Less Dorky Mirror

Bill

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:36:45 GMT, mark <markfelber@excite.com> wrote:

>
> "Bill" wrote...
>> This sounds like a good case for riding on the wrong side
>> of the road. I know this will start a war but it is what
>> I do when I 'must' ride on a road with no bicycle lanes.
>> When you are going against traffic at least you can see
>> the cars coming and pull off into the dirt on the side if
>> need be.
>
> What if there's no possibility of pulling off into the
> dirt (road passes through a narrow road cut, road passes
> along the side of a steep slope, road has a guard rail)?
I walk the bike if there is a real bad area. Being in the
saddle 100% of the time is not mandatory.
>> Now everyone else can tell me what bad advice this is.
> Next time you get the urge to offer advice about
> riding in traffic, don't. Advice like yours could get
> someone killed.
It has kept me alive and unhit since I started doing it,
but only on seriously bad roads that I must take to get to
the fun roads. Citys, suburbs, bike lanes, I use the right
side. Bill Baka
> --
> mark
>
> A: What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
> Q: Top Posters
>
>
>

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:
http://www.opera.com/m2/

Psycholist

"Michael" <mdw3@nospam.cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:UTuBc.20479$WX1.16912@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> 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.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike

Personally, I think helmet mirrors look dorky. That might be
in part because I'm not coordinated enough to use one. When
I tried, instead of just moving my eyeballs to see the
mirror, I'd turn my head. Well, then what was behind me
wasn't behind me anymore. I'd end up with headaches from
straining my eyes and neck trying to get the view I wanted
in the little mirror. I could never relax into it. That may
be because I got used to a good handlebar mirror before I
tried the helmet mirror.

There's a very nice little mirror made by Rhode Gear that
plugs right into the bar end where the tape plug would
normally go. It's very unobrusive and doesn't stick out in
traffic. Despite this, it's very effective. At a glance I
get a very full view behind and it isn't much affected by
road vibration. Rhode Gear has several models that attach in
different ways. This one is a mirror affixed by one pivot
bolt to a plug that goes in the bar end. It's very simple
and clean.

If you get one off these, I'd suggest you do the following
to get the best result: use a razor or box cutter and trim
off the bar tape right at the end of the bars. It's very
easy to do. Make the tape flush with the bar end. That way
the rubber plug makes direct contact with the inside of the
bar. After you've ridden the bike and have the mirror
adjusted just right for you, use a little electricians tape
to wrap the exposed part of the plug and the end of the bar.
This keeps the mirror secure and also keeps the tape from
unraveling.

I take a lot of crap from some of the local racer dudes when
I pull up at centuries with my little mirror on my K2 or
Trek 5500. The dork factor drops very quickly when I ride
them off my wheel.

Bob C.
P.S. Please don't take the advice of the guy who suggested
riding on the wrong side of the road. It's a VERY bad
idea. You might get away with it in West Texas where
the sight distance is 30 miles. But where there are
any hills or curves, the suddenness of head-on
encounters creates extreme danger. Besides, nothing
could be dorkier!

John Everett

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 01:05:33 -0500, "Michael"
<mdw3@nospam.cornell.edu> wrote:

>Which is less dorky: a mirror on the helmet or a mirror on
>the handlebars?

All mirrors are dorky! ;-)

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

Garyg

"John Everett" <jeverett3@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> wrote in message
news:ci8ed0drl924upur05atq42fmo907apa6e@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 01:05:33 -0500, "Michael"
> <mdw3@nospam.cornell.edu> wrote:
>
> >Which is less dorky: a mirror on the helmet or a mirror
> >on the handlebars?
>
> All mirrors are dorky! ;-)

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

GG

>
>
> jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net
> http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

Psycholist

"Bill" <bbaka@syix.com> wrote in message
newspr9ye0xlsq730am@news.syix.com...
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:36:47 GMT, maxo
> <maxo@NOSPAMhome.se> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:14:32 -0700, Bill wrote:
> >
> >> This sounds like a good case for riding on the wrong
> >> side of the road.
> >
> > There is never a reason for riding against traffic.
> > You're only
confusing
> > the motorist, egregiously breaking the law, and adding
> > to the potential impact speed vs. subtracting from it.
> Survival is a real good reason.
> >
> > Please refrain from riding until you can wrap your head
> > around this. Seriously--no offense meant at all.
> If you rode around Beale AFB in northern California you
> would see what I mean. The roads are seriously bicycle
> unfriendly. Between big trucks, rednecks, and fly boys
> there are a lot of drivers who could care less about
> giving bicycles part of their road. Bill Baka
> >
> >

Bill,

There's no sound logic to your argument whatsoever. Large
log trucks and rednecks will overtake you much more rapidly
and with much less reaction time when you're on the wrong
side of the road.

I live in a county where the #1 economic activity is
logging. The #2 activity is watching NASCAR. The roads
are the worst I've seen anywhere and I've lived pretty
much all over the country. It seems I have everything to
deal with that you do. I would NEVER ride on the wrong
side of the road.

Bob C.

Badger_south

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 18:17:16 GMT, maxo <maxo@NOSPAMhome.se> wrote:

>On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:07:45 -0700, Bill wrote:
>
>> It has kept me alive and unhit since I started doing it
>
>Are you sure it wasn't wearing the same underwear everyday
>or some other superstitous falsehood?
>
>Look, I got yelled at by an older fellow on a bike a couple
>weeks ago, and by the looks of his gear I assumed he's been
>in the saddle a number of years--I turned into the alley to
>get to my garage [in a car of course] and he was riding on
>the wrong side of the road and had just turned onto the
>street we were sharing. He wiped out pretty hard from his
>brakes seizing, but no major damage was done. There was no
>way I could have seen him because of his behaviour and an
>inch more and I would have perhaps killed the guy. He layed
>into me with this anti-motorist rant, not knowing that I
>cycle many more miles than I drive per year--I responded
>that this ain't Britain and if he continues to break the
>law in such fashion I won't have any sympathy if I kill him
>next time. Such is the law of Darwin.

So much for making friends with the dogs...er wrong thread.

Bet he'd like you if he knew you though. ;-)

-B

Pat

> >
> >> This sounds like a good case for riding on the wrong
> >> side of the road.

This is why it is called THE WRONG SIDE of the road.

It's W-R-O-N-G. and you know it.

Pat in TX

Pat

> Look, I got yelled at by an older fellow on a bike a
> couple weeks ago, and by the looks of his gear I assumed
> he's been in the saddle a number of years--I turned into
> the alley to get to my garage [in a car of course] and he
> was riding on the wrong side of the road and had just
> turned onto the street we were sharing. He wiped out
> pretty hard from his brakes seizing, but no major damage
> was done. There was no way I could have seen him because
> of his behaviour and an inch more and I would have
> perhaps killed the guy. He layed into me with this anti-
> motorist rant, not knowing that I cycle many more miles
> than I drive per year--I responded that this ain't
> Britain and if he continues to break the law in such
> fashion I won't have any sympathy if I kill him next
> time. Such is the law of Darwin.

I wish I could have seen that! I always want to yell at
these idiots but never have the chance.

Pat in TX

Fred Hall

"Michael" <mdw3@nospam.cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:UTuBc.20479$WX1.16912@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> 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.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>

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. :-)

Bill

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:28:44 -0400, psycholist <technico@wctel.net> wrote:

> Bill,
>
> There's no sound logic to your argument whatsoever. Large
> log trucks and rednecks will overtake you much more
> rapidly and with much less reaction time when you're on
> the wrong side of the road.
>
> I live in a county where the #1 economic activity is
> logging. The #2 activity is watching NASCAR. The roads are
> the worst I've seen anywhere and I've lived pretty much
> all over the country. It seems I have everything to deal
> with that you do. I would NEVER ride on the wrong side of
> the road.
>
> Bob C.

Bob, Opinionated group we have here. I just rode 2 miles on
the left for a very good reason, I was riding into the sun
so cars coming from behind would not be able to see me in
the glare. Left side they could see me fine, so no problem.
Did I mention that I only do this on country roads that
average about 2 cars per minute? In town there is always
somewhere safe to ride on the proper side. As for the rest
of the group, all I am saying is that the law is not always
the best thing to obey under ALL circumstances when it comes
to riding a bike. I do what is needed for 'situational
awareness', including listening to the cars in my vicinity
and not a radio, whoops, that was another post, but relevant
to my style of riding. I am just in favor of rider safety,
not motorist pacification. Bill Baka

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:
http://www.opera.com/m2/

Pete

"Bill" <bbaka@syix.com> wrote

> If you rode around Beale AFB in northern California you
> would see what I mean. The roads are seriously bicycle
> unfriendly. Between big trucks, rednecks, and fly boys
> there are a lot of drivers who could care less about
> giving bicycles part of their road. Bill Baka

Read long enough in here, and you'll find that same
statement voiced about any city you can name.

Cicninnati, Virginia Beach, Boston, Phoenix, and now "around
Beale AFB".

Don't let them "give" you your part of the road...take what
you need (and no more)

Pete

Psycholist

"Bill" <bbaka@syix.com> wrote in message
newspr9y3mmnsq730am@news.syix.com...
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:28:44 -0400, psycholist
> <technico@wctel.net> wrote:
>
> > Bill,
> >
> > There's no sound logic to your argument whatsoever.
> > Large log trucks
and
> > rednecks will overtake you much more rapidly and with
> > much less reaction time when you're on the wrong side of
> > the road.
> >
> > I live in a county where the #1 economic activity is
> > logging. The #2 activity is watching NASCAR. The roads
> > are the worst I've seen anywhere and I've lived pretty
> > much all over the country. It seems I have everything to
> > deal with that you do. I would NEVER ride on the wrong
> > side of the
road.
> >
> > Bob C.
>
> Bob, Opinionated group we have here. I just rode 2 miles
> on the left for a very good reason, I was riding into the
> sun so cars coming from behind would not be able to see me
> in the glare. Left side they could see me fine, so no
> problem. Did I mention that I only do this on country
> roads that average about 2 cars per minute? In town there
> is always somewhere safe to ride on the proper side. As
> for the rest of the group, all I am saying is that the law
> is not always the best thing to obey under ALL
> circumstances when it comes to riding a bike. I do what is
> needed for 'situational awareness', including listening to
> the cars in my vicinity and not a radio, whoops, that was
> another post, but relevant to my style of riding. I am
> just in favor of rider safety, not motorist pacification.
> Bill Baka

Bill,

Reading your post reminded me of all the times I've gone
ahead and zipped through a stop sign or done something
similar with the rationale being that, "hey, those cars
won't know what to do with me at a 4-way stop" or some such
thing. And it's really true, unfortunately. The mere
presence of a bike can fluster some motorists completely.
Even though I ride 10,000 miles or more a year, when I'm in
the car and I encounter a cyclist, I can appreciate the
motorists' dilemma in many cases.

All that is to say, though I've never ridden on the other
side of the road, I have exercised "situational awareness"
plenty of times and blown through a stop sign just to get
away from an encounter with cars. So I guess I do know where
you're coming from.

I've been caught riding into a rising or setting sun a time
or two and never considered using the other side of the
road. As I can do a 50 mile ride where I live and maybe see
5 cars, that might be a trick worth trying in a pinch.

Peace.

Bob C.

The Real Bev

Tom Keats wrote:

> You say it's a 2-lane. I assume the lanes are narrow.
> Those are the most uncomfortable roads to ride on, when
> the traffic is thick. If there are plentious opportunities
> for traffic behind you to pass you, I'd say take the lane.
> If there isn't, and there's nowhere to ditch, I'd say find
> an alternate route. If there's no alternate route, I don't
> know what to say.

Try to wobble. An ordinary bicyclist is nearly invisible
(see other thread), but a wobbling bicyclist might suddenly
wobble out in front of you and scratch your paint.

--
Cheers, Bev
**********************************************************-
**********
Organized people will never know the sheer joyous ecstasy of
finding something that was believed to have been
irretrievably lost. -- D. Stern

Frank Krygowski

Michael wrote:
>
>
> About the dork factor: You don't see the guys on the Tour
> de France using mirrors. I'm just saying...

Ah, those Tour de France guys are just a bunch of dorks. You
don't believe it? Just wander into the local NASCAR bar and
ask the guys there.

But about the mirrors: I make my own eyeglass mirrors. My
technique for _slightly_ reducing dorkiness is to make them
as small as feasible - roughly 1/2" x 1" mirror surface -
and to have them sort of a light grey color so they're a tad
less visible.

Another possible technique is to go for maximum
dorkiness. Maybe hang streamers on it? Fashion's pretty
incomprehensible anyway. You might find yourself a
fashion leader.

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