Night Riding Safety? - Page 2

"Thunder9" <thunder9@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:3f27a6e6.334740398@netnews.comcast.net...
> Thanks. I'm researching night riding safety, and just stumbled upon a great quote:
>
> "Ride like you're invisible"
>
> BTW, where do you get the reflective clothing and tape? Is Illuminite any good?

Illuminite is not nearly as good as the advertising hype (who wudda guessed). I have a jacket that
gives off an underwhelming glow when hit with bright light. Of course, It is useless for rear
illumination if I am carying a backpack. 3M reflective strips are good, especially on moving parts
-- and a strip up the back of the booties is excellent. The fabric treatements are far less
effective than the plastic tapes.

IMO, you should buy the brightest light that you can afford which also meets your needs in terms of
run time, weight, durability, etc. I have ridden with people with HIDs, and the light seemed rather
odd to me -- it was blinding to took at, but it was not all that illuminating on the roadway. Maybe
it was a lense problem. A good bright flasher is a must.

The invisible thing is especially true when encountering cross traffic. A dim bicycle light often
fades into the background of car lights, business and other light sources, and my most common
problem at night is having cars pull out in front of me, even when using a 20+ watt set-up. --
Jay Beattie.

Ted Bennett <tedbennett@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<tedbennett-

> For errant pedestrians and other bicyclists, yelling is colorful, reliable and virually instant.

works a charm on the odd driver too, if you put some oopmfh into it. and so satisfying..

theres nothing like the look on a driver's face when he almost kills you, you dodge him, blow by his
window, and let him know how you feel about him

a) backing into the 'empty' road when you are doing 30 down a hill
b) opening his door into the 'empty' road.
c) swerving into the 'empty' lane without indicating.

etc..

but back on topic- if you were having close calls, as i do from time to time (apparentely i am a
stealth biker), one of those disposable airhorns really would be impressive. they are inbeleivably
loud. i think i could zip tie one to my handlebar, and just about wake up any driver within a block,
nevermind the stereo. makes me smile to think of it.

Jay Beattie wrote:
> Illuminite is not nearly as good as the advertising hype (who wudda guessed). I have a jacket that
> gives off an underwhelming glow when hit with bright light.

I have to agree. I am not impressed with its reflectivity. The only way I've been able to get a good
reflection off of it is with a camera flash; which is very unlike a car headlight.

3M strips work pretty well as does reflective tape.

Avoid Illuminite. It's a rip-off.

--Bill Davidson
--
Please remove ".nospam" from my address for email replies.

I'm a 17 year veteran of usenet -- you'd think I'd be over it by now

LOL.... sure and have someone cell phone the cops saying theres a big broad in the bushes screaming
at bambi's

take care Liz

Hey! Look what Ted Bennett <tedbennett@earthlink.net> wrote :

>Like I said: yelling would work better. Try a blood-curdling scream on those deer.

On 31 Jul 2003 05:00:10 GMT, tbgibb@aol.com (TBGibb) wrote:

>In article <3f2868f5.384426203@netnews.comcast.net>, thunder9@nowhere.com (Thunder9) writes:
>
>>>You don't need an HID to "be seen" a simple 1.25 W halogen will serve
>>without
>>>spending 30X as much.
>>
>>I've read this before, and I don't buy this argument. The fact of the matter is, most people even
>>if they rode with no lights at all... would never get into a serious or life threatening wreck.
>>Similarly, most airbags are never deployed. Yet they save lives, and increase your odds of
>>surviving "the big one" and with vastly reduced injury.
>
>You don't buy which argument? The idea that a 1.25 W halogen will get a driver's attention or that
>one should have an HID to be noticed?

Here is what I thought you were saying (I disagree with the first statement, and thus with the
conclusions that follow):

"A 1.25 W halogen is just as effecitve as HID in getting the attention of drivers. So HID offers
insignificant increases in safetey. Therefore, the cost of HID is unjustified."

I apologize if I misunderstood you. Perhaps you can clarify.... and explain why you think a 1.25 W
halogen is just as good as HID for getting the attention of drivers?

Regards, Thunder9

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:06:16 GMT, thunder9@nowhere.com (Thunder9) may have said:

>... The bottom line seems to be that "cars respect you more" when you use HID on the street. People
>have noticed clear behavioral changes of drivers when they ride with HID. This leads me to believe
>that HID does make a significant safety impact at night. I can't quantify it, but I'm now convinced
>/* there's a good chance that */ it is worth the money.

I will note that in my travels, I've seen some night cyclists in fairly remote areas with a variety
of approaches to both the see and the be-seen aspects of night safety. The ones with lots of red and
white reflective material on helmet, waist, sleeves and feet seemed to get wider berths from rear-
and side-approaching traffic than those who relied on a flasher at seat level alone. The ones with
tightly focused (probably halogen) headlights that did a good job of putting light on the road ahead
of them, but which frankly appeared indistinguishable from a multitude of other *possible* small
white light sources, were frequently not resolvable as being a cyclist in an oncoming arrangement
until after they'd been passed. The few that I've seen who combined the headlight with a front amber
LED flasher were *much* easier to identify both as being moving objects and as being "probably a
cyclist" than those with merely the headlight alone...and I will also note that in my experience,
reflective material vanishes in the glare from any useful headlight. Thus, unless the headlight is
powerful enough to command instant respect *in and of itself*, I feel that the front amber flasher
(where not prohibited by asinine regulations) is also a good idea. As a backup, the white LED
lights, with their apparent brilliance, would seem to come second or equal.

Nothing, of course, will protect against the kind of random act of malice or incredible negligence
that caused a certain cyclist to be nearly killed some 20 to 30 years ago in the Western US, but
then, these are risks that exist in every facet of life; dwelling on or obsessing over them is
neither productive nor protective.

>If I didn't buy HID, I would in all probability be able to regularly ride at night without ever
>having an accident. But I think the increased safety benefit is significant. And I feel its part of
>my responsibility as a parent to make this purchase. Besides, its also kewl as sh..

I feel similarly, but my personal budget does not yet afford the option of such a system, so I'll go
with what I can get that seems to be effective, and limit my night riding to those areas least
likely to present significant dangers.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail. Yes, I have a killfile. If I
don't respond to something, it's also possible that I'm busy.

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 01:14:41 GMT, thunder9@nowhere.com (Thunder9) may have said:

>I see motorcyclists riding during the day time with their powerful lights on.

In many states, this is mandatory. (It may be a Federal requirement, but I believe it isn't as yet.)

>So the reasoning goes, fork over the bucks and get a HID light. Maybe even two (one for the
>handlebars, one for the helmet).

Former, good idea. Latter, bad idea, in my opinion, for the same reasons already stated by other
contributors.

>So I'm thinking about getting just that, night rider blow torch and storm. Cost a lot, sure. But
>how much is one's life and health worth?

The answer to this question is, for the majority, "More than I can afford, but I can't sit here and
hide under a rock, either." Most people will buy what they consider to be a good balance between
their needs and their budgets. For some, this is a roll of electrical tape and a 2-AA Maglite. I
will not disparage their choice, if that's all they can provide.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail. Yes, I have a killfile. If I
don't respond to something, it's also possible that I'm busy.

When I commute by bike during the wee hours of dark, I use a NightSun headlamp, orange front
flasher, red rear flasher, reflectors front and rear, reflectorized leg bands (Nashbar makes a
really nice BRIGHT set), and special metal prism reflective tapes on my rims. 16 each, front and
rear, mounted on the face of the rims, between the spokes.

The rim reflectors are probably the best idea, they are seen from all angles and create two distinct
rotating circles of light. Unmistakably a bicycle.

May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear for the hills! Chris

Chris'Z Corner "The Website for the Common Bicyclist": http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:48:43 -0400 (EDT), ChriszCorner@webtv.net (Chris Zacho "The Wheelman") wrote:

>When I commute by bike during the wee hours of dark, I use a NightSun headlamp, orange front
>flasher, red rear flasher, reflectors front and rear, reflectorized leg bands (Nashbar makes a
>really nice BRIGHT set), and special metal prism reflective tapes on my rims. 16 each, front and
>rear, mounted on the face of the rims, between the spokes.
>
>The rim reflectors are probably the best idea, they are seen from all angles and create two
>distinct rotating circles of light. Unmistakably a bicycle.

Where do you get these from?

In article <3f291099.427349597@netnews.comcast.net>, thunder9@nowhere.com (Thunder9) writes:
>I apologize if I misunderstood you. Perhaps you can clarify.... and explain why you think a 1.25 W
>halogen is just as good as HID for getting the attention of drivers?

TBGibb wrote:
> That's correct. The 1.25 W halogen stands out as a bright spot in the darkness. Since it's moving
> from side to side as the rider manuvers the bike it is adequate for "being seen." I don't find it
> to be much help in seeing the road though.

There's being visible and there's grabbing your attention.

You can see a candle from 1/2 mile away in the dark. You can also see a giant bonfire from roughly
the same distance.

Which one do you notice first?

I'm guessing the brighter one. More light is more noticable.

--Bill Davidson
--
Please remove ".nospam" from my address for email replies.

I'm a 17 year veteran of usenet -- you'd think I'd be over it by now

thunder9@nowhere.com (Thunder9) wrote in message news:<3f272c80.303401308@netnews.comcast.net>...
> I want to do some night riding - mostly on the road, and some trail riding. I'm new at this so I
> need some advice.
>
> For the road, it seems that the more light the better - to be seen - not necessarily for my own
> visibility.
>
> I see motorcyclists riding during the day time with their powerful lights on.
>
> So the reasoning goes, fork over the bucks and get a HID light. Maybe even two (one for the
> handlebars, one for the helmet).
>
> So I'm thinking about getting just that, night rider blow torch and storm. Cost a lot, sure. But
> how much is one's life and health worth?
>
> Also, is that kind of a dream set up for trails?
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks, Thunder9

FWIW, I was inches away from getting creamed by an SUV making a left hand turn (The driver started
making the turn about a half block too early. I jumped off the bike and over to the curb. The SUV's
tires were inches from my bike's tires.). I had a single 1.5W CatEye and a rear blinkie. Now I have
two headlights PLUS a front yelllow blinkie, as well as the rear red blinkie. I think that the
yellow front blinkie is the eye catcher, not necessarily the brightness of the headlights (but I
added the second headlight to hedge my bet!).

So, IMHO, you need:

* Enough illumination to see where you're going and to avoid road obsticles.

* A blinkie light front AND rear so the point-n-click drivers see something they aren't
accustomed to.

* Enough reflective tape to make you feel better.

* Ride like you're invisible (as another poster said).

Happy Trails, GW

Thunder9 wrote:

>I've read this before, and I don't buy this argument. The fact of the matter is, most people even
>if they rode with no lights at all... would never get into a serious or life threatening wreck.
>
>
That seems to have been true for me. When I was in college I commuted to my part-time job by bike on
a long 2-lane road which was unlighted. Cars were infrequent but helpful, since they allowed me to
see the road clearly at least briefly. After a while I memorized all of the potholes! It's
interesting what youth and lack of funds will allow you do do (or at least *think* you can do). For
a couple of years in the 70's, a couple of cheap platic reflectors was "enough" to get me through. I
didn't need no 2 watt light for 30X the price :-) Funny how perspectives change.

Jim Edwards wrote:

>My thoughts... most danger is from cars coming up behind you.
>
In my experience the dangerous encounters are from cars entering the side (sidestreet, parking lot,
driveway), and also oncoming traffic turning in front of you.

Jay Beattie wrote:

> I have ridden with people with HIDs, and the light seemed rather odd to me -- it was blinding to
> took at, but it was not all that illuminating on the roadway. Maybe it was a lense problem. A
> good bright flasher is a must.
>
>
>
I think it's because the light is heavy on the bluish part of the spectrum. The low amount of yellow
and red components does give a certain feeling of ghostliness to the illumination. Stop signs, for
example, look grayish. Still plenty of light to see the road well though, imo. Another result is
that I find glass in the roadway less noticeable and I think that has to do with less information
reflected back -- less chromatic refraction or "sparkle". If you shine a monochromatic light into a
prism you get no rainbow. These are minor annoyances though, compared to what I feel is an
outstanding advantage in getting noticed by oncoming traffic and traffic approaching intersections.

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 07:20:49 GMT, John Albergo <lososos@pacbell.net> wrote:

>
>
>Jim Edwards wrote:
>
>>My thoughts... most danger is from cars coming up behind you.
>>
>In my experience the dangerous encounters are from cars entering the side (sidestreet, parking lot,
>driveway), and also oncoming traffic turning in front of you.
>

This concurs with my research on the Internet. The prevailing research/wisdom indicates that
most people are scared of getting hit from behind, but the real danger is from side traffic or
cars pulling in front of you. Also, the cars coming from behind won't typically crash right into
you, but rather, go around you and then make a right hand turn into you (according to my
research). I suspect this is partially due to the rider being too far to the right, out of fear
of getting hit from behind, thus allowing the car to pass with little bearth and little
conciousness of sharing the road.

I think its similar to the fear of flying. Statistically, flying is safer than driving. But there is
a sense of loss of control, and your life is literally in the hands of another individual.

Regards, Thunder9