Bike safety

Bike Laser Tail Light

Creates a bike lane on the ground in back of the rider to improve safety.

Hacks to follow to increase wattage, provide ranging and sighting capability. Unit will be capable of dividing pursuing zombies into three segments vertically or horizontally.

Cool idea, does it work well?

How does creating a bike lane behind the bike improve safety?

They're really not at all visible to car drivers. If you want a patch of light on the pavement as a guide for cars, there are much better options out there (such as the Down Low Glow or Bike Brightz). They will create a pool of bright light at the ground.



The idea is that it outlines the three-foot berth legally required in most States (some require four feet), and hopefully makes drivers who are unaware of the laws regarding interaction with cyclists on the road think twice about passing dangerously closely.

I'll assume there are some folks here who don't know why passing closely to a cyclist can be dangerous, for the sake of being thorough.

There have been instances of drivers who judge 'not hitting' a cyclist by the width of the cab, ignoring the mirrors at the side of the vehicle, and ultimately striking the cyclist with the mirror. Some people judge the 'not hitting' distance by the width of the cyclist's torso, ignoring wider handlebars, panniers, etc., with the same result. In neither scenario could I necessarily say that hitting the cyclist was deliberate.

There's also the issue of the wake created by a much larger, faster-moving object. The air forced around the car can easily disrupt the cyclist, sucking the cyclist towards the vehicle or blasting the cyclist off the road. Three feet can make a huge difference.

Besides this, there are some unpredictable riders out there. Though it's very unwise to vary one's line while being passed, sometimes it does happen. That three feet can make a huge difference.

Also, in light of the amount of harassment cyclists receive (people screaming at them, throwing things at them, swerving their cars at them, and on and on and on), giving a bit of space is nothing short of just plain polite.

I'm not sure the lights would work that way. Out of curiosity I looked up Down Low Glow and Bike Brightz, and they would probably strike most drivers as decorative ("bling," I suppose). But then maybe they unconsciously influence the drivers and make them stay farther away.

I've been working on the bike safety thing... mostly got it figured out... need some grey paint and a yellow stripe to finish it off...

I'm a triathlete(*) so I am of course a cyclist. I try to stay on trails where I can. Many of the streets and highways around here are too narrow and/or have too much traffic for me to ride on them. When encountering cyclists on those roads behind the wheel, I give them a wide berth and think less than complimentary things about their judgement.

Lights are good. I put a red blinky light on the back of my wife's bike -- I don't ride at night. I don't see any way that the laser tail light is better than the three/$10 LED blinky that I picked up at the hamfest.



(* I completed a sprint tri last year and, having had two surgeries and spending 18 months in PT recovering from injuries suffered, am now training to do it again. What was that definition of insanity?)

If I have to ride street, I'll use one of those reflection vests. When I'm driving, those things are impossible for me to miss. Also, they're good during the day, and they don't need batteries. Some sort of light on the back would be a supplement.

Unfortunately, with the advent of texting, it's getting more dangerous out there. I'm sure we all have heard stories about a driver accidentally hitting and killing bicyclist riding on the side. This is the type of danger over which the biker has no control. It's the type of danger that doesn't make the biker mysteriously macho if the biker decides to bike in the face of danger anyway.

Every single time I get on the road, I see at least a few drivers swerving to get back into their lane while being distracted by their cell phone. Whatever goal the biker is trying to achieve is not worth the clear risk to life if riding on the street is not totally necessary.

I live out in the country (mostly) so I am fortunate to ride on pretty low traffic roads, even though most of them are shoulder-less. I am pretty comfortable with it, although my wife pretty much refuses to ride on the road.

To be fair, I have been hit before. I was clipped by a truck mirror while climbing a hill. Luckily for me, they were moving slowly and trying to go around me right before the crest of the hill. I was able to stay upright, but it left a nice bruise. Totally freaked my wife out though.

I seriously doubt that little laser would be visible to a motorist. A flashy red LED is visible a LONG way away. Vests also work well, as do reflective stripes on panniers and the "slow moving vehicle" triangles.

Be safe out there!

Greg

I have commuted by bike for the last forty years, the vast majority of the time. Be as bright as possible. Today I rode with two headlamps - one flashing and mounted on the handlebars and a brighter one on my helmet. There is a blinking red on the rear of my helmet and another on my seat bag. I always wear a bright jersey or jacket - screaming yellow or luminous green.

I am fortunate. The streets are wide and the drivers are courteous - probably a good fraction of them are recreational cyclists.

I average an "incident" about once every five years. On one of these occasions, the drunk driver was led from the scene in handcuffs - the bike was totaled; I was not.

Doubtful a car could even see two lines on the concrete behind the bike.

Drivers have a tendency to drive into what they are looking at, why police cars get hit on the side of the road when at a traffic stop. This may actually be counterproductive. Maybe it should show them where they should go instead of where to stay out of.

I say a driver tends to avoid a biker if the driver sees the biker or warning lights. However, there are exceptions to that rule. In order to cause a biker fatality, all it takes is 1 bad driver out of 10,000 for example.

There have been many times I came close to hitting a biker at night who had no lights or reflective gear, and I have better than 20/20 vision. It pissed me off because my heart rate shot up and I had to think about what could have happened, while the biker kept riding in ignorant bliss. In contrast, a biker with bling puts himself in a much safer position.

Quite precisely. I've nearly hit cyclists as well, for the same reason. On cycling boards, this is known as going 'ninja.'

A common piece of advice is to be as visible as possible, but ride as if you are invisible (cautiously).

I was referring to the projection of a "lane" behind the bike being something that would attract attention and that maybe it should instead indicate to the side where a motorist should go, not where they should not go. Sorry if I was not clear enough. Obviously it is better for a cyclist to be seen. This is a bit unusual and may not be clear to drivers what it means or what they are intended to do. Too much attention focused on it could cause a driver to swerve into it rather than avoid it.

The area I live in is not biker, both defintions, friendly. Nor is it motorized wheelchair friendly. For that matter, it's not pedestrian friendly either. Yet daily, I see people riding bikes, in the dark, with dark clothing and no reflectors/lights. The motorized wheelchairs are as bad, well into the travel lanes. Pedestrians have death wishes - no reflective clothing, walking with traffic, in the travel lanes.

You have to take the responsibility to keep yourself safe. Travel with a brain. I mean I will feel really bad should I hit someone, but I won't hurt as much as the one I hit with my pickup.

Having a mobile bike lane following you around all the time might make you fell safe, but I doubt it actually makes you safer. If the light stripe to the left of the bicycle is not projected for some reason, might it actually degrade your safety?

Visibility is key. I,too, have seen ninja cyclists in dark clothing, no lights, on the wrong side of the street, running stop signs and red lights. One of them actually complained about my bright light as we passed in the morning darkness!

I would be happy if the nitwits on bikes would just have any kind of light. I nearly got run over a few days ago while walking the dog at zero dark 30. the bike was almost invisible in the dark. Not even a reflector.

I suspect very few bicyclists have even a remote clue how hard they are to see sometimes. They are zooming around in and out of traffic like motorcyclists tend to do on occassion and they appear in total unexpected places because many just plain refuse to obey the traffic laws.

I know of a couple folks,very healthy,taken out while on bikes. One fella was riding along safely,passed by a truck that made a right hand turn and knocked him down and ran over him.Neither saw it coming,driver or cyclist.

Then the guy backed over in a wheelchair by a pickup truck in PO parking lot,and the guy hit and killed downtown in a 25 mph zone that people actually drive 25 mph.

Dangerous world.

I can't for the life of me figure out the runners in my neck of the woods. They would rather run in the dark in a 45 mph zone inside the white line when there is a perfectly good sidewalk 5 yards or so away. Wearing headphones, oblivious to their surroundings, crossing without looking. I never used to use the high beam headlights in urban areas. I do it all the time now to try to stir the runners out of their self-induced la-la land. Maybe I need one of those horns like they had in the movie, The Car, with James Brolin. Watch it some time, beautiful scenery (Zion National Park) and high body count (mostly pedestrians).

Many serious runners think the asphalt of a street is easier on the joints than the concrete of a sidewalk. When I was a runner, I didn't run long enough distances for it to make a difference. Running was painful on my joints either way!

Anyway, running can be safer than biking. A runner can legally run on the left side of the street and have a shot at jumping out of the way of an oncoming car. That's not an option while riding a bike. A biker can have a rear view mirror while biking on the right side of the street, but still the visibility would not be nearly as good as a runner who's facing traffic. Also, a runner can still wear the reflective gear that lights up the runner like a Christmas tree.

Asphalt is definitely easier on your body compared to concrete, especially at temperatures 90 degrees or higher. At those temperatures, you can actually feel the asphalt soften and deform as you run.

Running might be safer than biking, and then again it might not, depending upon the individual. I routinely see lots of bikers traveling on the wrong side of the street; I think it is a great way to get killed.

Ok, so its some measurably small difference in the hardness of concrete vs. playing chicken with a 4000 lb. automobile? I'll stay on the sidewalk and buy a better set of running shoes.

One reason for running on the road instead of on the sidewalk is that the sidewalk tends to have more obstacles, overhanging trees, and uneven surfaces than the road. Running on the road is generally my preference over sidewalk in areas where I'm not too worried about becoming an impromptu speedbump!

Fortunately, where I live now has easy access to the city's Greenbelt, so I can avoid cars altogether.

Unsafe bike riders are a pet peeve of mine. I leave for work early in the morning, when it's still dark out. Every day I drive past at least the same three bike riders, who depend solely on those little reflectors on their peddals to help me see them. They have dark bikes and wear dark clothes with dark backpacks.

They are riding on the side of a busy road. No sidewalk. No bike lane. One or two lanes of traffic going each way, and surprisingly busy at that time of the morning. It seems inexcusably careless to me.

A device like the OP shows, or some of the others mentioned by other posters, would be a welcome addition in my mind. A light coloured jacket, backpack or a reflective vest would even be an improvement!

Bikes are not supposed to be on the sidewalk anyway.
I guess I should add that the sidewalk thing has become a pet peeve of mine. So many times I hear or read "why would they have the bike in the street when there is a sidewalk.

I am a cyclist,and I have been saving news paper articles about each bicycle related accident this summer.
In every case the cyclist broke a law.
Lights are required at night, travelling against traffic is illegal and riding at night with dark close is mentioned in the Utah bicycle guidelines, my son was hit one night wearing black, He quickly found out he had no leg to stand on in court.
And yes the side walk is illegal in many areas. It is also unsafe.

Here in NJ bicycles are required to have a horn or bell of some sort if they ride on public roads.

If they ride on public roads at night, they are also required to have a white headlight and a red taillight, both visible for at least 500 ft.

Finally, bicycles are given the same rights and duties as cars. Therefore, they are supposed to ride the same direction as traffic, they aren't supposed to ride on the sidewalk, and they have to obey all standard signs and signals (and I've seen cops give tickets to bicyclists for running stop signs).

The one major difference though, is that they are supposed to ride as far right as possible to allow faster vehicles to pass. However, they are allowed to cautiously enter the middle of the lane when necessary (like when turning left, avoiding road debris, avoiding cars doors, ect).

All in all, I've found that when drivers and bicyclists are aware of these laws and follow them, they tend to have few incidents. It's when someone fails to obey them that we get big problems (usually ending up in a hurt bicycle rider, regardless of who was in the wrong).

With that in mind, when I take my bike out, I do it with the understanding that it's a fairly dangerous activity and I need to be as cautious as humanly possible. Under the same token, when I see a bicycle on the road, I do my best to be cautious of them, stay as far away from them as possible, and let them do what they're going to do.

Even if I'm the one in the right legally, I would hate to injure someone else, especially when it's in a completely avoidable situation.

If a biker has never driven a car (e.g., biker is only 14 years old), then the biker does not fully understand the perspective of a driver. When I was 14, I biked everywhere I could. I thought drivers were naturally looking out for bikers. I didn't realize until I started driving, that's not the case at all!

Likewise, if a driver has never driven a motorcycle, then the driver is unlikely to be looking for motorcyclists. That brings up another point. Motorcyclists think a really loud motorcycle is a safety feature. Are you kidding me? Most times, I don't hear a loud motorcycle until it is beside me. An accident would have occurred before that. I'm sure the motorcycle is loud to the rider and pedestrians, but not to drivers, especially not on the freeway.

I consider myself a good driver. (I have never been in an accident in my 23 years of driving in all types of conditions.) However, while driving, I am NOT actively looking for bicyclists or motorcyclists. They are simply another part of the road activities of which I am generally aware. They aren't a priority of my awareness like the car in front of me is.