Well, the rear brake handle is typically on the right, though that can be changed. And I’m no biker, so I’m probably doing it wrong, but I typically apply more braking power to my rear wheel than to my front, to avoid going ass over teakettle.
And just because of American traffic patterns, we typically signal with our left hands.
The brakes are set up so that the one leading from the right hand goes to the back wheel, because people squeeze just a fraction tighter with their dominant hand, and we don’t want cyclists going head-over-handbars when the front wheel stops more quickly than the back.
This means that a left-handed cyclist has to know to be extra careful when stopping suddenly (say a car or pedestrian pulls out right in front of you).
Ok, here’s a quick, page one Google result on turn signals:
[quote]Research from the Society of Automotive Engineers says failure to use
those turn signals results in more than twice the number of accidents
that are caused by distracted driving.[/quote]
So, that study found that lack of use of turn signals causes 2,000,000 accidents per year. And that’s just people who don’t use them, not the accident rate if they were eliminated entirely.
Maybe there is a type of turn signal that doesn’t flash that could work? Worth looking into. But given that it will probably be less effective at getting attention of other drivers, accident rates, in the aggregate, would go up. It would be great if there’s a solution that is just as effective as current tech, but also works for you. Perhaps it will take autonomous driving tech?
That’s an interesting thought about the brakes.
In Europe, they’re by default setup opposite of here- motorcycle style (left rear, right front).
Indeed, given that maximum braking power is found via the front wheel, having your stronger hand on the front brake is a small advantage.
Drivetrain on the right side of the bike is the result of righty-tighty threading on parts.
I don’t see how much of a difference that would make. If you’re squeezing the front brake hard enough that the rear tire leaves the ground, would it really matter how hard you’re squeezing the rear brake?
That’s true, and also why the front brakes of cars do the vast majority of stopping work, and thus wear out several times faster than the rear ones. But unless someone is used to rapidly adjusting their center of gravity when having to perform a panic stop using the front brake, it’s pretty easy to tumble over the handlebars. My habit has been to apply the rear brakes fairly strongly, and then apply front brakes when and as needed for the situation at hand. I do wear out the rear brakes much faster, but I haven’t crashed my bike since 1982.
Sure, most bikes with coaster brakes are for kids, but still, coaster brakes are rear-wheel-only. Braking the rear wheel slows and stops you without generally adversely affecting handling. Braking with the front wheel requires a bit more skill. It’s not rocket surgery, but still.
I do that. Cross platform continuity.
If my bike isn’t up on the front wheel durning braking, I end up wondering “did I actually have to brake there, or could I have done that flat-out?”
/jest
/maybe
/youdon’tknowwhatI’veseen
One of my bikes was set up like that.
See the problem?
I suppose that if I got in front of a group of cyclists and decided to control where I should be overtaken, while driving downhill at 12 mph, that would be my privilege?
This type of attitude is verboten in yoga mom parenting.
I suspect you’re a more serious cyclist than I am.
(That’s not my bike, just my road attitude.)
This just happened to a friend earlier this year up in Duluth, MN.
UMD mourns staff member killed while bicycling in Hermantown | Duluth News Tribune
The driver eventually got charged with misdemeanor Careless Driving and Failure to Keep to the Right – he never even hit the brakes.
Oh man. I was totally hoping that was your ride. That thing is great.
I used to be oh=so-serious about riding, but at some point I decided that was a little silly for me- biking was fun, and a little ridiculous, and fun. So that’s how I treat it.
As a result, I’ve developed a hearty appreciation for all manner of things that used to irritate me- triathletes, recumbents, hybrids… they’re all cool to me now. And the weirder the thing, the more neat I think it is. Sidecar BMX? Hell yes. Tandem recumbent? Yup.
Except fat bikes. Those are weird and I don’t/won’t understand them.
Okay, now I gotta see sidecar BMX. That can’t possibly be a thi–
Awright internet, now I’ve seen everything.
You’re welcome.
It’s not on pubmed.
It’s not comparable either.
First, as long as these are supposed to be signals, those who aren’t endangered by the flashing safetyweapons may take the flash as a signal that they’re turning, and the absence as a signal that they’re not turning; if these weren’t supposed to be signals, people would take the absence as no info.
I think there’s an important difference between problems with false info and problems with no info.
Second, those of us endangered by the safetyweapons aren’t allowed to drive. [and don’t have access to public transportation either, since bus and train stations are full of flashing safetyweapons].
Third, since it’s impossible to see near flashing safetyweapons, how do they make things more visible? I recall an old Nova special on the brain, when I was a kid, which had one part about using similar lights to make military vehicles less visible on the battlefield.
Are the effects you feel noticeable at a specific frequency? Could it be possible to develop eyewear that shifts those frequencies out of a range that’s harmful for you? I’m thinking of something like the glasses certain types of 3D tv use…
I use Polare Cocoons outside and tend to have less trouble with a blue-green tint on my computer and more trouble with f.lux’s reddish tints, but it’s a slight effect.
I have a lot of trouble with 1 hz and above for blink frequency.
