I know this has been brought up before but following on from this thread http://1000rr.co.uk/general-1000rr-discussion/11150.htm I wondered what the opinions are regarding using full bean during the day. I was stuck in traffic on the way home from work and I noticed a bike filtering with full bean on and the cars were moving over a good 200 - 300 yards in front. The lights weren't dazzling as it was the day and appeared to be a safer option. A few comments from the forum constabulary would be good as I haven't a clue on what the law says about this?.
Technically it could be viewed as a breach of the road vehicles lighting regulations which state that you can't do this; Use a light to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road. However, in heavy static or slow traffic on the M62 I often stick it on when I think the traffic is so nose to tail that the extra glare gives drivers a better chance of catching a glimpse of the bike coming through. Especially now that so many cas have daytime running lights, I believe it les me stand out just that little bit more. For the same reason I use an led bulb in the small pilot light and different colour bulbs in the main lights. Small differences can attract drivers attention to your existence. It's the same piece of legislation that could be used to tell numpties to switch off their front fogs on non foggy days cos it doesn't make a 15 year old corsa look like a fecking Lamborghini . I've never seen that done by the traffic lads so I doubt you'd have much of an issue using your main beam for safer purposes as long as you aren't doing anything else bad, and you switch it back to dipped when done.
I'm not surprised they were getting out of the way as they probably wanted to get away from the blinding light burning their retinas from the 'tosspot on the bike' (which is what they'll be thinking or saying to their fellow passengers). Apart from it being bad manners and illegal, it won't help. The dipped beam is plenty enough to be seen clearly, which any proficient and regular bike filterer will tell you. There's no need to be anti-social just because you think you'll be safer. If you want to increase your presence when filtering then I find dropping down a cog, slipping the clutch and raising the engine note to be far more effective. Most drivers will keep a gap or even move out of the way for you, which is reciprocated with a friendly wave of acknowledgement. (Now I've said that it's nailed-on I'm going to get wiped out whilst filtering on the A12 tonight!!)
I agree that using full beam is an annoyance and as we have learnt here it's also illegal. I dare say most of us here do something illegally on our bikes everyday though! Whenever driving.my 4 wheel, roofed transporter I have to say that bikes on full beam, especially newer bikes fitted with tungsten halogen lamps are very dazzling.
No disrespect to anyone on here, but commuting daily through lines of slow or non moving traffic, I get totally fecked off by tossers on bikes on full beam and/or poxy HID lights...if you aren't good enough to filter without the need for main beam blinding the biker in front of you then piss off and get the train...that's where you belong. Rant over.
I am too old to be PC, I have tried the nice approach, it don't work, so according to the wife I have fully reverted back to being a grumpy old b**stard....it feels good too.
Have spent bit of time abroad over past few years, all bikes there seem to have hazard warning lights on when they filter. Seems to work in most cases here too, but if there texting or doing make-up won't make any difference how many lights you have on!
Apart from failing to comply with the road vehicle lighting regs (improper use of headlights), it also leaves you open to prosecution for driving/riding without reasonable consideration for other road users which is one of the sub sections of careless driving and is therefore the more serious offence and leaves you open to a heavy fine and/or even disqualification. The other issue is that especially in daylight, dipped beam causes what is called the "Halo" effect which means that the bike and rider gets hidden behind the aura of the headlight meaning that drivers have difficulty in judging speed and distance of approaching bikes. Full beam in daylight makes this even work, and in the event of a crash, it is possible that you could be penalised with some contributory negligence if it was established on the balance of probability that the main beam headlight being displayed was part of the cause. Many SMIDSY crashes occur for this reason, not because drivers have not seen you, but simply because of the fact that they are unable to accurately judge speed and distance and think they have more time than they actually do. This problem is now made worse because all new bikes are hard wired headlights, and contrary to what many believe this has nothing to do with any EU regulations, but simply costs as it saves the manufacturers about 50p per bike.
The bottom line on this is simple in my mind. Filtering is a legal grey area, I don't care what test cases have been heard and how liability is apportioned. Ask 10 coppers what speed is OK and they will give you 10 different answers, and then you will be arguing in court against their judgement, and that's a loser to start with. The only thing that matters is that if you are filtering and someone changes lanes, and you go down it hurts. So its the 'buyer beware' rule, if you want to play you might have to pay. For me the onus is on me to miss the cars and trucks not the other way around, most of us that commute daily probably filter far too fast both in slow and moving traffic, blinding the guy or giving him a Christmas tree light show with my indicators counts for feck all, when I am lying on the deck arguing who was to blame, so if I want to dive through the gaps then its on my shoulders to make sure I pick it right.
I try to filter more when cars are alongside each other and not where there is a gap that a driver could suddenly go for trying to make progress through the traffic. The fact that I have to tuck in my mirrors usually means it's tight and close together with no lane changing possible. Of course the phone users while driving are a lot higher during heavy traffic as they are bored and that to me is the most dangerous risk as they are not paying much attention at all.....
How do you come to the conclusion that filtering is a legally grey area? It is perfectly legal, and if you get a copper who says otherwise, then it goes back to a point I made a while ago that we no longer have that many professional traffic cops these days, and they will probably be the same coppers who will argue that undertaking is illegal!!! Providing certain basic rules are complied with, filtering is not only legal but accepted which is why it is now included in the Highway Code, Roadcraft the Police Riders Manual and many other publications. Yes riders have to be careful when filtering, but then we have to be careful with any actions we take, but drivers also have a legal and statutory duty of care before they start changing lanes or position. Also bear in mind that to prosecute for an offence, the Police have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt, and providing that filtering is carried out carefully, then regardless of speed they would have difficulty in obtaining a conviction unless the rider was riding like a complete knob. In a civil case however, it only has to be established on the balance of probability of 51% or more so the burden of proof is far less stringent. But legally a grey area? No way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In moving traffic, I'd never filter between vehicles that are alongside each other as one could easily drift to the edge of their lane (as is their right) and squeeze you out with nowhere to go. Much better to head into gaps or at least have a gap as an outlet in case something impedes on your intended path. Always have a safety net!
If people are not using their mirrors, then having main beam on is not going to help one bit. Main beam particularly on high up touring type triumph / bmws is blinding during the day, I often find myself thinking what a tit.
Right then, at what speed does your average PC say 'thats now too fast' or that's riding without due care etc? I have asked many over the years and many come up with a different number tagged with caveats. So for me it becomes a grey area, whilst never stating it was not legal, there is nothing set in stone that says this is right and acceptable and this is not. I spend a lot of time with riding and driving with current and ex traffic police and they all have a take on this that is different.
You actually stated that it was a "Legal Grey Area"! Each case has to be judges on its merits whether it is with a view to a prosecution or a civil case after a crash. Filtering past traffic at 20 MPH may be perfectly safe and proper in some situations and would be totally inappropriate in other areas. Even filtering at 5 or 10MPH faster than the vehicles being passed may not be appropriate in some areas. And it is not about what your average PC might say, it is about what they can prove . I got pulled a few months ago for a nearside overtake on the Motorway because of some numpty sitting in lane 2 at 50 and lane 3 was solid, so I went up the nearside in lane 1 which was empty. Arrogant copper asked what I thought I was doing carrying out an illegal overtake (undertake), so I asked him what part of the Road Traffic Act stated that it was illegal. He tried to bluster and then referred to the Highway Code, so I gave him a quick legal lesson He did not have a clue. So yes you will get different answers depending on who you speak to and what training they have had and experience they have got.
I agree with KentBlade - Filtering is definitely a grey area!!! This is because filtering along slow or stanionary traffic is very different from filtering while cars are going 50 MPH, Which is all different from going 5MPH over their speed or going 40 MPH over their speed. The base factor is it is legal but must be done safely, so definitely it is a grey area because it is based on someone's opinion of what was safe and what was not. Dip your lights, High beam is for attention seekers...
Exactly, I do not dispute that, what I did not say is that it was illegal. But again as you have shown, you got pulled over, because we are at that point into what the officer considers is right or wrong, and I fully accept that is along way from a conviction, but ultimately if each officer has his own view at what is acceptable, and whether he stops you or not, then in my terminology it becomes a grey area. Bottom line is that on my commute, if I see plod driving along at say 30 or 40 in lane 1, then I am not going to test his resolve by filtering through at 45 between lane 2 or 3.
