Headphones and Cycling! Is it safe?

[Alien8]

... and I'm closer to this than you might think given that it's hard to look back on the bent, so I compensate with better signalling.

Does this, the restricted ability to look behind, make you feel more vulnerable when manoeuvring on your bent compared to when you're riding an upright?

I think I would find it very disturbing if I couldn't physically turn to look behind when manoeuvring in traffic.

 

[Norm]

I tend to indicate this by sticking my arm out before I change lane or direction. far more definite (no might caveat needed with an arm stuck out) and visible than a head turn, which would last for less time than an outstretched arm and which is far more easily missed by the driver or misinterpreted as a routine backward glance just to see whats there (as per most decent motorists who use their car mirrors at other times than when executing a change manouvre)

I see that you are responding to something in your reading, something which was specifically not in what I wrote. Moving across a lane is not the same as changing lane. As BM says, there are also benefits of being seen to take some personal responsibility.

If there is traffic around which could benefit from my signalling, I will signal appropriately when changing lanes.

When I'm moving around within the lane, to overtake parked vehicles, move to primary etc, I usually don't signal.

 

[BentMikey]

Does this, the restricted ability to look behind, make you feel more vulnerable when manoeuvring on your bent compared to when you're riding an upright?<br /><br />I think I would find it very disturbing if I couldn't physically turn to look behind when manoeuvring in traffic.<br /><br /><br />

I take it that you drive, and I assume you don't find it very disturbing to use the mirrors in your car?

I can look behind if I want to, it's just much easier to use mirrors and blind spot checks like I would when driving. So, no, I don't feel more vulnerable, in fact I feel considerably safer on the bent than on an upright.

 

[BentMikey]

When I'm moving around within the lane, to overtake parked vehicles, move to primary etc, I usually don't signal.<br />

Is that best practice though, assuming there is another vehicle behind you, for example?

 

[Alien8]

... in fact I feel considerably safer on the bent than on an upright.

Why's that then?

Having never ridden a bent I'm just interested in the differences between upright and bent riding - both physical and behavioural.

 

[Norm]

Is that best practice though, assuming there is another vehicle behind you, for example?

Well, obviously I think so or I wouldn't do it.

It's something I was advised for motorbike training, signal to change lanes, life-saver to check that the tarmac is clear when moving within your lane.

I wouldn't advise / expect everyone to do it, even though it serves me well. You need to be pretty confident, possibly assertive but, hey, some people think that Cyclecraft is the cure to all cycling problems. None of this stuff can be considered a blanket approach.

Sometimes, I do signal when moving within my lane, but it's often with only one or two fingers and that's also not something you'll find in the Highway Code.

 

[Jezston]

you did. Zefal Spy mirror for any bike type or Zefal Doobck for flat/slightly moustachioed bars - no arms between clamp/plug and mirror to shake about so both are remarkably stable even on the worst roads that I've been on & over 1/4 mile of cobbles.

I shall check these out. Would certainly be handy.

I've not read this through from the start and might even have posted way back when on this, but on impairments:

Also the distraction of music piped direct into your head is more akin to a mobile phone pressed to your ear than ambient speakers otherwise car stereos would be prohibited and there'd be plenty of the grumpy rider types haranguing motorists over their radios in the same way they do their mobiles.

Would any of the pro-headphoners ever dare to cycle with one eye taped shut or with something cutting out half the vision in both of them, or a virtual reality goggle on, playing a film you really like direct into one eye or partly into both?

I shall give you the benefit of the doubt as you haven't read the rest of this lengthy thread so won't have seen my rebuffals to such statements! But, I shall quote an earlier answer I gave:

Some people seem to be under the impression that headphones to your ears are like blindfolds to your eyes. Unless you are wearing heavy duty noise-cancellation or deep in-ear headphones, your typical 'open backed' headphones don't cut out external sound at all, they just add some music on top of it, at a level you feel comfortable with. Also, the foam pads reduce wind noise.

 

[nilling]

Only tried it once on my commute, but found it all too distracting. Ear piece kept falling out then couldn't FF past duff tracks. Much prefer my own karaoke 'internal jukebox'

 

[Jezston]

Only tried it once on my commute, but found it all too distracting. Ear piece kept falling out then couldn't FF past duff tracks. Much prefer my own karaoke 'internal jukebox'

Get a pair of these then like me
http://www.jabra.com...abrabt620s.aspx
(WARNING - website blasts out loud music without warning after a few seconds)

Bluetooth so no cables, controls on the headphones themselves, fit well with helmets!

 

[Bigsharn]

@Sean, I don't see why headphones or speakers are any different really?

In my opinion, there is no difference but in the eyes of the law you can legally have AN earpiece, but not two. Speakers on the other hand are completely legal to have either side of you, as long as they're not in direct contact with the body... Depending on the type of headphone (be it noise cancelling, in-ear, over the ear making a vacuum so only the sound from the speaker goes in)

 

[Ravenbait]

In my opinion, there is no difference but in the eyes of the law you can legally have AN earpiece, but not two. Speakers on the other hand are completely legal to have either side of you, as long as they're not in direct contact with the body... Depending on the type of headphone (be it noise cancelling, in-ear, over the ear making a vacuum so only the sound from the speaker goes in)

Which piece of legislation? I was unaware of there being a legal aspect.

Sam

 

[ian_uk]

In my opinion, there is no difference but in the eyes of the law you can legally have AN earpiece, but not two. Speakers on the other hand are completely legal to have either side of you, as long as they're not in direct contact with the body... Depending on the type of headphone (be it noise cancelling, in-ear, over the ear making a vacuum so only the sound from the speaker goes in)

Which piece of legislation? I was unaware of there being a legal aspect.

Sam

I don't think there is a specific law against the use of headphones, but in the UK, they can prosecute you for 'riding without due care and attention' since a bicycle is considered a vehicle.

 

[Jezston]

Which piece of legislation? I was unaware of there being a legal aspect.

Sam

+1

You aren't confusing some piece of legislation regarding handsfree phone headsets in cars are you?

 

[Bigsharn]

Nope, working in PCV you learn stupid, petty bits of legislation that people can (and do) lose their licenses over, and one of them is having two earpieces in at once.

 

[gaz]

Nope, working in PCV you learn stupid, petty bits of legislation that people can (and do) lose their licenses over, and one of them is having two earpieces in at once.

But it's not against said legislation to do so on a bicycle.