Hi-Viz - I do not think that word means what you think it means (Princess Bride ref)

[RDJ]

Not so slow perhaps, but kits are available. A previous thread hereabout, however, indicated that use of such in Godzone was illegal. Research would be required.

http://www.roadrunner.travel/2015/10...fety-lighting/

I brought a strobe headlight unit back with me from the US once upon a time (not expensive and easy plug-in to existing wiring harness) and promptly got pulled over within a fortnight as no-no not allowed to have any flashing lights up front - apparently 'they' don't like competition.

[TheDemonLord]

I commute daily - I always wear a Hi-Viz.

Does it stop people from not seeing me - No.
Does it prevent people from trying to Kill me - No.
Do I think it will be a magic Cloak protecting me from harm - No.

Do I think that for a particular scenario, for a particular driver that it will tip the odds in my favour and be the difference between life and Death? Well, I hope so.

[Bass]

This whole hi-viz/lights on thing is a crock of shit if you ask me. It gives the user a false sense of security and then suddenly hey presto they are so surprised when someone pulls out on them they have to run home and tell the world about it.

Usually agree with you but not this time.
I had read this opinion so many times that I thought I would do some personal research - so I asked everybody I knew who wore hi-viz while riding, what they thought about it.
The almost universal response was that they didn't know whether it did any good or not, but wore it on the chance that it might. No-one regarded it as some magic suit of armour or even vaguely like it.
So sorry mate but having asked the questions, I come to the conclusion that you're wrong.
Having said that, I guess I should add that those asked were almost entirely old farts like me. So I have to admit the possibility that they had enough experience to be sceptical of such things anyway.

[OddDuck]

Hi-Viz black is the only option that works.

Gay faggotry cuntflap shit like yellow/orange/pink is for spastics.

Red Ducati, mega bass exhaust, black leathers plus black helmet. I keep the headlight on, at distance on a country road it's about the only thing visible to an onlooking car about to pull out.

My position on hi-vis is that it makes the wearer look like someone honest, honorable, and law-abiding... and easy to walk all over. I'm keeping the black.

Generally it works, but it's not 100%.

[Moi]

I commute daily - I always wear a Hi-Viz.

Does it stop people from not seeing me - No.
Does it prevent people from trying to Kill me - No.
Do I think it will be a magic Cloak protecting me from harm - No.

Do I think that for a particular scenario, for a particular driver that it will tip the odds in my favour and be the difference between life and Death? Well, I hope so.

+ 1

My reasons for wearing hi-viz, it just might make a difference... meantime I treat all other road users as if they are driving by braille...

[Moi]

Usually agree with you but not this time.
I had read this opinion so many times that I thought I would do some personal research - so I asked everybody I knew who wore hi-viz while riding, what they thought about it.
The almost universal response was that they didn't know whether it did any good or not, but wore it on the chance that it might. No-one regarded it as some magic suit of armour or even vaguely like it.
So sorry mate but having asked the questions, I come to the conclusion that you're wrong.
Having said that, I guess I should add that those asked were almost entirely old farts like me. So I have to admit the possibility that they had enough experience to be sceptical of such things anyway.

What does is riding a white fully faired bike with a dark blue jacket and hi-viz vest... is he or isn't he?? Really messes with the minds of other drivers... especially if sitting on speed limit in lane 1 of motorway...

[swbarnett]

I commute daily - I always wear a Hi-Viz.

...

Do I think that for a particular scenario, for a particular driver that it will tip the odds in my favour and be the difference between life and Death? Well, I hope so.

I seriously doubt it. If they see you with the hi-viz they're more than likely to see you without it. If the problem is that people don't look, which I believe it is, then a hi-viz vest is not going to make any difference to anyone that does look.

[swbarnett]

My reasons for wearing hi-viz, it just might make a difference...

So might driving a car instead. Each to their own as to where to stop with the "safety" measures. I don't wear hi-viz and my wets are green (darkest I could get).

[Moi]

I seriously doubt it. If they see you with the hi-viz they're more than likely to see you without it. If the problem is that people don't look, which I believe it is, then a hi-viz vest is not going to make any difference to anyone that does look.

Agree... if they don't look they won't see you... even if you're a Kenworth.

However, if wearing hi-viz just makes you a bit more visible to some then it is worth it, even for those who do look and see...

[TheDemonLord]

I seriously doubt it. If they see you with the hi-viz they're more than likely to see you without it. If the problem is that people don't look, which I believe it is, then a hi-viz vest is not going to make any difference to anyone that does look.

I agree if someone doesn't look, then its of no help completely.

[Trade_nancy]

"If they don't look.." - Well I guess you may as well not have headlight(s) on either eh?
Hi-viz may make you look conformist and in some eyes dorkish..but it improves your odds...it doesn't lessen them. While I decline to wear them myself ...I accept they improve potential for safety in many applications.

[swbarnett]

if wearing hi-viz just makes you a bit more visible to some then it is worth it, even for those who do look and see...

This is really what I have issue with. If you think this and want to wear it then I have absolutely no objection (and have no right to object anyway). The trouble is that this thinking all too often leads to an erosion of personal choice through legislation. Even when the benefits are not proven.

I don't wear hi-viz for the same reason that I don't wear a back or chest protector (which I believe are proven beyond doubt to work when needed). I've chosen my own level of risk/protection and these, for me, don't fit within that. All I want to see happen is that this personal choice is maintained. If conclusive proof of the benefit of hi-vis is produced then I might reconsider, but I highly doubt it.

[Moi]

This is really what I have issue with. If you think this and want to wear it then I have absolutely no objection (and have no right to object anyway). The trouble is that this thinking all too often leads to an erosion of personal choice through legislation. Even when the benefits are not proven.

I don't wear hi-viz for the same reason that I don't wear a back or chest protector (which I believe are proven beyond doubt to work when needed). I've chosen my own level of risk/protection and these, for me, don't fit within that. All I want to see happen is that this personal choice is maintained. If conclusive proof of the benefit of hi-vis is produced then I might reconsider, but I highly doubt it.

I agree with you on the personal choice for "safety items" that have yet to be proved beyond reasonable doubt that they are of value. I believe hi-viz does give me an advantage when it comes to being seen however, I know that wearing appropriate gear gives me an advantage should I have the misfortune to have an off. At the same time I know that I have still to ride as if every one else on the road can't see me. So it is the difference between believing and knowing.

As for legislation eroding personal choice: if the evidence is there then I'd tend to agree with legislation, but I want to see sound evidence.

[Berries]

As for legislation eroding personal choice: if the evidence is there then I'd tend to agree with legislation, but I want to see sound evidence.

I think you will find clear evidence that if you are involved in a crash on a bike you will end up getting more severe injuries than if you were wrapped up in a steel cage. Where are you going to draw the line?

[Moi]

I think you will find clear evidence that if you are involved in a crash on a bike you will end up getting more severe injuries than if you were wrapped up in a steel cage. Where are you going to draw the line?

Very true... when are you selling your bike? Probably, like me, not in the foreseeable future...

I did say "tend to agree"... that allows for me to either support the legislation or not. Would be happy to see people given the information and the reasons for do something, eg wearing gloves at all times, and being encouraged to wear them.

However, can also see the other side of the argument, if ACC is paying for the "fixing" then they may be in a strong position to expect legislation to make wearing gloves compulsory.