Handlebar width

[wc1934]

Originally Posted by azrider

good info here

Originally Posted by 11.4 View Post
There are a number of long threads on "narrow handlebars" that you might read here.

The bottom line is that traditional fits use a number of dogmatic standards that don't really have much justification. Knee over pedal spindle is one. Handlebar width is another. If you watch the pro peloton, they were all on 46's a few years ago and now are all doing 38's to 42's. Just being broad shouldered doesn't mean that the center of your shoulder joint is as wide -- spot that point and you may find that you could be fitting narrower bars, but even then, nothing says your bars have to match your joint center distance across your shoulders. That's just an arbitrary way to do it.

Here's the argument, not too briefly, for narrower bars, so you can see the reasoning and how to fit your bike to you with narrower bars. It has some reason and justification to it (more than just matching your shoulder width does) but you can decide how you feel. It's an approach that's become quite popular with field sprinters, track sprinters, anyone with an aero position, and so on.

1. Narrower bars help you to pull up with your hands in more direct opposition to the downward force on your pedals. Ideally one could say that you want your pedals and handlebars at the same width for that reason, though that's probably overdoing it for pragmatic reasons. But if you think of picking up a heavy box, you won't do it with your arms spread wide apart -- you'll want to match the width of your stance. It's the same basic idea on the bike. This also helps minimize the side to side swaying that comes when you have to tilt the bike to position your left hand over your left pedal when you are pushing down with the left foot, and then to the right and back again.

2. Aerodynamics are better. With arms open you're just opening a big trap for wind.

3. When your hands come together more, you reduce the tendency of your shoulders to sag, which isn't a good thing. That in turn strengthens your back and facilitates better hip rotation.

4. You don't just want to go to narrower bars without making other changes. If you think about bringing your bar width closer, your hands will be moving a bit forward as well. If you take 2-3 cm out of your bar width, your hands will naturally be 1-2 cm farther forward. This means you need to plan for a longer stem. It'll also give you a naturally lower position and by stretching out your back a little more, enable you to tension your back a bit better for more power into the pedals.

So this is how you can think your way to narrower bars. Now it doesn't always work for everyone. It takes a couple weeks to get fully comfortable and get your bike dialed in, and you may simply do better riding with a different layout. That happens. But there's not much reasoning or serious logic to most fits. It's like the Italian CONI manual of the 1950s, which was circulated all over the US in the 70s and became the basis for fitting in Japan in the national keirin system. It's full of dogmatic standards that increasingly don't make much sense today. I'm not saying all fitters do a bad job, but in the end you have to figure out your own fit. That fitter is just a first approximation and your fit will change as you ride more. So I might suggest you stick with the bars you have now until you've sorted out other things and ridden enough so you've developed a more typical level of flexibility and strength. Make sense?

Thanks - was helpful especially # 4 and stem length. I thought they might be related but couldnt figure it out.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by bikinchris

I think its weird how companies spend tons of money making aero frames, aero pedals, aero brakes, aero wheels and encourage riders to think aero, think of every thing to help them go fast, wear aero clothes even. They warn about sticking ANYTHING out into the wind, then they put 46cm bars on an aero bike.

I've wondered about that, too. There are several aero bikes that are designed to be used with the manufacturers proprietary aero handlebars (because the handlebars blend with the frame, and provide completely internal cable routing). But they don't make these handlebars in narrower widths. Wind tunnel testing has shown that a rider will save more drag power on a narrower standard bar than with these highly optimized proprietary (wider) bar. There are several bikes I've crossed off my list because their proprietary handlebars/stems would prevent me from achieving my best riding position.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by wc1934

1. Narrower bars help you to pull up with your hands in more direct opposition to the downward force on your pedals. Ideally one could say that you want your pedals and handlebars at the same width for that reason, though that's probably overdoing it for pragmatic reasons. But if you think of picking up a heavy box, you won't do it with your arms spread wide apart -- you'll want to match the width of your stance. It's the same basic idea on the bike. This also helps minimize the side to side swaying that comes when you have to tilt the bike to position your left hand over your left pedal when you are pushing down with the left foot, and then to the right and back again.

I don't buy this argument. Pedalling is an assymetric force - there's far more force on the descending pedal than on the rising pedal. Because of this force imbalance, the rider's force on the handlebars is also assymetric. A wider handlebar makes it easier for the rider to fight this force imbalance. This is especially true when out of the saddle. Because the downward pedal force is offset from the plane of the bike, the rider either has to lean the bike in the opposite direction (to bring the downward force more directly in line with the ground contact point), or use their arms to provide a counter-torque on the handlebars. Fighting this force imbalance is much easier with wider handlebars.

The main benefit of narrower handlebars is reducing aerodynamic drag. When this extra drag was less appreciated, riders naturally gravitated toward wider bars for better power delivery. But now that riders know that narrower bars produce less drag, they still can't go too narrow because they have balance drag reduction with less effective power delivery.

[bikinchris]

Originally Posted by nooneline

Narrower than that, even. For today's track sprinters, 37 is wide, 35 is normal, and 32 cm is common. There are also a few people out there on 28cm handlebars.

My mistake. I should have said 36cm, which is what I rode. But you are correct.

[paredown]

For fun, I just measured the Cinelli bars on my original racing machine from 1971--39.5 cm c-t-c.

I settled on about 42 c-t-c now--I'm a little bigger but I also think that I've been influenced by the modern trend towards wider bars.

If I did the shoulder measurement, it would suggest 44-46 which feel stupid wide to me.

My personal theory is that wider bars became more typical because of the less-than-benign influence of mountain bikers (like the 1 1/8" headset). Wider bars are great on a mountain bike--you need the leverage on rough terrain, since you are actually steering to avoid obstacles--on a road bike, not so much.