Bossy Drivers with a (strange) bee in their bonnet

debeli

Nowhere else to write this, so it goes on Bikeradar...

I was driving down a quietsingle-carriageway A Rod this afternoon between 4.20 and 4.50. Not exactly bright sunshine, but visibility was good and conditions were dry.

The Mini in front of me flashed its hazard lights a couple of times, which got me worried. Is a tyre down? Doesn't feel like it.... Is my bumper hanging off? Eeek!

The Mini then switched its lights off and on again a few times. I was scratching my head, but still at a loss.

After a few miles we were stopped by a temporary light at roadworks and the driver skipped out and jogged back to talk to me. He was smiling and I dropped my window. "Hello" I said.

"You don't have your lights on" he said. This threw me a little. Not what I was expecting.

"... No I don't" I said.

"Why not?" He asked. Getting weird now...

"It's broad daylight" I said. "I can see right across the river. I can see across to the next valley".

"Well you're the only one without lights" he said and stomped off.

Very weird. It really was broad daylight and visibility was good. Lots of cars had their lights on, but to no effect.

I got to where I was meeting my son and went through a ridiculous theatre with him and his friends "Can you see the mistletoe on yonder tree? Can you see the mortar between yonder bricks on that distant wall? Are the street lights illuminated? Can you read the sign on yonder distant commercial vehicle?".

The answer to every question confirmed my suspicion that it was daylight. Sorry, but I had to get that off my chest.

I get slightly cross when cars and bicycles go unlit in darkness, but seriously... it was daylight.

Slightly perplexed rant-type diatribe over. As you were.

pblakeney

Maybe he was a cyclist fed up with the hypocrisy.

Did your car have some hi-viz elements?
Were you wearing a helmet?

If not, why not? It's for your safety, innit?

mfin

Lock the thread.

ben@31

I can see it from both sides of the argument.

He has zero authority to tell you what to do. If you choose to ignore him, what can he do.

But then, even if you can see a huge valley or river, if you have a small dark car others may not see it in low light against the background. Somebody posted its for your safety, no its also for other road users safety.

Its now European legislation for all new car designs to have daylight running lights.I see no hardship in having lights on.

GGBiker

I do get the impression that some drivers will only turn lights on as a last resort, not really sure of the psychology underlying this but suspect it might be that doing anything vaguely safety conscious is not cool.

pblakeney

ben@31 wrote:

Somebody posted its for your safety, no its also for other road users safety.

Somebody took my post seriously. :P :?

veronese68

People are strange

keef66

You sure it was broad daylight with good visibility? If so, why did the majority of cars have their lights on? Were you caught up in a Volvo convention?

I had my 3 yearly driving assessment last wednesday morning. 3 hours having my driving scrutinised by a former Met traffic cop. I had my lights on most of the time because it was pretty gloomy.

As a cyclist you already know lights serve two purposes, to see and be seen. Maybe the other driver had trouble spotting your car behind him, and just wanted you to know that you weren't particularly visible to other road users. I don't suppose he was remotely interested in whether or not you could see across the valley :roll:

debeli

keef66 wrote:

You sure it was broad daylight with good visibility? If so, why did the majority of cars have their lights on? Were you caught up in a Volvo convention?

As a cyclist you already know lights serve two purposes, to see and be seen. Maybe the other driver had trouble spotting your car behind him, and just wanted you to know that you weren't particularly visible to other road users. I don't suppose he was remotely interested in whether or not you could see across the valley :roll:

A very reasonable question. Yes, visibility was fine. I am a keen cyclist and motorist and was once a keen motorcyclist. I think I have a fairly positive attitude towards lighting and visibility, but I see how my OP might make it appear otherwise.

In my defence, quite a few oncoming cars were unlit and were perfectly visible from a long, long way off, bends in the road permitting. One of my triggers for putting my lights on (car and bicycle) is how clear other road users are to me. If I have trouble seeing them, I assume they will have troubl seeing me. Yesterday afternoon I could see all the way to the Moon and back.

Sorry, this was just meant to be a gripe-let, not a thread. I ought to get myself a life. With lights on.

Although I was in a tiny, weeny car, it is bright pillar-box red.

cougie

It'd be odd if most cars had their lights on.

Sunday round here was foggy - plenty of fog coloured cars with no lights on, or piddly little side lights that added nothing to their visibility from the front.

I was hi viz and bright flashy lights (cycling).

Bobbinogs

cougie wrote:

... piddly little side lights that added nothing to their visibility from the front...

Side lights on cars are one of my gripes at the moment. I just don't get the benefit as the majority seem to add nothing to the driver's ability to see...or the car's visibility. However, dark sky/peeing down with rain/heavy dusk, on come the piddly side lights. I think I'm off to Peddle Up's rant thread...

capt_slog

Bobbinogs wrote:

cougie wrote:

... piddly little side lights that added nothing to their visibility from the front...

Side lights on cars are one of my gripes at the moment. I just don't get the benefit as the majority seem to add nothing to the driver's ability to see...or the car's visibility. However, dark sky/peeing down with rain/heavy dusk, on come the piddly side lights. I think I'm off to Peddle Up's rant thread...

With you on this one. For a long time i thought it wasn't legal to travel with side lights on, I thought they were only for parking, but it appears that they can be used upto a certain speed limit. I've never seen the point though, and often you can see the car before you can make out the lights.

Another one that I can never work out is why someone has their headlights on AND is wearing sunglasses.

joenobody

[quote="Capt Slog"}Another one that I can never work out is why someone has their headlights on AND is wearing sunglasses.[/quote]Driving towards the setting sun? Or, like me, they drive a Volvo...

capt_slog

JoeNobody wrote:

Capt Slog wrote:

Another one that I can never work out is why someone has their headlights on AND is wearing sunglasses.

Driving towards the setting sun? Or, like me, they drive a Volvo...

There are exceptions, but the ones that mystify me is when it's neither of those you mention.

joenobody

Capt Slog wrote:

There are exceptions, but the ones that mystify me is when it's neither of those you mention.

To be fair, I did catch myself out once, many years ago, when I forgot I was wearing sunglasses and turned my lights on because it was getting dark. My passenger noticed and queried what I was doing. Imagine my surprise when I realised, after removing the glasses, that it wasn't as dark as I thought :oops:

keef66

Debeli wrote:

keef66 wrote:

You sure it was broad daylight with good visibility? If so, why did the majority of cars have their lights on? Were you caught up in a Volvo convention?

As a cyclist you already know lights serve two purposes, to see and be seen. Maybe the other driver had trouble spotting your car behind him, and just wanted you to know that you weren't particularly visible to other road users. I don't suppose he was remotely interested in whether or not you could see across the valley :roll:

A very reasonable question. Yes, visibility was fine. I am a keen cyclist and motorist and was once a keen motorcyclist. I think I have a fairly positive attitude towards lighting and visibility, but I see how my OP might make it appear otherwise.

In my defence, quite a few oncoming cars were unlit and were perfectly visible from a long, long way off, bends in the road permitting. One of my triggers for putting my lights on (car and bicycle) is how clear other road users are to me. If I have trouble seeing them, I assume they will have troubl seeing me. Yesterday afternoon I could see all the way to the Moon and back.

Sorry, this was just meant to be a gripe-let, not a thread. I ought to get myself a life. With lights on.

Although I was in a tiny, weeny car, it is bright pillar-box red.

Fair enough. You were obviously following a lesser spotted dickhead then

veronese68

People wearing hi viz in their cars, isn't the reflection of themselves off their own windows a distraction? Maybe that's why they want other people to have their lights on. Was the guy driving in hi viz?

keef66

Capt Slog wrote:

Bobbinogs wrote:

cougie wrote:

... piddly little side lights that added nothing to their visibility from the front...

Side lights on cars are one of my gripes at the moment. I just don't get the benefit as the majority seem to add nothing to the driver's ability to see...or the car's visibility. However, dark sky/peeing down with rain/heavy dusk, on come the piddly side lights. I think I'm off to Peddle Up's rant thread...

With you on this one. For a long time i thought it wasn't legal to travel with side lights on, I thought they were only for parking, but it appears that they can be used upto a certain speed limit. I've never seen the point though, and often you can see the car before you can make out the lights.

It's illegal in Germany. Surprised they don't amend the law here. Bloody things are virtually useless, especially so if it's misty / foggy.

slowbike

Ah - well if we want to rant about pointless lights - wtf is it with front fog lights on - when it's not foggy .. turn the f**king things off ... please!

pblakeney

Capt Slog wrote:

Another one that I can never work out is why someone has their headlights on AND is wearing sunglasses.

I will take a bash at this.
I wear prescription glasses with "drivers" lenses (I also have a clear set). They look like sunglasses but are only slightly tinted and the coating can increase contrast in certain conditions. In those conditions I also use my lights to be seen, not to see by.
When driving in these conditions I test the appropriateness of the glasses by temporarily removing them when conditions allow for comparison. They then either remain on, or are switched to the clear set.
Hopefully this will help.

mamba80

Debeli wrote:

Nowhere else to write this, so it goes on Bikeradar...

I was driving down a quietsingle-carriageway A Rod this afternoon between 4.20 and 4.50. Not exactly bright sunshine, but visibility was good and conditions were dry.

sunset is 17:11 today (even early if you were further north) so you were clearly at fault here, another few minutes and you d have been driving in darkness, with no lights!!!!
instead of moaning, you should thank your good samaritin who has possibly saved your life and that of others.

i may not be entirely serious.

Pross

Don't forget that new cars have to have daylight running lights and many cars have had them for the last few years.

ben@31

Pross wrote:

Don't forget that new cars have to have daylight running lights and many cars have had them for the last few years.

Close.

It's only totally new models that have gone through type approval after a certain date.

My car is a 64 reg but because its just a "face lift" version of a model thats already been produced for years (disappointingly just a slightly different front bumper and a satnav option) , it doesn't have daylight running lights.