| | | | | | | | | Handlebar width | | | | | |
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:57 pm |
|
|
citternmaker |
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 |
Posts: 51 |
|
|
|
|
I had a quick question for those of y'all out there that regularly ride your vintage Gitanes:
Do you ride long distances on your vintage Gitane with older-style narrow drop bars, or wider (i.e modern width) ones? If you're using the narrower bars, do you notice any down-sides to riding long distances with them?
My TdF has a set of 38cm wide after-market Sakae Road Custom bars, which have a slight flare in the drops (not quite as flared as a randonneur bar). I love the bars, but they do take some getting used to after riding my modern bike (which has 42 cm bars). Going from the TdF to the modern bike takes even more getting used to -- the newer bars almost feel beach-cruiser wide -- almost like driving a bus by comparison.
FWIW, I haven't noticed any ill effects from the narrower bars on rides up to 20 miles, but I also haven't ridden a century on anything with narrow bars since I was, uh, narrower.
Thanks, |
|
_________________ Ron Banks
Fort Worth, Texas |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:56 pm |
|
|
vanhelmont |
|
|
|
Joined: 11 Dec 2007 |
Posts: 242 |
Location: Florida |
|
|
|
My Super Corsa, which is now stripped, awaiting a little file and perhaps alignment work then painting, is going to at least start out with the bars from my old commuting bike, which have flared, shallow drops. They are 41 cm, while the ergo bars on my other bike are 42. I prefer the flared drop bars, but in my case that has more to do with the shape than the width, I think. The flared drops just seem to be at an angle my wrists like to be. The farthest I have ridden either is about 20-25 miles, so I can't say anything about long distances.
I was going to get randonneur bars, but it seems to me like the rise in the tops would make your wrist bend the wrong way, so I'm going to stick with the old bars for now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Bar Width | | | | | |
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:15 pm |
|
|
verktyg |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Jan 2007 |
Posts: 2814 |
Location: SF Bay Area |
|
|
|
About 2 years ago I started riding on the road again. I had 4 road bikes and a 700c lugged Reynolds 531 "mountain bike" that I built in 1992. From the late 70s on I'd been riding off road most of the time. I even used to take several of my road bikes out into the woods with cyclocross sewups.
I have very wide shoulders and I got used to the wide bars on my mountain bike.
When I started riding on the road again I realized that the bars on 2 of my 4 road bikes were 38cm wide which was way too narrow for me. That's why I never enjoyed riding those bikes. The other 2 have 42cm bars which are OK but not quite wide enough. Breathing was much easier with the wider bars.
I calculated that I needed 46cm wide bars to fit my shoulder width so I put a set of Nitto 46cm bars on one of my bikes. They were so wide that it looked like an old Cadillac pimpmobile with a set of bull horns on the hood!
I've settled for 44cm horns er rather bars on most of my road bikes and they feel just about right to me. I scrounged up several sets of 41cm wide French bars for some old bikes that I want to keep close to original but I don't ride them more that 15-20 miles at a time.
I have a very long torso with a short neck that's given me lots of recurrent problems so I ride in a more upright position. I use short 70-80cm stems and bars with a short throw. Nitto 176 or 177 bars and several Ritchey models work great for me. I rarely ride on the drops except in a full tuck on a long downhill.
I like to be able to look through my glasses not over them.
Chas. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:05 pm |
|
|
sandranian |
Site Admin |
|
|
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 |
Posts: 2701 |
Location: Southern California |
|
|
|
Wider bars will be more comfortable in the long run. More available hand positions, and if there is any climbing involved, you will appreciate the wider bars (easier to "cheat"). I ride 42's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Narrow bars | | | | | |
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 11:15 am |
|
|
verktyg |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Jan 2007 |
Posts: 2814 |
Location: SF Bay Area |
|
|
|
Stephan,
Two reasons for narrow bars in the past:
1. Narrow bars allowed a more aerodynamic riding position. Also you could ride more tightly packed in a peloton or so the story goes.
That was the prevailing attitude up into the late 1970s. During the 1960s 36mm wide bars were common. The most popular widths during the 1970s were 38cm and 40cm wide bars. Bars 42cm and wider were very rare.
2. Up until the late 1960s most European Bike Racers had physiques with narrow shoulders, chests and hips: a "runners" build. Perhaps this was partly due to malnutrition they may have suffered in their formative years during and after WWI and WWII.
Compare Coppi with Merckx and Hinault. Check out Eddy's domestique in from of him! (also check out the domestique in front of Lemond!):
Many of the later riders had wider shoulders and hips, larger chests and more developed upper bodies (maybe not the optimum physique for cycling but perhaps the result of higher protein consumption in their youth).
Chas. - with a highly "developed" midsection |
|
Last edited by verktyg on Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:16 pm |
|
|
Gtane |
|
|
|
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 |
Posts: 681 |
Location: UK |
|
|
|
I'm with the wider autobus! For me, they are far, far more comfortable than narrow bars. As well as giving more positions on the bar when on the top, the overall benefit is stability. The wider (within reason) your hands are, the more stable the rider triangle (hands and derriere) will be for a multitude of surfaces and situations. I feel more instability on narrow bars, particularly when descending. I haven't ridden narrow bars for years.
I agree with the other views here too. Most pros ride wide bars nowadays.
Regards period correct machines, I would suggest that one sources the actual brand of bars the machine would have had when new (or an era correct brand) in the width one needs and replace, but retain the originals. Double check the diameter of the bars that they are consistent with the stem and always, always check for signs of fatigue on used equipment. If the bars have come from a bar wrencher they will show signs of wear where the stem meets the bars, usually with slight rucking or rubbing of the bar itself.
citternmaker, do bear in mind that handlebars are not consistent in their measurement of width, they all differ. Always carry a tape measure when at a jumble, shop or swap meet, to ensure you're getting the right width for your build. You will be better off going too wide than too narrow. It's also worth trying to maintain consistent set-up throughout your bike collection so whichever machine you take out, it will always be right for you.
Do bear in mind that there are also differences in drop and reach which will also have an effect on position but I'd say that width is the primary factor of the bar to get right first of all.
Here is a useful width guide as a quick reference;
http://www.bicycling.com/article/1,6610,s1-5-28-1056-1,00.html
Tim |
|
_________________ Everything has a cycle |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 7:42 am |
|
|
citternmaker |
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 |
Posts: 51 |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your help everyone! Thanks especially for the history of bar width! I'd never really thought about the way that the rider's physiology has changed over the years.
Based on your input, I've decided to upgrade the bars to the same width I'm using on my other bike. I had to order a new stem anyway (the old stem was too short in both directions for the new frame and had an undersized quill), so I added a set of Nitto randonneurs in a 42cm (c-t-c) size to the order.
I ride 42cm bars on my other bike (the recommended size for me), and unless I switch bikes, I don't notice the width....so they're probably what I should be riding. Since I already love the way my TdF climbs, making the switch to wider bars will probably make the experience even better (not that I really enjoy climbs). |
|
_________________ Ron Banks
Fort Worth, Texas |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:56 pm |
|
|
citternmaker |
|
|
|
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 |
Posts: 51 |
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to say thanks again to everyone that responded to my handlebar question. I just got back from my first short ride (20 miles) with the new stem/bars, and can say without a doubt that the change was for the better. It was amazing how much difference getting the fit right has made. This was the first ride I've been on that I haven't had any tingling in my hands/fingers, or had to consciously "loosen up" during the ride to keep that from happening. No lower back pain and no neck pain, either....
The change wasn't very drastic either -- 10mm in stem reach, 10mm in stem height, 4cm in bar width.
At least for me, the Nitto Randonneur is a keeper -- this is the first bar I've had that all of the hand positions were comfortable. For some reason the bend works pretty well for me, even the funky upsweep on the tops. I also spent a lot of time in the drops for a change this time, and never had my hands remind me to get out of the drops. I can't wait to ride again tomorrow! |
|
_________________ Ron Banks
Fort Worth, Texas |
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Handlebar width | | | | | |
gitaneusa.com Forum Index » Vintage Gitane
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
|