mtb question

Per stan:
>
>" the wide acceptance of riser bars by trail riders and cross-country
>racers signaled the end of the bar ends widespread use"
>
>I don't understand this as I always liked flat bars with bar ends, so

I use risers with bar ends.

Maybe somebody who knows more can comment, but I can't see the diff between
risers with bar ends and flats w/bar ends except that with risers I can tune my
cockpit length a little by tilting the risers fore or aft.
--
PeteCresswell

http://gallery.mtbr.com/showphoto.php/photo/16239/cat/500/ppuser/252656

some of us still use em

--
DTW .../\.../\.../\...

On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 01:08:12 GMT, stan <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>hi folks,
>
>have a mtb question for you, i was very much into the mtb scene in the
>late 80's and have missed it for a bunch of years and just playing
>again,
>
>while rereading the sept issue of mbaction i read
>
>" the wide acceptance of riser bars by trail riders and cross-country
>racers signaled the end of the bar ends widespread use"
>
>I don't understand this as I always liked flat bars with bar ends, so
>
>1) the purpose of bar ends was to provide an alternate hand holds to
>permit changing hand positions on long rides to prevent numbness and
>aches and they also provided a better position for hill climbing,
>..... so riser bars don't do either ... yet I don't see many folks
>using bar ends?
>
>2) i don't see much difference between using a riser bar with a lower
>rise stem ... and using a flat bar with a higher rise stem, so what's
>the big deal? I guess I always though flat bars looked better
>
>thanks for any enlightenment

From what I've seen, in part, the proliferation of riser bars reflects
the widespread failure of the marketplace to supply adequate numbers
of stems with sufficient rise, as well as the tendency of bike makers
to cut the steerers too short. If a bike has been retrofitted with
riser bars (and yes, sometimes those risers will have bar ends
installed), there's a good chance that the owner couldn't find a stem
that provided enough elevation.

This doesn't explain the presence of risers on new bikes, however. In
that market, the only likely explanation is "it's a styling choice".
Some people like the looks of the riser bars. Frankly, I prefer flat
bars, in part because it's a lot easier to mount lights and such when
you have more level pipe available...but when one of the bikes I was
building came up needing more bar elevation than I was going to get
with the stems I could buy locally, I swapped on a riser bar instead.
Try finding a 1 1/8" stem with a 135 degree angle and 140mm length.
With riser bars, the same effective grip location can be obtained with
stems that are common. The down side, as mentioned, is the lack of
pipe suitable for mounting accessories.

--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

stan wrote:
> hi folks,
>
> have a mtb question for you, i was very much into the mtb scene in the
> late 80's and have missed it for a bunch of years and just playing
> again,
>
> while rereading the sept issue of mbaction i read
>
> " the wide acceptance of riser bars by trail riders and cross-country
> racers signaled the end of the bar ends widespread use"
>
> I don't understand this as I always liked flat bars with bar ends, so
>
> 1) the purpose of bar ends was to provide an alternate hand holds to
> permit changing hand positions on long rides to prevent numbness and
> aches and they also provided a better position for hill climbing,
> ..... so riser bars don't do either ... yet I don't see many folks
> using bar ends?
>
> 2) i don't see much difference between using a riser bar with a lower
> rise stem ... and using a flat bar with a higher rise stem, so what's
> the big deal? I guess I always though flat bars looked better
>
> thanks for any enlightenment
>
> Stan

DON'T be swayed by magazines and bike shop pundits. Use what you wish,
what you like. If ya like barends, and a flat bar, use them, Still 'out
there'. LOTS of style and fashion points to be had at the coffee shop
in bicycles these days, both road and MTB.

"stan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> hi folks,
>
> have a mtb question for you, i was very much into the mtb scene in the
> late 80's and have missed it for a bunch of years and just playing
> again,
>
> while rereading the sept issue of mbaction i read
>
> " the wide acceptance of riser bars by trail riders and cross-country
> racers signaled the end of the bar ends widespread use"
>
> I don't understand this as I always liked flat bars with bar ends, so
>
> 1) the purpose of bar ends was to provide an alternate hand holds to
> permit changing hand positions on long rides to prevent numbness and
> aches and they also provided a better position for hill climbing,
> ..... so riser bars don't do either ... yet I don't see many folks
> using bar ends?
>
> 2) i don't see much difference between using a riser bar with a lower
> rise stem ... and using a flat bar with a higher rise stem, so what's
> the big deal? I guess I always though flat bars looked better
>
> thanks for any enlightenment
>
> Stan
>
>
>
>
>

It came on as a fad with all the "freeride" and "all mountain" rigs, as
higher bar height makes downhilling feel a little more secure, not to
mention make bicycles look more and more like motocross bikes. You are
right, there shouldn't be any difference between a rise bar and a flat bar
with a higher stem. Riser bar also limits useable space on the bar for
attaching lights, computers, etc. I've never liked riser bars all my mtbs
have flatbars with or without barends. Barends come in handy when climbing
as they give you better pull leverage.

stan wrote:
> hi folks,
>
> have a mtb question for you, i was very much into the mtb scene in the
> late 80's and have missed it for a bunch of years and just playing
> again,
>
> while rereading the sept issue of mbaction i read
>
> " the wide acceptance of riser bars by trail riders and cross-country
> racers signaled the end of the bar ends widespread use"
>
> I don't understand this as I always liked flat bars with bar ends, so
>
> 1) the purpose of bar ends was to provide an alternate hand holds to
> permit changing hand positions on long rides to prevent numbness and
> aches and they also provided a better position for hill climbing,
> ..... so riser bars don't do either ... yet I don't see many folks
> using bar ends?
>
> 2) i don't see much difference between using a riser bar with a lower
> rise stem ... and using a flat bar with a higher rise stem, so what's
> the big deal? I guess I always though flat bars looked better
>
> thanks for any enlightenment
>
> Stan
>

1. as stated by another poster, they provide a marginally better
position for steep downhills - need to keep c.g. rearwards. you can
adjust all this with stems of course, but with mtb's [unlike road bikes]
you want to keep the frame relatively small and low and there comes a
point where mechanical reliability [fatigue] of funky stems and spacers
are not too good.

2. they're usually longer - which gives a little more control on the
sketchy stuff. as with some other things in life, longer can be better.

do they save the planet? no. can you still ride a bike with flats?
sure - that's why they're still sold! but can they help a little?
absolutely. however, feel free not to use them if you don't want to.

stan wrote:

> 1) the purpose of bar ends was to provide an alternate hand holds to
> permit changing hand positions on long rides to prevent numbness and
> aches and they also provided a better position for hill climbing,
> ..... so riser bars don't do either ... yet I don't see many folks
> using bar ends?

My first bike came with them, so I used them for a while. I found that I
didn't use them as I often needed to use brakes even on climbs and They
had a tendency to grab foliage, so I took them off and never looked
back. I think the (un)usefulness has everything to do with the kind of
riding you do. I do east coast singletrack -- lots of foliage, glaciated
terrain (lots of short, steep, rocky climbs).


> 2) i don't see much difference between using a riser bar with a lower
> rise stem ... and using a flat bar with a higher rise stem, so what's
> the big deal? I guess I always though flat bars looked better

I have them on one MTB, not on the other. Easy way to get a couple of
inches more bar height if you need it, can make mounting lights more of
an issue.

Werehatrack wrote:

> This doesn't explain the presence of risers on new bikes, however. In
> that market, the only likely explanation is "it's a styling choice".
> Some people like the looks of the riser bars. Frankly, I prefer flat
> bars, in part because it's a lot easier to mount lights and such when
> you have more level pipe available...but when one of the bikes I was
> building came up needing more bar elevation than I was going to get
> with the stems I could buy locally, I swapped on a riser bar instead.
> Try finding a 1 1/8" stem with a 135 degree angle and 140mm length.
> With riser bars, the same effective grip location can be obtained with
> stems that are common. The down side, as mentioned, is the lack of
> pipe suitable for mounting accessories.

Because my current mountain bike is too big for me (but you don't turn
down a 2nd hand Cannondale at that price) I have a shorter than normal
stem and riser bars. Its the only way to get the bars high enough
while keeping the reach short enough.

-M

stan wrote:
> hi folks,
>
> have a mtb question for you, i was very much into the mtb scene in the
> late 80's and have missed it for a bunch of years and just playing
> again,
>
> while rereading the sept issue of mbaction i read
>
> " the wide acceptance of riser bars by trail riders and cross-country
> racers signaled the end of the bar ends widespread use"
>
> I don't understand this as I always liked flat bars with bar ends, so
>
> 1) the purpose of bar ends was to provide an alternate hand holds to
> permit changing hand positions on long rides to prevent numbness and
> aches and they also provided a better position for hill climbing,
> ..... so riser bars don't do either ... yet I don't see many folks
> using bar ends?
>
> 2) i don't see much difference between using a riser bar with a lower
> rise stem ... and using a flat bar with a higher rise stem, so what's
> the big deal? I guess I always though flat bars looked better
>
> thanks for any enlightenment
>
> Stan

Nothing wrong with using flat bars and bar ends, they still make a lot
of sense in some situations. Some of the trails here in the midwest
have closely spaced trees that make the shorter length of most flat
bars desirable.

Smokey