Time for new bars: Wide/compact suggestions?

[Lewis Moon]

I've been riding 3T Ergonovas for a while and am thinking of moving to new bars.
What I'm looking for:
Compact: The 3ts are 123/77 so I'd like something around that
Flat top: I'd like the reach to the hoods to be flat, then a tight hook.
Wide: 46 would be cool
No flare: I want the hoods to be as wide as the drops
Aluminum.

Any suggestions? I've been cruising the company websites but it really seems like folks are allergic to taking side pics of their bars. What you usually get are angled pics that tell you nothing about the shape of the drops. I see FSA Wing Pro Compacts that look like I want, but I go to the website and they look like a traditional bend.

[eBAUMANN]

FSA Wing Pro Compacts

They are great bars and not traditional bend.

[DrSpoke]

The Wing Pros are definitely not a traditional bend. I've not used the 3T but looking at the website I would say the FSAs have a very similar bend. That is, a typical compact bar. They have a short reach and a bend that keeps the hoods horizontal with a shallow drop. The flat tops were ok but I prefer round.

On my last bike, I went to the FSA New Ergo which has similar reach and top bend but a deeper drop - by about 1" - and really like them. Much more room in the drops as well as lower. You have a little more flexibility in fit too. You can raise the tops and have the drops in the same position or leave the tops where they are and then the drops will be lower. Or split the difference.

[Joachim]

Zipp..

[Uncle Jam's Army]

I love the Wing Pro Compacts (I think they're called Energy Compacts now). Not a traditional bend at all and nice flat ramp to the hoods.

But they're real close to the Ergonova's, except for the pronounced flare on the Ergonova's. I've ridden both and prefer the Wing Pro, but they're very similar. Reach is 80mm on the Wing Pro, so just a tad longer.

[Lewis Moon]

Zipp..

Does zipp make an Alu bar w/o the flair at the drops? If it's flared, it better be 46cm

[Lewis Moon]

I love the Wing Pro Compacts (I think they're called Energy Compacts now). Not a traditional bend at all and nice flat ramp to the hoods.

But they're real close to the Ergonova's, except for the pronounced flare on the Ergonova's. I've ridden both and prefer the Wing Pro, but they're very similar. Reach is 80mm on the Wing Pro, so just a tad longer.

I'm a little intrigued with K wings. Any experience?

[eddief]

Have alu on my travel bike and similar carbon on my real bikes.

I love the Wing Pro Compacts (I think they're called Energy Compacts now). Not a traditional bend at all and nice flat ramp to the hoods.

But they're real close to the Ergonova's, except for the pronounced flare on the Ergonova's. I've ridden both and prefer the Wing Pro, but they're very similar. Reach is 80mm on the Wing Pro, so just a tad longer.

[Keith A]

If you want something without flare, then give the Deda Zero100 RHM's a try. According to Competitive Cyclist's website, these have 128mm of drop and 75mm of reach...so these are just a little deeper than your 3T's, but not by much.

I also have the 3T Egronova and the FSA Wing Pro Compact, and as others have stated...these shapes are pretty similar and both of these do have some flare.

[VTCaraco]

Deda Zero100 RHM

I picked these up this past winter for one of my bikes and found that I really liked them. Switched over to a different bike mid-summer and realized that I REALLY liked the Dedas. When switching back to the bike with them, I was struck by how different they are from a more traditional bend/drop, but they're exactly what I bought for the new build that I'm currently putting together. Price is pretty reasonable, too.

[SteveV0983]

I have both Ergonovas and Deda Zero100s and it sounds like the Dedas are exactly what you are looking for. They do not have the flare and although the top is not perfectly round, it is very close and completely different from the 3T. The 3T reach number I always found incorrect for me because to get that reach, the ramp to the hoods pitches down. If you rotate them so that the ramp is level (which I prefer), the reach increases a bit. The 75mm reach on the Deda happens with a pretty level ramp and therefore, to me, feels a tiny bit shallower than the 3T. I go back and forth because I happen to love the drop shape on the 3T, but really cannot stand the egg shaped top. Ultimately, I always end up back on the Dedas. By the way, they have a new bar called the Zero100 "Shallow", which is different from a standard Zero100. You would want the standard, NOT the "shallow".
But here's the potential problem: the widest they come is 46 outside to outside, which is basically 44 center to center. Not sure if that is what you meant by 46.

[Keith A]

SteveV0983 -- good description of the handlebar shape. I would add that the 3T has a smoother curve on the end if drops than the Deda's.

BTW, have you tried the 3T Ergosum? It's the same shapes as Ergonova's, but with a round shape on top instead of the egg shape that you don't like.

[Lewis Moon]

I have both Ergonovas and Deda Zero100s and it sounds like the Dedas are exactly what you are looking for. They do not have the flare and although the top is not perfectly round, it is very close and completely different from the 3T. The 3T reach number I always found incorrect for me because to get that reach, the ramp to the hoods pitches down. If you rotate them so that the ramp is level (which I prefer), the reach increases a bit. The 75mm reach on the Deda happens with a pretty level ramp and therefore, to me, feels a tiny bit shallower than the 3T. I go back and forth because I happen to love the drop shape on the 3T, but really cannot stand the egg shaped top. Ultimately, I always end up back on the Dedas. By the way, they have a new bar called the Zero100 "Shallow", which is different from a standard Zero100. You would want the standard, NOT the "shallow".
But here's the potential problem: the widest they come is 46 outside to outside, which is basically 44 center to center. Not sure if that is what you meant by 46.

What about the compatibility issue with the deda? 31.7 rather than 31.8. I need to use a stem with a 35mm stack.

[jmal]

Ritchey WCS EvoCurve 44 C-C

[Keith A]

What about the compatibility issue with the deda? 31.7 rather than 31.8. I need to use a stem with a 35mm stack.it's not an issue with the clamp size. I've mixed and matched Deda stems and bars with other stems and bars, and never had a problem.

[jamesau]

These are FSA Energy Compact: 125 drop / 80 reach, up to 44cm width(measured CTC), aluminium. They have a slight flair; my 42s measure 42 CTC at drops and 41 at my brifter clamps. The tops are flat. I like them.

[SteveV0983]

Clamp size is definitely not an issue. I have used both FSA and 3T stems with both bars and they are both perfect. I wish the Ergosum were the same as the Ergonova without the egg shape, but the Ergosum is not a "compact" because it has a reach of 89 as opposed to 77 for the Ergonova. Honestly, an Ergonova without the egg shape would be my perfect bar, but I guess it does not exist.

[mudhead]

+1 for FSA Energy Compact bars

[CiclistiCliff]

Soma HWY 1 measure 46 ctc and no flare. Great bars that most people forget about.