Bars: just right for flats and climbing, too far forward for comfort on descents...?



X

x

Guest
Seems like a built-in fact of life to me.

Courtesy of a Fit-Kit session, I've got a position that's
really dialed-in for the flats and climbing. I can now
easily clean hills that were hopeless before due to the
front wheel floating too much.

The downside is that when I'm descending, thoughts of
Christopher Reeves keep coming to mind. Seems to me like I'm
definately going in face-first if anything goes wrong up
front - like a wheel washing out.

Moving the bars back an inch makes descents tolerable. Not
wonderful, but not as risky-feeling... Two inches would
probably nail it.

So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
conflict between climbing and descending position-wise, are
there any workarounds besides bar ends? My guess would be
that at least some people set their bars back a little and
then use bar ends for climbing to get the position forward
for climbing.
--
PeteCresswell
 
"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
> conflict between climbing and descending position-wise,
> are there any workarounds besides
bar
> ends?

There are trade offs in the best position.

I think you have this well under control, but here are two
things to consider besides reach which may or may not
prove helpful.

If your position is more forward would this mean that, since
you now have more weight forward, you would need a stiffer
shock (spring, oil, air pressure) to give you the handling
characteristics you prefer? In other words, are you feeling
sketchy because your suspension is tuned for your weight
being further back?

If you enjoy the longer reach, before you get rid of it
consider saddle height and drop. If your saddle is a little
high, it will keep your rear up, which will put your weight
forward. This can feel like you need a shorter stem to push
away from the front of the bike when going downhill.
Sometimes bike fitters set you up for optimal pedaling
efficiency and that can mean the seat is a bit too high for
some mountain biking. A big drop, between saddle height and
bar height, has been known to make descending more
difficult as well because, again, it is hard to get back
and can keep your weight forward. Like saddle height,
sometimes the text book drop is too severe for descents.
Look at a downhill bike.

If either of these suggestions aren't helpful enjoy your new
bar ends. I would say they certainly seem worth a try. Reach
and drop are something you just have to find out what works
best for your style of riding.
 
> So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
> conflict between climbing and descending position-wise,
> are there any workarounds besides bar ends? My guess would
> be that at least some people set their bars back a little
> and then use bar ends for climbing to get the position
> forward for climbing.

I found that climbing posture is essential to successful
riding. At my last race in the mountains of eastern
Tennessee, I leaned all the way forward and down, my nose
almost at the stem. No wheelies, no light front end,
unlimited traction at the rear (and yes, it was muddy!).
Barends would help me naught.

I'm 5'5" on a 17" XC frame though... YMMV.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
 
"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

<snip>
> So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
> conflict between climbing and descending position-wise,
> are there any workarounds besides bar ends? My guess would
> be that at least some people set their bars back a little
> and then use bar ends for climbing to get the position
> forward for climbing.

Sumthin' wrong with bar ends? They work pretty well for
me........

-S.S.-
 
"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Seems like a built-in fact of life to me.
>
> Courtesy of a Fit-Kit session, I've got a position that's
> really dialed-in
for
> the flats and climbing. I can now easily clean hills that
> were hopeless
before
> due to the front wheel floating too much.
>
> The downside is that when I'm descending, thoughts of
> Christopher Reeves
keep
> coming to mind. Seems to me like I'm definately going in
> face-first if anything goes wrong up front - like a wheel
> washing out.
>
> Moving the bars back an inch makes descents tolerable. Not
> wonderful,
but not
> as risky-feeling... Two inches would probably nail it.
>
> So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
> conflict between climbing and descending position-wise,
> are there any workarounds besides
bar
> ends? My guess would be that at least some people set
> their bars back a
little
> and then use bar ends for climbing to get the position
> forward for
climbing.
> --
> PeteCresswell

Are you a racerboy or do you ride for fun?

If you race you need that stretched out position to climb
faster and have your weight distributed evenly for fast flat
terrain turning without shifting your weight.

If you ride for fun you should slap a riserbar and shorter
stem to make descending a breeze. You can still climb with
this setup but it won't be as fast because you'll have your
saddle stuck up your ass to keep the front from floating.
Your high speed turning on flats terrain will require more
work because you'll have to shift your weight back and forth
to keep your bike planted in the turns.
 
>Seems like a built-in fact of life to me.
>
>Courtesy of a Fit-Kit session, I've got a position that's
>really dialed-in for the flats and climbing. I can now
>easily clean hills that were hopeless before due to the
>front wheel floating too much.
>
>The downside is that when I'm descending, thoughts of
>Christopher Reeves keep coming to mind. Seems to me like
>I'm definately going in face-first if anything goes wrong
>up front - like a wheel washing out.
>
>Moving the bars back an inch makes descents tolerable. Not
>wonderful, but not as risky-feeling... Two inches would
>probably nail it.
>
>So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
>conflict between climbing and descending position-wise, are
>there any workarounds besides bar ends? My guess would be
>that at least some people set their bars back a little and
>then use bar ends for climbing to get the position forward
>for climbing.
>--
>PeteCresswell
>
>

Yup. Bar position is like tire choice - a matter of trade-
offs and compromises.

One thing to try is a seat post with more setback. Couple it
with a shorter stem and you get both a nice long and low
position, and a lower liklihood of going head over
handlebars (or assoverteakettle, or whatever your favorite
expression happens to be).

Bonus, I've found that I seem to be able to get more leg
power to the pedals sitting about an inch further back than
I used to. YMMV.

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Seems like a built-in fact of life to me.
>
> Courtesy of a Fit-Kit session, I've got a position that's
> really dialed-in
for
> the flats and climbing. I can now easily clean hills that
> were hopeless
before
> due to the front wheel floating too much.
>
> The downside is that when I'm descending, thoughts of
> Christopher Reeves
keep
> coming to mind. Seems to me like I'm definately going in
> face-first if anything goes wrong up front - like a wheel
> washing out.
>
> Moving the bars back an inch makes descents tolerable. Not
> wonderful,
but not
> as risky-feeling... Two inches would probably nail it.
>
> So, the question: Given that there's probably a built-in
> conflict between climbing and descending position-wise,
> are there any workarounds besides
bar
> ends?

Yes, you should adjust your bars so that you can do downhill
sections comfortably and then be prepared to bring your
chest near your handlebars for the steep climbs. Lay your
chest on your bars if you need to.

You probably will not need a riser bar.

Dave
 
RE/
>Are you a racerboy or do you ride for fun?

Strictly a feelgood rider.
--
PeteCresswell
 
RE/
>Sumthin' wrong with bar ends? They work pretty well for
>me........

I haven't tried them yet, but what I keep hearing is that it
really hurts when one catches on a piece of brush or small
tree. OTOH, I notice that a lot of them are curved inwards
on the leading end...
--
PeteCresswell
 
RE/
>One thing to try is a seat post with more setback. Couple
>it with a shorter stem and you get both a nice long and low
>position, and a lower liklihood of going head over
>handlebars (or assoverteakettle, or whatever your favorite
>expression happens to be).
>
>Bonus, I've found that I seem to be able to get more leg
>power to the pedals sitting about an inch further back than
>I used to. YMMV.

That's what I'd been doing on my current bike. 2" setback
post.... and the comfort factor is very noticible.

But now that someone's shown me a "correct" position, I
realize that I was defeating the design of my frame. It
climbs a *lot* better with the corrected position and when
going over, for instance, stutter bumps, it has a far more
balanced feeling...can't find the words to describe it any
better...but it's a world of difference.

I think it's something to do with the saddle being in the
middle/axis of rotation as the front and rear go up and
down...the saddle just sort of tilts instead of pogo-
ing....sort of like sitting in the center of a bus vs
sitting over the rear axle.

Another thing, though, that I don't care for is how I'm
getting the bars that far forward. It's via about 5" of stem
extension. This creates a handlebar that wants to flop to
one side or another.

In my quest for a custom frame (at 6'5"/37" inseam I'm kind
of to the right of the bell curve...) I was hoping to find
that somebody could just lengthen the whole bike - keeping
the balanced feeling, not having a floaty front end...but
also giving me handlebars that don't want to flop to one
side or another.

What I'm hearing so far though is "Well, we have these
designs that we know work...." and "Trust me...".

This time around, I'm going with "Trust me...". One of my
main drivers for a custom frame is the fact that I need too
many spacers and too much bar rise to get the bars up near
saddle height where I need them. Having your handlebars
suddenly rotate forward and down in a hard braking situation
is a wakeup call, to say the least. Worst fore-aft case
scenario, I can always tweak the whole thing back to what I
have now but but retain the benefit of not having to worry
about an unsafe stack height/bar rise situation.
--
PeteCresswell
 
"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> RE/
> >Sumthin' wrong with bar ends? They work pretty well for
> >me........
>
> I haven't tried them yet, but what I keep hearing is that
> it really hurts
when
> one catches on a piece of brush or small tree. OTOH, I
> notice that a lot
of
> them are curved inwards on the leading end... -

I've had bar ends for as long as I've been riding off-road
(~10 years now) and I can honestly say that they've
deflected far more trees and brush than they've ever
snagged. If you're going to get bar ends, I'd recommend ones
that angle in significantly as these act more like brush
deflectors than brush snaggers. In slow, tight situations I
often purposely use my bar ends to do a controlled bounce
off trees and such. If you do catch something far enough
inboard that it would snag these type of bar ends, you'd be
in trouble without them too.
 
"KLydesdale" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > RE/
> > >Sumthin' wrong with bar ends? They work pretty well for
> > >me........
> >
> > I haven't tried them yet, but what I keep hearing is
> > that it really
hurts
> when
> > one catches on a piece of brush or small tree. OTOH, I
> > notice that a
lot
> of
> > them are curved inwards on the leading end... -
>
> I've had bar ends for as long as I've been riding off-road
> (~10 years now) and I can honestly say that they've
> deflected far more trees and brush
than
> they've ever snagged. If you're going to get bar ends, I'd
> recommend
ones
> that angle in significantly as these act more like brush
> deflectors than brush snaggers. In slow, tight situations
> I often purposely use my bar ends to do a controlled
> bounce off trees and such. If you do catch something far
> enough inboard that it would snag these type of bar ends,
> you'd be in trouble without them too.
>

Well said. Bar ends serve two purposes, extra positions and
handguards.

Greg
 

Similar threads