How come I never see a cyclist with listening to music with an mp3 player? - Page 3

I don't know, you tell me. I'm not the one who decided to fall off my motorcycle at 100+ mph. Brainiac.

Okay, I can see that the spirit of Mr. B hasn't left us. Not by any stretch of the imagination...

I bought an ipod nano not too long ago, with the idea that I'd use it for my longer rides. Most of my riding is on very lightly traveled backroads around horse farms - you might see three or four cars in an hour - so immediate danger wasn't that much of an issue.

However, I only used it cycling a couple of times. First off, I found that wind noise tended to interfere with the music, even with the larger, thicker ipod headphones. You had to really jam them in to block out the wind noise, which also blocked out everything else.

More than that, I found that I really prefer listening to the sounds of the ride. It's the most peaceful music of all.

WORD [you can wear your helmet JohnO]

Well, gee, I said mine was a racing crash. You, however, are the one that alleged that a motorcycle provides cushion, therefore, you have to sniff your pixie dust and pretend you know how that can be. No one else made the fanciful claim that you did, so, fill us in. Don't forget to use that logic, thing, and be careful not violate any physical laws.

Gee whiz you got me. So you're telling me that I'd be better off getting t-boned by a car at 25mph on my bike than on your motorcycle? Or hit anywhere else for that matter - front, back, etc. So by your self-described LOGIC, a pedestrian would stand a better chance against that same car than a motorcycle or a bike; what with all that useless metal to crash on top of them.

Can I ask you exactly where did you get your crack, and do you have any left after smoking the quantities that have you so high?

This is so easy, have you made it as far as high school physics boy? A motorcycle has far more MASS (look it up if you "no comprende amigo") and therefore will absorb far more FORCE than a 15 pound tin-foil-like-crumpling bicycle frame. Furthermore, the impact is far more likely to be absorbed by a BIG MOTORCYCLE PART in relation to the small mass of a bicycle. WHICH leaves the brunt of the impact to be borne by the RIDER of the bicycle. You know, legs, head, back, and the like of which you have already obviously cracked? Go ahead and get a paper and pencil, maybe a crayon, and draw it out if it helps you to understand.

Well, I guess we see the limit of your knowledge. Mass absorbing force? Gee, that doesn't happen. Force can act on a mass, but it doesn't soak it up like a sponge, beav. I know you didn't get that far in school, but there's this little ol' equation that says that force=mass*acceleration. If you used a bit of algebra (you might need your nanny to help you with this), you could rearrange that equation to find that if you divide that force by the mass it is acting on, you get an acceleration. Hmmmm. Imagine that, that ol' force didn't just disappear in that mass. No, it made that mass move. Weird, eh? Now, later I'm gonna use a term called "momentum." That's just a mass times its velocity. But guess what: if you change that momentum over a little interval of time, guess what you get? That's right: force. It takes force to change momentum. See, there's something they teach in a math class called calculus, and that thing is integration. And when you integrate a change in momentum over time, you get force. I know that's complicated, but maybe someday, after you get the hang of fractions, you'll get to take calculus.

And since you mentioned getting t-boned, we'll look at that scenario, cupcake: in a t-bone, on a motorcycle, there is nothing to protect your legs, therefore the force the car applies will be acting on your leg, or simulataneously, the motorcycle. Now let's get to that cushion. Since the motorcycle has inertia(OOOpps. I better explain inertia to you: inertia is just a measure of how much something resists a change in its motion. Can you handle that?) much greater than your leg, the motorcycle is less likely to move than the parts of your leg are. The net result is a crushing leg injury. A bicyclist is likely, in the same scenario, to suffer equally horrific injuries, BUT the one thing the bicyclist has going for him is that his ride has magnitudes less inertia than the motorcycle. Therefore, while the car will break the cyclists leg, it is unlikely that the fractures will be much greater from his leg being pinned betweent the bike and the car. Head on collision: in both cases the rider is likely to suffer chest and head trauma, as well as spinal trauma, when he rotates over his ride into the car. The motorcyclist's head may be spared due to the better protection offered by a motorycle helmet. The one thing that won't be spared is the motorcyclist's femurs and or pelvis. It is common in these types of collisions for the motorcyclist, as they rotate over the bike...don't forget, he still has forward momentum....to fracture both femurs when they strike his clip-ons (aka handlebars) or handlebars. The cyclist may incur the same injuries or he may not since the bicycle is likely to rotate with the cyclist. At the very least, the bicycle has much less forward momentum and will likely be moved in some other direction. Glancing blows? Well, guess what: even if the car only hits the motorcycle and not the ridere, the motorcycle is still likely to go down so that the rider is likely to be hit by the motorcycle. These cases are all born out by injuries typically seen in motorcycle and bicycle accidents.

Since you seem to have difficulty understanding simple, Newtonian mechanics, let me say this: a motorcycle and rider system moving at 25 mph has more energy than a bicycle and rider moving at that same speed. So that energy has to be dissipated somewhere, and it's usually the rider that is the victim of that dissipation. More importantly, the motorcycle rider combo has more momentum. In fact between the car, the motorcycle, and the rider, the rider has the least momentum, so if he/she is between the two, guess which of the three will suffer the most?

What is really stupid is to claim that there is any real substantive advantage to being on either a motorcycle or bicycle in a 25 mph collision. The difference in injury severity between the two scenarios is unlikely to be so great that one is preferable over the other. Now see, that's something that you probably didn't pick up in the video game you were playing.

Are you holding back on us? I mean, why don't you say what you really feel?

[QUOTE=JohnO]
First off, I found that wind noise tended to interfere with the music, even with the larger, thicker ipod headphones. You had to really jam them in to block out the wind noise, which also blocked out everything else.
[QUOTE]
Yes the wind makes them pretty useless going downhill, but I'm not quick enough for that to be too much of a problem on the flats and I like to climb big hills where it's a non issue and a little music helps distract me from the pain.

The important thing from a safety point of view is to focus on what you are doing. Any distractions such as mucking about with power metres, watching passing females, reading street signs, chatting... can be dangerous, but we don't get self appointed experts coming out and saying ban street signs, ban talking! Anything that is fun people tend to want to ban, alcohol, sex, music, dancing... depending on where you live. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean there is a good reason and listing to music while riding thankfully is not illegal here.

Sure, an earplug of any discription will lessen the sound somewhat as sunglasses will lessen the light somewhat. So? I haven't been able to find any evidence that listening to music while riding is dangerous and my experience is that it isn't for me. There is some evidence that music can improve safety with regard to driving. So call people all the names you like (not meaning you JohnO) but opinions are not evidence.

It posted twice

I think we need to get the billy goat.

You know, I first thought you hadn't had your coffee yet and so you were a little ill-disposed toward the rest of us. Now I see that you're simply a complete ignoramus. A motorcycle is not a 600-pound "cushion" by any stretch of the imagination. All things being equal, one would prefer to be on the bicycle because its own heft is far less likely to cause problems. The only factor that levels the playing field is that on a motorcycle the rider would be wearing full leathers, probably with some armor, instead of lycra. That's about it.

My point was simply that riding smart and always being hyper-aware of 4-wheeled vehicles (in motorcycling we fondly call them "cages") are far, far more important than whether one's ears are partially blocked.

Having been in several altercations on a bike over the years. It's easy to walk away from most if your keep your head about you. T-bone comin', you gonna hit then now stopped car. Get sideways, absorb the impact with the whole body, done it a couple times in the rain and rode away both times. Otherwise go for gold in getting over the car. I saw a buddy launch out of his clippless pedals, go over the hood like it was a piece of gym gear and land on his feet on the other side. So many people make the mistake of hold on to the bike. It's a piece of gear toss it. You'll never see a moto racer holding on to his ride.

The secret to traffic riding is to always give yourself a couple options of escape. Riding where they want you to eliminates those choices, that's why I take the lane, and am the fastest thing in traffic. I accelerate faster, brake faster and have better bead on the lay of the land.

__________________
Messengers....the other Pros
Professional Rider, Closed course, DO NOT attempt this yourself.