Other Resources > Component Deals & Selection
Separate set - narrow handlebars and low stem - for internal routing
Sakizashi:
--- Quote from: obuwiecieplezimowe on August 16, 2024, 02:30:44 AM ---Finally I bought a different handlebars accidentally found on Ali. Also narrow, but with less flare and cheaper. First 3h ride on it so far. Feels ok, "relaxed" position looks definitely less relaxed but is as comfy as on wider bars. As I suspected standing sprints on hoods feels odd, but it is odd anyway :)
New frame hasn't been sent yet so tested in my own one.
One problem with this setup - cabling it is a total nightmare. But my case is really a worst case scenario - small frame, low stack, old 11s Shimano di2 setup, junction box in a bar end. This one except of very tight openings with little "steps" making routing more difficult doesn't have little holes inside drops for example. So cable must be routed to the top and then a sharp turn to shifter has to be made. Or you can simply drill that hole because why not :)
The handlebars is something bought in "EC90 bicycle store" on Ali, now 92 EUR, looks like this - I don't know if it is allowed to post links here but it will be easy to find if needed :) So dimensions, comparsion with "wide" 36cm one and on the bike. Weight of mine is 233g.
--- End quote ---
Lol, so this design is one of the rejected ones that was part of the conversations I had that led to the “Bikedoc” bars. By rejected, I mean they proposed the other design after we talked about the shortcoming of this design. A few reasons appear to have bothered you already and a few might not. One of the big flaws is that everyone should pay attention to is that the clamping area is too small for a lot of modern internal routing stems.
elmtree:
--- Quote from: Sakizashi on August 22, 2024, 05:54:15 PM ---Lol, so this design is one of the rejected ones that was part of the conversations I had that led to the “Bikedoc” bars. By rejected, I mean they proposed the other design after we talked about the shortcoming of this design. A few reasons appear to have bothered you already and a few might not. One of the big flaws is that everyone should pay attention to is that the clamping area is too small for a lot of modern internal routing stems.
--- End quote ---
Any other issues? These have a bit less flare, but a bit more aero top shape. Price is close enough that I don't really care, but neither look super friendly for routing mech+hydro through.
obuwiecieplezimowe:
Around 15-20 hours so far but including very steep mountains, flats, sprints, slow and fast rides. All fine I think. I especially love mountain descends on it.
And yes the clamping area is a bit narrow for some stems - I even have one very wide -17* drop bar stem that wouldn't fit, or just barely. But that stem is so ugly anyway it will always remain as a spare :)
I think for mechanical shifting (the same for my mechanical brakes) a link type housing is a must. I first tried to use standard cable housing, but except difficulties in routing it through the bar my rear brake spring has not enough force to fully return due to sharp curves. And I had to rewire all using liner + links type of housing. That was much easier to do and brakes works like a charm. But it rattles inside :)
And a fully internal routing should be easier as it's easier to reach that "back" port from handlebars to stem than those small crappy exit ones. I'll see when my new frame arrives so in a few weeks from now.
coffeebreak:
What rim brake calipers are those?
Sakizashi:
--- Quote from: elmtree on August 22, 2024, 10:27:11 PM ---Any other issues? These have a bit less flare, but a bit more aero top shape. Price is close enough that I don't really care, but neither look super friendly for routing mech+hydro through.
--- End quote ---
Oops sorry for the late reply.
It's not as stiff, probably, though I never saw the data, so it's more of a theoretical discussion. The big difference is in the shape of the bar itself. The Bikedoc HB24 has 3mm more drop and no rise on the ramps. Your shifters mount ~7mm lower as a result. You also have more flare and more wrist clearance when sprinting or climbing out of the saddle in the drops. Shape-wise, it’s a wider / road-adapted version of a modern bunch bar from the track. There is some overlap in size, with the 34cm size being very similar to what you would see as the wider end of track bars. The rejected design, the one from EC90, is a more traditionally shaped road bar that is narrower, so shrunken in one dimension.
The question was, if you had no funding for research, whose shoulders do you stand on? Track bars where the narrow position is proven, but the shifter/bar interface is trickier? Or road bars where the shifter/bar interface is more known, but the ergonomics of designing around a narrow aero hood position and sprinting in the drops on a narrow bar is still taking shape? Given that most of the narrower than the old but well-loved Enve SES Aero bars are track-style designs, I was biased toward a track-style bar.
You also have the divots for the wrist (their idea, not mine) vs. not having them, which forces the wrist inside the ramps like they are on the Enve SES Aero bars. The divots work well and allow a more natural angle for the arms and wrists when in the aero hood position. I pushed a little for more reach on the bar, but that was rejected. :(
I also had no trouble with the hose routing, which could have been due to the extra 2mm of bar thickness.
TLDR; Bikedoc HB24 should be stiffer, but the difference is the shape being an adapted (wider) track bar vs a small width road bar.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version