Road issues that irritate me.......

RainyDay

talking_walnut wrote: »

Your awareness is more impaired when you use headphone than when you use speakers. There's no doubt about that (unless your headphones are pure sh1te).

Is this personal opinion, or do you have any source for this?

The King of Moo

talking_walnut wrote: »

Your awareness is more impaired when you use headphone than when you use speakers. There's no doubt about that (unless your headphones are pure sh1te). Granted a modern car might be sound-proofed enough to make this point moot, but at the end of the day, you're the one out there on the bike, with nothing between you and the multi-tonne cars/trucks/buses except for your lycra. Being in the right isn't going to help you when you're under a truck.

At least leave one ear out if you're going to wear headphones. For your own sake.

Here's a pretty simple survey to test decibel levels of noise heard by drivers with and without music on the stereo, and cyclists with ear buds and with in-ear earphones.

https://rideons.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/an-ear-on-the-traffic/

Conclusions

Based on these relatively simple tests, it is fair to conclude that:

A bike rider with ear-bud earphones playing music at a reasonable volume hears much more outside noise than a car driver, even when that driver has no music playing.
A bike rider with in-ear earphones playing music at a reasonable volume hears about the same outside noise as a car driver with no music playing, but more than a car driver playing music.
Ear-bud earphones set at a reasonable volume still allow riders to clearly hear the warning sounds of other riders.

Also, they defined "a reasonable volume" as 3 clicks below the maximum on an iPod, which is pretty loud to me.

CaptainR

If you're relying on hearing to keep you aware of your surroundings while you're on the road then youre doing it wrong. I wear a motorcycle helmet with ear plugs and have never had a case of a car sneaking up on me because I couldn't hear it. Its why deaf people drive and blind people dont.

I've also read that deaf people are no more likely to be in an accident than someone with hearing.

Now a bicycle is a different animal because they don't have mirrors (which they should) so they have to rely on sound which is an awful idea in my opinion because you can't hear a car and gauge just how close they are to you by ear.

Bit of a ramble I admit but I have had a few people with full car licenses saying my ear plugs are dangerous because you won't hear any cars near you.

Fratton Fred

I have just seen it again this evening. Some gormless ****wit who manages to park their nissan micra in such a way that it takes up two parking bays.

I mean, how the **** do people do that, it must take a lot of skill to squeeze a small car in to two parking bays.

Or ignorance/stupidity.

SixSixSix

CFlat wrote: »

Politeness, courtesy and consideration are synonyms.

Synonyms of what? I don't follow what point you are making.

CFlat wrote: »

I'm not going to worry about failing my driving test at this stage as I did it a few decades ago!

Ah I see! One of those that believe you learned so you could pass a test only. You did pass a test?

CFlat wrote: »

It's hard to believe that a driving tester would fail you on something like that.

Well if you go about "Beckoning others" during a driving test the tester has it specified as a point on his marking sheet - including Grade 3 option - immediate fail.

CFlat wrote: »

Maybe they are worried about the car behind you not knowing what's going on and rear ending you. In real life, that's what drivers do.

And you're not worried about such a situation? That was why I suggested you be predictable - if you have the right of way you SHOULD take it! It is expected of you.

CFlat wrote: »

In real life, that's what drivers do.
I'm not spiritual or anything but I believe there is 'road karma' when you let people out at junctions or trying to merge into traffic. Someone down the road will let you out or flash you if there's a traffic camera van ahead

Yes unfortunately I see it day in day out - gobsh1tes stopping for no good reason other than to give away their right of way! Stuff the queue of vehicles following behind. Where's the politeness to those following behind?
Karma working to increase the number of those said gobsh1tes doesn't really fit with my definition of karma!

talking_walnut

RainyDay wrote: »

Is this personal opinion, or do you have any source for this?

Really? Is that a serious question? One is a set of speakers jammed against your ears and the other is a set of speakers not jammed against your ears.

Can you hear more ambient noise in a sound proof room or with ear plugs in?

Veloce150

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Occasionally there will be someone coming the other direction waiting to turn into an estate and they can't get through ...It takes no more than 3 seconds for me to slow enough for them to execute their turn and then keep driving,

And for the driver to t-bone a cyclist coming up your inside in the bicycle lane...

Colser

Veloce150 wrote:

And for the driver to t-bone a cyclist coming up your inside in the bicycle lane...

Wouldn't it be the cyclist hitting the car in that situation?Not saying its right but "expect the unexpected" and all that...

talking_walnut

The King of Moo wrote: »

Here's a pretty simple survey to test decibel levels of noise heard by drivers with and without music on the stereo, and cyclists with ear buds and with in-ear earphones.

https://rideons.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/an-ear-on-the-traffic/



Also, they defined "a reasonable volume" as 3 clicks below the maximum on an iPod, which is pretty loud to me.

It's not about how much you can hear compared to how much a person in a car can hear. A car driver can afford to hear less because they're in a car. You're on a bike. Use every advantage you can.

CaptainR wrote: »

If you're relying on hearing to keep you aware of your surroundings while you're on the road then youre doing it wrong. I wear a motorcycle helmet with ear plugs and have never had a case of a car sneaking up on me because I couldn't hear it. Its why deaf people drive and blind people dont.

I've also read that deaf people are no more likely to be in an accident than someone with hearing.

Now a bicycle is a different animal because they don't have mirrors (which they should) so they have to rely on sound which is an awful idea in my opinion because you can't hear a car and gauge just how close they are to you by ear.

Bit of a ramble I admit but I have had a few people with full car licenses saying my ear plugs are dangerous because you won't hear any cars near you.

I didn't mean you should rely on sound/hearing. I mean that you should take advantage of the sense and use it to help you stay safe.


As I said before, it doesn't matter how "in the right" you a car is hitting you at 40+kmph.

The King of Moo

talking_walnut wrote: »

It's not about how much you can hear compared to how much a person in a car can hear. A car driver can afford to hear less because they're in a car. You're on a bike. Use every advantage you can.



I didn't mean you should rely on sound/hearing. I mean that you should take advantage of the sense and use it to help you stay safe.


As I said before, it doesn't matter how "in the right" you a car is hitting you at 40+kmph.

And the study shows that you can still hear a person shout pretty clearly: what more do you need to hear than that? Even if one were to put the volume to the maximum, you can still hear engines and traffic light chimes. I've just cycled home with the volume on my iPod at the level they recommended, out of curiosity. It was higher than I usually have it and I could still hear everything around me. Most earphones, apart from noise-cancelling ones, are specifically designed not to filter out ambient sound.

Pinch Flat

CaptainR wrote: »

Now a bicycle is a different animal because they don't have mirrors (which they should)

Personal opinion or based on research? A bicycle, unlike a motorbike, has no suspension - so the mirror is going to rattle to the extent that it's rendered almost useless.

A glance over the shoulder is of more use, in my own experience.

talking_walnut

The King of Moo wrote: »

And the study shows that you can still hear a person shout pretty clearly: what more do you need to hear than that? Even if one were to put the volume to the maximum, you can still hear engines and traffic light chimes. I've just cycled home with the volume on my iPod at the level they recommended, out of curiosity. It was higher than I usually have it and I could still hear everything around me. Most earphones, apart from noise-cancelling ones, are specifically designed not to filter out ambient sound.

That last part is definitely not true. Try and buy earphone that do (passively) block out noise and you'll see how expensive they quickly become. Most cheaper earphones don't appear to be designed at all


Are you trying to say that you can hear equally as well with and without earphones in? It's not possible. Sound is a waveform subject to interference. The very fact that you've something covering your ears is going to block some noise. By reducing the amount you can hear, you're impairing one of the senses you use to navigate the world.

You also pointed out in your earlier post that style of music affects your cycle style which shows that some part of your brain (either consciously or subconsciously) is focussed on the music and responding to it.

I sometimes cycle with one in. This does reduce my ability to hear what's going on but I've decided that it's to an acceptable level. I also stick to talk based audio as I don't have to have the volume as high.


At the end of the day, do whatever you want. Just don't be naive about the choices you make.

Colser

Pinch Flat wrote:

A glance over the shoulder is of more use, in my own experience.

I hate when cyclists look over their shoulder because they usually wobble out when they do ,maybe not all but most that I'm stuck behind anyway.

The King of Moo

talking_walnut wrote: »

That last part is definitely not true. Try and buy earphone that do (passively) block out noise and you'll see how expensive they quickly become. Most cheaper earphones don't appear to be designed at all


Are you trying to say that you can hear equally as well with and without earphones in? It's not possible. Sound is a waveform subject to interference. The very fact that you've something covering your ears is going to block some noise. By reducing the amount you can hear, you're impairing one of the senses you use to navigate the world.

You also pointed out in your earlier post that style of music affects your cycle style which shows that some part of your brain (either consciously or subconsciously) is focussed on the music and responding to it.

I sometimes cycle with one in. This does reduce my ability to hear what's going on but I've decided that it's to an acceptable level. I also stick to talk based audio as I don't have to have the volume as high.


At the end of the day, do whatever you want. Just don't be naive about the choices you make.

Which applies equally to cars.

Look, a cyclist with earphones (unless they've got noise-cancelling earbuds wedged into their ears and volume up full, which I've never heard of happening) can hear ambient noise perfectly fine, usually moreso than a driver.

I can hear traffic, I can hear voices, I can hear relevant chimes and sirens.

Of course I'm partly focused on the music, just as I am when I'm driving.
But the human brain is great at compartmentalising. I can passively listen to music while still taking in the noises around me, just as I can when I drive.

Listening to music is functionally no different to listening to music while driving, except in that it might be less of a risk as cyclists are more exposed to ambient sound.

Cyclists listening to music is simply not an issue.

NiallBoo

SixSixSix wrote: »

Yes unfortunately I see it day in day out - gobsh1tes stopping for no good reason other than to give away their right of way! Stuff the queue of vehicles following behind. Where's the politeness to those following behind?
Karma working to increase the number of those said gobsh1tes doesn't really fit with my definition of karma!

It's especially annoying when someone with nobody/1/2 people behind them stops to let you in.

It would have been quicker for them to drive by than to wait for them to slow down and stop, just because they want to feel like they're doing you a favour.

RainyDay

talking_walnut wrote: »

Really? Is that a serious question? One is a set of speakers jammed against your ears and the other is a set of speakers not jammed against your ears.

Can you hear more ambient noise in a sound proof room or with ear plugs in?

Thanks - so it's definitely just personal opinion then. Good to know.

Colser wrote: »

Wouldn't it be the cyclist hitting the car in that situation?Not saying its right but "expect the unexpected" and all that...

I suppose on that technicality, it depends who reaches the collision point first, but it is interesting to note the rush to blame the cyclist. Before we get to 'expect the unexpected', how about drivers just start to 'expect the expected' - given that it is pretty well expected that cyclists will filter up a line of slow/stopped traffic on the inside?

Colser wrote: »

I hate when cyclists look over their shoulder because they usually wobble out when they do ,maybe not all but most that I'm stuck behind anyway.

Cyclists wobble all the time for lots of reasons - wind, potholes, avoiding glass, whatever - it goes with the territory - which is why the RSA tell you to leave 1.5m passing space. I'm not quite sure why it impacts you when a cyclist in front 'wobbles' slightly? Does it bother you when a car changes their lane position slightly?

Colser

RainyDay wrote:

Cyclists wobble all the time for lots of reasons - wind, potholes, avoiding glass, whatever - it goes with the territory - which is why the RSA tell you to leave 1.5m passing space. I'm not quite sure why it impacts you when a cyclist in front 'wobbles' slightly? Does it bother you when a car changes their lane position slightly?

It bothers me because no matter what happens between a cyclist and a car the driver will always be "wrong" imo..at least with a car collision the person that IS wrong is usually deemed to be wrong.TBH cyclists make me nervous on a narrow road and don't always help when they could e.g. maybe pull in slightly when it's obviously safe for them to do so ect.

Seth Brundle

Colser wrote: »

It bothers me because no matter what happens between a cyclist and a car the driver will always be "wrong" imo..at least with a car collision the person that IS wrong is usually deemed to be wrong.TBH cyclists make me nervous on a narrow road and don't always help when they could e.g. maybe pull in slightly when it's obviously safe for them to do so ect.

Pull in where?
As for you being nervous on a country road, have you reason to be nervous? Are you likely to encounter cyclists and if so why are you nervous? I think this is a strange emoticon to have whilst driving unless you are driving I a manner likely to hit one of them!

pablo128

RainyDay wrote: »

Thanks - so it's definitely just personal opinion then. Good to know.


I suppose on that technicality, it depends who reaches the collision point first, but it is interesting to note the rush to blame the cyclist. Before we get to 'expect the unexpected', how about drivers just start to 'expect the expected' - given that it is pretty well expected that cyclists will filter up a line of slow/stopped traffic on the inside?

Cyclists wobble all the time for lots of reasons - wind, potholes, avoiding glass, whatever - it goes with the territory - which is why the RSA tell you to leave 1.5m passing space. I'm not quite sure why it impacts you when a cyclist in front 'wobbles' slightly? Does it bother you when a car changes their lane position slightly?

Why is it a metre and a half for motorists but cyclists will squeeze into any gap they can?
As a cyclist, do you leave a metre and a half when passing pedestrians or vehicles?

Colser

kbannon wrote:

Pull in where? As for you being nervous on a country road, have you reason to be nervous? Are you likely to encounter cyclists and if so why are you nervous? I think this is a strange emoticon to have whilst driving unless you are driving I a manner likely to hit one of them!

Let's say a city street then..if I'm turning left at a junction I have to spend more time looking in the inside for a cyclist to come whizzing up than I do checking out pedestrians ,cars ect..I've often had to stop and wait because the cyclist didn't bother checking if anyone had an indicator on and was turning in front of them.

Seth Brundle

Colser wrote: »

Let's say a city street then..if I'm turning left at a junction I have to spend more time looking in the inside for a cyclist to come whizzing up than I do checking out pedestrians ,cars ect..I've often had to stop and wait because the cyclist didn't bother checking if anyone had an indicator on and was turning in front of them.

I drive throughout Dublin and don't need to spend excessive amount of time looking for them (or motorcyclists or pedestrians or...).

Never once felt nervous of them whilst driving. Maybe you should reevaluate your driving skills.

Colser

kbannon wrote:

Never once felt nervous of them whilst driving. Maybe you should reevaluate your driving skills.

That's what I'll do..thanks for the advice.

Seth Brundle

Colser wrote: »

That's what I'll do..thanks for the advice.

One down. A few million left to get off my roads!

Colser

kbannon wrote:

One down. A few million left to get off my roads!

So you agree that cyclists think they own the road..at least we have something in common.

AndyBoBandy

Taking absolutely no prisoners today.... ^^

Pinch Flat

Colser wrote: »

I hate when cyclists look over their shoulder because they usually wobble out when they do ,maybe not all but most that I'm stuck behind anyway.

I take it you cycle then and have first hand experience of the benefits of a mirror on the handle bars versus looking over your shoulder?

How long do you get stuck behind a cyclist? I take it it's a daily occurrence that eats up hours of your time? I can never understand how people will happily sit for hours in bumper to bumper traffic, yet a cyclist "holding them up" and their world collapses around them.

Seth Brundle

Colser wrote: »

So you agree that cyclists think they own the road..at least we have something in common.

I think that there are asshole cyclists but more drivers are simply incompetent, most completely unaware of their inabilities. These are far more dangerous than any cyclist!

RainyDay

Colser wrote: »

It bothers me because no matter what happens between a cyclist and a car the driver will always be "wrong" imo..at least with a car collision the person that IS wrong is usually deemed to be wrong.TBH cyclists make me nervous on a narrow road and don't always help when they could e.g. maybe pull in slightly when it's obviously safe for them to do so ect.

Your lack of confidence is your problem, and it is not up to other road users to give you confidence. There is no 'presumed liability' in Ireland, so motorists are not always deemed to be wrong, though research into causes of car/bike collisions suggests that motorists are more often at fault than not. Cyclists won't pull in because that encourages motorists to overtake where they don't have enough room. If you can't overtake, you wait until you can.

How often do you move over in heavy urban traffic to let a fast cyclist pass through?

RainyDay

pablo128 wrote: »

Why is it a metre and a half for motorists but cyclists will squeeze into any gap they can?
As a cyclist, do you leave a metre and a half when passing pedestrians or vehicles?

Because they are two different manoevres, with different levels of risk involved! Do I really need to spell that out, or do you go by some kind of childish tit-for-tat rule on the roads?

StewartGriffin

Colser wrote: »

It bothers me because no matter what happens between a cyclist and a car the driver will always be "wrong" imo..at least with a car collision the person that IS wrong is usually deemed to be wrong.TBH cyclists make me nervous on a narrow road and don't always help when they could e.g. maybe pull in slightly when it's obviously safe for them to do so ect.

kbannon wrote: »

Pull in where?
As for you being nervous on a country road, have you reason to be nervous? Are you likely to encounter cyclists and if so why are you nervous? I think this is a strange emoticon to have whilst driving unless you are driving I a manner likely to hit one of them!

As he clearly stated above: pull in slightly where it's safe to do so.
And he never said anything about a country road.
And it's obvious to any one reading this that he is nervous because the cyclist might do something unpredictable, thereby causing an incident.

kbannon wrote: »

Maybe you should reevaluate your driving skills.

Maybe you should re evaluate your reading comprehension skills?