I think I'll stick to alloy handlebars

[yinzerniner]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Carbon handlebars - Lighter? More shock abssorbing?

Carbon has been used in road drop handlebars for a number of years now, taking its place next to aluminum. But are they lighter? Not really - carbon handlebars are typically in the mid-200 gram range, with the lightest coming in just under 200 grams. In comparison, many aluminum handlebars are in the mid-200 gram range, with the lightest coming in just under 200 grams.

Are they more shock absorbing? Not really - in this VeloNews Technical Q&A article, Lennard Zinn asked several carbon handlebar makers if carbon bars can be more vibration absorbing. Their answers were all over the place, with 1 saying carbon bars absorbed more shock, 1 saying that shock absorption doesn't really come from the handlebars, and 2 saying that carbon bars are stiffer and more harsh (with 1 of these recommending that user use aluminum bars for more comfort).

It seems the only real advantage of carbon fiber for handlebars is that it can be molded into more varied shapes. This might be might provide more hand comfort for some, if the bar is shaped to their hands better. Or it can be shaped for better aerodynamics.

Interestingly, Zipp made its name as a pioneer in carbon fiber wheels and components, and they used to make carbon fiber handlebars, but it appears they have switched to aluminum for all its road drop handlebars now.

I have several bikes, but 2 of them are highly specialized: One is set up for racing criteriums and time trials, so this uses a carbon handlebar because it is more aerodynamic; The other bike is a super-light hill climb bike (about 11 lb), so this bike uses a sub-200 gram aluminum handlebar. All the rest of my bike use aluminum handlebars.

Some inaccuracies in the statements and especially lacking context and proof, but the hypothesis seems to be sound - that the benefits of CF isn't necessarily what's being marketed.

The Velonews article cited - it's from around 2003-2004 since it cites the "New" Hollowtech II. CF handlebars have come a LONG way since then. And no one suggests aluminum bars are more comfortable - the only quote that comes close is the last where they say:

From Stella Azzurra
Carbon fiber parts are generally considered stiffer, that’s why manypeople wrap extra soft tapes on bars or gel pads underneath them. I donot have comparative research among all the carbon bars, so it’s difficultto say if there are carbon bars that are stiffer than others. I would suggesttrying a carbon bar, and depending on the feeling, apply a thick and softtape (i.e. Tecno Spugna extra soft) or a thinner tape (Tecno Spugna standarddensity) to absorb the vibrations. I am sure that extra light aluminumbars are very flexible because the light weight is obtained by the lackof material and so the result is generally a weak and flexible light bar.Instead, at the same weight, with a carbon fiber bar you can have a strong,safe and stiff product.

For any shape the carbon will always be lighter than aluminum. Whether it's stronger, stiffer, more shock absorbing - who knows?
Ritchey Streem - Alu 270g, CF 235g
Zipp Ergo - Alu 260g, CF 205g
Deda Superzero - Alu 305g, CF 215g
3T Superergo - Alu 279g, CF 199g

Also, Zipp makes both ergo and aero carbon handlebars, not as many shapes as their aluminum models but then again Zipp was never the handlebar shop that 3T, FSA, Enve or Deda are.

Retail prices of CF vs Alu bars of similar shapes is usually 3x, but actual cost is usually higher. And if selling CF holds its value better than Alu.

Here's a more recent comparison of Alu vs CF.
https://gravelbikes.cc/tests/quick-t...num-handlebar/
Not exactly perfect since they don't compare exact designs against each other, but they conclude that it's really more about the design than the material. Where has that been said before.....

[glepore]

Originally Posted by Old School

I clarified that the Canyon Clamp is completely silly




Mathieu van der Poel can easily average 800 watts for a minute. Apple apples

lol. Ain't that the truth.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

- it's from around 2003-2004

To add context to yinzerniner's post:

In the year 2003, "Desperate Housewives" had yet to appear on the Television Set.

[joevers]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Carbon handlebars - Lighter? More shock abssorbing?

Carbon has been used in road drop handlebars for a number of years now, taking its place next to aluminum. But are they lighter? Not really - carbon handlebars are typically in the mid-200 gram range, with the lightest coming in just under 200 grams. In comparison, many aluminum handlebars are in the mid-200 gram range, with the lightest coming in just under 200 grams.

Interestingly, Zipp made its name as a pioneer in carbon fiber wheels and components, and they used to make carbon fiber handlebars, but it appears they have switched to aluminum for all its road drop handlebars now.

Zipp absolutely still makes carbon bars. We got two in to the shop for customers in the last week, both with the new graphics. Carbon is also just about always lighter by somewhere around 60g vs top end aluminum. Agree that it's misleading to quote a Leonard Zinn opinion piece from 18 years ago, carbon bars are not even close to where they were 18 years ago.

They can be lots of things because the layup and shaping can be so different. I've found certain current gen aero bars from reputable brands to just be straight up too flexible in the drops, some round bars too stiff and uncomfortable, and some (Enve, among many others) that are stiffer than alloy, super comfortable and good at absorbing road buzz. I go back and forth on carbon bars, but there are some dang good carbon bars out there and saying they're not lighter or more shock absorbing than alloy is just not accurate.

[RoosterCogset]

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

For any shape the carbon will always be lighter than aluminum. Whether it's stronger, stiffer, more shock absorbing - who knows?
Ritchey Streem - Alu 270g, CF 235g
Zipp Ergo - Alu 260g, CF 205g
Deda Superzero - Alu 305g, CF 215g
3T Superergo - Alu 279g, CF 199g

Fun to look at data from a long time ago
https://weightweenies.starbike.com/l...roadhandlebars

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

Some inaccuracies in the statements and especially lacking context and proof, but the hypothesis seems to be sound - that the benefits of CF isn't necessarily what's being marketed.

The Velonews article cited - it's from around 2003-2004 since it cites the "New" Hollowtech II. CF handlebars have come a LONG way since then. And no one suggests aluminum bars are more comfortable - the only quote that comes close is the last where they say:


For any shape the carbon will always be lighter than aluminum. Whether it's stronger, stiffer, more shock absorbing - who knows?
Ritchey Streem - Alu 270g, CF 235g
Zipp Ergo - Alu 260g, CF 205g
Deda Superzero - Alu 305g, CF 215g
3T Superergo - Alu 279g, CF 199g

The VeloNews article may be old, but at least it was closer to an apples-to-apples comparison. Due to market demands, handlebar makers are no longer making high-end handlebars aluminum handlebars, so for a true apples to apples comparison today, you'd have to compare aluminum handlebars to low end carbon handlebars.

Many of the high-end aluminum handlebars aren't available anymore, but I've got a few models of NOS bars that I just weight on my own scale: ITM Millenium, 248g; 3T Less XL, 214g; Cinelli Neos, 214g, and ITM THE, 198g. All are 31.8mm clamp (except the THE which is 26.0), 40cm C-C and with ergo bends. Average weight of the 4 aluminum bars I measured is 219g, vs. an average of 214g for the 4 carbon bars you cited (assuming these are actual weights, and not just advertised weights).

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

Also, Zipp makes both ergo and aero carbon handlebars, not as many shapes as their aluminum models but then again Zipp was never the handlebar shop that 3T, FSA, Enve or Deda are.

You're right. When I looked on the Zipp web page, I didn't click the "Load More" button enough times to find the carbon bars. From my count, Zipp makes 15 models of aluminum handlebars, and only 4 models of carbon handlebars.

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

Here's a more recent comparison of Alu vs CF.
https://gravelbikes.cc/tests/quick-t...num-handlebar/
Not exactly perfect since they don't compare exact designs against each other, but they conclude that it's really more about the design than the material. Where has that been said before.....

Yes. It is also likely that the carbon bars tested were more expensive than the aluminum bars - I wonder how the test would have come out if the aluminum bars had the amount of design/manufacturing put into them that you could do if they cost as much as carbon bars.

[yinzerniner]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

The VeloNews article may be old, but at least it was closer to an apples-to-apples comparison. Due to market demands, handlebar makers are no longer making high-end handlebars aluminum handlebars, so for a true apples to apples comparison today, you'd have to compare aluminum handlebars to low end carbon handlebars.

I kind of see your point - kind of. Not sure if comparing high-end aluminum bars to low end carbon bars of different manufacturers is "apples to apples" unless you're considering pricing as the the constant. In my earlier comparison the constant was the manufacturer and bar shape, thus showing that carbon will always be lighter. Whether it will be stronger, or more dampening, or stiffer, etc is up to some controlled testing. And all of the Alu bars listed in previous post are considered top of the range.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Many of the high-end aluminum handlebars aren't available anymore, but I've got a few models of NOS bars that I just weight on my own scale: ITM Millenium, 248g; 3T Less XL, 214g; Cinelli Neos, 214g, and ITM THE, 198g. All are 31.8mm clamp (except the THE which is 26.0), 40cm C-C and with ergo bends. Average weight of the 4 aluminum bars I measured is 219g, vs. an average of 214g for the 4 carbon bars you cited (assuming these are actual weights, and not just advertised weights).

Again, the CF bars cited were just the ones that I could think of off the top of my head that had direct Alu counterparts with stated weights at 42cm, and a few are aero-shaped which adds weight. If you want to compare regular/compact shaped CF bars from the four manufacturers above, you'd have:
Ritchey Superlogic 190g 42cm
Zipp Ergo 205 42cm
Deda Superleggera RS 180g 42cm
3T Superergo 199g 42cm

which average out to 193.5g at 42cm vs the 3 40cm 31.8 clamp bars at 225.3g you mentioned (including a 26.0 clamp bar in average weight is super faulty)
The 3T Less XL was notoriously noodly for an Alu bar, but so are a lot of their carbon offerings (ask me how I know ). But for true apples to apples comparisons sake, the Cinelli Neos alu at 40cm is 214g, while the current Neos CF is 185g at 42cm size (stated) and can be picked up for less than $200 brand new. While the value proposition isn't there the weight saving is undeniable.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Yes. It is also likely that the carbon bars tested were more expensive than the aluminum bars - I wonder how the test would have come out if the aluminum bars had the amount of design/manufacturing put into them that you could do if they cost as much as carbon bars.

Now THAT is an interesting question - if someone really put their mind to making an Alu high end bar, even at twice the price of current offerings but still lower than carbon, whether it could compete with carbon bars with regards to weight, stiffness, shape, etc while also improving on strength and impact resistance. Could be a crit racers dream.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

Now THAT is an interesting question - if someone really put their mind to making an Alu high end bar, even at twice the price of current offerings but still lower than carbon, whether it could compete with carbon bars with regards to weight, stiffness, shape, etc while also improving on strength and impact resistance. Could be a crit racers dream.

While it has been noted that carbon fabrication technology has advanced in the last 18 years, so has aluminum fabrication technology. In the olden days, aluminum bars started as constant wall thickness tubes, bent into shape, and with an extra re-inforcement sleeve installed at the stem clamp. Later they started using butted tubing. But while more advanced hydroforming has been applied to aluminum frames (particularly MTB frames) in just the last few years, I don't think much has been done with it for drop handlebars. Imagine if someone really put their minds to how far they could go in hydroforming an aluminum handlebar ...

[pasadena]

they can do a lot with hydroforming
I don't know the market, but seems at a certain pricepoint, people value carbon for weight... but I would def buy some cool hydroformed alloy bars.

I run Zipp alloy bars, and they are around 250g. Not bad for an inexpensive bar. Even for my weight weenie build, I'm staying with them.

Never felt comfortable w carbon bars, but i'm someone who throws bars away if I crash on them.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

While it has been noted that carbon fabrication technology has advanced in the last 18 years, so has aluminum fabrication technology. In the olden days, aluminum bars started as constant wall thickness tubes, bent into shape, and with an extra re-inforcement sleeve installed at the stem clamp. Later they started using butted tubing. But while more advanced hydroforming has been applied to aluminum frames (particularly MTB frames) in just the last few years, I don't think much has been done with it for drop handlebars. Imagine if someone really put their minds to how far they could go in hydroforming an aluminum handlebar ...

[mtechnica]

Sorry Mark but carbon bars are lighter than the equivalent model aluminum bars and all of the lightest bars on the market are carbon.

Also with regards to comfort and whatnot I guess that's subjective and could vary bar to bar but it's a real thing and I stand by my conclusion that carbon bars are usually more comfortable. It's a thing for MTB as well.

[bicycletricycle]

I think you are right, a carbon bar will always be lighter than a aluminum bar, all other things being equal. Some of carbons attributes make it difficult to realize all of the potential weight savings in a handlebar though, especially in the complex case of a road handlebar.

I question the comfort thing, I think it is mostly in peoples heads. Sure it dampens some higher frequency vibrations, that is just one way in which a handlebar can increase your comfort and I think it is probably the smallest one.

Super thin handlebar tape with basically no padding is also described as comfortable, well, I just don't know if the word has any meaning.

Comfort is in the eye of the beholder?

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Sorry Mark but carbon bars are lighter than the equivalent model aluminum bars and all of the lightest bars on the market are carbon.

Also with regards to comfort and whatnot I guess that's subjective and could vary bar to bar but it's a real thing and I stand by my conclusion that carbon bars are usually more comfortable. It's a thing for MTB as well.

[zap]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Imagine if someone really put their minds to how far they could go in hydroforming an aluminum handlebar ...

There is so little to work with.....aluminum can only be so thin given the diameter.

Personally, I would not ride a sub 270g al handlebar. Too much flew. My Crumpton does have a carbon bar that weighs 180g and is stiff enough for my hard out of the saddle efforts. One tandem has a Thomson carbon bar that weighs 220g.

Comfort.....I don't wear gloves (except when its cold) and I don't notice any difference between al and carbon. I use thinnish bar tape too.

Note. I have been racing/riding carbon bars since '88. Still have that 180g bar.

Note 2. The only reason I use bar tape...increased diameter and improved grip.....especially on hot humid days.

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by bicycletricycle

I think you are right, a carbon bar will always be lighter than a aluminum bar, all other things being equal. Some of carbons attributes make it difficult to realize all of the potential weight savings in a handlebar though, especially in the complex case of a road handlebar.

I question the comfort thing, I think it is mostly in peoples heads. Sure it dampens some higher frequency vibrations, that is just one way in which a handlebar can increase your comfort and I think it is probably the smallest one.

Super thin handlebar tape with basically no padding is also described as comfortable, well, I just don't know if the word has any meaning.

Comfort is in the eye of the beholder?

Have you tried a lot of carbon bars?

[bicycletricycle]

I have owned a few road/mountain versions in the past. Rode a lot of them on customer bikes and shop bikes.

Initially I liked the larger more interesting shapes carbon made possible. Hydroforming has bridged a lot of that gap.

I couldn't ever really feel the increased vibration damping. I think handlebar tape and tire pressure makes a much bigger difference than bar material.

I have never tried the same bike with aluminum and carbon bars in close succession in an attempt to really isolate the difference.

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Have you tried a lot of carbon bars?

[pasadena]

carbon bars on road bikes are for weight savings and one-piece designs.

Since they are often touted as stiffer than alloy bars, I haven't noticed much real difference in vibration dampening (how much vibration do you encounter on a road bike that isn't taken up by tires and bar tape?)

I had Ritchey WCS carbon bars and going to Zipp alloys, no difference.
Besides being cool looking, nothing notable in performance difference w the Canyon H36 either. Though it does look and feel good, and a nice hidden area for the Di2 box.