...I now have complete coverage when either passing on the left or being passed: before the car disappears from my rear-view, it shows up in my side mirrors, and then again before I lose it in the side mirror it becomes visible in my peripheral vision... I'm not sure how having a 360-degree view makes things less safe - and, yes, in my case the view IS 360-degrees now.
Excuse me, Dan, could possibly elaborate a little on this? A simple diagram/drawing, perhaps? Comments on the one above? May be that will help me to understand it, since so far fail to see how you can possibly have 360 view... unless we're advocating nearly
the same setup (which now seems even more likely to me, considering how far from the steering wheel you sit and the limits of adjustment of the side view mirrors). Also please address the potential issue with smaller object (e.g., bikes).
I don't get it. The movement the article explains is done before you even start the car - once set, they're set forever unless further adjusted. You don't lean all the way over left or right to check your mirrors while driving; you only do it in the driveway to get them set the way they describe and then simply turn your eyes to check the mirrors, then turn your head to check the blindspot if the mirrors show that things look clear.
That is' exactly the problem - if you adjust the mirrors that way, and NOT learn toward the glass while you drive, you will have a nasty blind spot along the side of your car (please see Steve's post above).
Just curious - have you actually tried this since the thread was posted, or simply declared it, and those who do it this way, unsafe without actually giving it a shot?
I did. And felt totally insecure because I could not see that rear blind spot, unless I moved my head a lot
or kept switching focus between rear and side view, which is slow and distractive (I am used to being able to have complete coverage from just the side mirror plus side glance/turn in any lane changing or similar maneuver, even without convex sub-mirrors). I also considered this many years ago as well, and rejected it for the very same reasons (and banning the person who suggested that from driving my car).
So it's not the matter of habit and/or stubbornness and/or "superiority complex", as you keep trying to suggest - it's a matter or thorough research, analysis and experimentation. And since my anatomy and physiology is nothing out of the ordinary, I am reasonably certain that my conclusions apply to most other people as well. If I am mistaken, please show me where and how (the paragraphs above provide a good reference point in terms of questions that need to be answered).
There might be another thing at play here, somewhat related to "personal preference" (so that not to induce another attack on myself for suggesting that this is "the right way" for everyone)... I have to have full coverage with
fast response times, and I
cannot achieve that by having poorly/barely covered "transition zones" and no reference points - I need to locate and track all threats thoroughly and
quickly, instead of just seeing a corner of an approaching car in one mirror or the other and simply "checking if there is something in the place where I want to go", since that only provides a fuzzy binary answer, and not much perspective/prediction (yes, the latter can be obtained with more intensive prior scanning, but it is more straining, takes longer, and is, therefore, less than optimal, to say the least). But this is just me - I like to have as much control over the situation as possible.
I also never thought my driving skills were perfect - that's why I am constantly trying to make a reasonable effort to improve them (reasonable - because most of my driving is till just a commute to and from work, so the possibilities are limited)...
...way too may "I"s in here...