Being seen in the dark.

"Peter B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Oh, and how poxy the lights are of people who presumably think that they
must be alright because they're on sale.

Not only that but the cells they are using hardly ever get changed. Most
people I see think that as the leds are actually glowing at all, that that's
good enough. That's one reason I use NiMH cells, I can afford to change them
every few days at virtually no cost.
--
Simon M.

Peter B said:

..........
Oh, and also...why do people remove the rear reflectors that by law
the bikes should have come with?

I have also seem some cyclists who have not only removed the rear reflector,
but have ripped out the wheel reflectors, the front reflector as well as all
4 pedal reflectors!

Quoted message said:

Oh, and also...why do people remove the rear reflectors that by law
the bikes should have come with?

More to the point, why did the lbs sell me a bike with no front or rear
reflactors fitted? Now it's winter might pop round and ask 'em if they've
anything in the bits box. Anyone know if they were required to sell bikes
with reflectors, or is it up to the rider?

Mark Thompson said:

More to the point, why did the lbs sell me a bike with no front or
rear reflactors fitted? Now it's winter might pop round and ask 'em
if they've anything in the bits box. Anyone know if they were
required to sell bikes with reflectors, or is it up to the rider?

I think it's law unless the bike is sold without pedals.

The most bizarre thing I have noticed is that there seems to be some law
that now says a *bell* must be fitted!

Adrian Boliston said:

I have also seem some cyclists who have not only removed the rear reflector,
but have ripped out the wheel reflectors, the front reflector as well as all
4 pedal reflectors!

That would be me then. The wheel reflectors and front reflector are
useless and (rightly) not a legal requirement. See how many experienced
riders use them.

The back reflector is mandatory after dark and pedal reflectors are also
mandatory and useful - if your pedals can take them.

Adrian Boliston said:

The most bizarre thing I have noticed is that there seems to be some law
that now says a *bell* must be fitted!

Indeed there is. On the bright side, you can now get rather neat little
ping bells for 99p because the Govt has suddenly created a "market" for
them.

"Peter B" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Oh, and also...why do people remove the rear reflectors that by law the
bikes should have come with?

Who says they remove them? The nuts rattle loose and they fall off...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Zog The Undeniable <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:417e84eb.0@entanet:

Quoted message said:

Adrian Boliston said:

I have also seem some cyclists who have not only removed the rear
reflector, but have ripped out the wheel reflectors, the front
reflector as well as all 4 pedal reflectors!

That would be me then. The wheel reflectors and front reflector are
useless and (rightly) not a legal requirement. See how many experienced
riders use them.

The back reflector is mandatory after dark and pedal reflectors are also
mandatory and useful - if your pedals can take them.

I use reflective straps round my ankles. They're just as useful and work with
any kind of pedal.

I think you're right about the front and wheel reflectors though. I've still
got the front reflector because it doesn't clutter anything up, and it gives
a little extra wind resistance so I can have more exercise.

:-)

--
Chris

Zog The Undeniable <[email hidden]> wrote in news:417e8525.0@entanet:

Quoted message said:

Adrian Boliston said:

The most bizarre thing I have noticed is that there seems to be some law
that now says a *bell* must be fitted!

Indeed there is. On the bright side, you can now get rather neat little
ping bells for 99p because the Govt has suddenly created a "market" for
them.

Is it legal to replace it with an air zound?

--
Chris

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:56:04 +0000 (UTC), "Peter B"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I'm relating this purely to point out how visible was the rider who not only
was well lit but also appeared big, tying in with the Theory of Big I've
read about.

Exhibit B: a bike with all lights switched off
<url:http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/images/gchn-5g8ggb/$file/stinger-3.jpg>

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Adrian Boliston said:

Quoted message said:

Oh, and also...why do people remove the rear reflectors that by law
the bikes should have come with?

I have also seem some cyclists who have not only removed the rear reflector,
but have ripped out the wheel reflectors, the front reflector as well as all
4 pedal reflectors!

The [censored]! And they ride [censored] up head down so that oyu can't see
their hel*et!

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Oh, and also...why do people remove the rear reflectors that by law
the bikes should have come with?

More to the point, why did the lbs sell me a bike with no front or rear
reflactors fitted? Now it's winter might pop round and ask 'em if they've
anything in the bits box. Anyone know if they were required to sell bikes
with reflectors, or is it up to the rider?

They are, it doesn't meet BS standards without the reflectors

Zog The Undeniable said:

Adrian Boliston said:

I have also seem some cyclists who have not only removed the rear
reflector, but have ripped out the wheel reflectors, the front
reflector as well as all 4 pedal reflectors!

That would be me then. The wheel reflectors and front reflector are
useless and (rightly) not a legal requirement. See how many
experienced riders use them.

The back reflector is mandatory after dark and pedal reflectors are
also mandatory and useful - if your pedals can take them.

Why is the front reflector considered less important than a rear reflector,
when oncoming traffic generally has a much greater closing speed?

Zog The Undeniable said:

The back reflector is mandatory after dark and pedal reflectors are also
mandatory and useful - if your pedals can take them.

They're mandatory even if your pedals can't take them. From the Road
Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 [1]:

Schedule 1, Table III: Pedal Cycle
Pedal Retro Reflector, Schedule 20: Part 1. Exceptions - A pedal cycle
manufactured before 1st October 1985

Schedule 20, Requirements relating to obligatory pedal retro reflectors
blah blah

Number - Two reflectors on each pedal

Position - On the leading and trailing edge of each pedal
[which is a bit of a problem on a recumbent]

Angles of Visibility - Such that the reflector on the leading edge of
each pedal is plainly visible to the front and the reflector on the
trailing edge of each pedal is plainly visible to the rear

[1] <URL:http://www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1989/Uksi_19891796_en_1.htm>

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Adrian Boliston said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The most bizarre thing I have noticed is that there seems to be some law
that now says a *bell* must be fitted!

and Monkey Hanger responded:

Quoted message said:

Is it legal to replace it with an air zound?

Do what you like. There's no legal requirement to leave the bell on
once the bike's left the shop.

Personally I like to have both - a bell for peds, the horn for cagers
and dogs.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Adrian Boliston wondered:

Quoted message said:

Why is the front reflector considered less important than a rear reflector,
when oncoming traffic generally has a much greater closing speed?

My guess is that it has something to do with oncoming traffic usually
being on the other side of the road (except for BMW's and WVM, natch) :-P

Now lights are a different matter. I tend to think front lights are
more important than back lights, because back lights don't do anything
to stop cars pulling out in front of you.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Adrian Boliston said:

Peter B said:

..........
Oh, and also...why do people remove the rear reflectors that by law
the bikes should have come with?

I have also seem some cyclists who have not only removed the rear reflector,
but have ripped out the wheel reflectors, the front reflector as well as all
4 pedal reflectors!

Don't be quite so quick to damn them. I've had the wheel reflectors
break, bike has nowhere to mount a front reflector, and spd's (though I
don't use them, and have rear-facing pedal reflectors) don't appear to
have pedal reflectors unless you try really hard to get some that will
take special ones.

I *do* however have a rear reflector, liberal amounts of scotchlite
stickers, two rear lights, and *three* front ones. Both rears are
LED's, but one static, one flashing. One of the fronts is LED, the
other two are halogen. And my jacket has reflective stuff on the back -
though not high-vis-vest levels!

Having said this, I don't cycle in the dark yet...

--

Velvet

Danny Colyer said:

Adrian Boliston wondered:

Quoted message said:

Why is the front reflector considered less important than a rear
reflector, when oncoming traffic generally has a much greater
closing speed?

My guess is that it has something to do with oncoming traffic usually
being on the other side of the road (except for BMW's and WVM, natch)
:-P

Ironically most of the close shaves I seem to have on my daily commutes seem
to be with oncoming motor vehicles overtaking *other cyclists*.

Danny Colyer said:

Adrian Boliston wondered:

Quoted message said:

Why is the front reflector considered less important than a rear
reflector, when oncoming traffic generally has a much greater closing
speed?

My guess is that it has something to do with oncoming traffic usually
being on the other side of the road (except for BMW's and WVM, natch) :-P

Now lights are a different matter. I tend to think front lights are
more important than back lights, because back lights don't do anything
to stop cars pulling out in front of you.

Hmm, no. Back lights are *equally* important, to avoid being seen at
the last minute due to oncoming traffic's headlights masking the stealth
cyclist you're approaching rapidly.

--

Velvet