7 ms·

This was eye opening (pun not intended) and make me a bit worried as a recreational cyclist - many of my clothes are dark and it seems worth investing in bright

by mitko 8y ago

This was eye opening (pun not intended) and make me a bit worried as a recreational cyclist - many of my clothes are dark and it seems worth investing in brighter ones. As a driver, I found that using BGE setting of the side mirrors (it's wider out, slightly overlapping with rearview mirror), coupled with keeping an eye on the road gives me a much better situational awareness, and prevents the need to turn my head in many cases - "Nope, there's a car in my blind spot, not changing lanes yet". It's a minor convenience but really helps with fatigue of the neck muscles, and keep my eyes forward, so I can react if anything happens in front of me. I've been driving BGE for nearly 10 years now, and I feel a lot safer that way. It takes some getting used to not seeing the side of the car, so if you consider doing it, I'd recommend getting used to it on a chill road, before getting on the highway. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/blindzoneglaremirrormethod.pdf https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/blindzonegla...

baud147258 8y ago
>many of my clothes are dark I've taken so many risks like this when I was using a bike: dark grey coat: check, black pants: check, dark grey backpack: check, black shoes: check. And usually my light (only in the back) is barely visible because of using old batteries and forgetting to change them.
- komali2 8y ago
  >check out the middle cyclist >https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Fighter4.jpg https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/... That part of the article blew my mind. That cyclist is practically invisible. I consider myself an extraordinarily safe driver and I know I would not see that cyclist. Time to get a high viz vest for the motorcycle and bicycle rides.
- polaritron 8y ago
  Partly, the instinct is about feeling trashy, and having to replace worn-out old junk as it accumulates stains, scuff marks, battle damage. It feels wasteful to have to discard perfectly useful items, because they look worn out. We all know that black, dark items tend show the least amount of wear, and in the interest of efficient frugality, some of us gravitate toward that instinct. You look at a white t-shirt, and you know it's going to show pit stains by the end of the year. A black t-shirt might show some white accumulation inside the armpits, but not outside, and you really are only going to have to trash it, once some holes show up. Same with socks. So too with hi-viz stuff. You just don't want to buy something, and throw it out, the moment it gives a sense of unintended imperfection. It's more an equipment maintenance perspective, than a live, situational awareness point of view. The best equipment is the stuff you have, and the stuff you have is the stuff you keep. Being a little OCD, but that's what's going on under the hood, from my own perspective.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    Everything costs money. Everything has tradeoffs. Safety is no exception. It's all about management of risk. If you seek to mitigate all risk you'll find yourself with even more risk because your bank account is now empty. The internet is great at telling other people how to spend their money so of course everyone will tell you you need the "best" helmet and the "most" reflective jacket, etc, etc.
    - def_true_false 8y ago
      If you don't care about looks, you could just get some reflective tape (the kind used for trucks, e.g. V82). Use it on the bike and helmet and you'll probably be more visible than someone in a fancy jacket. Spending couple bucks on safety seems like a decent tradeoff.
  - baud147258 8y ago
    It was more about taste than being cheap about clothes, but I understand your perspective. But I still kept most of those clothes because they are still in good enough state.
nsnick 8y ago
Saying cyclists should wear bright clothing is blaming the victims of vehicle violence. https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cyclist-pedestrian-crashes/Content?oid=24570247 https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cy...
- hardlianotion 8y ago
  And still good advice.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  I've seen pedestrians cross the street without a walk light in a downpour where visibility is five feet at midnight on a poorly illuminated intersection while wearing all black. Cars have lights not just so they can see, but so others can see them. Pedestrians absolutely should have the same, or at least something approaching reflective clothing.
- dvdcxn 8y ago
  We blame the drivers of cars without headlights on for night time collisions, why would cyclists be any different?
  - isostatic 8y ago
    Sure, and in the UK at least it's a requirement to have lights on when riding at night.
    - rjsw 8y ago
      Can't remember the last time I saw a cyclist with lights. They seem to think that they don't need them if in a cycle lane, even when there is nothing separating it from the rest of the road.
      - 8y ago
isostatic 8y ago
None of those cyclists are riding in a particularly sensible position, it's patently unclear where they are going, are they in lane 1 or lane 2, or moving from one to another?
- mcguire 8y ago
  In the NHTSA pdf? They're roughly in the middle of the lane.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    In the article, specifically the picture they appear in https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Fighter4.jpg https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/... The argument "it's the cyclist fault she got killed for not wearing bright colours" is practically the same as "it's the woman's fault she got raped for wearing a short skirt" Maybe cyclists should be forced to wear high vis clothes so car drivers can drive around without awareness. Maybe schoolkids in the UK should wear bullet proof vests so gun owners don't accidentally shoot them. Maybe women should be forced to wear burkas so men don't get tempted. These arguments are very similar logic. However if cyclists are to take some responsibility for their safety on the road, not riding at the edge of a lane is the first thing to do, not wearing a burka or a flak jacket.
    - bacon_waffle 8y ago
      It looks to me like they're in a perfectly sensible position - just outside the door zone as they approach some parallel-parked cars. Am I missing something?
      - isostatic 8y ago
        They are in the second lane, then they are too close to the left most lane. A vehicle (especially a large vehicle) passing up the inside could be very close. If the yellow rider were to move slightly to the left, the blue one would probably swerve towards the left lane, but there's no where to go. They are also encouraging in-lane overtaking, which might just about work for a motorbike or another bike, but anything wider would be a problem The yellow topped one is probably OK in lane position if the other cyclists weren't there (but why not another metre to the right). However he's very close to the blue one. The blue and stripy ones run the risk of being hemmed in by traffic from the rear
chooseaname 8y ago
I always use BGE. My dad basically nagged me into remembering it always. I tell people who have never done it, go find a parking lot with just a few cars in it and convince themselves that it works and that it is safer than twisting their head around to see backwards.
- noratonsto 8y ago
  A warning, do NOT use this mirror arrangement if you drive in a crowded city and share the road with scooters, motorcycles, bikes, and pedestrians. BGE is great if you drive on big roads and mainly share it with other cars. However if you drive in a city with tons of scooters, you know the ones that will swarm your car, then they will all be in your blind spot if you use this mirror arrangement.
  - gomox 8y ago
    My Ford car has smaller convex mirrors in the corners of the normal side mirrors and they are a godsend in busy city driving. I really miss them when driving other cars.
    - Forbo 8y ago
      I'm surprised to see this is the first mention of convex mirrors. I get some of the stick-on variety for any car I'm driving, as it dramatically increases the viewing angle for my side mirrors. I get them for my friends to put on their mirrors, too. If a $6 item can help avoid any kind of collision, that's an insane ROI.
      - Spooky23 8y ago
        I agree with you on the stick-on mirrors. My current car has convex mirrors built in, and I find them very distracting. The little $6 stick on is a superior product.
  - jsight 8y ago
    I completely agree. Although, alternatively, you can keep BGE and just move your head a lot more when in the crowded city environment, if that isn't your primary driving environment. It isn't nearly as big of a problem to look sideways in the low urban speed environments, IMO.
jtbayly 8y ago
Just to be clear, you still have to look over before you do change lanes. It's just that you don't have to look as often to figure out that you can't change lanes yet.
- rsync 8y ago
  This is in contrast to what the article from NHTSA says: "With this new setting, it is no longer necessary to turn and look into the blindzones." ... which is in contrast to what the original article quite emphatically says: "... move your head or you're dead ..." I like the novel mirror arrangement and will try it but I hope people will follow the advice of the fighter pilot, and not NHTSA, and continue to move their heads.
  - ahmedalsudani 8y ago
    I tried the different angle a couple of years ago because it seemed like the smart thing to do—increase the number of things I see. I found that my blind spots were reduced but not eliminated. It’s scary to think that somebody on the road might stop looking over after adjusting their mirrors. One solution that I have more faith in is the little convex “blind-spot mirrors.” Those actually seem to cover everything in the blind spot and then some more (at least on the driver side).
logfromblammo 8y ago
It seems to me like angling the mirror further outward could be done with mirrors (or cameras) installed inside the car. The advantage of the outside mirror is that you can see the side of the car. So if you prefer to drive with BGE mirrors, wouldn't you be better off leaving the outer mirrors so you can see along your side, and a bit to the rear, and install auxiliary outward-angled mirrors on the dashboard inside the car? I know in one of our cars that the B-column is absolutely huge, and even swiveling my head is not enough to check the left blind spot, because that B-column is fat enough to hide a car. I have to check an auxiliary convex mirror before changing lanes left. That's mounted on the wing mirror, but I would have preferred it to be on the dash, because it eats up a lot of space on the regular mirror, and is still rather small in its own right.
rconti 8y ago
If you can replace your car's driver's side mirror with aspheric european mirror, do so. (Assuming you're in the US). I had the euro glass on my Golf, and the ability to see more than just a massive grille filling up your entire mirror glass on the driver's side is a godsend. I can actually see a car 2 lanes over moving into the same lane I'm trying to move into, using just my mirrors. I've used this mirror adjustment method forever, and it really does eliminate blind spots, especially given correct mirrors. It depends on the car, though -- our Tesla 3 has pretty bad blind spots in the peripheral area because the glass doesn't adjust far enough out, and they haven't started selling the car in Europe yet, so you can't get the correct glass for it.
lazyant 8y ago
I don't remember if it was 1/3 or 2/3 (a lot anyways) of motorcycle accidents were caused by another car driver, and mostly due that they didn't see the motorcycle so a high-visibility jacket (yellow/orange with reflective stripes) is a must imho.
- marssaxman 8y ago
  I'm not going to wear a dorky-looking yellow vest even if it does make me safer, but it is very useful to assume that I am always effectively invisible. If you expect that drivers will constantly cut you off, pull out in front of you, and even merge directly into your lane, motorcycles are nimble enough that you can generally see the problem coming and react in time to avoid catastrophe when it inevitably happens.

by mitko 8y ago

baud147258 8y ago

>many of my clothes are dark I've taken so many risks like this when I was using a bike: dark grey coat: check, black pants: check, dark grey backpack: check, black shoes: check. And usually my light (only in the back) is barely visible because of using old batteries and forgetting to change them.

komali2 8y ago
>check out the middle cyclist >https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Fighter4.jpg https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/... That part of the article blew my mind. That cyclist is practically invisible. I consider myself an extraordinarily safe driver and I know I would not see that cyclist. Time to get a high viz vest for the motorcycle and bicycle rides.
polaritron 8y ago
Partly, the instinct is about feeling trashy, and having to replace worn-out old junk as it accumulates stains, scuff marks, battle damage. It feels wasteful to have to discard perfectly useful items, because they look worn out. We all know that black, dark items tend show the least amount of wear, and in the interest of efficient frugality, some of us gravitate toward that instinct. You look at a white t-shirt, and you know it's going to show pit stains by the end of the year. A black t-shirt might show some white accumulation inside the armpits, but not outside, and you really are only going to have to trash it, once some holes show up. Same with socks. So too with hi-viz stuff. You just don't want to buy something, and throw it out, the moment it gives a sense of unintended imperfection. It's more an equipment maintenance perspective, than a live, situational awareness point of view. The best equipment is the stuff you have, and the stuff you have is the stuff you keep. Being a little OCD, but that's what's going on under the hood, from my own perspective.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  Everything costs money. Everything has tradeoffs. Safety is no exception. It's all about management of risk. If you seek to mitigate all risk you'll find yourself with even more risk because your bank account is now empty. The internet is great at telling other people how to spend their money so of course everyone will tell you you need the "best" helmet and the "most" reflective jacket, etc, etc.
  - def_true_false 8y ago
    If you don't care about looks, you could just get some reflective tape (the kind used for trucks, e.g. V82). Use it on the bike and helmet and you'll probably be more visible than someone in a fancy jacket. Spending couple bucks on safety seems like a decent tradeoff.
- baud147258 8y ago
  It was more about taste than being cheap about clothes, but I understand your perspective. But I still kept most of those clothes because they are still in good enough state.

nsnick 8y ago

Saying cyclists should wear bright clothing is blaming the victims of vehicle violence. https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cyclist-pedestrian-crashes/Content?oid=24570247 https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cy...

hardlianotion 8y ago
And still good advice.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ocdtrekkie 8y ago
I've seen pedestrians cross the street without a walk light in a downpour where visibility is five feet at midnight on a poorly illuminated intersection while wearing all black. Cars have lights not just so they can see, but so others can see them. Pedestrians absolutely should have the same, or at least something approaching reflective clothing.
dvdcxn 8y ago
We blame the drivers of cars without headlights on for night time collisions, why would cyclists be any different?
- isostatic 8y ago
  Sure, and in the UK at least it's a requirement to have lights on when riding at night.
  - rjsw 8y ago
    Can't remember the last time I saw a cyclist with lights. They seem to think that they don't need them if in a cycle lane, even when there is nothing separating it from the rest of the road.
    - 8y ago

isostatic 8y ago

None of those cyclists are riding in a particularly sensible position, it's patently unclear where they are going, are they in lane 1 or lane 2, or moving from one to another?

mcguire 8y ago
In the NHTSA pdf? They're roughly in the middle of the lane.
- isostatic 8y ago
  In the article, specifically the picture they appear in https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Fighter4.jpg https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/... The argument "it's the cyclist fault she got killed for not wearing bright colours" is practically the same as "it's the woman's fault she got raped for wearing a short skirt" Maybe cyclists should be forced to wear high vis clothes so car drivers can drive around without awareness. Maybe schoolkids in the UK should wear bullet proof vests so gun owners don't accidentally shoot them. Maybe women should be forced to wear burkas so men don't get tempted. These arguments are very similar logic. However if cyclists are to take some responsibility for their safety on the road, not riding at the edge of a lane is the first thing to do, not wearing a burka or a flak jacket.
  - bacon_waffle 8y ago
    It looks to me like they're in a perfectly sensible position - just outside the door zone as they approach some parallel-parked cars. Am I missing something?
    - isostatic 8y ago
      They are in the second lane, then they are too close to the left most lane. A vehicle (especially a large vehicle) passing up the inside could be very close. If the yellow rider were to move slightly to the left, the blue one would probably swerve towards the left lane, but there's no where to go. They are also encouraging in-lane overtaking, which might just about work for a motorbike or another bike, but anything wider would be a problem The yellow topped one is probably OK in lane position if the other cyclists weren't there (but why not another metre to the right). However he's very close to the blue one. The blue and stripy ones run the risk of being hemmed in by traffic from the rear

chooseaname 8y ago

I always use BGE. My dad basically nagged me into remembering it always. I tell people who have never done it, go find a parking lot with just a few cars in it and convince themselves that it works and that it is safer than twisting their head around to see backwards.

noratonsto 8y ago
A warning, do NOT use this mirror arrangement if you drive in a crowded city and share the road with scooters, motorcycles, bikes, and pedestrians. BGE is great if you drive on big roads and mainly share it with other cars. However if you drive in a city with tons of scooters, you know the ones that will swarm your car, then they will all be in your blind spot if you use this mirror arrangement.
- gomox 8y ago
  My Ford car has smaller convex mirrors in the corners of the normal side mirrors and they are a godsend in busy city driving. I really miss them when driving other cars.
  - Forbo 8y ago
    I'm surprised to see this is the first mention of convex mirrors. I get some of the stick-on variety for any car I'm driving, as it dramatically increases the viewing angle for my side mirrors. I get them for my friends to put on their mirrors, too. If a $6 item can help avoid any kind of collision, that's an insane ROI.
    - Spooky23 8y ago
      I agree with you on the stick-on mirrors. My current car has convex mirrors built in, and I find them very distracting. The little $6 stick on is a superior product.
- jsight 8y ago
  I completely agree. Although, alternatively, you can keep BGE and just move your head a lot more when in the crowded city environment, if that isn't your primary driving environment. It isn't nearly as big of a problem to look sideways in the low urban speed environments, IMO.

jtbayly 8y ago

Just to be clear, you still have to look over before you do change lanes. It's just that you don't have to look as often to figure out that you can't change lanes yet.

rsync 8y ago
This is in contrast to what the article from NHTSA says: "With this new setting, it is no longer necessary to turn and look into the blindzones." ... which is in contrast to what the original article quite emphatically says: "... move your head or you're dead ..." I like the novel mirror arrangement and will try it but I hope people will follow the advice of the fighter pilot, and not NHTSA, and continue to move their heads.
- ahmedalsudani 8y ago
  I tried the different angle a couple of years ago because it seemed like the smart thing to do—increase the number of things I see. I found that my blind spots were reduced but not eliminated. It’s scary to think that somebody on the road might stop looking over after adjusting their mirrors. One solution that I have more faith in is the little convex “blind-spot mirrors.” Those actually seem to cover everything in the blind spot and then some more (at least on the driver side).

logfromblammo 8y ago

It seems to me like angling the mirror further outward could be done with mirrors (or cameras) installed inside the car. The advantage of the outside mirror is that you can see the side of the car. So if you prefer to drive with BGE mirrors, wouldn't you be better off leaving the outer mirrors so you can see along your side, and a bit to the rear, and install auxiliary outward-angled mirrors on the dashboard inside the car? I know in one of our cars that the B-column is absolutely huge, and even swiveling my head is not enough to check the left blind spot, because that B-column is fat enough to hide a car. I have to check an auxiliary convex mirror before changing lanes left. That's mounted on the wing mirror, but I would have preferred it to be on the dash, because it eats up a lot of space on the regular mirror, and is still rather small in its own right.

rconti 8y ago

If you can replace your car's driver's side mirror with aspheric european mirror, do so. (Assuming you're in the US). I had the euro glass on my Golf, and the ability to see more than just a massive grille filling up your entire mirror glass on the driver's side is a godsend. I can actually see a car 2 lanes over moving into the same lane I'm trying to move into, using just my mirrors. I've used this mirror adjustment method forever, and it really does eliminate blind spots, especially given correct mirrors. It depends on the car, though -- our Tesla 3 has pretty bad blind spots in the peripheral area because the glass doesn't adjust far enough out, and they haven't started selling the car in Europe yet, so you can't get the correct glass for it.

lazyant 8y ago

I don't remember if it was 1/3 or 2/3 (a lot anyways) of motorcycle accidents were caused by another car driver, and mostly due that they didn't see the motorcycle so a high-visibility jacket (yellow/orange with reflective stripes) is a must imho.

marssaxman 8y ago
I'm not going to wear a dorky-looking yellow vest even if it does make me safer, but it is very useful to assume that I am always effectively invisible. If you expect that drivers will constantly cut you off, pull out in front of you, and even merge directly into your lane, motorcycles are nimble enough that you can generally see the problem coming and react in time to avoid catastrophe when it inevitably happens.