POLITE - Hi-Vis Vest

[anonymous-user]

ZiggyNiva said:

Do you have proof they aren't warn because the wearer thinks they make them more visible?

Hi viz
Less than a fiver.

Hi Viz, politely put
£23?

Is the latter genuinely more visible to the tune of twenty quid?

And just why is the "POLITE" in big bold letters where the "Notice" is in teeny tiny small print?
More visible.....complete cock. Designed to provoke a reaction. Simple as that.

[black-k1]

Crossflow Kid said:

You've got a special vest, haven't you?

Unfortunately, no I don’t have one. I gave up wearing Day-Glo many years ago when I decided (from my own anecdotal evidence) that road position and road presence were much bigger influencers in being or not being seen.

Crossflow Kid said:

Hi viz
Less than a fiver.

Hi Viz, politely put
£23?

Is the latter genuinely more visible to the tune of twenty quid?

And just why is the "POLITE" in big bold letters where the "Notice" is in teeny tiny small print?
More visible.....complete cock. Designed to provoke a reaction. Simple as that.

Would you spend an extra £20 on a given helmet because you "think" it’s safer when there was no evidence (from SHARP, of course!!!) that it was any safer?

I think most of us would not think twice about spending an extra £20 on an item that we believed, rightly or wrongly, increased our safety without reducing our enjoyment.

[anonymous-user]

black-k1 said:

I think most of us would not think twice about spending an extra £20 on an item that we believed, rightly or wrongly, increased our safety without reducing our enjoyment.

Or to ask it another way, is the polite vest worth ten times the plain one?
I wager no.

[MrKipling43]

Prof Prolapse said:

Been discussed numerous times. It normally goes like this;

You will be decidedly agreed with.

Then someone will mention horse riders.

Then the conversation will degrade into berating horse riders for their perceived lack of consideration.

People will discuss how they then show horse riders no consideration and brag about it.

The irony will be lost.

Someone will mention "they don't pay road tax"

Someone else will point out that isn't what road tax is actually for (usually me) and they do actually pay to use the roads.

Someone will join the conversation late and mention the police having not disapproved of these vest.

I die a little inside.

That raised a good ol' chuckle.

I saw someone wearing one of these riding a Harley the other day. Triple nobber points.

[black-k1]

Crossflow Kid said:

black-k1 said:

I think most of us would not think twice about spending an extra £20 on an item that we believed, rightly or wrongly, increased our safety without reducing our enjoyment.

Or to ask it another way, is the polite vest worth ten times the plain one?
I wager no.

If you think it's going to save your life then yes. (Especially as it's only £10 regardless of the multiples)

We're back to Aldi/Lidl £35 helmets vs.£350 Arai/Shoei. Which do you wear?

[anonymous-user]

black-k1 said:

If you think it's going to save your life then yes. (Especially as it's only £10 regardless of the multiples)

We're back to Aldi/Lidl £35 helmets vs.£350 Arai/Shoei. Which do you wear?

Are we bks.
A helmet has a technical aspect to it, it's researched, developed and engineered.
A hi viz vest is a hi viz vest even if one version says "I'm a tt" across the shoulders.
To suggest one costing ten times more than the cheapest option is actually "safer" is utterly laughable.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 25th September 15:48

[moanthebairns]

if hi-vis is so great why is it for several major chemical companies I am not required to wear it on site?

Your front light is more likely to be seen than your hi-vis

[creampuff]

moanthebairns said:

if hi-vis is so great why is it for several major chemical companies I am not required to wear it on site?

'Cos hi-viz is the same colour as radioactive toxic green death, so they wouldn't be able to work out who has been contaminated.

[Prof Prolapse]

moanthebairns said:

if hi-vis is so great why is it for several major chemical companies I am not required to wear it on site?

Wishful thinking?

[anonymous-user]

creampuff said:

moanthebairns said:

if hi-vis is so great why is it for several major chemical companies I am not required to wear it on site?

'Cos hi-viz is the same colour as radioactive toxic green death, so they wouldn't be able to work out who has been contaminated.

What about orange hi-viz? How can that be the same colour as radioactive toxic green death?
Or is it the same as radioactive toxic orange death and thus equally confusing?

[LoonR1]

creampuff said:

'Cos hi-viz is the same colour as radioactive toxic green death, so they wouldn't be able to work out who has been contaminated.

That has to be on the shortlist for post of the year.

[moanthebairns]

Prof Prolapse said:

moanthebairns said:

if hi-vis is so great why is it for several major chemical companies I am not required to wear it on site?

Wishful thinking?

I'm often amazed that when I worked on building sites it was a complete taboo not to wear hi-vis. Yet the general safety standard was fking shocking.

Whilst chemical plants don't care yet these places have the most strictest of safety standards, they are one of the safest places you can work and have few accidents. I mean almost nil.

[Prof Prolapse]

moanthebairns said:

Prof Prolapse said:

moanthebairns said:

if hi-vis is so great why is it for several major chemical companies I am not required to wear it on site?

Wishful thinking?

I'm often amazed that when I worked on building sites it was a complete taboo not to wear hi-vis. Yet the general safety standard was fking shocking.

Whilst chemical plants don't care yet these places have the most strictest of safety standards, they are one of the safest places you can work and have few accidents. I mean almost nil.

No I was trying imply that they are hoping something bad happens to you.

That's because they don't report them. My mate accidentally dumped several tonnes of highly toxic chemicals into a local river, they found two corpses the the solvents tank a few years ago which never hit the press, and when my step Dad was surveying there couldn't dig a hole that wouldn't instantly fill with some sort of mercury. Oh and my mate's sister plant won't certain won't be filing reports, it blew up killing everyone. I believe that was France though I'd need to check but the important is it resulted in no significant revisions to the identical plant.

Oh and to meet emissions targets I believe without using the expensive scrubbers they currently vent direct to atmosphere when they know there isn't an inspection. Not a safety issue, but hardly the work of a company who doesn't cut corners.

[VinceFox]

Prof Prolapse said:

Been discussed numerous times. It normally goes like this;

You will be decidedly agreed with.

Then someone will mention horse riders.

Then the conversation will degrade into berating horse riders for their perceived lack of consideration.

People will discuss how they then show horse riders no consideration and brag about it.

The irony will be lost.

Someone will mention "they don't pay road tax"

Someone else will point out that isn't what road tax is actually for (usually me) and they do actually pay to use the roads.

Someone will join the conversation late and mention the police having not disapproved of these vest.

I die a little inside, although managing altruistically to struggle to the keyboard.

[Prof Prolapse]

LOL Yeah cos I'm really contributing to the topic.

[Maxheadroom]

VinceFox said:

Prof Prolapse said:

Been discussed numerous times. It normally goes like this;

You will be decidedly agreed with.

Then someone will mention horse riders.

Then the conversation will degrade into berating horse riders for their perceived lack of consideration.

People will discuss how they then show horse riders no consideration and brag about it.

The irony will be lost.

Someone will mention "they don't pay road tax"

Someone else will point out that isn't what road tax is actually for (usually me) and they do actually pay to use the roads.

Someone will join the conversation late and mention the police having not disapproved of these vest.

I die a little inside, although managing altruistically to struggle to the keyboard.

The police haven't disapproved them..............

[vrod]

I was also hoping for the group buy, but with a really loud black V-Rod I don't think many would be fooled.

I think the horse riders went for the 'polite' notice as they don't have loud exhausts and headlights to help viability.

I think motorcyclists go for them as the ones with 'get out my way you stupid tt, don't you dare pull out, yes, I do pay road tax' can't be read until you actual hit them.

[WaferThinHam]

If you think about it, the police have a vested interest in not banning them. You have the effect of more police on the road from the mistaken identity of these guys, with zero cost to the police budget. It's a complete no brainer really.

I don't have one, but would be tempted to get one when pulling stand up wheelies......if I could wheelie. :P

[jimbop1]

Crossflow Kid said:

You mean these? Special Escort Group. Do stuff like get Charles and Camille to the theatre on time and barge peasants out the way for Phil.

Pretty cool job though. Has anyone ever seen these guys in action? They can escort a vehicle through the centre of London, at rush hour and never come to a complete stop or put a foot in the ground. Brilliant riders!

Nice bike too.

[Hooli]

LoonR1 said:

creampuff said:

'Cos hi-viz is the same colour as radioactive toxic green death, so they wouldn't be able to work out who has been contaminated.

That has to be on the shortlist for post of the year.

+1

Excellent post, would read again.