Why we all need an Airzound
 

From my commute yesterday. It isn't totally obvious in the video, but at about 0:53 the girl in front of me starts frantically dinging her silly little bell to try to get the attention of a driver who was pushing her off the road.

I gave a short blast with my Airzound, and all the guys windows instantly blew out. His skull caved in from the pressure and by the time I passed him, the driver's seat was completely empty. It's as though he never existed. Unfortunately you can't really see that in the video, but it's true.

For $20, why would any commuter not have an Airzound (or something similar)? I don't use mine much, but when you need it, you really need it!

I guess if you ride like that, squeezing between cars, and hugging the curb to snake around them, then yes, you need a loud horn.

As opposed to what? Sitting for 30 minutes in a traffic jam?

I don't have anything against filtering when it can be done safely (only when cars are stopped, and never through the middle of two traffic lanes), but have to agree with stdlrf11 that's pushing your luck. The airzound is cool, but the rider ahead of you was already safely past the SUV when you honked.

My point is that SHE could have used an Airzound instead of a goofy bell. I know my honk didn't really accomplish anything there.

As for the filtering, that's really the only reasonable way to deal with that situation. That road doesn't even have a sidewalk until after the light.

I've got one of these HornIts.

Great in traffic, but don't use it on the MUP, you'll give an old lady a heart attack :)

Sometimes when the traffic on freeways in California is moving slowly, motorcycles "filter" through on the dashed lines, kind of weaving back and forth at about 30 MPH more than the speed of other traffic. Used to scare the hell out of me when I was driving.

and then the CHP on another motorcycle also splits the lane and gives you a fat citation and court date to appear.

Actually, this is mostly legal: California Motorcyclist Safety Program

edit: I apologize for this derailling the discussion.

Motorcyclists are not allowed to filter here, or anywhere else in Canada. I think they should be - within reason. The UK seems to have a pretty decent balance.

California is the only place I've ever been to that allows it. I understood that the guidelines told me I wasn't responsible for the motorcyclist, but that didn't help me put my guard down at all. My need to constantly assume the responsibility of other road users is part of the reason I hated driving, and why I'm so relieved to live in a place where I don't feel I have to drive.

I'm not sure about Sweden, but here in the south, motorcycles are really uncommon, even more uncommon than cars. I also won't have a car here, and don't even have my bikes yet!

The riding in heavy traffic portrayed in the video is absolutely normal for an urban cyclist and is actually quite safe. I personally don't use a horn but sometimes I think about it. To ride less aggressively in a situation like that seems (to me anyway) to negate a lot of the advantages of bicycling over driving. Also, I don't think motorists are as upset about it as we cyclists sometimes think. One thing is that the camera angle makes it seem a little more "hair-raising" than it actually is.

I'm only on the tablet, but I saw someone on a bicycle squeeze past an SUV that was over towards the right still in their lane rather than an SUV squeezing a bicycle over. The SUV driver did nothing wrong.

Is that Richmond, heading toward the Knight Street bridge? Could you get some shots of the beautiful Magnolias, Forsythias, and Cherry tree blossoms next time?:p

I guess I'm pretty lucky in Surrey; I at least have a bike lane almost the whole way to work, but still dream of moving somewhere with less traffic.

The only time I say "oh maaan" to myself while driving is, after waiting to find a safe place to pass a cyclist, I get by, then at the next red light they squeeze by and I have to do it all over again.

Hmmm. Let's suppose the premise of the o.p. is true. I'm not saying it is. But, let's humor the o.p. and say it is. Now what? Most cyclists don't have Airzounds. So... should they be compulsory, the way bells and flashers are? Where I live you can be fined $200 for not having either a flasher visible at greater than 200 yards, or a bell. Should that be instead: flasher visible at greater than 200 yards and horn louder than 120db?? OK I guess. I mean... cars have to have horns. Doesn't mean you have to use them. I don't. I've driven for decades without ever once using a horn in anger or for any other reason than a polite shout out to people I know. My singles don't have bells and although they are "required" equipment, no LEO has ever made an issue of it. One of my tandems has a nice bell (Incredibell) that I put on the stoker bars so my wife can entertain gawkers. In decades of cycling in NYC, NJ, MI and OR I have never felt the need to have a loud horn, or any other kind of horn for that matter, on a bicycle. To each their own. The FAIL point of this thread is that the o.p. extrapolates that because THEY are so fearful in traffic, and so lacking in defensive riding ability, that this implicates the whole of the cycling community by extension.

H

No, this is what you need: Bicycle Train Horns Attack the Streets 1 - YouTube

I didn't take Mr.Hairy Legs literally anyway, I just thought he meant useful.

I just gave my daughter a bike bell for her birthday and it reads right on the package that it is intended for MUTs.

You guys do have a valid point... The first rider should have either waited or passed on the left as I did. But I have had similar situations in the past where larger vehicles veer to the right into shoulders/bike lanes just as I am passing them, and there really is no way to predict this. Also, the purpose of the horn is not to get mad at drivers or tell them they did something wrong; it's to alert them to your presence. Some drivers may misinterpret this, but that's their problem.

Anyway, this is all getting "overthunk" as usual. My point is that drivers don't hear little weenie bells, so don't bother trying.

Certainly! It's been a nice couple of weeks.

http://s23.postimg.org/yrslixtjv/cherryblossoms.jpg

:thumb:

I was an NCO;my voice is much louder than an Airzound.

No joking,I've actually made people in cars jump.

If you pass cars on the RIGHT hand side, like she was, you can't expect them to expect you. I often filter like that, but I just stop when I see a car turning right - since I know I'm not supposed to pass cars on the right hand side. Using a loud horn when filtering like that would make me feel like a bully - no better than impatient drivers honking me to get off the road for slowing them down.

That video is vastly different from my commute in many ways.

This thread should be 'Why we need decent bicycling infrastructure.'

I think you're making an inference where none was intended. The OP said he doesn't understand why someone wouldn't have a sound signalling device given the relative cost. He gives an example of where it's useful, but it's just one example. I use my horn occasionally, even if I'm not passing on the right or lane splitting. I would think have a sound signal would be a really practical asset when practicing this defensive riding you speak of.

Since I'm not closed in a glass & metal box when riding a bicycle, so sound is not damped, I can use the sound signal I always carry, even when on foot.