The Black Prince wrote (see)
Hence The Black Prince is temporarily day glo.
Day-glo is useless at night.
wasabi wrote (see)
It is only 'useless' if there is no light source whatsoever. The actual illumination may wall be in the low light mesopic range well known to commuters - see http://resodance.com/ali/mes_crit.html
The problem is that 'dayglo' glows in daylight by converting UV light to visible wavelengths. If there's no source of UV (ie the sun is below the horizon) it's no better than any other light coloured clothing.
As we've said before, unless your lights are directly illuminating any object, you're relying on diffuse light from other sources - in town that's likely to be streetlighting.
In fact dayglo orange is worse under low pressure yellow sodium streetlighting - it appears brown.
All original contributions to this forum by Kevin Williams are subject to a (cc) Creative Commons deed.Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales Full terms are available here but in brief if you use the author's work for any purpose, it's under the following conditions: * Attribution. You must give the original author credit. * Non-Commercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. * Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under a licence identical to this one. VD DEALS Blog Courses Books Facebook Twitter FREE STUFF
"Force has no place where there is need of skill" Herodotus 450BC :burnout:
wasabi wrote (see)Does this one make it clearer? http://www.telescope-optics.net/eye_spectral_response.htm
wasabi wrote (see)
And don't get me started on 95 percent of bikes having unfit for purpose headlights and tail-lights.
At least retro bikes made an attempt to illuminate the road within the limitations of quirks like 6v systems, low spec coils and single headlights. Didn't always work mind, (6 months commuting on an RXS100) Most new bikes, even those with 2 headlights, waste it on one / up one down, or silly ridiculously small reflectors. Form over function.
Blame Euro-regs, someone in the EU decided that having two headlights might make bikes look like cars (a mistake I have personally made with an early R1, truth be told). As I understand it, twin lights have to be behind a single 'glass' to meet the design regs.
The Spin Doctor wrote (see)
Blame Euro-regs, someone in the EU decided that having two headlights might make bikes look like cars (a mistake I have personally made with an early R1, truth be told).
FJSRiDER. wrote (see)
If the motorised bicycle designers were not quite so inept this would never have become a problem. Just put the lights close together. Honda did quite well with the VFR/Varidero type headlight for a bit - but seem to have decided that a new 'style' with a single headlight is preferable currently.As a rider at night I don't see why I should be handicapped by having a single lamp. I can't see any better than car drivers so why should I be restricted to the half the candlepower of a car?
I entirely agree.
Why in 2010 does my new bike have a single incandescent tail light bulb? My CX500 had no less than three bulbs at the rear - that was in the mid-80s!
I have no idea. The Voyager has 2 x Renault 21 Safrane brake indicator clusters and apparently you can see them in the spray on a wet motorway at a distance when the bikes I was riding with were still invisible. So that suits me.
Look at the latest FF-converted TMAX!
(Fiesta I think)
Perhaps a tad larger than I would like, but there really is no reason that bikes continue to have poor lighting.
Though of course we risk going down the "he must have seen me cos of my lights" route if we're not careful!
What a terrible thing to do to a lovely T-max! I at least hope the donor bike was pre-crashed.
Someone should do a feet forward piaggio mp3 - the wider front might convince doubters like me of stability in crosswinds.
The debate seems to polarise opinions. But as the wear it / don't wear it divide is still a personal choice at present, it matters not at all what people choose to do for themselves.
The point of the thread is that some 'road safety' organisations are promoting it as 'safer' when there is no strong evidence to suggest that it is.
I don't much like hi-viz, but I am willing to give it a try as my wife will be happier if I do. That provides various upsides
What you wear to pleasure your wife is not of interest here.
Correct... that will be for general!
Become a fan of Visordown
Follow us on twitter
Other Immediate Media Sites
Our eCommerce Platform
© Immediate Media Company Ltd 2012. This website is owned and published by Immediate Media Company Limited. www.immediatemedia.co.uk