, 1989 Kona Cinder Cone, 1995 Trek 5200, 1973 Raleigh Super Course FG, 1960/61 Montgomery Ward Hawthorne "thrift" 3 speed, by Hercules (sold) : 1966 Schwinn Deluxe Racer (sold)

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1739 Post(s)
Liked 1,014 Times in 696 Posts
Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg
Personally, if riding in traffic, I always ride with lights front and rear, blinking. My evidence is everyone's perceived response. Call the evidence empirical if you must, but if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and acts like a duck, it's probably a duck.
You're looking for the word anecdotal.
Unca_Sam is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 08:02 AM
  #108  
Metieval
Senior Member
 
Metieval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857

Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by Unca_Sam
You know as well as I do that a revocation isn't always a revocation. I'm sure you've seen the Drunk Driver (tm) plates that our state issues to OVI convicts. All you have to do is tell the judge you're sorry and agree to a curfew, and you'll have limited driving privileges during your license suspension with the scarlet letter plates. If we can't revoke driving privileges for being selfish and careless enough to drive while impaired, we certainly won't simply because you're a poor driver/can't see.

As a community, we keep returning to the fact that American road culture is toxic and dangerous for all road users, and we're addicted to it. Building our communities around the car is a mistake that we'll be rueing for decades.

Suburbs as far as the eye can see...
yes.

Maybe it is wishful thinking on my part, but... doing something is better than nothing. We also don't have a justice system, it's a revenue system.
Metieval is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 08:47 AM
  #109  
jpdemers
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Brooklyn NY
Posts: 34

Bikes: '78 Raleigh Super Grand Prix, on nicer wheels.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Milton Keynes
Having a bright flashing light on the front & back of your bike ought to negate the "I didn't see him" excuse somewhat. Why couldn't you see the cyclist wearing brightly colored clothing with flashing lights on his bike?
The point is not to negate excuses - it's to prevent the excuse from ever becoming necessary.
jpdemers is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 08:51 AM
  #110  
jpdemers
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Brooklyn NY
Posts: 34

Bikes: '78 Raleigh Super Grand Prix, on nicer wheels.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
I remain astounded by the logic behind "I'd rather risk my life than flip that little switch."
jpdemers is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 09:10 AM
  #111  
Unca_Sam
The dropped
 
Unca_Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,406

Bikes: Pake C'Mute Touring/Commuter Build, 1989 Kona Cinder Cone, 1995 Trek 5200, 1973 Raleigh Super Course FG, 1960/61 Montgomery Ward Hawthorne "thrift" 3 speed, by Hercules (sold) : 1966 Schwinn Deluxe Racer (sold)

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1739 Post(s)
Liked 1,014 Times in 696 Posts
Originally Posted by jpdemers
I remain astounded by the logic behind "I'd rather risk my life than flip that little switch."
The posters against recommendations for lights are always like that. I can understand some of the reasoning: "A little light, no matter how expensive or flashy, is a replacement for maximum visibility, high-vis clothing and careful riding". Also, "the complacency that light will give you is more dangerous than not having a light at all." They'll also tell you to ride far to the right of a lane or on the shoulder if possible since you should never share space with motor vehicles. They've survived this long like that, so that's going for them.

I'll flip a switch. I'll need light to ride the unlit MUP anyway. I have my experience as an average driver that a bicycle with lights on a sun-dappled residential street is much easier to see and adjust for than a bicycle you only see in the last 150 ft, high-vis vest or not.
Unca_Sam is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 09:27 AM
  #112  
Miele Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,655

Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times in 640 Posts
Originally Posted by kingston
Snipped
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.
I had an approaching driver make a left turn in front of me as I was riding at 40 kph (25mph) down a road with excellent sight lines. I hit the brakes hard and laid the bicycle down so I wouldn't slam into the side of his pickup truck. When he came over to check and make sure i was okay he said he didn't realize how fast I was going.

I've read in many instances where a driver did not realize how fast a bicyclist was traveling. Perhaps this is due to exposure to the plethora of bicyclists who ride only at a slightly faster than walking pace. Or it could be due to fact that many motorists simply do NOT see bicyclists when the driver scans for oncoming traffic.

Cheers
Miele Man is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 09:30 AM
  #113  
Jim from Boston
Senior Member
 
Jim from Boston's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times in 171 Posts
Originally Posted by BlazingPedals
Daytime running lights probably won't hurt; but I'm not convinced they help - at least not in urban conditions where visual overload is already an issue.

That said, I have started using a rear blinkie on the premise that it makes me more visible from behind on bright days when I ride into deep shade.
Just my opinion, but as one who cycles and occasionally drives in visually complex urban conditions, I think in ambient lighting a bright pinpoint light. especially flashing, is conspicuous [incuding a rear blinkie].
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
Which then begs the question: how much MONEY is it reasonable to spend on what has already been acknowledged as a crapshoot?
Originally Posted by 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, and daytime oncoming drivers’ or cyclists’ eyes are pretty well accomodated to sunlight.

If 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 [in specific singular instances], 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 vehicles
Originally Posted by Jaackil
First of all there is mountains of evidence….
Originally Posted by 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…
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
"Studies?..We don’t need no stinking studies…"

Many disputed safety practices, while maybe ineffective, are of themselves relatively harmless, e,g daytime lights, rear view mirror; perhaps less so, FRAP vs Take the Lane.…

I like to consider the perceived risk:benefit ratio (based on my own experience, and/or advice of trustworthy others).
Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg
Personally, if riding in traffic, I always ride with lights front and rear, blinking. My evidence is everyone's perceived response. Call the evidence empirical if you must, but if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and acts like a duck, it's probably a duck.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Jim from Boston is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 09:34 AM
  #114  
Miele Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,655

Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times in 640 Posts
Originally Posted by Unca_Sam
The posters against recommendations for lights are always like that. I can understand some of the reasoning: "A little light, no matter how expensive or flashy, is a replacement for maximum visibility, high-vis clothing and careful riding". Also, "the complacency that light will give you is more dangerous than not having a light at all." They'll also tell you to ride far to the right of a lane or on the shoulder if possible since you should never share space with motor vehicles. They've survived this long like that, so that's going for them.

I'll flip a switch. I'll need light to ride the unlit MUP anyway. I have my experience as an average driver that a bicycle with lights on a sun-dappled residential street is much easier to see and adjust for than a bicycle you only see in the last 150 ft, high-vis vest or not.
There are certain ambient light conditions where a light on a bicycle in daylight is a benefit. However, there are also many instances where an average bicycle light will not make a bicyclist any more visible than not having a light. I see a few bicyclists each week who have a front DRL on their bike. The thing is, I've already seen the bicyclist long before I've noticed their front light. Low light areas are an exception as is misty rainfall. I've noticed a flashing front light in my rear-view mirror long before I saw the bicycle itself when it was heavily overcast and drizzling rain.

Whether one runs a DRL or not one still needs to remain vigilant for unpredictable and unexpected driver behaviours. Remember, a lot of drivers can NOT judge how far away a bicycle light is and that's even more so if the light is flashing.

Cheers
Miele Man is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 10:06 AM
  #115  
Unca_Sam
The dropped
 
Unca_Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,406

Bikes: Pake C'Mute Touring/Commuter Build, 1989 Kona Cinder Cone, 1995 Trek 5200, 1973 Raleigh Super Course FG, 1960/61 Montgomery Ward Hawthorne "thrift" 3 speed, by Hercules (sold) : 1966 Schwinn Deluxe Racer (sold)

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1739 Post(s)
Liked 1,014 Times in 696 Posts
Originally Posted by Miele Man
There are certain ambient light conditions where a light on a bicycle in daylight is a benefit. However, there are also many instances where an average bicycle light will not make a bicyclist any more visible than not having a light. I see a few bicyclists each week who have a front DRL on their bike. The thing is, I've already seen the bicyclist long before I've noticed their front light. Low light areas are an exception as is misty rainfall. I've noticed a flashing front light in my rear-view mirror long before I saw the bicycle itself when it was heavily overcast and drizzling rain.

Whether one runs a DRL or not one still needs to remain vigilant for unpredictable and unexpected driver behaviours. Remember, a lot of drivers can NOT judge how far away a bicycle light is and that's even more so if the light is flashing.

Cheers
I hate riding fully exposed to the sun, it's unpleasant unless it's 40 degrees F or below out. In many instances, I expect that I'm served better using one all the time. In daytime when I need to call attention to my presence, I use a blinking setting. From dusk to dawn, it's better to be solid so your position and speed difference can be judged before you're in the headlights. If you're in the headlights before they slow, you're already toast. I think a slow flash or pulsing with a solid is beneficial after nightfall only because that should clue a motorist in that you're not a motorcycle, and to react sooner rather than be surprised.
Unca_Sam is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 11:18 AM
  #116  
kingston 
Jedi Master
 
kingston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lake Forest, IL
Posts: 3,724

Bikes: https://stinkston.blogspot.com/p/my-bikes.html

Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1759 Post(s)
Liked 488 Times in 313 Posts
Originally Posted by Jaackil
Your Logic is flared, it’s based on proof or lack of proof of events that do not occur. That is your whole argument show me proof that an accident did not occur. So therefore day time running lights are not safer. It is a totally made up fantasy. SMH. So the reduction in accidents is a result of what? Climate change? It was only about 600 years ago 99% of scientists said the world was flat
too. Some people will always choose to believe what they want. Based on your logic what is the argument against using them? Where is the mountains of data against using them. Do they make you less safe? Will having DRL’s make you more likely to have a crash with a car? Where is the mountains of Data supporting your position? Has there been a single study that shows having lights will make you more likely to collide with a motor vehicle? But like I said to each their own as to whether the use them or not. I will keep mine on big and bright.
The evidence shows that there is no measurable safety difference between lights and no-lights during the day, so people who run lights during the day statistically have the same number of injury causing accidents as people who do not run lights during the day.

Normally I wouldn't care if people want to run DRL's, and as I mentioned in an earlier post, I don't really have a problem with steady DRL's.

My issue is with super-bright blinking lights during the day that I personally find to be intensely annoying for no measurable safety improvement. It's just a rude thing to do.
kingston is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 02:00 PM
  #117  
Milton Keynes
Senior Member
 
Milton Keynes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,947

Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 1,710 Times in 936 Posts
Originally Posted by jpdemers
The point is not to negate excuses - it's to prevent the excuse from ever becoming necessary.
What I mean is, a distracted driver shouldn't be able to use "I didn't see him" when the cyclist has brightly colored clothing and bright flashing lights. I hope my daytime lights attract the attention of drivers so they know I'm there, but we all know that all too often "I didn't see him" is what they say because they weren't looking. So I would hope that a cop would ask the driver, "WHY didn't you see them? What were you looking at which made you not see them?"
Milton Keynes is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 03:04 PM
  #118  
Metieval
Senior Member
 
Metieval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857

Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by Miele Man
I had an approaching driver make a left turn in front of me as I was riding at 40 kph (25mph) down a road with excellent sight lines. I hit the brakes hard and laid the bicycle down so I wouldn't slam into the side of his pickup truck. When he came over to check and make sure i was okay he said he didn't realize how fast I was going.

I've read in many instances where a driver did not realize how fast a bicyclist was traveling. Perhaps this is due to exposure to the plethora of bicyclists who ride only at a slightly faster than walking pace. Or it could be due to fact that many motorists simply do NOT see bicyclists when the driver scans for oncoming traffic.

Cheers
In my opinion, Timing and judging the speed of others should be a driver license requirement. It should be tested! Probably just wishful thinking. Many people can't even do the on ramp thing.
Metieval is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 03:42 PM
  #119  
Jim from Boston
Senior Member
 
Jim from Boston's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times in 171 Posts
Originally Posted by Milton Keynes
Having a bright flashing light on the front & back of your bike ought to negate the "I didn't see him" excuse somewhat.

Why couldn't you see the cyclist wearing brightly colored clothing with flashing lights on his bike?
Originally Posted by Milton Keynes
What I mean is, a distracted driver shouldn't be able to use "I didn't see him" when the cyclist has brightly colored clothing and bright flashing lights.

I hope my daytime lights attract the attention of drivers so they know I'm there, but we all know that all too often "I didn't see him" is what they say because they weren't looking.

So I would hope that a cop would ask the driver, "WHY didn't you see them? What were you looking at which made you not see them?"
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
… I was also in a cycling accident three years ago, that kept me off work for three months and off the bike for five…
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
I have had the experience of being hit-and-run, presumably not intentionally, but by a distracted (?inebriated) driver. The police filed charges.
The police were great, and their report at the subsequent trial was spot on and particularly noted my details for visibility, including lights and high vis vest.

The driver got a year in jail.
I have posted earlier to this thread:
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
"Studies?..We don’t need no stinking studies…"

Many disputed safety practices, while maybe ineffective, are of themselves relatively harmless, e.g. daytime lights, rear view mirror; perhaps less so, FRAP vs Take the Lane.…

I like to consider the perceived risk:benefit ratio (based on my own experience, and/or advice of trustworthy others)
I think the police testimony in my accident about lights was favorable to my case, though was in the situation of a rear hit-and-run at night.

Nonetheless, I think that any safety practice, including daytime (front and rear) lights, helmets, FRAP, even if unproved by studies, would be favorably considered by even the non-cyling public, including judges and juries.

But,
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
…However, riding venues for me are situational, and I use my judgement
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Also, most states have some sort of Uniform Traffic Code which contains a section on bicycles.

Regardless of what other riders (and sometimes LEOs) might tell you, it is the laws on the books that a judge will enforce.
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
Thanks for that sobering piece of advice, particularly if I had to appear before one “as sober as a judge.”

Last edited by Jim from Boston; 09-25-19 at 05:30 AM.
Jim from Boston is offline  
Old 09-24-19, 05:47 PM
  #120  
bobwysiwyg
Senior Member
 
bobwysiwyg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 961' 42.28° N, 83.78° W (A2)
Posts: 2,344

Bikes: Mongoose Selous, Trek DS

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 941 Post(s)
Liked 319 Times in 189 Posts
Originally Posted by Unca_Sam
You're looking for the word anecdotal.
Thanks, I understand your correction, but in this instance, I will stick with empirical.

"Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία.​​​​"
bobwysiwyg is offline  
Old 09-25-19, 06:56 AM
  #121  
Jim from Boston
Senior Member
 
Jim from Boston's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times in 171 Posts
Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg
Personally, if riding in traffic, I always ride with lights front and rear, blinking. My evidence is everyone's perceived response.

Call the evidence empirical if you must, but if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and acts like a duck, it's probably a duck.
Originally Posted by Unca_Sam
You're looking for the word anecdotal.
Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg
Thanks, I understand your correction, but in this instance, I will stick with empirical.

"Empirical evidence is the information received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and documentation of patterns and behavior through experimentation. The term comes from the Greek word for experience, ἐμπειρία.​​​​"
I have posted earlier on this thread:
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
"Studies?..We don’t need no stinking studies…"

When it comes to safety issues of bicycling, I consider the Aphorisms of Hippocrates, Greek, so-called Father of Medicine: :
Life is short,

and art long,

opportunity fleeting,

experimentations perilous,

and judgment difficult.
Many disputed safety practices, while maybe ineffective, are of themselves relatively harmless, e,g daytime lights, rear view mirror; perhaps less so, FRAP vs Take the Lane.

The alternative, “experimental” methodology was previously described: :
Originally Posted by Last ride 76
…Extrapolating from individual experience, done on a trial and error basis, means: You think it worked better (or didn't work better) for you...

Roughly thats it, unless you were trained properly, in a controlled setting and tested in a validly designed and executed study. Then, if the results for a large enough group of people were taken in aggregate, anomalous factors accounted for properly, then those results would mean something more.
I like to consider the perceived risk benefit ratio (based on my own experience, and/or advice of trustworthy others). Or, not to be religious, but in a similar vein, consider Pascal’s Wager: :
Originally Posted by Pascal
–God is, or God is not.
–Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives
–A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up
–You must wager (it is not optional

Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing…
I happen to be in a scientific profession where strict adherence to properly controlled studies is the norm with the statistical parameter “P<.05” as the holy grail. Yet in my career I have seen well-accepted hypotheses fall by the wayside, or have encountered outliers to the data set.

PS to @Last ride 76:
Originally Posted by Last ride 76
Clear as mud to me. I don't understand why you dragged my words into this, your point seems to be the opposite of Pascals... [regarding eye contact]

I'm not sure why, but we just seemed on different wavelengths...Do me a favor, keep me out of your imaginary conversations. and I will in future, refrain from commenting on yours. Best regards, Eric
I have have again cited your post, in the public domain, not to takes sides, but because IMO, it is a well-written explanation of the scientific method.
Jim from Boston is offline  
Old 09-25-19, 08:43 AM
  #122  
bobwysiwyg
Senior Member
 
bobwysiwyg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 961' 42.28° N, 83.78° W (A2)
Posts: 2,344

Bikes: Mongoose Selous, Trek DS

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 941 Post(s)
Liked 319 Times in 189 Posts
Jim, I'm flattered that you believe my replies are worthy of this much forum bandwidth. Personally, I don't feel they are.
bobwysiwyg is offline  
Old 09-25-19, 09:35 AM
  #123  
Jim from Boston
Senior Member
 
Jim from Boston's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times in 171 Posts
Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg
Jim, I'm flattered that you believe my replies are worthy of this much forum bandwidth. Personally, I don't feel they are.
Thanks for your reply, @bobwysiwyg, and presumably reading my above post.

While I did agree with your comments, I quoted you not in reply, but as a “talking point” to elucidate my post:
Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg
Personally, if riding in traffic, I always ride with lights front and rear, blinking.

My evidence is everyone's perceived response. Call the evidence empirical if you must, but if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and acts like a duck, it's probably a duck.
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
I have posted earlier on this thread:I happen to be in a scientific profession where strict adherence to properly controlled studies is the norm with the statistical parameter “P<.05” as the holy grail.

Yet in my career I have seen well-accepted hypotheses fall by the wayside, or have encountered outliers to the data set.
As always, FWIW.

Last edited by Jim from Boston; 09-25-19 at 05:55 PM.
Jim from Boston is offline  
Old 09-26-21, 07:27 PM
  #124  
Miele Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,655

Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times in 640 Posts
Just saw this thread as it came in my notifications emails.

Looking at that video posted by the OP, the first thing I'd do for safer riding in that area is get the heck out of the door zone. DON"T RIDE IN A DOOR ZONE! It can be fatal if an opening car door knocks you down into traffic and your head gets run owner as happened to a least on person that I know of.

Cheers
Miele Man is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CompleteStreets
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
7
11-26-14 10:25 AM
Z R I D E R
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
41
07-27-13 11:04 PM
RoadSurfer
Advocacy & Safety
2
04-27-13 10:36 AM
Richard Cranium
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
10
11-22-11 09:45 AM
sudo bike
Commuting
14
09-05-11 10:11 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.