Freddie wrote:I don't think the comparison is entirely fair. The arguments in favour of headphones are the bad ones.
Take the risk if you must, just don't pretend that it is comparable to going without a helmet. A helmet protects you from a fall (infrequent event), whereby you might hit your head (rare even in a fall, save certain types of mountain biking).
Wearing headphones diminishes your ability at all times to fully understand traffic and risks around you. This cumulative diminishment is worse, since you are wearing headphones the entire time you are cycling. Headphones worn whilst offroading, on the other hand, I don't see a particular problem with.
The lack of a helmet may impact you in certain, thankfully rare circumstances, while wearing headphones hobbles you for as long as you use them. There is a difference between avoiding a potential, infrequent risk and increasing risk at all times for no good reason (save to stave off boredom).
I hadn't intended to compare the wearing of headphones as being better or worse, in safety terms, as the wearing of a helmet. I was comparing the arguments used, which in either case seem to depend more on the application of personal feelings, 'common sense' etc. than solid data and statistical analysis.
pwa wrote:In a car I have three good mirrors, whereas on a bike if you have a mirror it is a tiny thing juddering around and giving you very little information.
I disagree I find a CatEye BM-300 RVM on the bike invaluable and pretty steady in use on all but the roughest of roads and trails.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
pwa wrote:In a car I have three good mirrors, whereas on a bike if you have a mirror it is a tiny thing juddering around and giving you very little information.
I disagree I find a CatEye BM-300 RVM on the bike invaluable and pretty steady in use on all but the roughest of roads and trails.
Would you still think it good if it replaced the three mirrors on your car? I just think three car mirrors each give a steadier, better view and all three together give much better coverage, meaning that you are in a much better position to anticipate the intentions of a vehicle behind.
pwa wrote:In a car I have three good mirrors, whereas on a bike if you have a mirror it is a tiny thing juddering around and giving you very little information.
I disagree I find a CatEye BM-300 RVM on the bike invaluable and pretty steady in use on all but the roughest of roads and trails.
Would you still think it good if it replaced the three mirrors on your car? I just think three car mirrors each give a steadier, better view and all three together give much better coverage, meaning that you are in a much better position to anticipate the intentions of a vehicle behind.
Bikes and cars are two completely different animals that require different methods of riding/driving. I only ever treat a RVM on the bike as supplementary tool which isn't a replacement for direct sight,such as the 'lifesaver' over the shoulder look,which in itself sends a message to traffic behind me when on the bike that I've seen them and that I may be about to make a manoeuvre. Driving a car is a different kettle of fish,where the three mirrors are enough rearward vision needed most of the time,though there are instances when an over the shoulder check is still necessary.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2 wrote:I disagree I find a CatEye BM-300 RVM on the bike invaluable and pretty steady in use on all but the roughest of roads and trails.
Would you still think it good if it replaced the three mirrors on your car? I just think three car mirrors each give a steadier, better view and all three together give much better coverage, meaning that you are in a much better position to anticipate the intentions of a vehicle behind.
Bikes and cars are two completely different animals that require different methods of riding/driving. I only ever treat a RVM on the bike as supplementary tool which isn't a replacement for direct sight,such as the 'lifesaver' over the shoulder look,which in itself sends a message to traffic behind me when on the bike that I've seen them and that I may be about to make a manoeuvre. Driving a car is a different kettle of fish,where the three mirrors are enough rearward vision needed most of the time,though there are instances when an over the shoulder check is still necessary.
I agree with all that, but I simply add that part of the difference is that on a bike it is useful to have sound as well.
I find the thing the often drowns out traffic noise is the wind, I'll sometimes wear low density foam earplugs to lesson the effect. I don't feel any less safe when I do. On some rides I'd quite like to listen to some music but haven't found earphones I'm comfortable with, I'm tempted to try the bone conduction ones though the reports on them are varied. As these leave your ears open, they's hopefully please all parties.
PH wrote:I find the thing the often drowns out traffic noise is the wind, I'll sometimes wear low density foam earplugs to lesson the effect. I don't feel any less safe when I do. On some rides I'd quite like to listen to some music but haven't found earphones I'm comfortable with, I'm tempted to try the bone conduction ones though the reports on them are varied. As these leave your ears open, they's hopefully please all parties.
I remember someone once marketing ear covers that had openings at the rear and were claimed to cut wind noise and allow you to hear things approaching from behind.
PH wrote:I find the thing the often drowns out traffic noise is the wind, I'll sometimes wear low density foam earplugs to lesson the effect. I don't feel any less safe when I do. On some rides I'd quite like to listen to some music but haven't found earphones I'm comfortable with, I'm tempted to try the bone conduction ones though the reports on them are varied. As these leave your ears open, they's hopefully please all parties.
You know when you read something and the best hope is Bob?
PH wrote:..... I'm tempted to try the bone conduction ones though the reports on them are varied.....
If you do try them do let us (me) know how you get on with them (quality, staying in place, etc.) as they are something I regularly consider, investigate (again) but never quite seem to go ahead and purchase (normally as something else crops-up to distract me).
