Originally Posted by vol

I thought she's saying "Don't you have something better for me?"

Originally Posted by Doohickie

I like chocolate cake.



I don't like peanut butter. Anyone who eats peanut butter is letting the terrorists win.

Originally Posted by Doohickie

I like chocolate cake.



I don't like peanut butter. Anyone who eats peanut butter is letting the terrorists win.

Originally Posted by KonAaron Snake

BLASPHEMING INFIDEL! Only a communist infiltrator would dare to disparage God's true food - peanut butter. This is also an insult to all right thinking supporters of George Washington Carver! Take you and your Internationale's chocolate cake else where, you communal cake supporting pinko dog.

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike

Where?

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike

The solution is at:
https://www.kevinandamanda.com/whatsn...day-bliss.html

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike

Where?

Originally Posted by turbo1889

I love that line !!! Such a good little quip without being nasty.

Although I should mention that me personally sometimes when its hot in the summer I do like to just jump on a bike bare chested wearing only a pair of swim trunks and some good tennis shoes (pedaling in saddles sucks) and take a quick 5-10 mile ride down to the nearest good source of cold clean water to jump into. Tried wearing the vest once and it stuck to my bare skin chest and felt weird and sticky. But so long as its not over a bare chest but on top of at least a T-shirt I totally agree, not an issue.

Originally Posted by turbo1889

Both chocolate cake and peanut butter should be on the menu and we should be able to freely choose between the two at our own discretion or even have both if we so desire.

Where the line is crossed is where the chocolate cake eaters try to violate the rights of the peanut butter eaters and forbid them to eat peanut butter and declare they may only eat the chocolate cake. Or when the peanut butter eaters try to violate the rights of the chocolate cake eaters and forbid them to eat chocolate cake and declare they may only eat peanut butter. Even worse when they side with terrorists willing to use terror of force and violence to enforce such an edict or themselves stoop to that level.

Originally Posted by CB HI

Too bad, you refuse the best safety device of your entire list, the mirror.

Originally Posted by johnnymoses

The use of mirrors is somewhat of a decision struggle for me. I often ask myself "Do I want to know that I am about to die or be seriously injured or is ignorance bliss?" I realize there is much more to discuss concerning whether to use mirrors or not but sometimes for me it comes down to those two simple arguments.

Originally Posted by turbo1889

What's the problem boys? At least in what I've read so far all of the "safety" gear the OP refuses to use are not required items. Now if he wanted to run total night-ninja with no lights or reflectors at all after dark or in inclement weather then that would be an actual problem and clearly codified as such in the mutual agreed to by society rules of the road.

No one is required to use optional additional "safety" gear. If he don't want too, that's his loss.






-----------------------------------------------------------

Now if we are just doing a thread on the pros. and cons. of such items then my personal $0.02 on some of the things so far discussed would be:

----- A few really good lights are much better then a whole bunch of pathetic little wimpy ones (and a lot easier to maintain and keep fresh batteries).

----- Currently I'm in the process of updating all my lighting systems on my bikes to 12.8v 4-cell LiFePO4 battery pack powered systems running full on 12v automotive LED lights especially those nice big 4" round and 6-6.5" oval bright LED truck tail-lights that are bright enough to meet commercial motor-vehicle standards and those powerful rotating strobes in red and amber like they put on top of plow trucks and such.

----- Cameras are a good idea but can be a pain, I haven't made the leap to start running a camera(s) myself but am very close to it. I know for sure that one thing that I really don't want to do is mount a big Go-Pro or similar big ugly thing to my helmet, to the bike not a problem but anything on the helmet is going to need to be small and tight.

----- Mirrors can be helpful but should never be relied upon, learn to turn your head and use your ears and at night track shadow arc angles from approaching headlights from behind as well since mirrors don't show the big picture.

----- I never could get used to helmet mirrors myself and handle-bar mirrors where the angle changes when the bars are turned aren't ideal for me. I prefer a hard frame mounted mirror which on a normal upright bike I mount a mirror on a short arm sticking out a little less then the handlebars to the left of the head tube at just the right angle to show what is behind me with my pumping left leg in the edge of the view. Gives me the most stable and consistent rear view mirror for me.




--------------------------------------------------

Also, to the person claiming that bikes don't need mirrors because they don't back up and that is what mirrors on cars are for (backing up). People who just look in the mirror when they back up a car are being dangerous and scare me. The only reason you only use the mirrors when backing up is if your backing up a vehicle where he can't turn around and look and even then you are extremely careful doing so and many times with a large truck you actually get out of the truck and do a walk around before backing up when you have to use only your mirrors to do so and if you don't you will be liable if you back over someone and hurt or kill them.

This coming from someone who actually often drives 2-5 ton, 6-10 wheel, short trucks and other large vehicles. In fact I'm usually either on a bike or driving a truck (a real truck not one of those little light duty pickup trucks) and driving a light car is the minority after those other two.

Originally Posted by johnnymoses

I often ask myself "Do I want to know that I am about to die or be seriously injured or is ignorance bliss?"

Originally Posted by MrCjolsen

A lot of mirror-haters will tell you that a mirror is no substitute for looking back, and that you don't need mirrors because the purpose they serve in cars does not apply to bicycles.

It's true that cars use mirrors primarily for backing and checking the blind spot before changing lanes. These things don't apply to bicycles. We normally don't back up and our peripheral vision is good enough to see our so-called blind spot.

But there is other vital information that a cyclist needs from a mirror that cars do not need. When I'm in my car, driving down a two lane road at 60 mph, I don't really care if there is a car 200 or 300 yards behind me. If there is, I'm also not too worried about how fast it's going. In my car, I'm going fast enough that even if the car overtaking me was going 90 or 100 mph, the driver would most likely see me before he rear ended me. In other words, I don't need to worry about getting out of his way any time soon.

Now, if I'm on the same two lane road riding my bicycle, I do worry about cars 200 or 300 yards behind me and how fast they are going. That is where my mirror comes in very handy. If I see a car behind me, I can keep an eye on it with my mirror and ascertain how fast it is going and how soon it will get to me. Moreover, as it approaches me, I can determine if the driver has seen me by whether or not he starts to move over to pass me or slows down due to oncoming traffic that prevents him from passing me.

A few times, I've seen a car in my helmet mirror and watched as the driver did not slow down or move over. With that information, I determined that I needed to get myself onto the unpaved shoulder because there was a good chance that the driver did not see me. In those situations my mirror probably saved my life because just "looking back" would have told me the car was there, but not given me any information about it's speed or driver's attentiveness.

Originally Posted by johnnymoses

I would like to see a new thread for highly recommended lighting systems people are using today, discussed in terms of:

Rechargeable
Single point power switch (I prefer not to spend several minutes clicking and flipping switches for 10+ different lights on my bicycle)
Visibility, range, and lighting spectrum/radius
Mounting capabilities/flexibility (what are all the places on/off the bike these can be mounted, including trailers and helmets)
Reliability and life span
Water and element proof/resistant
Price point
Pros and cons
Availability, warranty, refund/replacement policy, and level of customer service??

Originally Posted by SmallFront

I don't get why blinding motorists with a bright headlight is seen as a safe practice, merely because "it gets their attention". In Germany they have strict rules for bicycle lights, and for good reason. There is nothing worse than meeting a bunch of mountainbikers (or runners, for that matter) coming out from the forest with their gigawatt headlights on, when I try to bike my daughter home. I am not the only one annoyed and blinded, all the cars in both directions are likewise blinded as each mountainbiker (or runner) looks to both sides before crossing the road.

That behaviour will get headlights banned for good, and I hope that the people who think it is perfectly fine to blind fellow road users will find it equally fine to be blinded by a car's high beams while they themselves are operating a motorvehicle. In fact, I find it to be an extremely antisocial behaviour. Headlights (as in helmet lights) have their place, but that place is not on the road.

Okay, rant over, lol.

Originally Posted by lostarchitect

That has more to do with aiming the light rather than the light itself. I have a German light that fits into the codes there, but if it's aimed too high, people will complain.

Originally Posted by SmallFront

I don't get why blinding motorists with a bright headlight is seen as a safe practice, merely because "it gets their attention". In Germany they have strict rules for bicycle lights, and for good reason. There is nothing worse than meeting a bunch of mountainbikers (or runners, for that matter) coming out from the forest with their gigawatt headlights on, when I try to bike my daughter home. I am not the only one annoyed and blinded, all the cars in both directions are likewise blinded as each mountainbiker (or runner) looks to both sides before crossing the road.

That behaviour will get headlights banned for good, and I hope that the people who think it is perfectly fine to blind fellow road users will find it equally fine to be blinded by a car's high beams while they themselves are operating a motorvehicle. In fact, I find it to be an extremely antisocial behaviour. Headlights (as in helmet lights) have their place, but that place is not on the road.

Okay, rant over, lol.

Originally Posted by genec

OK, in America we have no "strict rules for bicycle lights," and somewhat poor motorist training... so while it seems dumb to "blind motorists;" bear in mind that a typical excuse for avoiding any repercussions after a collision with a cyclist is the statement "I didn't see the cyclist." Rather hard to deny seeing a cyclist if the lights from a cyclist hit you right in the eyes.

Originally Posted by SmallFront

Yes, but the "A cyclist blinded me, causing me to swerve and hit the pedestrian/car/other cyclist" may then be the "excuse".

People also often go "I didn't see him (in that other car" when they ram someone in an intersection. Should we have high beams on the sides of cars too?




And some cyclists need to be brow beat before they learn that they do not own the road to the detriment of other road users.



Surely you are not suggesting what I think you are suggesting: That the solution is to blind other road users, whether you are on a bicycle or motorcycle, or in a car or 18-wheeler?


What happened to being able to anticipate the traffic, and stop or slow down if you think someone in an intersection will potentially ram you? Blinding him is the solution? Really? You may have the right of way in a given situation, but that doesn't mean you should blind him if you perceive him to not make good on that.

Oh, and while I'm there, if you only blind the ones you perceive to be coming close to ramming you, how do you keep from blinding other people while doing so, or even just looking while crossing a street/intersection? Do you turn the light on, go from "low" beam to "high" beam? Do you adjust the headlight? No, although it sounds plausible on the surface in a righteous sort of way, the fact is that if you have enough power to blind a motorists in a situation where speed is of the essense, you will also blind other motorists by simply looking around while riding. As a result, I can't take your explanation seriously, nor can I take as anything else than some sort of entitlement. Yes, we have to do something to be safe, but in my neck of the woods, that means being more careful and driving/riding defensively. Not acting aggresively towards other road users.




I don't know, I'm from Denmark, not Germany, and as such we don't have any rules about this blinding of bicycle lights here either, hence my comment about it being banned (both here and in the US) if people persist in such antisocial behaviour.

Originally Posted by genec

Interesting response considering that your earlier comment was "In Germany they have strict rules for bicycle lights, and for good reason."

Originally Posted by genec

Interesting response considering that your earlier comment was "In Germany they have strict rules for bicycle lights, and for good reason."