scorpakid wrote: and they are calling it...'the start of the season' ..? what season..? didnt know there was one..?

This "season" train of thought seems to be working its way into the scooter scene as well. Many times when we had that warm spell in March I read posts from people saying they've just been out on their scoot for the first time this year.

Please don't feed the troll!

Personally I think it's better to wear a hi-vis vest *and* a blue flashing light on a pole attached to the side of the top box. Makes all the cage drivers get the hell out of the way...

Interesting responses.
I thank you all....even those calling me a cnut,or a twat.
I may well be either or both of the above but 'just a troll' I`m not.
Nor am I a squid in tee shirt and shorts or a sunny day poseur....being an all weather 365 days UK and European rider and have been for 30 years now.

Vain biker....well,I do care about how I look and it`s precisely why I won`t knob about in Dayglo Derek gear.
For those who mock 'such vanity'...do you not care about how your bike looks...or how you look...do you never choose anything based on its appearance ??
If you`re honest,you do...there`s vanity in all of us.
But perhaps with the exception of those who voluntarily wear Dayglo.

Does it not bother you that you`re helping to accelerate compulsory wearing of this sartorial abberation?
Helping to breed and develop a false sense of security via PPE and further this ninny approach to life that is now seeing vomit inducing lines of schoolkids enshrouded in Dayglo vests and armbands simply to walk across the road and a shock horror response to the 'reckless approach' of those who don`t wear the fecking stuff ?

To the guy who claims HiViz gear is so necessary in order to see other riders in their group,I`m stuck between wondering about levels of eyesight and attentiveness between group members and chuckling at the thought of what happens if ever another lot of Dayglo Dereks happen to be sharing the same route

To the guy who said HiViz is compulsory in France...nope,it isn`t.
It`s compulsory for car drivers to have a HiViz vest for each vehicle occupant that is accessible from within the vehicle but in no way shape or form is it compulsory for bike riders...and as I said earlier,the proposed but not actual legislation only refers to reflective material of 150 square cm area and not radioactive fluorescent Please Don`t Knock Me Down gear.

and as I said earlier,the proposed but not actual legislation only refers to reflective material of 150 square cm area and not radioactive fluorescent Please Don`t Knock Me Down gear.

interesting, if the same legislation were bought in over here my Richa Boomerang textile jacket which is black with a few dark reflective bits would be legal and still look good

......and Tarka would still be a total cnut, whatever he wears!

Tarka wrote:
Does it not bother you that you`re helping to accelerate compulsory wearing of this sartorial abberation?

Nope. Not in the slightest.

A question for you tarquin , what exactly do you mean when you call someone a "knobber", are you calling someone a knobhead or a knob , just because of what he decides to wear when riding, even though youv' never met him , or know what kind of person he is?? If I'm jumping the gun, then I apologise up front, but if you are calling them a knob, then I think for you to come on a forum like this and slag people off who you dont even know, or have met, then you are the DICK.

Fair enough with the discussion. But it's the name calling that I objected too.