An investigation of motorcycle rider use of and attitudes to high visibility gear

[Bald Eagle]

From personal experience hi-viz doesn't stop retarded disqualified drivers from pulling out of side rides hitting you and driving away. I still wear my hi-viz but now it's got lovely road rash scrapes all down the back.

[Berries]

If we can accept that full-face helmets are better, armoured and leather gear is better, headlights on all the time and louder pipes saves lives, etc., why not putting on hi-viz then?

Because not everyone accepts all those items that you quote. I'll give you the first two, but has headlights on made any difference? I'd rather have the choice personally, and I have never believed that loud pipes save lives, they just scare the kiddies.

[Swoop]

Guess it is hard to change the way of thinking, what they need is an external group in touch with the road users, and willing to abandon preconceived ideas in favour of facts.

Oddly, they are called the NZ Police and have enough laws available to them that they could aid the situation (lack of road courtesy, failure to indicate, failure to keep left unless passing, etc, etc) and could improve the situation.

However "those that know best" seem determined to compel us to wear hi vis, and as the safety benefits are apparently negligible, other benefits should be sought.

I would be interested to know what experience the "researchers" have of two-wheel transport. Their experience levels, are they riders themselves or merely adding data to their project?

[theseekerfinds]

did the survey.. don't wear hi-vis as a rule aside from my 1-piece RST wet weather suit, and even then haven't worn that in ages.
it has taken decades for the motorcycle safety and fashion industry to develop to where they are today (a multi-billion dollar industry) and whilst there is certainly room for reflective piping and panels etc there just isn't the scope for great swatches of hi-vis and as such I don't see the motorcycle clothing manufacturers climbing onboard with gusto to make hi-vis leathers or cordura for the mainstream as a core product. For emergency services perhaps but the mainstream, not likely.
I was at the Ulysses ANZAC ride in Upper Hutt today and out of the several hundreds of riders in attendance, aside from the marshals, there would have been maybe 1% with hi-vis on. They stood out more because they were bright spots in a sea of black leather and the like, as opposed to actually being highly visible. put them out on the road and they were barely more visible than any ZX6R or Ducati in attendance, and that was only if you actually knew what to look for.
Hi-vis should be a matter of choice, we should be able to choose to wear it if we want to. I don't want to so choose not to.
I agree with the early post that said something like "the best Hi-vis protection is my eyesight".. in the final survey question I noted that there is really very little in the way of genuine motorcylist hi-vis, it is all plain old hi-vis vests worn over our other clothing which means it doesn't fit properly, it isn't designed to do 50km/h - 100km/h and in that respect isn't very hi-vis at all it's just a waste of time and effort putting it on.
I just wish the powers that be would start to show some basic understanding of motorcycling and see that rider and driver training is where the solution for 90% of our issues lies. Not hi-vis, not ACC levies, not capacity limits, just training, training, training..

[Swoop]

Not hi-vis, not ACC levies, not capacity limits, just training, training, training..

Now there is a concept that has whooshed past the heads of our legislators.

[Hitcher]

I have completed this short, amateurish, clumsy and leading survey. I hope that the supervising professor or whomever goes and talks to a professional market researcher. They should have before allowing a lame effort like this to go public. It's disappointing that a tertiary institute would be associated with something like this.

[MIZXR]

it has taken decades for the motorcycle safety and fashion industry to develop to where they are today (a multi-billion dollar industry) and whilst there is certainly room for reflective piping and panels etc there just isn't the scope for great swatches of hi-vis and as such I don't see the motorcycle clothing manufacturers climbing onboard with gusto to make hi-vis leathers or cordura for the mainstream as a core product. For emergency services perhaps but the mainstream, not likely.

If they make it law, how many of the quality "read I just sold my wife and kids expensive" brands are going to change their production to meet our requirements. If I have to wear a vest that will distract my attention from where I want it to and risk increasing my chance of injury by causing me to tumble - suits slide. Is helping someone see me more use than the protection I get?

Reflective rain gear is the only exception that I would consider but that seems to make people think I'm a big field with a puddle on top, not a bike.

Most people seem to spot badly dented and iratically driven vehicles, maybe where just safer on stuff that looks rough and ignoring road rules.

[MIZXR]

I have completed this short, amateurish, clumsy and leading survey. I hope that the supervising professor or whomever goes and talks to a professional market researcher. They should have before allowing a lame effort like this to go public. It's disappointing that a tertiary institute would be associated with something like this.

The might be smarter than us. Could be a fake test to guage our reactions through sites like these. Or maybe our old age in NZ is looking worse.

[p.dath]

...If we can accept that full-face helmets are better, armoured and leather gear is better, headlights on all the time and louder pipes saves lives, etc., why not putting on hi-viz then?

Full face helmets, armour and leather are normally chosen to reduce the serious of any in injuries during an accident - not to prevent an accident.

It is put forward that headlights, loud pipes and high-viz are intended to reduce the likelihood of an accident.

So the choice with the last three is quite different for the first three. Personally I use all of the first three, as I do want to reduce the seriousness of injuries should the worst happen. I don't really subscribe to the second three, as I don't think they have much impact on the chance of preventing an accident.

I used to wear a high-viz jacket, but have pretty much stopped now. It didn't seem to make any difference before or after I stopped wearing it. I can't find any research to suggest it makes any difference. So it seems a wasted effort.

[joan of arc]

Could it happen that riders wearing Hi Viz assume that they are obvious on the road and therefore place responsibility on others to see them thus relinquishing their own accountibility to ride safe?

What proportion of biker deaths/accidents are due to not be seen by cagers?


And does anyone know if the colour of bike has any effect on being noticed on the road?

[Scuba_Steve]

And does anyone know if the colour of bike has any effect on being noticed on the road?

yea riding a bright pink sports bikes


Or being a typical Harley rider are both more likely to get you noticed on the road

[bogan]

lol, survey is back up and I just did it, wtf! I was thinking, you know, this isn't so bad, good to get some of these introductory questions out of the way, then BAM, quiz done, no important questions asked

I did manage to get in one comment though, when asked why I wouldn't wear high vis

Well it doesn't do bugger all, so why would I wear it? Like asking if a want to ride in a goddam pink tutu and coconut bra isn't it

[Harry the Barstard]

Do you guys remember spokey doekeys?

Hi viz jackets can eat a fat one! Spokey doekeys are the silver bullet. They came in multiple fluro colours and will make a cool clicking sound when you are going slow.

Boom!

[Crasherfromwayback]

How 'bout you do a fucking survey on wire rope barriers.

R.I.P to the rider that died today hitting one.

[MrKiwi]

In response to the enquiries about this study:

We are a group of 4th year medical students undertaking the study as part of our course. We are receiving no funding from outside the University. MOTO NZ are the client and will be receiving a copy of the report. However, the project is being conducted independent of MOTO NZ and they have no influence on our grades for the project.

For those who do not believe that there is a benefit to wearing high visibility clothing, please list this under the "other" category on the question regarding what you would consider a barrier to wearing high-vis clothing.

Also, this is just one component of our study. We are also conducting key informant and public interviews, as well as gathering other quantitative data.

Thanks again for your responses.

MotoNZ is the client? This is news to me. I am a council member of MotoNZ and a member of the proposals subcommittee. I am not aware that we are the client of this work and as far as I am aware we have not been asked to endorse it and I doubt we would at this point in time.

I completed your survey and on the last question noted to you that the research suggests the best bang for bucks on conspicuity is likely to be with the bike and not necessarily the rider. The jury is well and truly still out on hi viz jackets. Visibility can be defined as the ability to see an object against the background when you know where the object is. Conspicuity can be defined as the ability for an object to stand out against the background when you are not looking for it and don't know the object is there ie grabs your attention. In certain circumstances high viz jackets/vests are not that visible let alone conspicious.

We would be grateful if you could retract/correct the assertion that MotoNZ is the client for this work. We are likely to be interested in the results just as we are interested in the results of any research.

David Crawford.