|
`Nemesis posted:Wear a bright colored reflective traffic vest over your riding jacket if you're worried about visibility.... I bet it would be more effective than what color your helmet is. I'm sorry but no increase in safety and visibility is worth the humiliating tradeoff of wearing an orange traffic vest. There are plenty of things you can do to get noticed without looking like an enormous tool: -Put reflective stickers on your helmet. They can be funny drawings, or expressions of contempt for "the man." -Keep your high-beam on day and night. -Get a black leather jacket with tastefully placed reflective strips: Awesome looking jackets: https://wi.somethingawful.com/bf/bfb3ada41b367a11026787ef9eb687c70303453d.jpg Reflecting light awesomely: https://wi.somethingawful.com/8d/8dede3e3909cf3831fb7b1edeed16fccd122dbeb.jpg -Take care to change your lane position to make sure you are not in anybody's blind spot.
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 15:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:-Keep your high-beam on day and night. I'm coming from a car so obviously this is a dick move in that sense. Is it really alright to have them on day and night? Also, anyone ever experienced with reflective tape on the bottom of the jacket and the likes? We use them at work for our cloth jackets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 16:58
|
|
|
...  I've been wearing a reflector vest over my jacket on and off for the last few years.I bet it /does/ make me look like a gigantic somethingorother, but those things light up like a god drat christmas tree, very hard to miss. I think textile jackets with reflective strips are just as good for catching the attention of most drivers. I can't personally imagine a white helmet as being effective on its own... lots of cars, buildings, objects, etc. are also white. It doesn't make you stick out. A reflector vest is what you probably need for all the septo and octogenerians! Datsun Honeybee fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jan 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 17:27
|
|
|
First google result:quote:drivers wearing any reflective or fluorescent clothing had a 37% lower risk than other drivers. Compared with wearing a black helmet, use of a white helmet was associated with a 24% lower risk. http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/328/7444/857
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 18:44
|
|
|
Plain white helmets rule. Also this:  Click here for the full 640x480 image.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 18:52
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:
This is bad advice at night. Unless you think blinding oncoming traffic is a good way to not get run over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 19:03
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:-Keep your high-beam on day and night. Please don't ride with your high beam on in the day time. It's seriously annoying and might get you road raged on. I had a guy on a bike following my car with his high beams on and it just made me want to brake check him. Just like it does when cars do it. Blinding the car in front of you with your high beam doesn't make you safer. It just makes you an rear end in a top hat. Your low beam works fine. Personally I wear a red and white helmet, but I also put reflective strips on it. Actually they were left over rim tape strips that I had after finishing my wheels. They usually send two extra strips which are just the right size to fit a helmet. If you want rim tape that is...I think it looks nice and helps at night.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 19:06
|
|
|
QnoisX posted:Please don't ride with your high beam on in the day time. It's seriously annoying and might get you road raged on. I had a guy on a bike following my car with his high beams on and it just made me want to brake check him. It did a pretty good job of making you aware of his presence, didn't it? There's absolutely no way I am going to compromise my safety for the personal comfort of some jerk in a car.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 19:14
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:It did a pretty good job of making you aware of his presence, didn't it? I saw him just fine without the high beam. Once he got behind me with it hitting my rear view mirror it made him less safe since I wasn't using it anymore because his light was blinding me. So no, it didn't make him safer. Use some common sense. There's a reason people don't use high beams when they're following or meeting other vehicles. The guy in the car in front of you isn't a jerk because he's pissed you're blinding him. You're the jerk for blinding him. Don't be a dick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 19:43
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:It did a pretty good job of making you aware of his presence, didn't it? This is why I don't run a muffler on any of my bikes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 19:52
|
|
|
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/00-NHT-212-motorcycle/motorcycle49-50.htmlquote:• Using the high beam of a motorcycle’s headlight during the day also helps to prevent violations of the motorcyclist’s right-of-way (Hurt, 1981). Any stock motorcycle's high beam is pointed no higher than parallel to the ground. This is not pointing directly into anyone's eyes, nor into their rear view mirror. Additionally, if you were blinded by a high beam during the daytime, you need to see an optometrist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:05
|
|
|
Headlight modulators, yes or no? I've only seen it once on the road but it caught my attention real quick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:15
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/00-NHT-212-motorcycle/motorcycle49-50.html Who says it was stock and I don't drive an SUV or truck. This was a touring bike and fairly tall. I drive a 74 Ford that's fairly low to the ground and when someone's riding on your bumper with their high beams on it blinds you. Just like most compact cars that are also low to the ground. All vehicles aren't the same height. We're also not talking about noon here, but it really doesn't matter when it's shining directly in your face. This did happen and it was loving annoying. Personal experience. I don't know anyone that's not affected when a light is shining directly in their face. If I'd been driving a high off the ground truck it probably wouldn't have bothered me at all. The sport bike that was riding with him didn't have his high beam on and I saw him just fine too. If you want to be a dick and ride with your high beam on, I can't stop you. Pissing off everyone on the road with you seems like a great way to be safe. Or not. I'll keep riding with just my low beam on personally. It works just as well without blinding traffic in front of me. What you do is your own choice. I just didn't want you spreading around bad advice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:32
|
|
|
1) It's not bad advice, according to the NHSTA and a lot of riders with more than a few months experience. 2) If you get blinded by headlights in the middle of the day, you are medically unfit to drive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:42
|
|
|
Skier posted:This is why I don't run a muffler on any of my bikes.  blugu64 posted:Headlight modulators, yes or no? I've only seen it once on the road but it caught my attention real quick. They seem to work really well, it's definitely on my "to buy" list.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:50
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:Headlight modulators, yes or no? I've only seen it once on the road but it caught my attention real quick. NO. I wanted to follow the people and smack them for being so distracting and making me feel like I was going to have a seizure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:57
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:Headlight modulators, yes or no? I've only seen it once on the road but it caught my attention real quick. Check your local state laws, but legal in california as long as they flash between a certain rate. I'm sorry to those people who are so terrified by flashing lights that they immediately crash and go flying off the road, but it's absolutely worth it if you do a lot of street riding. God forbid an ambulance ever come by, someone might get hurt!  I use my highbeams while I laneshare. It's like the parting of the seas...about a thousand times better than the loudest pipe. I don't use them during the major daylight hours, although it'd probably be safer. They'd go off at twilight or night. Z3n fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Jan 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 20:59
|
|
|
Pst... ambulance lights are not at an eye level, and they rotate with colors! Would you keep someone flashing a light bright to dim on and off on and off on and off in your view if it annoyed you? I know it hasn't been my past time to stare at pulsating lights, but hey, I guess you were easily entertained as a kid. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 21:24
|
|
|
I use bright rear end HID's that are way brighter than any standard high beam, and I have two of them. So far they've made riding much safer, and I never get cut off anymore. Just get the brightest possible light that's legal and you're set.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 21:32
|
|
|
Headlight modulators are 50 state legal due to a federal law. They don't flash by definition, they modulate. They also don't improve safety. Highbeam use during the day for motorcycles varies from state to state. Don't give Officer Friendly another reason to have a chat with you. Also keep in mind today's headlights are waaaay better than the ones of the 70s, so a current headlight's dipped/low beam is probably brighter than the highbeam of almost 40 years ago. You want multiple study, international, proven conspicuity enhancers? Wear a high-vis jacket or vest and have running lights. (edit) Also, I read somewhere a possible reason why the Hurt report has highbeam users under-represented in accidents is because the riders who choose to ride with their headlight on, then also choose to ride with the highbeam on, make safer choices in general than the weekend warrior and bar hopping crowd. Hough, as usual, has a bunch written about this subject. quote:Some riders believe in running with the headlight on high beam in the daytime, the concept being that brighter must be more conspicuous. That may not be as effective as some would like to believe. Yes, the visual priorities are larger, brighter, more contrasting, or fast approaching. But let’s note that more than a few drivers have pulled out in front of railroad locomotives equipped with very bright flashing lights. http://www.soundrider.com/current/dec08/getting_noticed_in_traffic_2.htm http://www.soundrider.com/current/nov08/getting_noticed_1.htm Skier fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Jan 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 21:39
|
|
|
If my high beams were very bright, I would consider not riding with them on during the day. But even at night, they aren't that powerful. I do notice bikes with high beams during the day, but I have never once been adversely affected (in my car) by people riding from dawn to dusk with high beams on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 21:58
|
|
|
Skier posted:
I think both of these points are very valid. Back when the Hurt report was put together, most bikes had headlights about as effective as a flashlight with almost dead batteries. They also had an off position unlike bikes today. I would venture a guess that the people who ran around with their high beams on also wore some gear and were more safety conscious than most. It does bother me when someone has their brights on during the day. Sometimes they catch you just right and dazzle the poo poo out of you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 22:04
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:1) It's not bad advice, according to the NHSTA and a lot of riders with more than a few months experience. I don't put much faith in 28 year old studies. Any experienced rider can make his own decision. From someone that's been on the other side of high beams following him, it's lovely advice. Not blinded, but very annoyed just before sundown. Pretty much blinded by it at night? Yeah. I don't know anyone that's not affected by a bright light shining directly in their face. A good experiment? Head to a local shopping center with a maglite and shine it in everyone's face as you walk by them. See how long it takes to get knocked the gently caress out. Report back. Just like a loud exhaust, I just think it's pointless other than to annoy your fellow drivers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 22:05
|
|
|
Whatever I'm mounting one of these to increase my visibility.
blugu64 fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Jan 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 22:30
|
|
|
Hey, I've got a set of these if you're interested!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 22:45
|
|
|
Re: http://motoblag.com/blag/?p=548 Which was posted earlier. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/487 I apologize for the vast amount of studyspeak going on in there, but the guy linked misinterprited the reasearch shown there. He said that "A florescent vest is what they recommend" and implies that they offer the same amount of safety. The conclusion that the study actually came to was that a florescent vest was the most cost-effective method of preventing an accident. Headlight modulators are far more effective and are the #1 thing that they suggest from a safety standpoint. Honestly, it's not really a suprise when a vest costs 10$ and a modulator is 150-300$ + installation. Those who doubt the effectiveness of it can read the study...they did some pretty interesting stuff, essentially building a gap in traffic with a motorcycle and seeing if a car attempted to take it in each condition. To refute the motoblag posting: quote:Later, the paper says that no claim is being made that fixation of a target is also a sufficient condition for efficient identification. This means while drivers may look at a rider because of the modulating headlamp, they may still fail to see the rider. Every rider who has made eye contact with a driver and had the car violate their right of way anyways know exactly what this means. Yes, that's true. But it's also a useless fact: If .5% of people will always pull out in front of everyone/everything, it doesn't mean that something reduces the chance of the other 99.5% of people pulling out in front of a motorcyclist ineffective. quote:Before we get into the fact drivers looking at riders does not necessarily mean anything, let us not forget the study states “the advantage of flashing light is absent in the presence of other flashing light.” More riders using modulators means a lower chance it will have an effect on motorists. If you move in groups, all running modulators...yes, I can see that the advantage of a flashing light being absent because 2 motorcyclists are less likely to be pulled out of in front. He's (cleverly) twisting the data to fit his conclusion. He's also accepting that the study found that the headlight modulators are more effective, and then assuming that if more people run them that it will make them less effective, which is a logical jump that the study, again, doesn't support. quote:Another item in the study is the fact that for less than three second gaps, a motorcycle with a dimmed headlight and the automobile control are not statistically different. So if the gap in front of a rider is less than three seconds, the rider’s right of way is just as likely to be violated as a full sized car. To be more specific, a 1969 Plymouth station wagon, the control car. Motorcycle visibility is already on par with huge cars in this situation! So if motorcycles are equal to a car with the lowbeam on, and improved with a modulator on, then modulators still improve safety. Accepting that your bike is "just as visible as a car" and using that as a reason to not improve safety is retarded. "Well, I don't need to practice swerving or emergency braking because I'm just as visible as a car." quote:A page later, an important few sentences appear: First of all, not everyone is going to buy one for a variety of reasons. Second of all...there's no proof that it would happen. Taking "may happen" to "will happen" is a huge leap. He assumes that because they mention it's possible that it's a novelty effect, it is...which it didn't say it is in the slightest. Furthermore, diminishing doesn't mean "ineffective" like he once more assumes. The motoblag guy doesn't really understand what he's talking about, nor does he understand how to read a study. He cherry picks his sentances and then makes incorrect but seemingly logical jumps that the study doesn't actually back up. Z3n fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Jan 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 22:48
|
|
|
I wanna get the same horn used by police vehicles. That will surely grab people's attention.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 22:52
|
|
|
Z3n posted:Re: http://motoblag.com/blag/?p=548 Which was posted earlier. Both SAE papers 856129 and 900749 show brightly colored jackets/vest improve visibility on par with or better than anything else, without regard to price. The Olson report also assumed replacement of the bright jacket/vest annually, so it makes the cost higher than it is with today's technology. Look at page 74 of the Olson report. Orange vest/cap, green vest/cap and orange vest all score better than the control motorcycle. Page 79 shows wearable conspicuity improvers outperforming modulating headlights. Page 83: Summary, Daytime Treatments posted:These data suggest that the daytime conspicuity of motorcycles can be improved in several ways having a meaningful effect on the drivers of automobiles. Riding with the headlamp on seems very effective, although causing the headlamp to modulate from low to high intensity seems to improve response even more. The wearing of fluorescent materials also seems effective. All of these recommendations come before the cost-benefit analysis section and do not take cost effectiveness into account. Later in the study they mention modulator effectiveness may be due to the novelty factor. When drivers see modulators more often they will tune them out. Also, if more than one flashing light is within sight at a time, the benefit vanishes. The downsides of wearing a brightly colored jacket are considerably less than using your highbeams or a headlight modulator. Skier fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Jan 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 23:07
|
|
|
Z3n posted:Yes, that's true. But it's also a useless fact: If .5% of people will always pull out in front of everyone/everything, it doesn't mean that something reduces the chance of the other 99.5% of people pulling out in front of a motorcyclist ineffective. The entire point of a headlight modulating at three to four Hertz is to forcefully acquire the eye's focus. Just because the eye is looking at the headlight doesn't mean the brain recognizes the motorcycle's size, speed or distance from the eye. Z3n posted:If you move in groups, all running modulators...yes, I can see that the advantage of a flashing light being absent because 2 motorcyclists are less likely to be pulled out of in front. He's (cleverly) twisting the data to fit his conclusion. He's also accepting that the study found that the headlight modulators are more effective, and then assuming that if more people run them that it will make them less effective, which is a logical jump that the study, again, doesn't support. Olson report, page 75 posted:However, it is interesting to note the continued effect of the modulated headlamp even at gaps as large as five seconds. This may represent a novelty effect. If so, it would be expected to diminish were the treatment commonly employed. I am missing how interpreting diminishing effects as making them less effective is a wrong conclusion. Z3n posted:So if motorcycles are equal to a car with the lowbeam on, and improved with a modulator on, then modulators still improve safety. Accepting that your bike is "just as visible as a car" and using that as a reason to not improve safety is retarded. "Well, I don't need to practice swerving or emergency braking because I'm just as visible as a car." Sure, if a small number of motorcyclists run modulators they can improve safety. But now you're leaping to conclusions with bringing up not having to practice. Z3n posted:First of all, not everyone is going to buy one for a variety of reasons. Second of all...there's no proof that it would happen. Taking "may happen" to "will happen" is a huge leap. He assumes that because they mention it's possible that it's a novelty effect, it is...which it didn't say it is in the slightest. Furthermore, diminishing doesn't mean "ineffective" like he once more assumes. If the government mandates motorcycle headlight modulators, then yes everyone will buy one, factory provided or not. While there's no proof of the novelty effect, there's not enough evidence supporting the use of modulators over other proven methods, such as running lamps or fluorescent jackets. I accept translating "may happen" to "will happen" is a leap, but why bother tackling it at all if brightly colored jackets work just as well or better?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 23:17
|
|
|
How hard is it to get a small dent out of a tank? We're talking about something the size of a human thumb and not particularly deep. It's on the curve from the side to the top of the tank.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:17
|
|
|
Skier posted:The entire point of a headlight modulating at three to four Hertz is to forcefully acquire the eye's focus. Just because the eye is looking at the headlight doesn't mean the brain recognizes the motorcycle's size, speed or distance from the eye. Yes, but...that's irrelevant. You could be driving with no lights on, every light on, sirens, you could be riding a locomotive, Dr. Strangelove style, and people like that would still pull out in front of you. The point here is not to stop everyone from pulling out, but to realize that the majority of people don't see bikes because they get lost in the backround noise, and with the addition of lights, modulators, or bright clothing, you can help bring attention to you. quote:I am missing how interpreting diminishing effects as making them less effective is a wrong conclusion. Read the part you bolded: "This MAY be a novelty effect." So diminishing effects are dependent on it being a novelty effect, which it may or may not be. Assuming that effects would diminish with more users on the road depends on both more users using them and them being a novelty effect. Which...may or may not be true. So he's basing the lessening effectiveness of it on both more people running them, and the potential chance of it being a novelty effect, and then uses that to argue that they're somehow not safe?  Furthermore, they're talking about the increased effectiveness of preventing people from pulling out in front of you with a 5 second gap, which is pretty drat good. quote:Sure, if a small number of motorcyclists run modulators they can improve safety. But now you're leaping to conclusions with bringing up not having to practice. It was a bit of a joke, thusly the quote:If the government mandates motorcycle headlight modulators, then yes everyone will buy one, factory provided or not. And the government is never going to mandate that everyone buy modulators or that they are installed on bikes, because honestly, the government doesn't care enough. quote:While there's no proof of the novelty effect, there's not enough evidence supporting the use of modulators over other proven methods, such as running lamps or fluorescent jackets. quote:5.6.2 Means for Improving Conspicuity. It appears that there quote:I accept translating "may happen" to "will happen" is a leap, but why bother tackling it at all if brightly colored jackets work just as well or better? Because it's an additive effect. Brightly colored vests, plus modulators, plus running your running lights along with proper, safe riding technique will reduce your chances of being in an accident. Unfortunantly, headlight modulators somewhat rely on the fact that people find them annoying...if people are finding it annoying, then they're noticing it, which is more than can be said for most drivers around motorcyclists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:21
|
|
|
OrangeFurious posted:How hard is it to get a small dent out of a tank? We're talking about something the size of a human thumb and not particularly deep. It's on the curve from the side to the top of the tank. You can get a dent puller, but that might be too big of a tool to use. For a small dent, I might be inclined to use filler and just to repaint. But that would require ambition, so I'd be more likely just to live with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:24
|
|
|
There's two separate diminishing effects for modulators. Multiple flashing lights is proven to make the brain filter them out. There is no question of this. Groups of motorcyclists aren't necessarily the only way of putting multiple flashing lights in a driver's vision. Flashing crosswalk signals, a rider ahead and a rider behind can mask the oncoming rider's modulating headlight. The novelty effect is a possibility, but there hasn't been a study done to prove the novelty effect is a non-issue. I disagree with people finding modulators annoying meaning they work. It doesn't necessarily help with motorcycle speed, distance or size identification. An orange vest or riding jacket with retroreflective material will help with conspicuity, day and night. Easier to use, just as good or better for conspicuity and non-offensive. What's not to like? Skier fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Jan 9, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:30
|
|
|
OrangeFurious posted:How hard is it to get a small dent out of a tank? We're talking about something the size of a human thumb and not particularly deep. It's on the curve from the side to the top of the tank. If the paint is fine you might want to get a PDR guy to get it out for you. If you are planning on painting it, you can maybe push it out from the inside and smooth it will filler.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:35
|
|
|
Skier posted:There's two separate diminishing effects for modulators. Multiple flashing lights is proven to make the brain filter them out. There is no question of this. Groups of motorcyclists aren't necessarily the only way of putting multiple flashing lights in a driver's vision. Flashing crosswalk signals, a rider ahead and a rider behind can mask the oncoming rider's modulating headlight. Then you look like a lamer and not a powerranger from the future.  My experience with modulators is that I notice bikes with them even earlier than I notice bikes normally. The accident that I was in a couple of years back may have been avoided by a modulator, as I was riding a black and green bike against a black and gree background. Then again, I think she didn't even look.  The modulator is to avoid the "I didn't see you!" accident. The rest of it (size, distance, speed ID) is something that can only be overcome with driver training. There are times where a modulator would probably be less effective, just like bright clothing would probably be less effective in, say, a construction zone. Don't get me wrong here: I'm not trying to crusade that everyone should use modulators or anything like that. I'm just saying: it seems that it's a legitimate way of increasing visibility. It's also worth noting that it's illegal to use them during any time but daylight. So...no modulators at night or during twilight times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:38
|
|
|
Z3n posted:Then you look like a lamer and not a powerranger from the future. We motorcyclists make worse anecdotal evidence than usual, since we're always looking for bikes. Yes, modulators are supposed to avoid the "I didn't see you" accidents. However, remember eye contact doesn't mean the driver sees you? Just looking at an item doesn't mean it's properly identified. So while the driver looks right at the motorcycle they can still fail to classify it as something worth looking at longer. My view is modulators offer no gains over other conspicuity enhancers but do offer drawbacks: annoyed motorists and sometimes startled motorists. And yes, modulators are illegal at night.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 00:53
|
|
|
Skier posted:We motorcyclists make worse anecdotal evidence than usual, since we're always looking for bikes. Yeah, absolutely. It's just that at least if they notice something is coming down the road, maybe there will be a better chance of holding up for a second, long enough for you to get by or for them to ID you. quote:My view is modulators offer no gains over other conspicuity enhancers but do offer drawbacks: annoyed motorists and sometimes startled motorists. See, I think that they offer some gains over other conspicuity enhancers, but I still hold that even with a modulator you can't skimp on standard safe riding technique. So...I just ride carefully and call it good. Nothing will stop me from using my brights during daytime lanesharing, though. It's an astounding difference.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 01:27
|
|
|
I wear my fluro vest when I commute and try to wear it when riding at night/horrible weather. I really don't give a gently caress if I look like a dork if it helps some SUV driving dickhead see me better on the road, and not run me over. On weekend blats, and rolling round to parties... that's another matter entirely...
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 01:42
|
|
|
I'm seriously considering making my next set of riding gear the "HOLY poo poo MY RETINAS ARE MELTING" yellow Aerostich Roadcrafter one piece, especially for riding around in inclement weather/night. Sure, I might look like I'm directing air traffic on a runway in a hurricane, but nobody is going to fail to notice something that goddamn visible. Incidentally, if you bought anything from them in the last year in that high-vis yellow, it's subject to a recall. The newer colour starts fading, apparently, whereas the old one doesn't. I don't ride everywhere with my high-beams on, because it's just a dick move. As long as I'm devoting a large-ish portion of my awareness to traffic flow around me, I shouldn't have to blind/annoy fellow road users, no matter how old/retarded they may be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 02:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
A while ago someone mentioned wearing earplugs that only filter noise above a certain dB level and were remarkably cheap. Anyone have a link?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2009 02:21
|
|