An interesting blog post on the evolution of road bike fit
- Thread starter alienator
- Start date
My one observation: reducing handlebar width from your given natural, while possibly resulting in better aerodynamics, is the quickest way to achieve **** handling. Wider handlebars give better leverage. That is my story and I am sticking to it. **** handling. Even better are the hipsters with handlebars narrower than their shoulders, styling which originated from the bike messenger trend toward squeezing between ever narrower spaces. But I got news for ya, and any cat with whiskers knows this inside and out... if your shoulders are not fitting, neither are your obsurdly narrow handlebars. Rant over.
I wouldn't go so far as to say **** handling, but the leverage part sure works for me when I'm out out of the saddle. Of course, I'm only talking about the range from 40 to 44 cm, nothing too radical.
In general, it appears that frames are getting smaller, and not just to accommodate the longer head tubes of "endurance" geometries. Handlebars are getting lower to accommodate the smaller frames. Saddles are moving forward, possibly to open the hip angle to accommodate everything else getting smaller. And reach is getting shorter, possibly because the UCI mandates you shan't use a stem longer than 14 cm. Crazy.
My epitomes of elegance are, in no particular order, Francesco Moser, Greg LeMond, Laurent Fignon, Roger DeVlaeminck, Jacques Anquetil, Eddy Merckx, Ercole Baldini, Hugo Koblet, and Fabian Cancellara. Some would say that I'm from another time.
Just like with clothes, the key is to ignore sizes and pick what actually fits. I completely ignore frame size and instead find the TT and HT lengths, as well as ST and HT angles, and then I mix all those up to spit out the reach and stack of a frame......and I'm good to go. There's naught else needed.
Sometimes drinking makes me passionate and possibly lends to more embelishment using the fecally oriented adjectives. However while sober I am still of the opinion, gained through personal experience, that if your natural width is a C-C42 or O-O44, and you tempt aerodynamic fate by trying out a 38C-C on your local downhill run you'll come back with a +1. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif
What if you just place your hands in a narrow stance on a CC-44? I think a better way to go faster downhill would be to hold off braking in corners until you see the face of your dear fluffy lord (whatever god that would be), and then count to three. Then apply the brakes. If nothing else, that will, over time, help increase the tone of one's anus.danfoz said:Sometimes drinking makes me passionate and possibly lends to more embelishment using the fecally oriented adjectives. However while sober I am still of the opinion, gained through personal experience, that if your natural width is a C-C42 or O-O44, and you tempt aerodynamic fate by trying out a 38C-C on your local downhill run you'll come back with a +1.Â
The evolution of handlebar shapes and widths could be an interesting study in itself. Someday maybe someone will explain to me how those great old Cinelli and 3T bends became superseded by stuff like this:
Not that I'm complaining now that we have "compact" bars. I just wish they weren't quite so compact.
Not that I'm complaining now that we have "compact" bars. I just wish they weren't quite so compact.
Aaaaargh, My eyes! But how you say? It was the 80's lol. The above is the mullet equivalent of handlebar styles.Originally Posted by oldbobcat .
The evolution of handlebar shapes and widths could be an interesting study in itself. Someday maybe someone will explain to me how those great old Cinelli and 3T bends became superseded by stuff like this:
Not that I'm complaining now that we have "compact" bars. I just wish they weren't quite so compact.
I tried a set of compact bars when I got my Campy group thinking the decreasing radius curve would put my thumbs even closer to the upshift, Even if I could have gotten past the aesthetics of the shape, the downside was not having that deep position available in the drops of the "classic" bend which I use when decending to get my mass a little lower, and a little further forward. However Deda makes a bar that combines my two favorite bends of all time: the 64 and 65. Ain't life grand!
I would never judge anyone on any choices they made for there own bikes, either functional or aesthetic. I do see how the curve (or lack thereof) would certainly improve one particular hand position though. I on the other hand have made many choices based on aesthetics and have just had the good fortune that things worked out. I have the same issue with many of the women I've dated, although it's not always worked out as well in those cases.
Similar threads
