Roadies, do you use rear-view mirrors

[David Newman]

I often think David's responses on this NG are thoughtful and reasonable, but his response to this
reasonable question looks to me like an anti-mirror zealot preaching the dogma rather than a
reasoned response based on real experience with a mirror.

In article <[email protected]>, "David L. Johnson"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Most guys with bar-mounted mirrors can't use them. When riding behind them, I usually see just the
> sky in the mirror, rather than their head. The image bounces around too much to be useful.

This is a complete straw man. When using a mirror, I don't want to be looking at things that are
five feet off the ground and four feet behind my rear wheel, I want to see things that are
considerably farther back, farther to my left, and usually a bit lower. I've used a bar-end mirror,
and it worked fine. I had no trouble getting a good look behind me, and I didn't have a problem with
too much bouncing. My main problem with the bar-end mirror was weight and the fact that it tended to
vibrate loose and fall off on rough roads.

> Helmet-mounted mirros avoid this, but all you see is your ear...

This is just false. I used a helmet-mounted mirror, and the only time I saw my ear was if the mirror
was completely mis-adjusted.

> I saw one mirror that mounted on the top tube. Gives you a good view of the front of your shorts,
> but that seems a bit narcissistic.

I advocate both mirrors and turning your head. I use a glasses-mounted mirror, and it definitely
helps me keep track of what's going on behind
me. Just as when driving a car, I make frequent checks in the mirror to be aware of what's going on.
When a car approaches, or when I'm preparing to change lanes or turn, I turn my head. I'd say a
mirror is a useful tool in spite of it's nerdy reputation, though it's clearly not a magic
talisman that will prevent all accidents. Try a mirror on a couple of solo rides -- it won't
hurt your rep, and you'll learn if you want one badly enough to put up with the negative
stereotypes.

David Newman

 

[Christopher Bri]

Per Daniel Sørensen <s648@_RM_ii.uib.no> writes:
> > Looking back also gives you a better view. Even if you do use a mirror,
>
> > don't rely on it. Look back to verify and to see in the blind spots the mirror leaves.
>
> Are you related to the girl that was in The Exorcist? Maybe I just have a very inflexible neck,
> but I can't turn my head and look at the traffic behind me.
>
> > Yes, I do this while driving.
>
> According to the teacher at the driving school I attended, this was a sure way to fail the
> driving test.

Then this teacher was incompetent. You should _always_ check your blind spots when changing lanes,
whether you are driving a car or riding a bike -- how else can you be sure that there isn't someone
in the spot you are about to move your vehicle into?

Yes, I _do_ know someone who failed their driving test over this. They neglected to check their
blind spots before leaving a parking space, and instantly failed.

Chris
--
Chris Colohan Email: [email protected] PGP: finger [email protected] Web: www.colohan.com Phone:
(412)268-4751

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Nick Payne" <[email protected]> wrote:

>And over the past 25 or 30 years it's saved me several times when some

>misjudged it...better a dork than dead.

Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them several
times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit from behind.

Either most of the cars that you "dodged" wouldn't really have hit you, or the rest of us really get
run down quite often but won't admit
it... ;-)

On a slightly more serious note, consider that taking evasive action to a perceived threat may
have very negative consequences, and it does appear that there are many more "perceived" than
"real" threats.

But each of us should determine what works and go with it...

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> "Nick Payne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >And over the past 25 or 30 years it's saved me several times when some

> >misjudged it...better a dork than dead.
>
> Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them
> several times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit
> from behind.
>
> Either most of the cars that you "dodged" wouldn't really have hit you, or the rest of us really
> get run down quite often but won't admit
> it... ;-)
>
> On a slightly more serious note, consider that taking evasive action to a perceived threat may
> have very negative consequences, and it does appear that there are many more "perceived" than
> "real" threats.
>
> But each of us should determine what works and go with it...

I like using a mirror on the road simply because it helps me keep track of what's coming up from
behind. I'm under no illusions that it is going to allow me to avoid a car intent on hitting me from
behind (not that is a likely scenario anyway), but I simply feel more comfortable with it after all
those years of using mirrors in a car.

I think it also helps keep me from having to shoulder check as much: if I see another vehicle in the
mirror, there's no point in doing a shoulder check, because it's definitely there. I only shoulder
check if there's nothing in the mirror, just to ensure I'm not missing something in a blind spot. A
mirror won't give any false positives in detecting a vehicle behind you, though it can give false
negatives!

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Shayne Wissler]

> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>> "Nick Payne" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >And over the past 25 or 30 years it's saved me several times when some

>> >misjudged it...better a dork than dead.
>>
>> Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them
>> several times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit
>> from behind.
>>
>> Either most of the cars that you "dodged" wouldn't really have hit you, or the rest of us really
>> get run down quite often but won't admit
>> it... ;-)

Or those without mirrors got hit and were never heard from again

Shayne Wissler

 

[Nick Payne]

I've had three friends hit from behind - one was killed, another was brain damaged, the third merely
suffered some broken bones...

Nick

"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them
> several times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit
> from behind.

 

[Java Man]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Most guys with bar-mounted mirrors can't use them. When riding behind them, I usually see just the
> sky in the mirror, rather than their head.
>
Determine the correct mirror angle required to see vehicles approaching from a few hundred feet
behind, and you'll understand why.

Rick

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:19:55 +0000, David Newman wrote:

> I often think David's responses on this NG are thoughtful and reasonable, but his response to this
> reasonable question looks to me like an anti-mirror zealot preaching the dogma rather than a
> reasoned response based on real experience with a mirror.

My... I don't think of myself as zealous about mirrors, but I do not see that they will add to
safety. I was also being a bit tounge-in-cheek.

>> Most guys with bar-mounted mirrors can't use them. When riding behind them, I usually see just
>> the sky in the mirror, rather than their head. The image bounces around too much to be useful.
>
> This is a complete straw man.

Not really. I ride with a guy who uses one of these, and I tease him about this. Every time, he
adjusts it. Then, a while later, it's back giving him a view of the sun.

>> Helmet-mounted mirros avoid this, but all you see is your ear...
>
> This is just false. I used a helmet-mounted mirror, and the only time I saw my ear was if the
> mirror was completely mis-adjusted.

That was a joke. The guys I ride with who have these spend as much time and concentration moving
their heads so they can see back as it would to simply turn their heads.
>
>> I saw one mirror that mounted on the top tube. Gives you a good view of the front of your shorts,
>> but that seems a bit narcissistic.

No comment on this one? It's real. They claim it gives a good view under your thighs, but....

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Accept risk. Accept responsibility. Put a lawyer out of _`\(,_ | business. (_)/ (_) |

 

[David Newman]

David, I guess I need to have my humor-detector recalibrated. Sorry. I guess I'm in a serious kind
of mood lately.

In article <[email protected]>, "David L. Johnson"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> >> I saw one mirror that mounted on the top tube. Gives you a good view of the front of your
> >> shorts, but that seems a bit narcissistic.
>
> No comment on this one? It's real. They claim it gives a good view under your thighs, but....

I've seen them, but I've never used one, so I can't really say how well they work or don't work or
how narcissistic one might have to be in order to use one. They do seem kind of goofy to me, much
more likely to get you a rep as a goofy mirror user than a small glasses mirror.

I can see how handlebar mirrors might move out of adjustment. That wasn't what I thought you were
talking about originally. All I can say is that I didn't have any trouble of this kind with the
Rhode Gear mirror I used. The only times mine got out of adjustment were when I bumped it getting on
or off the bike, or when a really rough road was in the process of vibrating it right out of the
handlebar. On reasonable roads, it held its position nicely.

Head-mounted mirrors do require some head motion to use effectively, but much less than the full
turn of the head one might do without a mirror. Again, the car analogy works for me. Looking in the
mirror takes about as much head motion as looking in a car mirror does, and a full head-turn is as
much bigger on the bike as it is in the car. If your riding buddies are doing more than this, I
suspect something else is going on, but I really can't imagine what.

>>Dave

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:18:36 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:
>Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them several
>times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit from behind.

Once you make a statement like that...

>But each of us should determine what works and go with it...

...you're not _supposed_ to make a statement like _that_. You're supposed to say that it's
statistically proven that mirrors put you at higher risk, and that if they get popular, then
mandatory mirror laws will follow; and that you wouldn't need a mirror on a bike, because a magic
shiny piece of glass isn't nearly as effective as a magic triangle of metal tubes (with two rubber
circles) at preventing accidents.

Didn't we learn _anything_ from the recent helmet war?

>Mark Hickey
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Carl Fogel]

"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:19:55 +0000, David Newman wrote:
>
> > I often think David's responses on this NG are thoughtful and reasonable, but his response to
> > this reasonable question looks to me like an anti-mirror zealot preaching the dogma rather than
> > a reasoned response based on real experience with a mirror.
>
> My... I don't think of myself as zealous about mirrors, but I do not see that they will add to
> safety. I was also being a bit tounge-in-cheek.
>
> >> Most guys with bar-mounted mirrors can't use them. When riding behind them, I usually see just
> >> the sky in the mirror, rather than their head. The image bounces around too much to be useful.
> >
> > This is a complete straw man.
>
> Not really. I ride with a guy who uses one of these, and I tease him about this. Every time, he
> adjusts it. Then, a while later, it's back giving him a view of the sun.
>
> >> Helmet-mounted mirros avoid this, but all you see is your ear...
> >
> > This is just false. I used a helmet-mounted mirror, and the only time I saw my ear was if the
> > mirror was completely mis-adjusted.
>
> That was a joke. The guys I ride with who have these spend as much time and concentration moving
> their heads so they can see back as it would to simply turn their heads.
> >
> >> I saw one mirror that mounted on the top tube. Gives you a good view of the front of your
> >> shorts, but that seems a bit narcissistic.
>
> No comment on this one? It's real. They claim it gives a good view under your thighs, but....

Dear Dave,

To my shame, I tried the top-tube-mounted mirror years ago.

A more intelligent bicyclist would have realized before ordering one that his seat-bag would
interfere with the view.

Other than that, it just didn't work. Whatever it takes to use mirrors while riding a bicycle, I
haven't got it. But good luck to those who do.

Carl Fogel

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>, John Everett
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:17:12 -0400, "Scott Schelle" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I ride 50 - 100 miles a week on the roads around Baltimore and am getting weary of not knowing
> >what's pulling up behind me.
> >
> >Question: What is the thinking regarding rear-view mirrors, either helmet or bar-end mounted? Is
> >this something for the pocket protector set only, or is it something most serious road riders do?
>
> I depend on my ears. I can usually hear a car approaching from the rear in plenty of time to take
> appropriate action. The exception; when riding into a strong headwind. There's usually so much
> wind noise it's hard to hear an approaching car until it's right on me.

Now that it's dark both on the way to and on the way back from work, I've noticed the great value in
my classic, shallow, convex, polished aluminum rims. By glancing down at the front wheel, I can see
a crude reflection of the headlights approaching from behind. The intensity gives me a good idea of
the distance back.

Works well in Canada because of near-universal always-on headlights.

Back to regular mirrors, I very happily used a helmet-mounted one for a while, but couldn't adjust
it properly to suit me on a drop-bar bike. I gave up on it, and don't miss it enough to seek out a
new mirror.

My father has a bar-end (road bike) mirror, and is apparently very happy with it. I think it's a
convex (wide-angle) mirror.

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

 

[Mark Janeba]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them
> several times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit
> from behind.

Collisions by cars overtaking bikes *are* very rare, though sadly not unheard of (e.g. Peter). I
don't think watching out for "pure" rear-enders is the real value of a mirror. I don't stare into
the thing constantly, nor do I expect very many mirror users do.

There are other uses: On a narrow road, when I see an oncoming car a ways ahead, a mirror makes it
convenient to look behind, and make sure some bozo isn't going to pass me wide when the oncoming car
arrives. (You'd think drivers would know better - no, strike that, experience says otherwise). This
way I'm just a little more aware if some pileup (or sudden rightward swerve) is about to happen in
my vicinity.

While commuting, with lots of left turns, I can keep an eye behind watching for an opening (but make
sure to double check with a head turn before changing lanes leftward).

Mark (watching his ear closely) Janeba

 

[Mark Hickey]

Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

>Now that it's dark both on the way to and on the way back from work, I've noticed the great value
>in my classic, shallow, convex, polished aluminum rims. By glancing down at the front wheel, I can
>see a crude reflection of the headlights approaching from behind. The intensity gives me a good
>idea of the distance back.

I always just judge the cars behind me by the shadow I throw from their lights. If my shadow is
directly in front of me, I start worrying... if it's off to my right, I can judge their position
and speed (to a point). Oh, you may want to ignore the second part of that advice if you live in
the UK... ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Tim McNamara]

Mark Janeba <[email protected]> writes:

> Mark Hickey wrote:
>
> > Strangely, many people who ride with mirrors will say the same thing - that it's saved them
> > several times... while the vast majority of those of us who ride without mirrors never get hit
> > from behind.
>
> Collisions by cars overtaking bikes *are* very rare, though sadly not unheard of (e.g. Peter).

ISTR that the greatest percentage of car-bicyclist fatalities happen when the driver is overtaking a
cyclist going in the same direction.

Rather than use a mirror , I use my ears and also look over my shoulder. A little practice makes it
easy to turn one's head momentarily and continue riding in a straight line. I know trackies who can
ride an entire lap of the velodrome while looking over their shoulder. If you have neck problems or
ride a recumbent, this may be less practical.

 

[Mark Hickey]

Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:

>ISTR that the greatest percentage of car-bicyclist fatalities happen when the driver is overtaking
>a cyclist going in the same direction.

It might seem likely, but it's far from the case. Most fatalities occur when a car turns across the
path of a bike. I know there are those out there with the statistics on % of "rear-enders" who'll
likely add some more info.

>Rather than use a mirror , I use my ears and also look over my shoulder. A little practice makes it
>easy to turn one's head momentarily and continue riding in a straight line. I know trackies who can
>ride an entire lap of the velodrome while looking over their shoulder. If you have neck problems or
>ride a recumbent, this may be less practical.

You can also sneak a peek under your shoulder if you have trouble turning your head side to side.
That doesn't communicate "I'm watching you" as clearly as looking over your shoulder though.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Robin Hubert]

"Carl Fogel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:19:55 +0000, David Newman wrote:
> >
> > > I often think David's responses on this NG are thoughtful and
reasonable,
> > > but his response to this reasonable question looks to me like an anti-mirror zealot preaching
> > > the dogma rather than a reasoned response based on real experience with a mirror.
> >
> > My... I don't think of myself as zealous about mirrors, but I do not
see
> > that they will add to safety. I was also being a bit tounge-in-cheek.
> >
> > >> Most guys with bar-mounted mirrors can't use them. When riding
behind
> > >> them, I usually see just the sky in the mirror, rather than their
head.
> > >> The image bounces around too much to be useful.
> > >
> > > This is a complete straw man.
> >
> > Not really. I ride with a guy who uses one of these, and I tease him about this. Every time, he
> > adjusts it. Then, a while later, it's back giving him a view of the sun.
> >
> > >> Helmet-mounted mirros avoid this, but all you see is your ear...
> > >
> > > This is just false. I used a helmet-mounted mirror, and the only time
I
> > > saw my ear was if the mirror was completely mis-adjusted.
> >
> > That was a joke. The guys I ride with who have these spend as much time and concentration moving
> > their heads so they can see back as it would to simply turn their heads.
> > >
> > >> I saw one mirror that mounted on the top tube. Gives you a good view of the front of your
> > >> shorts,
but
> > >> that seems a bit narcissistic.
> >
> > No comment on this one? It's real. They claim it gives a good view
under
> > your thighs, but....
>
> Dear Dave,
>
> To my shame, I tried the top-tube-mounted mirror years ago.

If you believed the advertisement for the thing http://www.lickbike.com/i3239050.htm you'd know it
wasn't intended to have a rider in place. The view provided by this mirror
http://www.lickbike.com/i3235050.htm is clearly superior. ;-)

>
> A more intelligent bicyclist would have realized before ordering one that his seat-bag would
> interfere with the view.
>
> Other than that, it just didn't work. Whatever it takes to use mirrors while riding a bicycle, I
> haven't got it. But good luck to those who do.

Robin Hubert

 

[Sheldon Brown]

A usually reliable source wrote:

> ISTR that the greatest percentage of car-bicyclist fatalities happen when the driver is overtaking
> a cyclist going in the same direction.

That's absolutely incorrect. This type of collision amounts to only about 4% of car/bike collisions,
though it does represent a somewhat higher percentage of fatalities.

Here's a chart from: http://www.johnforester.com/Articles/Safety/Cross01.htm

TABLE A

Type of Accident Percent
A: Cyclist Exited Driveway Into Motorist's Path 8.59
B: Motorist Exited Driveway Into Cyclist's Path 5.73
C: Cyclist Failed to Stop/Yield at Controlled Intersection 8.33
D: Cyclist Made Improper Left Turn 11.20
E: Cyclist Rode on Wrong Side of Street 14.32
F: Motorist Collided With Rear of Cyclist 4.17<-
G: Motorist Failed to Stop/Yield at Controlled Intersection 7.81
H: Motorist Made Improper Left Turn 12.76
I: Motorist Made Improper Right Turn 11.20
J: Motorist Opened Car Door into Cyclist's Path 7.29 Other 8.60

I don't mean to cite this to discourage mirror use, however. I'm a very strong advocate of
helmet-mounted mirrors, and never ride without mine.

Sheldon "Numbers" Brown +-----------------------------------------+
| Well, the truth is usually just | an excuse for a lack of imagination... | --Garak, DS-9 |
+-----------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

 

[Per Daniel SøRe]

Christopher Brian Colohan wrote:
> Per Daniel Sørensen <s648@_RM_ii.uib.no> writes:
>
>>>Looking back also gives you a better view. Even if you do use a mirror,
>>
>>>don't rely on it. Look back to verify and to see in the blind spots the mirror leaves.
>>
>>Are you related to the girl that was in The Exorcist? Maybe I just have a very inflexible neck,
>>but I can't turn my head and look at the traffic behind me.
>>
>>
>>> Yes, I do this while driving.
>>
>>According to the teacher at the driving school I attended, this was a sure way to fail the
>>driving test.
>
>
> Then this teacher was incompetent. You should _always_ check your blind spots when changing lanes,
> whether you are driving a car or riding a bike -- how else can you be sure that there isn't
> someone in the spot you are about to move your vehicle into?

You misunderstood me, I meant turning your head and looking at the cars behind you ( not in the
blind spot, which is on your side ) while you are driving. Turning your head fully can take several
seconds, and at 90 km/h (56mph) you are travelling 25 meters each second.

Turning my head enough to look in the blind spot when I'm riding is easy, but turning it enough
to look at the cars that are straight behind is impossible for me. Sometimes when I'm backing a
car in a narrow space I turn and look behind instead of using the mirrors, but this requires that
I turn my shoulders around 45-50 degrees, which requires that I turn my hips, and that messes
with the placement of my feet ( but I can still use the pedals ). I can do this in a car but not
on a bicycle.
>
> Yes, I _do_ know someone who failed their driving test over this. They neglected to check their
> blind spots before leaving a parking space, and instantly failed.

I'm glad they did, not checking the blind spot before changing lanes or pulling out of a parking
space is a major cause of denting. After driving for a few years many people start to forget things
like checking the blind spot, and counting three seconds distance to the car in front.

Per D. Sørensen

 

[Tim McNamara]

Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> writes:

> A usually reliable source wrote:

Why, thank you, Sheldon <blush>.

> > ISTR that the greatest percentage of car-bicyclist fatalities happen when the driver is
> > overtaking a cyclist going in the same direction.
>
> That's absolutely incorrect. This type of collision amounts to only about 4% of car/bike
> collisions, though it does represent a somewhat higher percentage of fatalities.
>
> Here's a chart from: http://www.johnforester.com/Articles/Safety/Cross01.htm

Ummm. I've never really been quite willing to take Forester's word on much of anything, as I found
much that seemed inaccurate and objectionable in _Effective Cycling_ when I read it years ago. Maybe
it's improved since then.

> TABLE A
>
> Type of Accident %
> A: Cyclist Exited Driveway Into Motorist's Path 8.59
> B: Motorist Exited Driveway Into Cyclist's Path 5.73
> C: Cyclist Failed to Stop/Yield at Controlled Intersection 8.33
> D: Cyclist Made Improper Left Turn 11.20
> E: Cyclist Rode on Wrong Side of Street 14.32
> F: Motorist Collided With Rear of Cyclist 4.17<-
> G: Motorist Failed to Stop/Yield at Controlled Intersection 7.81
> H: Motorist Made Improper Left Turn 12.76
> I: Motorist Made Improper Right Turn 11.20
> J: Motorist Opened Car Door into Cyclist's Path 7.29 Other 8.60

My statement did not assume that the driver was the cause of the accident. Notice that items A, D, F
and I could all occur in an overtaking situation. That could add up to 35.16% if every one of these
accidents was between a bicyclist and an overtaking vehicle going in the same direction. In general,
the car on the other side of the road is far less dangerous to cyclists than the cars going in the
same direction on the same side of the road.

> I don't mean to cite this to discourage mirror use, however. I'm a very strong advocate of
> helmet-mounted mirrors, and never ride without mine.

Being as how I don't always wear a helmet, a helmet-mounted mirror would be of only occasional
value. In addition to that, I find the things somewhat difficult to use because the mirror is not in
a fixed relationship to the roadway. I'm not always sure *where* the car is that's behind me as a
result. I presume that practice can result in perceptual learning to compensate, but the mirror
seemed of such little utility that I've never spent the time.

But to each their own. If anyone finds mirrors useful, they should use them. Just because they're
useful to you doesn't mean they're useful to me (and of course the converse is also correct- because
I don't find them useful doesn't mean they're not useful for you).