or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Road Cycling › radio reception on bike
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

radio reception on bike - Page 3

post #31 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

"gds" <gary_jill@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1129762650.733983.181700@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>> Well, Gary, some things will simply be hard for you to imagine. You have
>> to
>> consider that listening to music while riding is something that I can
>> choose
>> to do or not do, even with earbuds in. In other words, I can simply not
>> pay
>> attention to the music and focus completely on something else. You're
>> acting
>> as if the mere fact that you hear something with your ears means that you
>> must focus on it or block something else important out. Simply not the
>> case.
>>

>
> Of course you can choose. My question can be restated "don't you think
> that when you choose to listen to music that to "some extent" it both
> distracts you and makes it harder to hear other things?" If the answer
> is yes I would then argue that the result is less safe.
> And yes it will remain hard for me to imagine that to some extent that
> is not the case.


Your lack of imagination is not the arbiter here, of course.

I do the same ride both with and without music, depending on my mood. There
is no discernable impact on my situational awareness. My habit of constant
visual scanning, and use of my mirror before making any lateral moves, is
the same whether I'm using headphones or not.

I don't rely on hearning because it's too variable. In the winter my ears
are covered anyway. At speeed the wind noise drowns out ambient sound.
Hearing is not reliable.

RichC
post #32 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

AM won't work directionally unless you use a capacitive probe antenna like cars used to.
Every antenna has a null direction, and the probe has its null aimed upwards, with uniform
response all around horizontally.

Aiming the null of a loop antenna (which is in every small AM receiver) upwards unfortunately
also produces a uniform horizontal null for vertically polarized signals, and AM signals are
vertically polarized.

Translation : you're stuck rotating the radio for best reception on AM all the time, on a bike.

FM ought to work except for the usual building reflections, as well as it does in a car, if
the antenna is vertical.

I use a Sangean DT200V, which is very sensitive on AM for its small size, into earphones,
and hang it from another pocket as necessary to reaim it. The chief handicap is wind noise.


--
Ron Hardin
rhhardin@mindspring.com

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.
post #33 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

Rich Clark wrote:
>
> My experience with racing type cyclists is that they are often the most
> ineffective vehicular cyclists on the road. I wouldn't use them as an
> example.
>
> The next time I see a cyclist on a racing bike, wearing full kit and
> carrying no cargo, signal a turn, stop at a red light, or low down rather
> than do something illegal will be the first.
>


OK but that isn't my experience.
I ride racing bikes and wear pretty fancy kits and I stop at lights,
signal turns and believe that I ride in a generally safe manner.
It cannot be a fact that you have never seen a "racing type cyclist"
ride in a safe manner. It is just too statitiscally difficult as even
an unsafe rider will sometimes do something right.

Why the predjudice against a type of bike and outfit rather than actual
behavior?
post #34 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

gds <gary_jill@msn.com> wrote:
:> E Willson wrote:
:>
:>> I notice that when I encounter serious bikers on my route (on the
:>> roads), they usually are very aware of the surroundings. They
:>> usually have mirrors.
:>
:> A bit of a thread hijack but: I have never ridden with a mirror. That
:> is not a value statement just a fact. However, I feel that I am very
:> aware of my surroundings and have no trouble looking around and back.

I wonder how you can make comparisons when you haven't done both. Most who
ride with mirrors have done both. Hmm....One could certainly decide not to
ride with a mirror if you found no advantage to it.

:>
:> Do you notice that racers never wear mirrors. Yet riding in a large
:> pack at high speeds sees relativley few problems. And the better the
:> racers, the higher the speeds and still less problems (forget mass
:> sprints that is another story).
:>

I wonder how many times races crash compared to the average joe. You think
it's less or more over a lifetime of riding?

:> And these same racer/riders do not use mirrors when training either,
:> so that gets them into all the same issues of motor vehicle traffic,
:> other cyclists, runners, etc.

Think about this, Gary. If you're training to race, you do what you need to
do to do well in a race. Using a mirror to train for racing would be silly
since you don't need a mirror in a race. Racers don't race on roads where
cars are.

:>
:> So, I guess my question is what impact does the mirror have? I'm not
:> arguing against using one as I have no personal experience- but I do
:> find it interesting that riders at the highest skill levels don't use
:> them.

Which highest skill? Going fast or not crashing?

:>
:> Also interesting is that while I certainly use a mirror when
:> driving a car- in high tension situations I will always look over my
:> shoulder to get a direct look rather than use the mirror.

That's because a car has a huge blind spot. You'd better look over your
shoulder. With a mirror on a bike (glass mounted) you can see much than you
can with a car and by looking over your shoulder. You have greater
situational awareness, period, as you're not in a cage.

I am sure
:> some will argue that is a bad practice as it takes my eys off the
:> road in front. But I was never good at multi tasking :-)

??? In a car or on a bike?
post #35 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

"gds" <gary_jill@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1129764354.947637.80660@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Rich Clark wrote:
>>
>> My experience with racing type cyclists is that they are often the most
>> ineffective vehicular cyclists on the road. I wouldn't use them as an
>> example.
>>
>> The next time I see a cyclist on a racing bike, wearing full kit and
>> carrying no cargo, signal a turn, stop at a red light, or low down rather
>> than do something illegal will be the first.
>>

>
> OK but that isn't my experience.
> I ride racing bikes and wear pretty fancy kits and I stop at lights,
> signal turns and believe that I ride in a generally safe manner.
> It cannot be a fact that you have never seen a "racing type cyclist"
> ride in a safe manner. It is just too statitiscally difficult as even
> an unsafe rider will sometimes do something right.
>
> Why the predjudice against a type of bike and outfit rather than actual
> behavior?


I'm talking mostly about commuting, and riding during commuting hours.

The lack of cargo is a strong indicator (not conclusive, certainly), that
the cyclist is not riding for transportational purposes. So are things like
lack of lighting in the dark months, ortheir presence in a paceline.

My point is that you are using professional racers as an exemplar when
discussing safe practices for transportational cyclists. I'm saying that
they have different standards and different goals, and are willing to take
risks that I never would.

I would also think that the radio chatter that pro teams listen to through
their earpieces could be considered a distraction too. And as a final note,
racers crash and sustain serious injuries at a far higher rate than I would
find acceptable for transportational cycling. So again, they are not an
example I have any interest in emulating.

RichC
post #36 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

Roger Zoul wrote:
>> I wonder how you can make comparisons when you haven't done both. Most who

> ride with mirrors have done both. Hmm....One could certainly decide not to
> ride with a mirror if you found no advantage to it.


I wasn't making a comparison I was asking a question. Why so defensive?

>
> I wonder how many times races crash compared to the average joe. You think
> it's less or more over a lifetime of riding?


Outside of racing I think they crash very little. And most of the
riding mileage is notn racing.

..
>
> Think about this, Gary. If you're training to race, you do what you need to
> do to do well in a race. Using a mirror to train for racing would be silly
> since you don't need a mirror in a race. Racers don't race on roads where
> cars are.


Actually sometimes they do!
And they certainly train on the same roads we ride.


> Which highest skill? Going fast or not crashing?


Well it is certainly more difficult to ride fast than to buy a mirror
;-)
>
>> That's because a car has a huge blind spot. You'd better look over your

> shoulder. With a mirror on a bike (glass mounted) you can see much than you
> can with a car and by looking over your shoulder. You have greater
> situational awareness, period, as you're not in a cage.


Now that is the first answer to my question that you gave,
Thanks, it's a good one.
post #37 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

"E Willson" <ewillson@patmedia.net> wrote in message
news:4356aa3d$0$28810$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
> To most serious cyclists this may seem like blasphemy but I would like to
> listen to a radio on my daily trip. I have tried several portable radios,
> but none can keep a constant volume as the bike changes direction. It
> seems that the antennas are very directional, so that when the bike
> changes direction the signal strength changes drastically. This is true on
> either AM or FM. Any info on how to setup a radio so that the signal
> strength is adequate and uniform would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> EJ in NJ


How about wraping the helmet in aluminum foil? They, run the atenna into
that.

Or, buy one of those atenna's down at the radio shack and attach to helmet.
post #38 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

gds <gary_jill@msn.com> wrote:
:> Roger Zoul wrote:
:>>
:>> Well, Gary, some things will simply be hard for you to imagine.
:>> You have to consider that listening to music while riding is
:>> something that I can choose to do or not do, even with earbuds in.
:>> In other words, I can simply not pay attention to the music and
:>> focus completely on something else. You're acting as if the mere
:>> fact that you hear something with your ears means that you must
:>> focus on it or block something else important out. Simply not the
:>> case.
:>>
:>
:> Of course you can choose. My question can be restated "don't you
:> think
:> that when you choose to listen to music that to "some extent" it both
:> distracts you and makes it harder to hear other things?"

And to that I answer NO. Because I don't allow distractions of that type.
The music is there primarily to spur me on and to help keep my mind
moving/thinking, not to lull me asleep.
I ride primarily long solo rides, over 60 miles on on Saturday and over 40
on Sunday (most times). Also, I'm on country roads without a lot of
traffic. It can be harshly boring out there and the fact of the matter is,
it doesn't take a whole lot of thought to see what's going on 99% of the
time. It's not techincal stunt riding, like what I saw some guy doing on TV
recently. That takes deep concentration.

If the
:> answer
:> is yes I would then argue that the result is less safe.
:> And yes it will remain hard for me to imagine that to some extent
:> that is not the case.

Well, then that's that.

:>
:>
:>
:> .
:>>
:>> If....do you think it's a good idea to completely zone out on a
:>> bike? I can be lost in thought, enjoying far off scenery, or any
:>> number of things.
:>
:> I think that is unsafe s well. Being lost in thought and thus less
:> aware of what is hapening around you while riding a bike is almost a
:> defintion of being unsafe. I'm not saying that this doesn't happento
:> all of us - but it sure is a less safe condition than when we are
:> focused on what is hapening. Don't you think?

Sure, assuming something is happening. You seem to be of the opinion that
you can and should be completely mentally focused on riding, even if there's
nothing happening that requires that kind of focus. What's most important
in my opinion is having the ability to react to the situation, and if the
situation just isn't that rapidly changing, there's little to react to. And
if it should become rapidly changing, music playing won't affect your
ability to react, because you can simply divert focus on the situation and
iqnore the music. I really don't know what's so hard to grasp about that.
It's almost as if you think one becomes a riding zombie, enslaved by the
music.
post #39 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, E Willson <ewillson@patmedia.net> wrote:

>To most serious cyclists this may seem like blasphemy but I would like
>to listen to a radio on my daily trip.


If you are using two headphones or two earplugs, doing so is illegal in
most states. This is the same for car drivers. You need to plug only one
ear, or have a radio attached to the handle bars.

Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).
post #40 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

E Willson wrote:
> To most serious cyclists this may seem like blasphemy but I would like
> to listen to a radio on my daily trip.


In response to the "That's Dangerous!!!" replies:

http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm


I suggest being reasonable with volume, and being quick to turn it off
in any significant traffic.


- Frank Krygowski
post #41 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

"E Willson" <ewillson@patmedia.net> wrote in message
news:4356b6b0$0$28805$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...

> I would support a total ban on cell phones while driving, although I have
> to admit I have taken calls on my bicycle.


I was headed out of town on my bike for a little ride in the county to watch
the trees change colors out by a river. To do that I had to cross an
Interstate highway on a state highway bridge. And I had to take the cell
phone because of the business I'm in. So I'm halfway across the bridge and
the thing rings. I get it out of the pouch and suddenly my tire blows out.
The rear tire, fortunately. I was right next to the cement barrier on the
edge of the bridge, which wasn't designed for pedestrians or cyclists. Had
it been my front tire with one hand on the handlbar, I might have hit the
barrier and done the ultimate endo.

I let the voicemail get it now.
post #42 of 89
Thread Starter 

Re: radio reception on bike

Chris,

Thanks for the reply.

Actually I do a ten mile rectangular closed course each day. The
elevation does not change more than 50 feet over the whole route and the
largest buildings are two story houses about every 200 yards.

EJ in NJ

Chris Zacho The Wheelman wrote:
> I used to do this too whilst commuting, but I went "all out", with an
> AM/FM Stereo cassette "walkman" in my handlebar bag with two mini
> amplified speakers "mounted" in the side pockets.
>
> But as to your question, I would get this problem as well, not because
> of "directinality" (is that a word?) of the antenna, as most walkmans
> use the speaker/headset wire as an antenna. The problem was a phenomenon
> called, I believe, multiplexing. This is caused by reflected signals
> interfering with the main signal.
>
> Are there any buildings or hills on your route?
>
> - -
>
> Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"
>
> "May you have the winds at your back,
> And a really low gear for the hills!"
>
> Chris'Z Corner
> http://www.geocities.com/czcorner
>
post #43 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

Thomas Wentworth wrote:
>
> How about wraping the helmet in aluminum foil? They, run the atenna into
> that.


Good idea. This has the added benefit of keeping the aliens from
stealing your thoughts...
post #44 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

I've taken _international_ calls while on my bicycle.

Come to think of it, those are about the only telephone calls I take
while riding. I have a special ringtone for incoming calls on the
international circuit.

Of course, if it is around dinner time, and it might be someone
inviting me to dinner, then I'm all for answering the phone.

-M
post #45 of 89

Re: radio reception on bike

bryanska wrote:
> Because it's IN YOUR EARS, idiot!


Ah yes. Always nice to hear a polite, diplomatic response.

>
> Unsafe, unsafe, unsafe.


Got data?

- Frank Krygowski
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Road Cycling
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Road Cycling › radio reception on bike