legitimate use for mirrors.. consider this

On Sun, 02 May 2004 14:43:08 -0000, [email hidden] (larry english - no

address harvesting) said:

say you are in fairly dense traffic.
you do not need to look back to see if there are cars -
you know there are cars.
you are not considering changing your lane position.
but you would like to know how far back that closest car is,
and where it is in the lane.
a quick scan in the mirror tells you, faster than
turning your head.
and your peripheral vision is still on the road.

Also a head mounted mirror has little or no vibration like a handlebar
mounted mirror.

Problem is these helmet or eyeglass mounted things can be breakage prone,
typically with a three-prong attachment, and if one prong breaks, that's
it. Sometimes the mirror is mounted on a pivot that's a bit delicate, also.

There is one place on my route where I need to make a quick, uphill U-turn,
and sometimes cars like to sneak up on me and ride my tail, so closely, in
fact, that they can't respond to my left-turn hand signal. (Fortunately
we're both traveling quite slowly.) A helmet or eyeglass mirror would be
great at those times, -just- to give me a quick scan, as traffic at this
point is usually non-existent but if I zone out and miss one it could be
nasty.

So go or the most robust model you can find, and treat it with care (or buy
two, heh.)

-B

I have not used a handlebar mirror or add-on helmet mirror. I have gone
through a few of the eyeglass mirrors and the tiny little ones that go
on the inside of your lense. While useful, they did have a pretty
narrow angle of vision and require moving the head to scan the needed
angle of view.

My preference is a helmet with a built in mirror. http://www.reevu.com/
started building these in 2002. It works like a periscope, a mirror in
the bill that reflects back over the forehead and a couple over the top
to get the line of site to road level. I bought mine from
http://www.edinburgh-bicycle.co.uk/ but they have been out of stock for
this helmet so look for other online retailers. I paid UK#45 and 15 for
Royal mail, converted to US$97.30 on the date I made my purchase.
Considering the mirrors I was going through, I found the cost
acceptable. I find the pictures of the rear view a bit mis-leading.
The apparent angle is about 1/2 normal size. After using for a few
miles, I got used to the size but always found the wide angle covering
you whole backside much better that the little of one side you see from
other mirrors. Like autos being able to use their center review mirros
instead of only the outside door mirror.

Badger_South said:

On Sun, 02 May 2004 14:43:08 -0000, [email hidden] (larry english - no

address harvesting) said:

say you are in fairly dense traffic.
you do not need to look back to see if there are cars -
you know there are cars.
you are not considering changing your lane position.
but you would like to know how far back that closest car is,
and where it is in the lane.
a quick scan in the mirror tells you, faster than
turning your head.
and your peripheral vision is still on the road.

Also a head mounted mirror has little or no vibration like a handlebar
mounted mirror.

Problem is these helmet or eyeglass mounted things can be breakage prone,
typically with a three-prong attachment, and if one prong breaks, that's
it. Sometimes the mirror is mounted on a pivot that's a bit delicate, also.

There is one place on my route where I need to make a quick, uphill U-turn,
and sometimes cars like to sneak up on me and ride my tail, so closely, in
fact, that they can't respond to my left-turn hand signal. (Fortunately
we're both traveling quite slowly.) A helmet or eyeglass mirror would be
great at those times, -just- to give me a quick scan, as traffic at this
point is usually non-existent but if I zone out and miss one it could be
nasty.

So go or the most robust model you can find, and treat it with care (or buy
two, heh.)

-B

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I have not used a handlebar mirror or add-on helmet mirror. I have gone
through a few of the eyeglass mirrors and the tiny little ones that go
on the inside of your lense. While useful, they did have a pretty
narrow angle of vision and require moving the head to scan the needed
angle of view.

i made mine, from actual piano wire and plastic mirror material.
it is taped to the helmet.
so no eyeglass worries.
sticks out about 4".

wle.

"Badger_South" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Problem is these helmet or eyeglass mounted things can be breakage prone,
typically with a three-prong attachment, and if one prong breaks, that's
it. Sometimes the mirror is mounted on a pivot that's a bit delicate,

also.

Quoted message said:

So go or the most robust model you can find, and treat it with care (or

buy

Quoted message said:

two, heh.)

Get ones in which the three prongs are metal (e.g. "Take a Look" brand), not
the ones in which they are plastic (e.g. "Third Eye" brand). The metal ones
are quite sturdy. As you note, the plastic ones break easily.

--
---
Mike Kruger
Blog: http://journals.aol.com/mikekr/ZbicyclistsZlog/

Quoted message said:

larry english - no address harvesting said:

ok, i use a helmet mirror.

{snippage}

Quoted message said:

thoughts..?

I use one, too. Did a hard 45-miler today, and I was only one (of 7) who
had a mirror.

Other days 4 or 5 out of 6 or 7 riders will have 'em.

Bill "personal choice" S.

larry english said:

i made mine, from actual piano wire and plastic mirror material.
it is taped to the helmet.
so no eyeglass worries.
sticks out about 4".

I made mine, too. Same materials, but it hooks to my eyeglasses. It's
usable with any - or no - hat.

Wire has an advantage over the plastic, three prong, ball-jointed
commercial models. It's much less fragile, and once you bend the wire
to give proper focus, it rarely needs refocusing.

--
-------------
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

Badger_South said:

...
Problem is these helmet or eyeglass mounted things can be breakage prone,
typically with a three-prong attachment, and if one prong breaks, that's
it. Sometimes the mirror is mounted on a pivot that's a bit delicate, also.

I have a pair of sunglasses I use just for cycling. They have wide
robust temples. I bored a couple of holes in the left temple and
attached the mirror with zip ties. Seems to work pretty well.

Mike

[email hidden] (larry english - no address harvesting) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

ok, i use a helmet mirror.

i like it.

i understand some of the arguments against using mirrors.

but - here is where i think they really help.

say you are in fairly dense traffic.

Say no more.....Dense traffic is a wonderful place for a mirror...

Quoted message said:

here is another one.
you are on a quiet road.
you are fairly far from the right, maybe even near the center of the
lane.
there are no cars.
you know there are no cars.
periodic scans behind, using the mirror, reinforce this
fact for you.

Again, a wonderful use for the mirror....

I really do not understand the uproar about mirror use...

Years ago when I raced no "serious" rider would be caught within 15
feet of a mirror (unless shaving their legs)...only tourists and freds
hung glass off thier helmets. But then again, in those days, no
serious rider wore a helmet (unless it was a Cinelli hairnet), used
clinchers, index shifted, or wore poly-anything.

However, these days, I really like my mirror (a stick-on Cycle Aware
Reflex). Years of training still allows me to look around when
needed, but having the mirror in traffic gives one more data input.
It sort of negates the loss or distortion of hearing caused by helmet
wind noise. All that air cooling my noggin creates enough noise to
somewhat mask the sound of approaching cars.

Just another lightweght weapon in my survival arsenal....

w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) said:

[email hidden] says:

Quoted message said:

I have gone
through a few of the eyeglass mirrors and the tiny little ones that go
on the inside of your lense.

i made mine, from actual piano wire and plastic mirror material.
it is taped to the helmet.

Wow, that seems like a tragic waste of a piano.

Chalo Colina

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Chalo) said:

w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) said:

[email hidden] says:

Quoted message said:

I have gone
through a few of the eyeglass mirrors and the tiny little ones that go
on the inside of your lense.

i made mine, from actual piano wire and plastic mirror material.
it is taped to the helmet.

Wow, that seems like a tragic waste of a piano.

Chalo Colina

Unlike 7-speed bike drivetrains, piano wire is not most easily or
cheaply acquired by buying the complete device which it is designed to
be part of.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

In article <[email hidden]>,

(larry english - no address harvesting) said:

say you are in fairly dense traffic.
you do not need to look back to see if there are cars -

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

you know there are cars.
you are not considering changing your lane position.
but you would like to know how far back that closest car is,
and where it is in the lane.

Why? And why look back if, as you say, you don't need to?
I'd think it's much better to look forward, to watch out for
cars crossing your line. After all, those are proven to be
bigger threats than anything on your 6.

....

Quoted message said:

here is another one.
you are on a quiet road.
you are fairly far from the right, maybe even near the center of the
lane.
there are no cars.
you know there are no cars.
periodic scans behind, using the mirror, reinforce this
fact for you.

Periodic shoulder checks do the same thing.

Quoted message said:

the reason you want to know is,
if a car did come along, you might consider moving a little farther
to the right.

We're mostly already required to be as far right as practicable,
and allowed to be as far left as is safe (North America, right-hand
driving.) So you should already be in the rightmost safest line.
Or, the safest rightmost line.

Quoted message said:

thoughts..?

People should learn to ride safely without mirrors before
resorting to them. It's been demonstratedly done in the
past, so it's do-able now. Mirrors are okay, but get the
skills first; the mirror, second.

Mirrors can good on narrow, urban, residential streets when
you take a track-stand siding between parked cars to let an
oncoming car through, and then prepare to re-enter the
traffic line. But even then, shoulder-checking is better.
Mirrors are also good for seeing how mussed your hair is,
after taking your helmet off.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ryan Cousineau said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Chalo) said:

w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) said:

[email hidden] says:
>I have gone
>through a few of the eyeglass mirrors and the tiny little ones that go
>on the inside of your lense.

i made mine, from actual piano wire and plastic mirror material.
it is taped to the helmet.

Wow, that seems like a tragic waste of a piano.

Chalo Colina

Unlike 7-speed bike drivetrains, piano wire is not most easily or
cheaply acquired by buying the complete device which it is designed to
be part of.

Malkin & Pinton. That's where I acquired the piano wire
with which I strung the hammered dulcimer I built, a few
decades ago.

Bronze wire is somewhat more ... obliging, in terms of
workability. Sweeter sounding, too.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

ah, here it is, the uproar.

wle.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(larry english - no address harvesting) said:

say you are in fairly dense traffic.
you do not need to look back to see if there are cars -

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

you know there are cars.
you are not considering changing your lane position.
but you would like to know how far back that closest car is,
and where it is in the lane.

Why? And why look back if, as you say, you don't need to?
I'd think it's much better to look forward, to watch out for
cars crossing your line. After all, those are proven to be
bigger threats than anything on your 6.

...

Quoted message said:

here is another one.
you are on a quiet road.
you are fairly far from the right, maybe even near the center of the
lane.
there are no cars.
you know there are no cars.
periodic scans behind, using the mirror, reinforce this
fact for you.

Periodic shoulder checks do the same thing.

Quoted message said:

the reason you want to know is,
if a car did come along, you might consider moving a little farther
to the right.

We're mostly already required to be as far right as practicable,
and allowed to be as far left as is safe (North America, right-hand
driving.) So you should already be in the rightmost safest line.
Or, the safest rightmost line.

Quoted message said:

thoughts..?

People should learn to ride safely without mirrors before
resorting to them. It's been demonstratedly done in the
past, so it's do-able now. Mirrors are okay, but get the
skills first; the mirror, second.

Mirrors can good on narrow, urban, residential streets when
you take a track-stand siding between parked cars to let an
oncoming car through, and then prepare to re-enter the
traffic line. But even then, shoulder-checking is better.
Mirrors are also good for seeing how mussed your hair is,
after taking your helmet off.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

In article <[email hidden]>,

w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (wle - no address harvesting!!) said:

ah, here it is, the uproar.

Not much of one. But hey, if ya want uproar I can
give you upr- ... nah, I've gotta make some brunch.
Two shingled over-easies, two rashers of bacon, cup
of coffee, and then maybe another one. I'd fix some
up for you, too, if I could. Or something healthier
and less greasy if you prefer. Salmon salad makes
a nice brunch.

cheers,
Tom

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mirrors are okay

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Ryan Cousineau said:

(Chalo) said:

w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) said:

i made mine, from actual piano wire and plastic mirror material.
it is taped to the helmet.

Wow, that seems like a tragic waste of a piano.

Unlike 7-speed bike drivetrains, piano wire is not most easily or
cheaply acquired by buying the complete device which it is designed to
be part of.

Ah, but is it then _actual piano_ wire, as Larry suggested, or simply
piano-type wire? Is there not a difference between a hot dog for
lunch, and a hot actual dog for lunch? Given a choice between say
"riding Big Bear" and "riding big actual bear", for instance, my
preference is clear.

Chalo Colina
"simple actual ton"

Tom Keats said:

Malkin & Pinton. That's where I acquired the piano wire
with which I strung the hammered dulcimer I built, a few
decades ago.

Cool! How's it sound? Do you play?

--
-------------
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

------------ And now a word from our sponsor ---------------------
For a secure high performance FTP using SSL/TLS encryption
upgrade to SurgeFTP
---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_surgeftp.htm ----

In article <[email hidden]>,

Frank Krygowski said:

Cool! How's it sound? Do you play?

It sounds very bright and perky, with lots of sustain.
I built it back in 1974. I had a 'store-bought' one, but
I wasn't happy with its design, and it didn't have enough
courses (range not high enough), so I decided I'd have to
DIY it. I did lots of research, examined many ethnic
versions and consulted with some luthiers before even putting
pencil to paper to come up with a design.

One day I walked into a piano shop and asked the guy if he
had any spare tuning pegs, and if he'd be willing to sell
them. He asked what I wanted them for and when I told him,
he was suddenly reminded that his father had built a
dulcimer way back when. He seemed delighted at that memory,
and he happily gave me a beat-up cardbox full of 'em.

On my store-bought one, the strings' paths have too many
bends in them. On my hand-built one, they only bend
once - where they pass over the bridges. At first glance,
a dulcimer might look like a simple box with strings across
it. But there's sure a lot of trig involved, as well as
some 'engineering' to keep the strings from folding the
whole thing up like a book. I worked out my own chromatic
tuning, but I still need a couple more courses :-)
So many tunes have that high note that's just out of range.
Maybe some day I'll build another.

As a musical instrument, I find them very interesting.
So many cultures all over the globe have their distinctive
versions. Sometimes people ask me about it; to keep the
story short, I just tell them it's basically a piano with
the keyboard kicked off.

I do play, but not while riding. Some folk tunes, some
rockabilly stuff ... just tunes that tickle my fancy.
The Theme from A Summer Place sounds interesting on it.
And some Latin American harp tunes I picked up off the radio.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca