Rear-View Mirrors

In article ,
" writes:

The way you say that, I must assume your roads are not used by riders
like me although I am sure I have ridden on every kind of road you can
imagine. You paint a picture of imaginary roads used by murdering
motorists. That doesn't wash!

Try riding them on a weekday with 5 semi truck trains going by at 65 MPH
and you might get knocked off of your high and mighty attitude, for good.
There is a damn good reason I ride wrong side on certain sections of
road. Get over yourself, you have been lucky. If you don't think it
washes, just ride Hammonton/Smartsville road between Linda and
Smartsville on a weekday and see if you survive.

Who is forcing you to ride on this dangerous road?


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

david wrote:

Having a mirror can never hurt, it gives you a better picture and that
has to be good.
I have never tried helmet/ glasses mounted types, they do not appeal.
Of the bicycle mounted ones the best by far is the original Mirycle.
These can only be fitted to non aero road levers, which suits me well
becase 3 of my bicycles have these levers.

Those were great, so of course they had to be discontinued.

blanny wrote:
Chris wrote in news:768e847e-02c4-4107-8f45-
:

Never used one and I doubt I ever will. They are distracting and block
part of your field of view. Some people like them, but I hate them in
all forms.

Chris


Your second sentence contradicts your first sentence. Not to be taken
seriously, I guess.

Yeah, his attitude reminds me of "G-d said it, I believe it, and that
settles it."

A mind is a terrible thing to close.

On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 18:15:33 +0000, me faxed us with....

You CANNOT STOP
responding, because YOU HAVE NO SELF CONTROL.

Actually - it's clear you win the Oscar for that one. I guess puberty is
not going good for you. Try some fresh fruit and vegetables (not the type
that make up your family, the ones that grow in the garden)

--
Replica Watches - TRY LIDL - Cheap meds? Visit your GP

In article ,
blanny writes:

Shoulder checking both to the left and right without
swerving is an easily-enough acquired bicycle riding
basic skill (with practice.) Once one has the skill,
one doesn't really need to rely upon redundant
accoutrements along with their limitations, in order
to lazily avoid a little initial effort and practice.
And it seems to me, the more skills a rider acquires,
the more empowered he or she becomes.

Sure, shoulder checking works. But the mirror does more than that. When]

Actually, mirrors do less.

we bike, we are eagle-eyed, when we look forward. We scan up the road,
not just 50 feet, but heck, a half-mile if it's a straight road. We want
to know what's up the road. Way up the road. I want the "exact same
thing", in terms of information, as to what's behind me. Maybe for no
other reason than INFORMATION. It's nice to know, if there's 0 cars a
half-mile behind me, or if there's 20 cars and 5 trucks a half-mile
behind me (and at that point, out of ear-shot). It's information. You

So stick a radar system on your bike.

probably make eye contact with every vehicle in front of you, in the
oncoming lane, on the side streets.

How can a rider make eye contact with a driver ahead of them?

I want an assessment of the vehicles
behind me, for similar reasons. No ... for more important reasons. They
are coming up upon me, they are "all" going to pass me.

Let them do so at every opportunity. Being overtaken isn't
the end of the world.

Contrary to
other comments, gathering this data is at no loss of attention. A flick
of the eye, one second max., and I've got a bunch of information ... 360
degrees of data.


Looking at the thing itself instead of its reflection
gives the advantage of depth perception, and avoids
certain optical effects impinged by mirrors, such as
image darkening, washing-out of certain colours, and
distorted image sizes ("objects in mirror are closer
than they appear.")

All of this is patently false.

No, it's most certainly not, and I emphasise that with
both remaining fibres in my being. Mirrors indeed do
naturally impinge undesirable optical effects.

I always advise, put that helmet-mounted
mirror "as close as possible", to your eye. The amount of depth
perception, and the amount of visibility, is greatly enhanced.

There is no depth perception in a two-dimensional mirror image.
Period. To state there is, is what is patently false.

I could hold a soup spoon right up in front of my eye, too,
and look at the reflections in that. Get that psychedelic
fisheye effect while occluding my forward field of vision.

You like your helmet-mounted mirror right up close to
your eye? Wait until age renders you far-sighted and
you need reading glasses.

klahowya,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 19:07:04 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

wrote:

The sound of an approaching traffic is not engine or exhaust noise for
civilized vehicles, but rather tire noise, the sound of storm surf
given off by highway traffic. That hasn't changed in a long time and
some of it has gotten louder through the use of wide low cross section
tires... and SUV's knobby tire fetish.

Hmmm. I've been seeing stories on the tube lately about blind people
who want something done about how quiet hybrid cars are. They're saying
that blind + Prius = mortal danger at crosswalks, pretty much.


It's not just blind people, I and a friend nearly got run down by a
Prius when walking round looking at cars on a Toyota car sales lot.
Despite relatively intact hearing and good, though corrected eyesight,
and a relatively quiet location there was absolutely no indication the
car was there until it was less than two yards away when it stopped,
there is a possibility the tyres slightly locked as it came to a
complete halt and attracted our attention but I can't be sure. What I
do know is that if the drivers attention had been elsewhere we would
have both being struck and not known a thing about it.


--

:
sniped:

The sound of an approaching traffic is not engine or exhaust noise
for civilized vehicles, but rather tire noise, the sound of storm
surf given off by highway traffic. That hasn't changed in a long
time and some of it has gotten louder through the use of wide low
cross section tires... and SUV's knobby tire fetish.

Hmmm.

Stop that humming, that's not the sound of an approaching vehicle.

I've been seeing stories on the tube lately about blind people who
want something done about how quiet hybrid cars are. They're saying
that blind + Prius = mortal danger at crosswalks, pretty much.

I haven't seen many blind people riding bike around here and rural
road traffic is the subject at hand.

Actually, "the subject at hand" is the usefulness of rear-view
mirrors. If a mirror would enable a cyclist to catch sight of an
overtaking hybrid, that might justify having one, and last time I
checked, seeing what's behind you is the function of all rear-view
mirrors.

Blind people are concerned about
crosswalks and whether cars are approaching in slow city traffic. You
may have noticed that tire noise is inaudible at those speeds.

My experience with passing cars has usually been that I hear them
coming, and I'm sure part of their noise is tires, but as a rule,
the noisier engined vehicles (e.g. big rigs, SUVs) are generally
also the ones with the noisy tires.
Stop inventing scenarios to support your claim.

SIR, very sorry SIR. But I have to admit, I've yet to see a Prius
with mud lugs.

Anybody know of any objective studies on this subject?
You mean a study on mirror use?

Actually I was wondering about vehicle sound emissions, how much
noise different engine types and different tire types make, and maybe
even a comparison between piston-driven and hybrid vehicles. I kind of
thought that the legislators might want to see objective data before
they'd pass the law the blind have been lobbying for. Which might
benefit cyclists too. Even on a nice straight, roomy rural road (and
that's the only place ANY of us ride, of course) it's nice to know when
you're being overtaken. Most cyclists have at one time or another been
startled by a motorist who overtakes quietly and then (for whatever
motive) lays on the horn.


Bill


__o | What is objectionable, and what is dangerous about extremists
_`\(,_ | is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant.
(_)/ (_) | --Robert F. Kennedy

On Feb 2, 1:03*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * blanny writes:

I always advise, put that helmet-mounted
mirror "as close as possible", to your eye. *The amount of depth
perception, and the amount of visibility, is greatly enhanced.

There is no depth perception in a two-dimensional mirror image.
Period. *To state there is, is what is patently false.

???

In an ordinary, full-sized mirror (like, say, a dressing room mirror)
depth perception works exactly as it does with no mirror. At close
range (up to, say, 20 feet) depth is judged partially by parallax (the
difference in image perceived by your left and right eye) and
partially by perspective (the reduction in image size at greater
distances). It doesn't matter if the image you're seeing is in a
mirror or not.

With a one-eyed eyeglass mirror, parallax is no help; but you still
see the perspective effect. It's easy to judge things like the
approach of a car, or the approach of a useful gap in traffic.

At least, it's easy for me. YMMV, I suppose.

I could hold a soup spoon right up in front of my eye, too,
and look at the reflections in that. *Get that psychedelic
fisheye effect while occluding my forward field of vision.

Convex mirrors do have detriments, in that they mess with the
perspective component of depth. "Objects in the mirror are closer
than they appear." OTOH, they have benefits too: wider field of view,
and less trouble from vibration. One of my motorcycles and all the
cars I drove in Europe had convex side view mirrors. It's certainly
possible to adapt to them.

You like your helmet-mounted mirror right up close to
your eye? *Wait until age renders you far-sighted and
you need reading glasses.

I'm already there, for many years now. The mirror is visible through
the upper portion of the glasses lens. It's no problem at all.

- Frank Krygowski

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
"blanny" wrote:
[...]
Facing forward, with the approaching sound of a car, can you tell if the
car is moving a couple feet to the left? Can you tell if the car is
hugging the right, oblivous to the biker?

With a handlebar mounted mirror the answer is yes. With a helmet mounted
mirror, no.

Nonsense (assuming a helmet mounted mirror also includes those that are
mounted on eye-glasses).

Jobst,

Man....what a tool you are. You really should just stay out of such
threads.


wrote in message
...
Mike Yankee wrote:

A mirror mounted on your glasses will likely be more stable than one
on your helmet. I've used such a mirror for years and it's saved my
ass a few times; I feel naked riding without it.

As I have often mentioned, try reading this text with your head turned
so that the angle of vision replicates looking into a glasses or
helmet mounted mirror, and tell me if you can read it. I cannot
decipher text with one eye at such an angle, something that tells me
the method does not replicate using mirrors in a car. Even those
mirrors are not fool proof as a driver's test will reveal. One must
turn the head and look to the rear or fail the test.

Beyond that, I must assume the mirror folk don't hear well so they
have no idea what is approaching from behind. As may be apparent, I'm
no advocate of head mounted mirrors. I believe they are reserved for
the paranoid just as the HID headlights (some even flashing) that burn
my eyes in broad daylight all to often.

It all seems to be part of John Forester's lectures in his "Defective
Cycling" the origin of "Take the Lane" bicycling, something that will
assure abuse from motor vehicle drivers who are impaired and insulted
by these condescending notions.

You needn't take this on faith, listening to non bicyclists describe
the arrogant, healthier than though, bicycle racer allusions should be
convincing. If the person is aware of speaking to one of these
elitists, they usually pack up and become silent because they are
aware of the abuse they will get from the take the lane faithful.

When I think of the thousands of miles I have ridden over more than
sixty years without having such encounters and not having been run
down by cars and trucks on so many narrow mountain roads, I have a
different perspective and cannot even have a civil discussion about it
with many of today's riders.

For startes try:

http://www.trentobike.org/Countries/...r_of_the_Alps/

Jobst Brandt