Less Dorky Mirror

[S O R N I]

maxo wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 15:36:35 +0000, S o r n i wrote:
>
>> Are you serious
>>> that you advocate someone placing themselves in a life-
>>> threatening situation just to avoid breaking the law?
>
> No, their perception of it being life threatening is
> delusional. There is no ground to stand on. I suggested
> avoiding the activity all together if the only apparent
> option is that of idiocy. Avoidance=quite safe.

Please learn how to quote/attribute. I wrote NONE of
the above.

Bill "simply astounded at times" S.

 

[Bill]

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 16:11:20 GMT, maxo <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 15:36:35 +0000, S o r n i wrote:
>
>> Are you serious
>>> that you advocate someone placing themselves in a life-
>>> threatening situation just to avoid breaking the law?
>
> No, their perception of it being life threatening is
> delusional. There is no ground to stand on. I suggested
> avoiding the activity all together if the only apparent
> option is that of idiocy. Avoidance=quite safe.

My perception of obeying the law to the point of being life
threatening is quite real, since I have been hit while
obeying the law. Had I been on the other side I could have
ditched it to avoid the idiot driver. Those who believe the
driver is A. Competent. B. Gives a ****. are only fooling
themselves. Remember the well known driver who was killed
while waiting on the side of the road for some friends? He
obviously was not looking at traffic or he could have
jumped out of the way, even if he already was on the
parking strip/bike lane. Overconfidence in the law can be
deadly since all the law can do is prosecute the guy who
ran you down. If riding on the wrong side is necessary
because I am riding into the sun and there is no bike lane
then the law makes no sense to follow. If there is a place
like a bridge with no place to go on either side I suggest
getting off the bike and waiting for a lull in traffic
rather than trying to 'take your rightful place' in the
lane. I have encountered two right side riders in the last
two days on no bike lane roads and just pull out into the
traffic lane 'wrong way' when it is clear and let them pass
without interference. If you are riding on the right side
on a busy road with no bike lane and a lot of traffic then
I can only assume you have a death wish or just want to
'DIE HEALTHY'. My style is my own and only applies to
country roads where there is no alternative route. I do
ride about 5,000 miles a year and will get off the bike to
avoid an oncoming problem. Bill Baka

 

[Fabrizio Mazzol]

"Tom Keats" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> ta beat hell. Maybe they're onto something. Fabrizio
> doesn't like 'em, 'cuz they do so well.

Doing 'so well' at what, Tom?

You North Americians always seem to mix up cyclists with
riff raff.

 

[Fabrizio Mazzol]

"GaryG" <garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Agreed...but, better a live dork, than a dead duck!
>

You must never ride with a mirror, not just for the Fred
factor, but they are useless.

You want to look ahead always except for the times when you
need to pull out to the left, then you do a shoulder check,
or, to see if a rider is overlapping your wheel you do a
very quick under arm check.

Those are the ONLY ways to check behind, that's how it's
done and always has been done.

 

[Jobst Brandt]

Somebody wrote:

>> Agreed... but, better a live dork, than a dead duck!

> You must never ride with a mirror, not just for the Fred
> factor, but because they are useless.

> You want to look ahead always except for the times when
> you need to pull out to the left, then you do a shoulder
> check, or, to see if a rider is overlapping your wheel you
> do a very quick under arm check.

> Those are the ONLY ways to check behind, that's how it's
> done and always has been done.

Just to point out what traffic research has found in that
respect, you'll fail the California driver's test if you do
not look back and relying a your mirror when changing lanes
or pulling out into traffic.

Jobst Brandt [email protected]

 

[Garyg]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Somebody wrote:
>
> >> Agreed... but, better a live dork, than a dead duck!
>
> > You must never ride with a mirror, not just for the Fred
> > factor, but because they are useless.
>
> > You want to look ahead always except for the times when
> > you need to pull out to the left, then you do a shoulder
> > check, or, to see if a rider is overlapping your wheel
> > you do a very quick under arm check.
>
> > Those are the ONLY ways to check behind, that's how it's
> > done and always has been done.
>
> Just to point out what traffic research has found in that
> respect, you'll fail the California driver's test if you
> do not look back and relying a your mirror when changing
> lanes or pulling out into traffic.

For the record, I do look back before changing lanes,
etc...same as in my car where I use the mirror for
general situational awareness, but still turn and look
for lane changes.

GG

> Jobst Brandt [email protected]

 

[Alan Hoyle]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 04:19:42 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

> Just to point out what traffic research has found in that
> respect, you'll fail the California driver's test if you
> do not look back and relying a your mirror when changing
> lanes or pulling out into traffic.

This is because mirrors give false negatives. It can look
clear in a mirror when there's actually something there.
However, they don't tend to give false positives: i.e. it
looks like something is there when there actually isn't.
If you get a "there's a car there" from a mirror, you
don't need to bother checking by turning your head. If you
get a "way is clear" from the mirror, you still need to
check by looking.

Also, it's not a symmetric problem.

true positive: keeps you out of danger. false positive:
doesn't affect your safety. true negative: doesn't affect
your safety. false negative: puts you in danger.

So, the false negative is dangerous, double checking is a
good idea. The mirror advocates' claim isn't that they
replace looking over your shoulder. The claims are that
mirrors give an efficient method for finding out when you
should even bother looking back and glancing into a mirror
is safer than turning your head away from the road ahead.

This is true for cars and bikes.

-alan

--
Alan Hoyle - [email protected] - http://www.alanhoyle.com/
"I don't want the world, I just want your half." -TMBG
Get Horizontal, Play Ultimate.

 

[Jeff Starr]

"Fred Hall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> I tried a Bell handlebar mirror on my straight bar hybrid
> and it was a real POS. Vibrated like crazy and was hard to
> keep in adjustment. Now that I have a real road bike I use
> a Third Eye mirror that clips onto my glasses and wouldn't
> go out without it...most of my normal ride is quiet
> country road, but there's a section of 2-lane 55MPH busy
> road that I just can't keep swiveling my neck around
> on...that and the fact of an old high school high jump
> injury (30 years ago) cut down my neck mobility. The Third
> Eye isn't real obtrusive on the road, but I wouldn't be
> trying to pick up chicks in a bar with it clipped on.

Hi, the first mirror that I bought, was a Bell. I bought it
with some other items, mail order, that's my excuse;-) The
mirror it self is plastic, distorted, and not all that
reflective. I removed the plastic lense and for $5 I had a
glass co. cut me a real glass mirror. I glued it in and then
it was fine in that respect. The trouble was, that flimsy
neck, wouldn't stay adjusted, and then the neck broke. The
Bell mirror is a total piece of ****.

I now use a handlebar mounted mirror. It is a Blackburn,
designed to be strapped to the left side brake hood. I don't
use it on the brake hood as it interferes with riding
comfortably on the hoods. I found that it can be strapped to
the bar on the lowest curve of the drop. I would try a
helmet mirror, but I keep my helmet in a pod, when not in
use, and I wouldn't want to keep taking it off and
reinstalling.

It is really no different than mirrors on motorcycles or a
side view mirror on a car, we all have them.

Life is Good! Jeff

 

[Jrkrideau]

"Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<81sCc.864841$oR5.820290@pd7tw3no>...
> "GaryG" <garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Agreed...but, better a live dork, than a dead duck!
> >
>
> You must never ride with a mirror, not just for the Fred
> factor, but they are useless.

Srange. I have been using mirrors for the last 10 years and
find them very useful. Of course, I supose they arn't any
more useful than those mirrors on a car and we all "know"
they're useless I have a bad neck and a full shoulder
checks to allow me to check behind me for 30 or 40 metres is
very difficult. So just as I use a rear view mirror and then
do a check of the 'blind spot' while driving a car I use a
mirror and check my bllind spot while cycling. Personally I
find that it makes merging across multi-lane streets much
easier and safer.

> You want to look ahead always except for the times when
> you need to pull out to the left, then you do a shoulder
> check, or, to see if a rider is overlapping your wheel you
> do a very quick under arm check.

Or when riding in heavy traffic and you need to judge when
to merge left into the next lane in preparation for a left
turn. This is when a mirror can help. Just how far back is
that charging mob of cars that is roaring away from the last
traffic light? I need to know what motor vehicles are 50m
back and gaining, not when a rider is overlapping.

> Those are the ONLY ways to check behind, that's how it's
> done and always has been done.

And they said the same thing when Henry Ford (or whoever)
first put that mirror on the Model T

John Perth ON

 

[Jrkrideau]

"Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<81sCc.864841$oR5.820290@pd7tw3no>...
> "GaryG" <garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Agreed...but, better a live dork, than a dead duck!
> >
>
> You must never ride with a mirror, not just for the Fred
> factor, but they are useless.

Srange. I have been using mirrors for the last 10 years and
find them very useful. Of course, I supose they arn't any
more useful than those mirrors on a car and we all "know"
they're useless I have a bad neck and a full shoulder
checks to allow me to check behind me for 30 or 40 metres is
very difficult. So just as I use a rear view mirror and then
do a check of the 'blind spot' while driving a car I use a
mirror and check my bllind spot while cycling. Personally I
find that it makes merging across multi-lane streets much
easier and safer.

> You want to look ahead always except for the times when
> you need to pull out to the left, then you do a shoulder
> check, or, to see if a rider is overlapping your wheel you
> do a very quick under arm check.

Or when riding in heavy traffic and you need to judge when
to merge left into the next lane in preparation for a left
turn. This is when a mirror can help. Just how far back is
that charging mob of cars that is roaring away from the last
traffic light? I need to know what motor vehicles are 50m
back and gaining, not when a rider is overlapping.

> Those are the ONLY ways to check behind, that's how it's
> done and always has been done.

And they said the same thing when Henry Ford (or whoever)
first put that mirror on the Model T

John Perth ON

 

[Fabrizio Mazzol]

"JRKRideau" <[email protected]> wrote in message ..

>> Or when riding in heavy traffic and you need to judge
>> when to merge
> left into the next lane in preparation for a left turn.

I find that statement rather disturbing, you shouldn't be
getting yourself out in heavy traffic situations when out
on the bike.

You really need to find some good roads to train on, ones
that don't require you to be thinking about auto traffic.

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <5VrCc.830070$Pk3.771814@pd7tw1no>,
"Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tom Keats" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> ta beat hell. Maybe they're onto something. Fabrizio
>> doesn't like 'em, 'cuz they do so well.
>
> Doing 'so well' at what, Tom?

1) merrily getting to where they're going without spending
a ton of gas money and other car-related expenses

2) becoming healthier & happier

3) demonstrating to other people that freedom from cars
is not only possible but also often preferable

4) reminding drivers that the streets aren't exclusive to
motor vehicles

5) getting your goat

> You North Americians always seem to mix up cyclists with
> riff raff.

White jelly beans have a right to exist, too. They're the
same size, shape & texture as the yellow ones.

cheers, Tom

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

 

[Pcb]

In article <[email protected]>, Michael
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Which is less dorky: a mirror on the helmet or a mirror on
> the handlebars?
>
> I've resisted mirrors all my life, but I must ride a two
> lane road with a 55 mile an hour speed limit with
> absolutely no paved shoulder. I hug the white line right
> now, looking back sometimes but with the chance of going
> into the road or into the gravel.

Black cycling clothing is the new 'image for a dork' - Right
up there with riding on the wrong side of the road.

ThirdEye mirror that clips onto your eye-shield - Works
great, and available at mass-market bike shops. I have
several ones for redundancy.

--
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ O ALERT: Please help a friend find
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ / / his abducted son by visiting: ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
// http://www.haveyouseenskye.com ¯¯¯¯¯¯
©"""""""""""© Thanks.