Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:00:49 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 18:15:53 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 5:54:10 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:45:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 7:23:11 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 18:55:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/22/2019 2:10 PM, Tom Kunich wrote: While sunglasses are usually valued for their ability to shade the eyes from glare that is not the first use of them on a bike. On a bike you need them to shield the eyes from wind and road debris that might be kicked up from passing cars or the wind. They are especially important descending when you can be traveling 40 mph or more in the open air. This used to be pretty well understood but it seems to have been thrown aside. None of the reasonably priced glasses are large enough to prevent a windstorm pulling around your glasses and blinding you at critical times. The glasses that used to work well - Oakley, Bolle and Smith are now of breath-taking expense and they TOO are now reducing their sizes. I cannot even find a Bolle Contour anymore. Even the $200 Oakley is too small.. Another thing - as a cyclist you often ride from light to shadow and out into the bright sunlight again. Heavily tinted sunglasses makes the road turn totally invisible in these shadow conditions. California roads filled with potholes and broken whiskey bottles are not amiable to having your sight hindered. On the first ride on a set of 600 Campy wheels I ran over a missing utility road opening and broke several spokes and could barely make it home. I had it repaired but it now breaks spokes so regularly that I no longer use it. The polarized glasses I've used do not seem to provide any improvements. Though the blue tinted ones seem to be a happy medium. One would think that the Chinese who are generally really fast on the uptake would jump on this market but they too are both skimping with the size of the lens and even worse yet the optical characteristics can have you seeing double. And the latest fad of very wide side pieces can rob you entirely of peripheral vision. I bought several pairs of $2 Chinese sunglasses in the hope that one would work. One was Tifosi and it is pretty good as long as I keep the speed below 30. Another is an unnamed brand. Has anyone had any good luck with sunglasses lately? I've had excellent luck with "sunglasses" since I started riding avidly in about 1973. But my "sunglasses" have always been my regular glasses with photochromic lenses. For me, it's just one less thing to worry about. These work with any bike I ride, for day or night riding, they work with my home-made eyeglass mirrors (one stored in each bike), they never get misplaced because they're always in front of my eyes, they don't clash with my street clothes nor my riding clothes, etc. I suppose in almost five decades I've had a couple incidents of grit or a small insect getting in my eye, but it's never been more than a minor irritation, and it's been rare enough that I don't feel the need for fancy special protection. YMMV. I don;t wear glasses for normal vision - only when things get too close - but have been quiter happy with "safety glasses. They are shaped to provide eye safety, i.e., heep the crud out of the eyes, and seem to have rasonably good sun protection. AND, are nrmally quite reasonible in price :-) see https://www.amazon.com/GaoCold-Outdo...9194420&sr=1-6 -- I've been riding with safety glasses for years. Cheap, lightweight, wrap around, ANSI Z87 rated. Cheap enough that you can afford to lose or break a couple of pair a year. I prefer clear lenses - my eyes don't react well to sunglasses when riding in and out of shade, which doesn't seem to be a problem with clear lenses. I ride sunglass versions when I know I'm going to be mostly in the sun. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003OBZ1XI..._t1_B00323LZVU I find that, for whatever reason, I seldom need, or use, colored glasses. In fact the one time that I really need them is early in the morning when the sun is barely over the horizon and I am heading east :-) Really dark sunglasses are bad in hard dappled light, which you probably get there in the jungle. I get that in the forest with my prescription sun glasses. It's hard to see what's happening in the shadows, which makes fast descents under the trees a little hairy. -- Jay Beattie. I tried for many years to buy a "jungle bike" to ride in the jungle but never could find one so can only ride on the road these days. But early in the morning, just after "sun up" the rays of the sun are almost horizontal. Right straight in your eyes. A bit later and the sun is high enough that your normal hat brim shades your eyes. It might be different in a more northern latitude but here the dawn comes up like thunder 'crost the bay and you need your sunglasses in the early morning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uthSAxn7BMU This is going up Larch Mountain. Look at the left side of the road and you'll see the descending cyclists getting lost in the shadow. The picture is really contrasty, but that's what you get with dark sun glasses. I figured with the dense greenery, you probably have similar situations. It really gets tree covered near the top with hard dappled light. An overcast day: https://tinyurl.com/y3jq2sxn -- Jay Beattie. -- Jay Beattie. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 20:35:02 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote: On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:00:49 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 18:15:53 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 5:54:10 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:45:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 7:23:11 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 18:55:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/22/2019 2:10 PM, Tom Kunich wrote: While sunglasses are usually valued for their ability to shade the eyes from glare that is not the first use of them on a bike. On a bike you need them to shield the eyes from wind and road debris that might be kicked up from passing cars or the wind. They are especially important descending when you can be traveling 40 mph or more in the open air. This used to be pretty well understood but it seems to have been thrown aside. None of the reasonably priced glasses are large enough to prevent a windstorm pulling around your glasses and blinding you at critical times. The glasses that used to work well - Oakley, Bolle and Smith are now of breath-taking expense and they TOO are now reducing their sizes. I cannot even find a Bolle Contour anymore. Even the $200 Oakley is too small. Another thing - as a cyclist you often ride from light to shadow and out into the bright sunlight again. Heavily tinted sunglasses makes the road turn totally invisible in these shadow conditions. California roads filled with potholes and broken whiskey bottles are not amiable to having your sight hindered. On the first ride on a set of 600 Campy wheels I ran over a missing utility road opening and broke several spokes and could barely make it home. I had it repaired but it now breaks spokes so regularly that I no longer use it. The polarized glasses I've used do not seem to provide any improvements. Though the blue tinted ones seem to be a happy medium. One would think that the Chinese who are generally really fast on the uptake would jump on this market but they too are both skimping with the size of the lens and even worse yet the optical characteristics can have you seeing double. And the latest fad of very wide side pieces can rob you entirely of peripheral vision. I bought several pairs of $2 Chinese sunglasses in the hope that one would work. One was Tifosi and it is pretty good as long as I keep the speed below 30. Another is an unnamed brand. Has anyone had any good luck with sunglasses lately? I've had excellent luck with "sunglasses" since I started riding avidly in about 1973. But my "sunglasses" have always been my regular glasses with photochromic lenses. For me, it's just one less thing to worry about. These work with any bike I ride, for day or night riding, they work with my home-made eyeglass mirrors (one stored in each bike), they never get misplaced because they're always in front of my eyes, they don't clash with my street clothes nor my riding clothes, etc. I suppose in almost five decades I've had a couple incidents of grit or a small insect getting in my eye, but it's never been more than a minor irritation, and it's been rare enough that I don't feel the need for fancy special protection. YMMV. I don;t wear glasses for normal vision - only when things get too close - but have been quiter happy with "safety glasses. They are shaped to provide eye safety, i.e., heep the crud out of the eyes, and seem to have rasonably good sun protection. AND, are nrmally quite reasonible in price :-) see https://www.amazon.com/GaoCold-Outdo...9194420&sr=1-6 -- I've been riding with safety glasses for years. Cheap, lightweight, wrap around, ANSI Z87 rated. Cheap enough that you can afford to lose or break a couple of pair a year. I prefer clear lenses - my eyes don't react well to sunglasses when riding in and out of shade, which doesn't seem to be a problem with clear lenses. I ride sunglass versions when I know I'm going to be mostly in the sun. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003OBZ1XI..._t1_B00323LZVU I find that, for whatever reason, I seldom need, or use, colored glasses. In fact the one time that I really need them is early in the morning when the sun is barely over the horizon and I am heading east :-) Really dark sunglasses are bad in hard dappled light, which you probably get there in the jungle. I get that in the forest with my prescription sun glasses. It's hard to see what's happening in the shadows, which makes fast descents under the trees a little hairy. -- Jay Beattie. I tried for many years to buy a "jungle bike" to ride in the jungle but never could find one so can only ride on the road these days. But early in the morning, just after "sun up" the rays of the sun are almost horizontal. Right straight in your eyes. A bit later and the sun is high enough that your normal hat brim shades your eyes. It might be different in a more northern latitude but here the dawn comes up like thunder 'crost the bay and you need your sunglasses in the early morning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uthSAxn7BMU This is going up Larch Mountain. Look at the left side of the road and you'll see the descending cyclists getting lost in the shadow. The picture is really contrasty, but that's what you get with dark sun glasses. I figured with the dense greenery, you probably have similar situations. It really gets tree covered near the top with hard dappled light. An overcast day: https://tinyurl.com/y3jq2sxn -- Jay Beattie. One might ask, why sunglasses at all? It doesn't appear to be a particularly bright day. -- cheers, John B. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 5:54:10 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:45:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 7:23:11 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Sun, 22 Sep 2019 18:55:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/22/2019 2:10 PM, Tom Kunich wrote: While sunglasses are usually valued for their ability to shade the eyes from glare that is not the first use of them on a bike. On a bike you need them to shield the eyes from wind and road debris that might be kicked up from passing cars or the wind. They are especially important descending when you can be traveling 40 mph or more in the open air. This used to be pretty well understood but it seems to have been thrown aside. None of the reasonably priced glasses are large enough to prevent a windstorm pulling around your glasses and blinding you at critical times. The glasses that used to work well - Oakley, Bolle and Smith are now of breath-taking expense and they TOO are now reducing their sizes. I cannot even find a Bolle Contour anymore. Even the $200 Oakley is too small. Another thing - as a cyclist you often ride from light to shadow and out into the bright sunlight again. Heavily tinted sunglasses makes the road turn totally invisible in these shadow conditions. California roads filled with potholes and broken whiskey bottles are not amiable to having your sight hindered. On the first ride on a set of 600 Campy wheels I ran over a missing utility road opening and broke several spokes and could barely make it home. I had it repaired but it now breaks spokes so regularly that I no longer use it. The polarized glasses I've used do not seem to provide any improvements. Though the blue tinted ones seem to be a happy medium. One would think that the Chinese who are generally really fast on the uptake would jump on this market but they too are both skimping with the size of the lens and even worse yet the optical characteristics can have you seeing double. And the latest fad of very wide side pieces can rob you entirely of peripheral vision. I bought several pairs of $2 Chinese sunglasses in the hope that one would work. One was Tifosi and it is pretty good as long as I keep the speed below 30. Another is an unnamed brand. Has anyone had any good luck with sunglasses lately? I've had excellent luck with "sunglasses" since I started riding avidly in about 1973. But my "sunglasses" have always been my regular glasses with photochromic lenses. For me, it's just one less thing to worry about. These work with any bike I ride, for day or night riding, they work with my home-made eyeglass mirrors (one stored in each bike), they never get misplaced because they're always in front of my eyes, they don't clash with my street clothes nor my riding clothes, etc. I suppose in almost five decades I've had a couple incidents of grit or a small insect getting in my eye, but it's never been more than a minor irritation, and it's been rare enough that I don't feel the need for fancy special protection. YMMV. I don;t wear glasses for normal vision - only when things get too close - but have been quiter happy with "safety glasses. They are shaped to provide eye safety, i.e., heep the crud out of the eyes, and seem to have rasonably good sun protection. AND, are nrmally quite reasonible in price :-) see https://www.amazon.com/GaoCold-Outdo...9194420&sr=1-6 -- I've been riding with safety glasses for years. Cheap, lightweight, wrap around, ANSI Z87 rated. Cheap enough that you can afford to lose or break a couple of pair a year. I prefer clear lenses - my eyes don't react well to sunglasses when riding in and out of shade, which doesn't seem to be a problem with clear lenses. I ride sunglass versions when I know I'm going to be mostly in the sun. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003OBZ1XI..._t1_B00323LZVU I find that, for whatever reason, I seldom need, or use, colored glasses. In fact the one time that I really need them is early in the morning when the sun is barely over the horizon and I am heading east :-) Really dark sunglasses are bad in hard dappled light, which you probably get there in the jungle. I get that in the forest with my prescription sun glasses. It's hard to see what's happening in the shadows, which makes fast descents under the trees a little hairy. -- Jay Beattie. I have a pretty heavy prescription and don’t tolerate contacts. So I need presumption sun glasses. Oakley make a pair that work for me though they’re a bit large. I use copper coloured lenses and find the contrast quite good so sun to shade is not bad. -- duane |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 11:41:20 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 7:02:39 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: BTW, I'm just back from a short ride to visit a friend. I went there in daylight, returned in dark. Same glasses, no problem. Also, it's so nice to have a powerful dynamo light ready at a click. Powerful dynamo light is kind of an oxymoron. It is nice not to have to remember to recharge, though. If you cannot keep the (circuit-boosted) electric output of 8W coming, it is you who isn't powerful enough uphill. Leaving my friend's house, I had a downhill for about half a mile, much of it at 25 mph or more. My tiny Busch & Mueller Eyc headlight was perfectly fine, except through a fairly tight S turn, where I could have used more beam width. (The IQ Cyo seems to have a wider beam.) Even a wider cut-off beam and tight turns still aren't a good match. The Cyos are dated, btw. The only one I'd still consider would be this third-party, modded version featuring switchable beams from a twin emitter: https://www.laempie.de/cyo He is aiming the the passing beam too low, but it demonstrates his mod's extra features: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-0lFSz-DNU Cutting through some neighborhoods later in the ride, I verified again that the headlight illuminated road signs about a quarter mile away. I can't imagine needing more. But as always, YMMV. You do have good glasses if the Eyc enables you to read road signs a 1/4 mile away. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 11:00:49 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
I tried for many years to buy a "jungle bike" to ride in the jungle but never could find one so can only ride on the road these days. But early in the morning, just after "sun up" the rays of the sun are almost horizontal. Right straight in your eyes. A bit later and the sun is high enough that your normal hat brim shades your eyes. It might be different in a more northern latitude but here the dawn comes up like thunder 'crost the bay and you need your sunglasses in the early morning. As mentioned: This time of year (near an equinox) it can be very hazardous to ride an east-west road near sunrise or sunset. The sun rises and sets very near due east or west, and the bright sun can be glaring in a motorist's eyes, even if they use their sun visors. Very few motorists will stop driving or drive cautiously enough to guarantee avoiding a cyclist. If your shadow is long on the ground and pointed toward a motorist, he probably can't see you. And sorry, no bike light is going to help. I either re-route to avoid east-west roads, or I wait until the sun has moved. - Frank Krygowski |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 9:59:55 AM UTC-4, Sepp Ruf wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote: Leaving my friend's house, I had a downhill for about half a mile, much of it at 25 mph or more. My tiny Busch & Mueller Eyc headlight was perfectly fine, except through a fairly tight S turn, where I could have used more beam width. (The IQ Cyo seems to have a wider beam.) Even a wider cut-off beam and tight turns still aren't a good match. The Cyos are dated, btw. The only one I'd still consider would be this third-party, modded version featuring switchable beams from a twin emitter: https://www.laempie.de/cyo He is aiming the the passing beam too low, but it demonstrates his mod's extra features: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-0lFSz-DNU His modification seems intended to give more "throw" - that is, lighting further down the road. I've never needed that with the Cyo. Now that we have excess lumens available, I'd prefer they get used to form a wider beam. And as I've said before, I think the optimum shape would have the extra beam width (beyond one lane's width) should curl upward a bit. This is because a turning bike tilts. Otherwise, the extra width of a flat beam would just burn into the ground close to the inside of the turn. Cutting through some neighborhoods later in the ride, I verified again that the headlight illuminated road signs about a quarter mile away. I can't imagine needing more. But as always, YMMV. You do have good glasses if the Eyc enables you to read road signs a 1/4 mile away. Oh, I'm not saying I could read the signs. But the signs (which are reflective) were shining brightly. This tells me that portion of my headlight beam was bright enough to travel the quarter mile to the sign, bounce off (with some losses) and return to me, quite visibly. It's proof that the headlight would be very noticeable to a motorist at least that far away. That's relevant because many cyclists who choose super-glaring round beam headlights justify the glare by saying they want motorists to notice them. It's nonsense. - Frank Krygowski |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:28:42 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 9:59:55 AM UTC-4, Sepp Ruf wrote: Frank Krygowski wrote: Leaving my friend's house, I had a downhill for about half a mile, much of it at 25 mph or more. My tiny Busch & Mueller Eyc headlight was perfectly fine, except through a fairly tight S turn, where I could have used more beam width. (The IQ Cyo seems to have a wider beam.) Even a wider cut-off beam and tight turns still aren't a good match. The Cyos are dated, btw. The only one I'd still consider would be this third-party, modded version featuring switchable beams from a twin emitter: https://www.laempie.de/cyo He is aiming the the passing beam too low, but it demonstrates his mod's extra features: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-0lFSz-DNU His modification seems intended to give more "throw" - that is, lighting further down the road. I've never needed that with the Cyo. Now that we have excess lumens available, I'd prefer they get used to form a wider beam. And as I've said before, I think the optimum shape would have the extra beam width (beyond one lane's width) should curl upward a bit. This is because a turning bike tilts. Otherwise, the extra width of a flat beam would just burn into the ground close to the inside of the turn. Cutting through some neighborhoods later in the ride, I verified again that the headlight illuminated road signs about a quarter mile away. I can't imagine needing more. But as always, YMMV. You do have good glasses if the Eyc enables you to read road signs a 1/4 mile away. Oh, I'm not saying I could read the signs. But the signs (which are reflective) were shining brightly. This tells me that portion of my headlight beam was bright enough to travel the quarter mile to the sign, bounce off (with some losses) and return to me, quite visibly. It's proof that the headlight would be very noticeable to a motorist at least that far away. That's relevant because many cyclists who choose super-glaring round beam headlights justify the glare by saying they want motorists to notice them.. It's nonsense. I have a 1 watt blinky that lights up signs a quarter mile away. It's more of a comment on the quality of reflective signs than the light. The blinky is useless to see by. I'm hoping people see it, but who knows. There is a comical range of lights out there, from seizure inducing landing strobes to the light on my friend's fender that I noticed while riding behind him in the rain on Sunday simply because it is red. It was on and pulsing like a dying Tinkerbell but totally invisible unless you were looking right at it. Kind of like a good-luck light. And then you get dopes on MUPS with retina burning, mis-aimed headlights. It's really bizarre -- and the light season is starting again. -- Jay Beattie. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 11:49:47 AM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:28:42 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 9:59:55 AM UTC-4, Sepp Ruf wrote: Frank Krygowski wrote: Leaving my friend's house, I had a downhill for about half a mile, much of it at 25 mph or more. My tiny Busch & Mueller Eyc headlight was perfectly fine, except through a fairly tight S turn, where I could have used more beam width. (The IQ Cyo seems to have a wider beam.) Even a wider cut-off beam and tight turns still aren't a good match. The Cyos are dated, btw. The only one I'd still consider would be this third-party, modded version featuring switchable beams from a twin emitter: https://www.laempie.de/cyo He is aiming the the passing beam too low, but it demonstrates his mod's extra features: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-0lFSz-DNU His modification seems intended to give more "throw" - that is, lighting further down the road. I've never needed that with the Cyo. Now that we have excess lumens available, I'd prefer they get used to form a wider beam. And as I've said before, I think the optimum shape would have the extra beam width (beyond one lane's width) should curl upward a bit. This is because a turning bike tilts. Otherwise, the extra width of a flat beam would just burn into the ground close to the inside of the turn. Cutting through some neighborhoods later in the ride, I verified again that the headlight illuminated road signs about a quarter mile away. I can't imagine needing more. But as always, YMMV. You do have good glasses if the Eyc enables you to read road signs a 1/4 mile away. Oh, I'm not saying I could read the signs. But the signs (which are reflective) were shining brightly. This tells me that portion of my headlight beam was bright enough to travel the quarter mile to the sign, bounce off (with some losses) and return to me, quite visibly. It's proof that the headlight would be very noticeable to a motorist at least that far away. That's relevant because many cyclists who choose super-glaring round beam headlights justify the glare by saying they want motorists to notice them. It's nonsense. I have a 1 watt blinky that lights up signs a quarter mile away. It's more of a comment on the quality of reflective signs than the light. The blinky is useless to see by. I'm hoping people see it, but who knows. There is a comical range of lights out there, from seizure inducing landing strobes to the light on my friend's fender that I noticed while riding behind him in the rain on Sunday simply because it is red. It was on and pulsing like a dying Tinkerbell but totally invisible unless you were looking right at it. Kind of like a good-luck light. And then you get dopes on MUPS with retina burning, mis-aimed headlights. It's really bizarre -- and the light season is starting again. Regarding "I'm hoping people see it but who knows": Why not check? It's over four decades since the first time I had family check out my lights by driving by me from each direction. (I think the young kid felt important when given the job of taking notes.) I've done it many times since, with family and with lots of friends. It just makes sense. But once again, if a headlight illuminates even a mirror 1/4 mile away, that means a tiny portion of the light emitted has traveled half a mile to return to your eyeballs. Even with perfect reflection, that should be impressive; and it's pretty clear evidence that your light will be conspicuous from far enough away. Adequate illumination of the road surface is another matter. I suppose differences in night vision are important; but it's crude to spray mega-lumens everywhere in hopes that enough hit the road. And it's a little paranoid to say we MUST have far brighter lights than cyclists have ever had before. I've verified many times that any light that adequately shows potholes will be plenty conspicuous to oncoming motorists. The physics should make that clear. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Sunglasses
On Tuesday, 24 September 2019 11:15:48 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 11:00:49 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: I tried for many years to buy a "jungle bike" to ride in the jungle but never could find one so can only ride on the road these days. But early in the morning, just after "sun up" the rays of the sun are almost horizontal. Right straight in your eyes. A bit later and the sun is high enough that your normal hat brim shades your eyes. It might be different in a more northern latitude but here the dawn comes up like thunder 'crost the bay and you need your sunglasses in the early morning. As mentioned: This time of year (near an equinox) it can be very hazardous to ride an east-west road near sunrise or sunset. The sun rises and sets very near due east or west, and the bright sun can be glaring in a motorist's eyes, even if they use their sun visors. Very few motorists will stop driving or drive cautiously enough to guarantee avoiding a cyclist. If your shadow is long on the ground and pointed toward a motorist, he probably can't see you. And sorry, no bike light is going to help. I either re-route to avoid east-west roads, or I wait until the sun has moved. - Frank Krygowski A safety tip I read about many, many years ago read: "If your long shadow on the road at night doesn't move as a vehicle approaches you from behind it means the vehicle is on a collision course with you." Cheers |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The 300 quid sunglasses | Simon Mason | UK | 0 | November 14th 11 06:01 AM |
Sunglasses | RicodJour | Racing | 1 | July 15th 10 03:49 AM |
Sunglasses & Rx | jalex | General | 13 | March 18th 07 05:02 AM |
Sunglasses | Micheal Artindale | Mountain Biking | 9 | June 9th 05 04:56 PM |
Ebay sunglasses | Rob | UK | 6 | March 31st 05 09:00 PM |