legitimate use for mirrors.. consider this

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by larry english - no address harvesting, May 2, 2004.

  1. 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.
    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.

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

    thoughts..?

    wle.
     
    Tags:


  2. Badger_South

    Badger_South Guest

    On Sun, 02 May 2004 14:43:08 -0000, [email protected] (larry english - no
    address harvesting) wrote:

    >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
     
  3. Mike Schwab

    Mike Schwab Guest

    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 wrote:
    >
    > On Sun, 02 May 2004 14:43:08 -0000, [email protected] (larry english - no
    > address harvesting) wrote:
    >
    > >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
     
  4. In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    >
    >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.
     
  5. Mike Kruger

    Mike Kruger Guest

    "Badger_South" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > So go or the most robust model you can find, and treat it with care (or

    buy
    > 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/
    >
     
  6. S o r n i

    S o r n i Guest

    larry english - no address harvesting wrote:
    > ok, i use a helmet mirror.

    {snippage}
    > 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.
     
  7. larry english wrote:

    > 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]
     
  8. Mike McGuire

    Mike McGuire Guest

    Badger_South wrote:
    > ...
    > 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
     
  9. [email protected] (larry english - no address harvesting) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > 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...
    >
    > 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....
     
  10. Chalo

    Chalo Guest

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

    > [email protected] 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
     
  11. In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:

    > w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) wrote:
    >
    > > [email protected] 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.

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

    Tom Keats Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (larry english - no address harvesting) writes:

    > 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.


    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.

    ....

    > 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.

    > 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.

    > 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
     
  13. Tom Keats

    Tom Keats Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> writes:
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:
    >
    >> w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) wrote:
    >>
    >> > [email protected] 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
     
  14. ah, here it is, the uproar.

    wle.

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    >
    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > [email protected] (larry english - no address harvesting) writes:
    >
    >> 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.

    >
    >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.
    >
    >...
    >
    >> 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.
    >
    >> 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.
    >
    >> 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
     
  15. Tom Keats

    Tom Keats Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (wle - no address harvesting!!) writes:

    > 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


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


    >> Mirrors are okay



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

    Chalo Guest

    Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

    > [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:
    >
    > > w l e @ h o t m a i l . c o m (larry english) wrote:
    > > >
    > > > 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"
     
  17. Tom Keats wrote:

    >
    > 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 ----
     
  18. Tom Keats

    Tom Keats Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:

    > 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
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - legitimate mirrors consider
  1. greyg8r
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,360
  2. sussexvlogger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,138
  3. jdumais
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,622
  4. decca234uk
    Replies:
    43
    Views:
    4,804
  5. therocket
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,009
Loading...