A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More on conspicuity



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 22nd 17, 06:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default More on conspicuity

Does high visibility clothing affect passing clearance? Perhaps not.

From
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...warfare-wheels

"In 2013 the tireless Ian Walker carried out a more extensive version of
his helmet study. It also measured how closely drivers passed a bike
when overtaking, but this time – using a volunteer colleague rather than
himself – there were seven different outfits. Four made the rider look
like a cyclist of varying experience and dedication, ranging from full
Lycra to more everyday clothes, including one involving a hi-vis jacket.
Three other outfits were based around bright yellow waistcoats bearing
written messages. One read, “Novice cyclist: please pass slowly”;
another said, “Polite: please slow down” – “polite” is sometimes used by
UK cyclists and horse riders in the hope drivers might mistake it for
“police” – and finally one read, “Police: camera cyclist”.

This brought data for just under 5,700 overtakes, more or less evenly
split between the seven outfits. None of the outfits made an appreciable
difference to driver behaviour, apart from the one saying “police”. For
the six others, the average passing distance was between about 114cm and
118cm. For “police” it went above 122cm. Similarly, the proportion of
drivers who went very near the bike was noticeably lower for the
“police” vest. In contrast, the tabard saying “polite” saw the nearest
average overtaking distance and almost twice as many potentially
dangerous passes as “police”.

The lessons seem clear and worrying. For one thing, no matter which
outfit was worn, a small percentage of drivers still overtook
dangerously near, at a distance of 50cm or less. More than this, it
seemed drivers were perfectly able to distinguish between different
types of rider, and to read and absorb any message displayed. But rather
than adjusting their driving to the perceived experience of the cyclist,
it was only when faced with a threat to their own welfare – a police
rider filming their actions – that many allowed a cyclist more space on
the road. Most alarming still, some seemed to treat the mild attempt at
deception of “polite” as a reason to almost punish the cyclist."

I don't recall hearing of this study.

Warning: The article linked above, from which this quote is taken, will
be offensive to some.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #2  
Old March 22nd 17, 06:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,345
Default More on conspicuity

On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 10:02:06 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Does high visibility clothing affect passing clearance? Perhaps not.

From
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...warfare-wheels

"In 2013 the tireless Ian Walker carried out a more extensive version of
his helmet study. It also measured how closely drivers passed a bike
when overtaking, but this time – using a volunteer colleague rather than
himself – there were seven different outfits. Four made the rider look
like a cyclist of varying experience and dedication, ranging from full
Lycra to more everyday clothes, including one involving a hi-vis jacket.
Three other outfits were based around bright yellow waistcoats bearing
written messages. One read, “Novice cyclist: please pass slowly”;
another said, “Polite: please slow down” – “polite” is sometimes used by
UK cyclists and horse riders in the hope drivers might mistake it for
“police” – and finally one read, “Police: camera cyclist”.

This brought data for just under 5,700 overtakes, more or less evenly
split between the seven outfits. None of the outfits made an appreciable
difference to driver behaviour, apart from the one saying “police”. For
the six others, the average passing distance was between about 114cm and
118cm. For “police” it went above 122cm. Similarly, the proportion of
drivers who went very near the bike was noticeably lower for the
“police” vest. In contrast, the tabard saying “polite” saw the nearest
average overtaking distance and almost twice as many potentially
dangerous passes as “police”.

The lessons seem clear and worrying. For one thing, no matter which
outfit was worn, a small percentage of drivers still overtook
dangerously near, at a distance of 50cm or less. More than this, it
seemed drivers were perfectly able to distinguish between different
types of rider, and to read and absorb any message displayed. But rather
than adjusting their driving to the perceived experience of the cyclist,
it was only when faced with a threat to their own welfare – a police
rider filming their actions – that many allowed a cyclist more space on
the road. Most alarming still, some seemed to treat the mild attempt at
deception of “polite” as a reason to almost punish the cyclist."

I don't recall hearing of this study.

Warning: The article linked above, from which this quote is taken, will
be offensive to some.


I'm not in particular agreement with that. Close passing isn't a sign that you weren't seen. It is almost always a sign that you were. So you can hardly use a close pass as any sort of indication yea or neigh.

I think you know my position on helmets. I do not recommend them for saving lives but for reducing minor head injuries to near nothing.

But I have ridden behind a man wearing a Sky black kit through an area of trees so that the road was alternately in shadow or bright sunlight. I KNEW that man was there and yet he actually would disappear. That was not the case with those with bright colors.In fact the most outstanding jersey I've seen on that road in those conditions has been the ONCE Giro leaders pink.

Now as a cyclist and more aware of bicycles than other road users, if I can't see a cyclists only 50 feet ahead of me I do not expect a car to see them either.
  #3  
Old March 22nd 17, 07:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default More on conspicuity

I believe the results of Ian Walker's study. They bear out a much more casual study I undertook a couple of years ago.

In my village there is a quay ( a road beside a river) that once carried bidirectional traffic as well as parked cars to one side and a border beside the river wall wide enough for shrubs and trees, so appearing spacious as well. As part of a general redesign of traffic flow, it was made one way about a generation ago, with the parking on the passenger side of drivers. The space left for drivers is two cars' width. The section between one crossing stop and the next crossing stop is all visible and is not long enough to get up any real speed, and is in any event clearly in town and subject to the general speed limit applicable to towns. Almost anyone who uses this piece of road does so daily, so they know all this, and also that it narrowa somewhat at the end junction, but this is compensated for by there being no parking at that point.

General experience on this piece of road is that, if you ride beside the parked cars, drivers tend to pass closely enough to push you into them. If you ride out from the parked cars, drivers don't pass, though there is in effect a spare lane-width (nothing marked on the road) but that some press their horns. Ladies among my pedal pals ride on the sidewalk to avoid the hassle.

My test was intended to prove only that drivers who can see how close a bicycle is to damaging the expensive paintwork on their cars will give a cyclist more space. This is something I prove daily in the narrow lanes outside town by going to the driver side of the lane and watching how much more space drivers give me than when they pass me with the passenger side of their cars. But this piece of road allowed for quick iteration (return via the quay in the other side of the road, 9-12 tests per hour) under controlled circumstances.

The test consisted of alternating rides on the "correct" passenger side of the drivers and on the "wrong" driver side near the green strip. In all tests I was dressed in a safety yellow cycling jacket with plenty of reflective, and all the lamps on my bike were lit (good strong blinkies fore and aft, best quality BUMM lamps front and rear), as well as reflectors front and rear. All test in daylight with sunshine.

The findings we

1. Further proof of what we knew already, that in the correct position on the passenger side of cars, drivers would give a cyclist less space, sometimes to pushing him towards the parked cars. The test was done in the summer; most cars had open sunroofs; it was several times necessary to shout out, "Watch what you're doing, you moron." An amazing number left me clearly much less space than the legally mandated minimum distance of 1.5 meters for passing a cyclist. This despite there being plenty of space to the other side of the car which the driver could plainly see. I wrote on my tallysheet: "They're not even malicious, they're just careless and incompetent."

2. Riding on the green barrier side, next to the driver, the first observation was how many of the drivers would stay behind and not pass, despite there being plenty of space for their cars between my bicycle and the parked cars. Those who did pass gave me much more space than those who couldn't see how far they were from me. None pushed me into kerb of the green border (they might have towards the end where the road narrows, but there I always took the lane as I do normally in situations I judge dangerous -- to do otherwise would have skewed the test).

3. I concluded that drivers who can see how close a bicycle is to doing expensive damage to their car's paint- and panel-work gives the cyclist more space out of simple self-interest.

4. It is also my opinion, though my test doesn't necessarily prove it, that those who came too close when I rode on their passenger side, and the people in Ian Walkers much larger test who Franki-boy concludes, very likely correctly, reacted maliciously to attempts to deceive them, all have an unrealistically overwrought sense of their own driving ability. (That is true of course of the majority of drivers, and near enough of 100% of those who cause accidents.)

5. None of this is intended to contradict Jeff Liebermann's thesis that many drivers just don't see cyclists. The two ideas are easily reconciled by confirmation bias: people see what they expect to see, and their expectation is conditioned by their experience. If they have long experience of cyclists not being a danger to their limbs, lives and property, they expect cyclists not to be a danger to them in future, and stop seeing them. I have no problem believing in all three ideas: economic drives, invisible cyclists, and losers, and in all their interactions too.

Andre Jute
Now you're getting something right, for the second time in your life, Franki-boy. Nice work in Ohio and posting the Guardian piece, Krygowski. Credit where it is due, even to you.
  #4  
Old March 23rd 17, 03:49 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default More on conspicuity

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:02:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Does high visibility clothing affect passing clearance? Perhaps not.

From
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...warfare-wheels

"In 2013 the tireless Ian Walker carried out a more extensive version of
his helmet study. It also measured how closely drivers passed a bike
when overtaking, but this time using a volunteer colleague rather than
himself there were seven different outfits. Four made the rider look
like a cyclist of varying experience and dedication, ranging from full
Lycra to more everyday clothes, including one involving a hi-vis jacket.
Three other outfits were based around bright yellow waistcoats bearing
written messages. One read, Novice cyclist: please pass slowly;
another said, Polite: please slow down polite is sometimes used by
UK cyclists and horse riders in the hope drivers might mistake it for
police and finally one read, Police: camera cyclist.

This brought data for just under 5,700 overtakes, more or less evenly
split between the seven outfits. None of the outfits made an appreciable
difference to driver behaviour, apart from the one saying police. For
the six others, the average passing distance was between about 114cm and
118cm. For police it went above 122cm. Similarly, the proportion of
drivers who went very near the bike was noticeably lower for the
police vest. In contrast, the tabard saying polite saw the nearest
average overtaking distance and almost twice as many potentially
dangerous passes as police.

The lessons seem clear and worrying. For one thing, no matter which
outfit was worn, a small percentage of drivers still overtook
dangerously near, at a distance of 50cm or less. More than this, it
seemed drivers were perfectly able to distinguish between different
types of rider, and to read and absorb any message displayed. But rather
than adjusting their driving to the perceived experience of the cyclist,
it was only when faced with a threat to their own welfare a police
rider filming their actions that many allowed a cyclist more space on
the road. Most alarming still, some seemed to treat the mild attempt at
deception of polite as a reason to almost punish the cyclist."

I don't recall hearing of this study.

Warning: The article linked above, from which this quote is taken, will
be offensive to some.


I'm beginning to think that it must be some sort of cultural thing.

Riding in Thailand and Indonesia I can't remember ever being passed
close enough to make me feel uncomfortable. But from what I read here
it appears common in the U.S. and Canada.

I read the claims here of heavy traffic but I ride in Bangkok which is
rated the second densest traffic in the world while the worst in the
U.S. seems to be L.A. which is 10th in the world.

I read about the need for special bicycle laws there but here there
are no specific laws to protect the bicyclist, as in most U.S. states
a bicycle is considered a vehicle and thus has a right to use the
roads but slower traffic, i.e., bicycles, are expected to stay on the
side of the road so as to not impede faster traffic.

Are Thai's just nicer people than N. Americans? I wonder.
The deliberate murder rate is the same for the U.S. and Thailand, both
3.9/100,000, the Crime Index is similar with Thailand - rated 49.78
and U.S. a bit better at 48.76.

Yet I do not feel endangered riding on the roads here. Quite the
opposite. People sometimes wave or give me a "thumbs-up" (see the old
geezer riding a bicycle).

Why is here so different from (what read) there?
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #5  
Old March 23rd 17, 04:33 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default More on conspicuity

On 3/22/2017 10:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:02:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Does high visibility clothing affect passing clearance? Perhaps not.

From
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...warfare-wheels

"In 2013 the tireless Ian Walker carried out a more extensive version of
his helmet study. It also measured how closely drivers passed a bike
when overtaking, but this time using a volunteer colleague rather than
himself there were seven different outfits. Four made the rider look
like a cyclist of varying experience and dedication, ranging from full
Lycra to more everyday clothes, including one involving a hi-vis jacket.
Three other outfits were based around bright yellow waistcoats bearing
written messages. One read, Novice cyclist: please pass slowly;
another said, Polite: please slow down polite is sometimes used by
UK cyclists and horse riders in the hope drivers might mistake it for
police and finally one read, Police: camera cyclist.

This brought data for just under 5,700 overtakes, more or less evenly
split between the seven outfits. None of the outfits made an appreciable
difference to driver behaviour, apart from the one saying police. For
the six others, the average passing distance was between about 114cm and
118cm. For police it went above 122cm. Similarly, the proportion of
drivers who went very near the bike was noticeably lower for the
police vest. In contrast, the tabard saying polite saw the nearest
average overtaking distance and almost twice as many potentially
dangerous passes as police.

The lessons seem clear and worrying. For one thing, no matter which
outfit was worn, a small percentage of drivers still overtook
dangerously near, at a distance of 50cm or less. More than this, it
seemed drivers were perfectly able to distinguish between different
types of rider, and to read and absorb any message displayed. But rather
than adjusting their driving to the perceived experience of the cyclist,
it was only when faced with a threat to their own welfare a police
rider filming their actions that many allowed a cyclist more space on
the road. Most alarming still, some seemed to treat the mild attempt at
deception of polite as a reason to almost punish the cyclist."

I don't recall hearing of this study.

Warning: The article linked above, from which this quote is taken, will
be offensive to some.


I'm beginning to think that it must be some sort of cultural thing.

Riding in Thailand and Indonesia I can't remember ever being passed
close enough to make me feel uncomfortable. But from what I read here
it appears common in the U.S. and Canada.

I read the claims here of heavy traffic but I ride in Bangkok which is
rated the second densest traffic in the world while the worst in the
U.S. seems to be L.A. which is 10th in the world.

I read about the need for special bicycle laws there but here there
are no specific laws to protect the bicyclist, as in most U.S. states
a bicycle is considered a vehicle and thus has a right to use the
roads but slower traffic, i.e., bicycles, are expected to stay on the
side of the road so as to not impede faster traffic.

Are Thai's just nicer people than N. Americans? I wonder.
The deliberate murder rate is the same for the U.S. and Thailand, both
3.9/100,000, the Crime Index is similar with Thailand - rated 49.78
and U.S. a bit better at 48.76.

Yet I do not feel endangered riding on the roads here. Quite the
opposite. People sometimes wave or give me a "thumbs-up" (see the old
geezer riding a bicycle).

Why is here so different from (what read) there?


Well first, the article quoted above was talking about Britain, not the U.S.

Second, I'm on record as saying I have very few problems from motorists.
There are occasions when I'm passed closer than I'd like, but they are
rare.

I suspect that people who always ride as far right as possible may get
passed more closely. I certainly hear more complaints from them; and
most cyclists who have learned to ride more prominently remark that it
does reduce close passes.

But I admit, it's possible such things vary from culture to culture.
As an example, I did some riding in Estonia (mostly Tallinn), and felt
that motorists were more aggressive than in the U.S. In several other
countries (e.g. France, Italy, Ireland) I thought they were more patient
than here.

But who knows? Attitudes probably vary for lots of reason - good or bad
days at work, whose football team has won or lost, how cloudy the day, etc.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #6  
Old March 23rd 17, 06:55 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default More on conspicuity

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 23:33:56 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 3/22/2017 10:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:02:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Does high visibility clothing affect passing clearance? Perhaps not.

From
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...warfare-wheels

"In 2013 the tireless Ian Walker carried out a more extensive version of
his helmet study. It also measured how closely drivers passed a bike
when overtaking, but this time using a volunteer colleague rather than
himself there were seven different outfits. Four made the rider look
like a cyclist of varying experience and dedication, ranging from full
Lycra to more everyday clothes, including one involving a hi-vis jacket.
Three other outfits were based around bright yellow waistcoats bearing
written messages. One read, Novice cyclist: please pass slowly;
another said, Polite: please slow down polite is sometimes used by
UK cyclists and horse riders in the hope drivers might mistake it for
police and finally one read, Police: camera cyclist.

This brought data for just under 5,700 overtakes, more or less evenly
split between the seven outfits. None of the outfits made an appreciable
difference to driver behaviour, apart from the one saying police. For
the six others, the average passing distance was between about 114cm and
118cm. For police it went above 122cm. Similarly, the proportion of
drivers who went very near the bike was noticeably lower for the
police vest. In contrast, the tabard saying polite saw the nearest
average overtaking distance and almost twice as many potentially
dangerous passes as police.

The lessons seem clear and worrying. For one thing, no matter which
outfit was worn, a small percentage of drivers still overtook
dangerously near, at a distance of 50cm or less. More than this, it
seemed drivers were perfectly able to distinguish between different
types of rider, and to read and absorb any message displayed. But rather
than adjusting their driving to the perceived experience of the cyclist,
it was only when faced with a threat to their own welfare a police
rider filming their actions that many allowed a cyclist more space on
the road. Most alarming still, some seemed to treat the mild attempt at
deception of polite as a reason to almost punish the cyclist."

I don't recall hearing of this study.

Warning: The article linked above, from which this quote is taken, will
be offensive to some.


I'm beginning to think that it must be some sort of cultural thing.

Riding in Thailand and Indonesia I can't remember ever being passed
close enough to make me feel uncomfortable. But from what I read here
it appears common in the U.S. and Canada.

I read the claims here of heavy traffic but I ride in Bangkok which is
rated the second densest traffic in the world while the worst in the
U.S. seems to be L.A. which is 10th in the world.

I read about the need for special bicycle laws there but here there
are no specific laws to protect the bicyclist, as in most U.S. states
a bicycle is considered a vehicle and thus has a right to use the
roads but slower traffic, i.e., bicycles, are expected to stay on the
side of the road so as to not impede faster traffic.

Are Thai's just nicer people than N. Americans? I wonder.
The deliberate murder rate is the same for the U.S. and Thailand, both
3.9/100,000, the Crime Index is similar with Thailand - rated 49.78
and U.S. a bit better at 48.76.

Yet I do not feel endangered riding on the roads here. Quite the
opposite. People sometimes wave or give me a "thumbs-up" (see the old
geezer riding a bicycle).

Why is here so different from (what read) there?


Well first, the article quoted above was talking about Britain, not the U.S.

Yes, I was thinking of listing countries, i.e., The U.S., Canada,
England, Scotland, Wales, North Ireland, etc., and decided to trim the
length a bit and posted just N. Americans.

Second, I'm on record as saying I have very few problems from motorists.
There are occasions when I'm passed closer than I'd like, but they are
rare.


But you are somewhat of an anomaly here. Old Goat riding a bicycle and
can't even understand how dangerious it is? Must be senile!
:-)

I suspect that people who always ride as far right as possible may get
passed more closely. I certainly hear more complaints from them; and
most cyclists who have learned to ride more prominently remark that it
does reduce close passes.


Possibly and certainly it depends a great deal on the roadway itself.
A narrow 2 lane road where the autos are driving 100 Kph and faster is
a far different thing from a wide 6 lane highway with a bus/breakdown
lane.


But I admit, it's possible such things vary from culture to culture.
As an example, I did some riding in Estonia (mostly Tallinn), and felt
that motorists were more aggressive than in the U.S. In several other
countries (e.g. France, Italy, Ireland) I thought they were more patient
than here.


Who knows.

In both Thailand and Indonesia I can't remember ever being harassed by
an automobile. Singapore is very law abiding and will give a bicycle
exactly what the law demands, and not an inch more. Which typifies the
countries.

If a number of people are queuing for a taxi for example. In both
Thailand and Indonesia it will be a sort of huddle with everyone
thinking about how to crowd in and be next. In Singapore it will be a
neat and orderly line and woe betide anyone that tries to crowd into
the middle of the line :-)

But who knows? Attitudes probably vary for lots of reason - good or bad
days at work, whose football team has won or lost, how cloudy the day, etc.


I wonder what she'll be cooking for supper ?
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #7  
Old March 23rd 17, 05:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default More on conspicuity

On 3/23/2017 1:55 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 23:33:56 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

But I admit, it's possible such things vary from culture to culture.
As an example, I did some riding in Estonia (mostly Tallinn), and felt
that motorists were more aggressive than in the U.S. In several other
countries (e.g. France, Italy, Ireland) I thought they were more patient
than here.


Who knows.

In both Thailand and Indonesia I can't remember ever being harassed by
an automobile. Singapore is very law abiding and will give a bicycle
exactly what the law demands, and not an inch more. Which typifies the
countries.

If a number of people are queuing for a taxi for example. In both
Thailand and Indonesia it will be a sort of huddle with everyone
thinking about how to crowd in and be next. In Singapore it will be a
neat and orderly line and woe betide anyone that tries to crowd into
the middle of the line :-)


One friend of ours, of Italian heritage, was excited to accompany her
husband on a business trip / vacation to Europe. They visited Germany
and Italy.

She returned disappointed in Italy. As an example, she said in Germany,
people waiting for a bus queued up politely and entered the bus in
order. In Italy, they crowded around the bus stop and shoved their way
aboard.

I've heard of other cultural differences from friends traveling to other
countries, as well. I suppose it pays to observe and try to blend in.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #8  
Old March 23rd 17, 05:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Doc O'Leary[_21_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default More on conspicuity

For your reference, records indicate that
John B. wrote:

Are Thai's just nicer people than N. Americans? I wonder.


I think it’s a mistake to attribute it to moral character prematurely.
There are all sorts of other factors that might produce the difference
in behavior. How much driving is done by the general population? How
much biking? How wide are the roads compared to the vehicles? What
are the speed differences between the different vehicles? Is the
actual accident rate higher, or is it more a perception of danger?

I dislike a close pass as much as anyone, but I’m not going to assume
it happened because the driver is a jerk. Maybe they’re a safe driver
that simply has an excellent sense of their vehicle’s space. Maybe
they see that I am biking fast and straight, and think it’ll be
perfectly safe to go past me without much clearance. And, as
unnerving as it is, it *has* been safe 100% of the times it’s been
done to me (with just 1 time being so close my leg was brushed by
their side mirror, so I had to give them an earful, but no real harm
done).

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly


  #9  
Old March 24th 17, 03:00 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default More on conspicuity

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Doc O'Leary
wrote:

For your reference, records indicate that
John B. wrote:

Are Thai's just nicer people than N. Americans? I wonder.


I think its a mistake to attribute it to moral character prematurely.
There are all sorts of other factors that might produce the difference
in behavior. How much driving is done by the general population? How
much biking? How wide are the roads compared to the vehicles? What
are the speed differences between the different vehicles? Is the
actual accident rate higher, or is it more a perception of danger?


Actually I was being a bit provocative :-) But equally true I do
notice differences among different countries as I remarked in another
post with the anecdote about the taxi queues. But also equally true is
that the more "laid back" countries usually had higher bicycle use
than the more regimented countries.


I dislike a close pass as much as anyone, but Im not going to assume
it happened because the driver is a jerk. Maybe theyre a safe driver
that simply has an excellent sense of their vehicles space. Maybe
they see that I am biking fast and straight, and think itll be
perfectly safe to go past me without much clearance. And, as
unnerving as it is, it *has* been safe 100% of the times its been
done to me (with just 1 time being so close my leg was brushed by
their side mirror, so I had to give them an earful, but no real harm
done).


I'm a bit curious what sort of bike you are riding where "my leg was
brushed by their side mirror"? My wife's small Honda's side mirrors
are about 40 inches above the road :-)

But as for close passes, frankly I can't remember ever being passed on
the highway close enough to frighten me, which is my personal
interpretation of a "close pass". On the other hand it is not
uncommon, at a stop light, to have a bus that is planning on making a
turn at the intersection to creep up beside me well within an arm's
reach. But in those cases the drive quite obviously sees me and even
sometimes stops and waits for me to wave him past.
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #10  
Old March 24th 17, 07:40 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Doc O'Leary[_21_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default More on conspicuity

For your reference, records indicate that
John B. wrote:

I'm a bit curious what sort of bike you are riding where "my leg was
brushed by their side mirror"? My wife's small Honda's side mirrors
are about 40 inches above the road :-)


Usually some standard type of 58 cm. The seat itself is about 40" off
the ground, putting my legs at +/- 3" of that normally, or up to ~48"
if I’m standing on the pedals. As I recall it, the guy was in some
sort of sports car, so it’s quite possible the mirrors were even lower
than that Honda.

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Colour combinations for conspicuity Nick L Plate UK 46 April 13th 09 02:47 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.