Re: Drop bar replacements?

Peter Clinch wrote:
<big snip>

Quoted message said:

You articulate your problems as being with shape, but that is just
ignoring the far more basic problem that you've got weight where your
body hasn't evolved to take weight.

Shirley the solution is to move the saddle back a bit (and the bars as
well, if that makes the reach too long) and take some of the weight off
your hands? It sounds to me like the problem is less to do with shape
than position on the bike. Anyway, if you're going to keep your arms
slightly bent (a good idea), you'll get terrible fatigue if you've also
got too much weight on your hands.

--
JimP
--
"We don't have a plan, so nothing can go wrong" - Spike Milligan

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Perhaps "bow" would be a better adjective than "bandy". The bit you
snipped had a question mark. I was asking not telling.

Bowing allows for a bit of shock absorption which a straight arm doesn't.

Have you seen the picture? It is possible to have flexible elbows without
having the hands widely spaced.

Quoted message said:

You articulate your problems as being with shape, but that is just
ignoring the far more basic problem that you've got weight where your
body hasn't evolved to take weight.

Two issues:

~ I see plenty of people looking awkward on drop bars (no doubt from the
usual bad advice) so it is not something uniquely *my* problem.

~ Whether weight is a basic issue or not, in my case it is a constant so
shape has to be the only variable.

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Perhaps "bow" would be a better adjective than "bandy". The bit you
snipped
had a question mark. I was asking not telling.

Bowing allows for a bit of shock absorption which a straight arm doesn't.

Have you seen the picture?
Flexibility at the elbows doesn't require widely spaced hands.

Quoted message said:

You articulate your problems as being with shape, but that is just
ignoring the far more basic problem that you've got weight where your
body hasn't evolved to take weight.

It isn't weight, which is a constant. Shape is the only variable.

Besides, as I have said before, it isn't uniquely *my* problem. I see
plenty of people looking awkward on drop bars including during braking. I
still regard it as a cultural issue.

DavidR said:

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You articulate your problems as being with shape, but that is just
ignoring the far more basic problem that you've got weight where your
body hasn't evolved to take weight.

It isn't weight, which is a constant. Shape is the only variable.

You could vary weight distribution. Hands are made more comfortable by
cycling harder (putting more force/weight through pedals and pulling on
the bars), or reducing the reach, both resulting in less weight going on
the hands.

The shapes aren't that bad anyway. Campagnolo Ergo bodies, for example,
*are* hand-shaped, and the rest of the handlebar is shaped well enough for
comfort while allowing freedom of movement.

Quoted message said:

Besides, as I have said before, it isn't uniquely *my* problem. I see
plenty of people looking awkward on drop bars including during
braking. I still regard it as a cultural issue.

I think it is much to do with yourself and the kind of people you ride
with, like that bloke who couldn't stop himself from running into the back
of a car. You won't see many drop-using London commuters doing [censored] like
that, for a start.

~PB

DavidR said:

Have you seen the picture? It is possible to have flexible elbows without
having the hands widely spaced.

Yes, I have, and from my subjective look I didn't see anything awkward.
Which suggests strongly that "looking awkward" is a rather subjective
notion. I don't generally find that cover stars are selected to make
the activity look as if it's a Hard Time.

Quoted message said:

~ I see plenty of people looking awkward on drop bars (no doubt from the
usual bad advice) so it is not something uniquely *my* problem.

And this includes people on magazine covers where nobody would be
looking for anyone "looking awkward"! I questioned a young lady
straining up a hill in big gears why she didn't use the lower ones.
Part of her reason was that spinning up at high cadence "looks really
stupid": one man's meat etc.

Quoted message said:

~ Whether weight is a basic issue or not, in my case it is a constant so
shape has to be the only variable.

Whether weight is a constant or a variable isn't really much to do
whether it's an issue. My weight is a constant too, and if I lean my
upper body weight onto my arms and wrists in a fixed position for a
goodly time then they (and I) start to suffer. So it's pretty clear
that the weight being a constant does not rule it out as being a
problem. Some people can take that upper body weight better than
others, and they're happier in crouches than people like me who find it
grinds a bit after a while. The shape of the bars may be variable, but
that doesn't make it the answer.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Have you seen the picture? It is possible to have flexible elbows
without
having the hands widely spaced.

Yes, I have, and from my subjective look I didn't see anything awkward.
Which suggests strongly that "looking awkward" is a rather subjective

Well, I didn't actually say anything about these particular people "looking
awkward". At least not in the way some riders are. I am also not
commenting on the aesthetics.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

~ Whether weight is a basic issue or not, in my case it is a constant so
shape has to be the only variable.

Whether weight is a constant or a variable isn't really much to do
whether it's an issue. My weight is a constant too, and if I lean my
upper body weight onto my arms and wrists in a fixed position for a
goodly time then they (and I) start to suffer.

Wrong context. It didn't mean that weight is constant over a period of
time. It meant that in a comparison between bars, it is a constant.

"Pete Biggs" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

I think it is much to do with yourself and the kind of people you ride
with,

Exactly. The type of people I have had in mind all along. I wonder how many
there are up & down the country?

Quoted message said:

like that bloke who couldn't stop himself from running into the back
of a car.

Which bloke?

Quoted message said:

You won't see many drop-using London commuters doing [censored] like
that, for a start.

Well, there is certainly considerably less chance of seeing this than the
unfolding of any bad car crash. (And lest we forget, tune into uk.tosspot
where such things never happen.)

But be careful! The spirits may be listening.

DavidR said:

Quoted message said:

I think it is much to do with yourself and the kind of people you
ride with,

Exactly. The type of people I have had in mind all along. I wonder
how many there are up & down the country?

Not enough for me to see very many, and I see plenty of people on drops.

~PB

DavidR said:

Wrong context. It didn't mean that weight is constant over a period of
time. It meant that in a comparison between bars, it is a constant.

Only if the positions of the grab points are /exactly/ the same relative
to the saddle, and since one of the points of drops is you've got
basically as many grab points as you want spread out in a 3d space
that's not really going to be the case.
You seem to have missed the point again that drop bars do not have
static isolated positions to hold them at, and that is a very large part
of the point of the design.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Wrong context. It didn't mean that weight is constant over a period of
time. It meant that in a comparison between bars, it is a constant.

Quoted message said:

Only if the positions of the grab points are /exactly/ the same relative

Goes without saying. Though the only place difficult to emulate is the drop
itself (by definition) but since this is the position with the highest
hand loading it doesn't seem relevant. It is also a position that some
riders don't use.

Quoted message said:

You seem to have missed the point again that drop bars do not have static

Not at all.

Drop bars give a wider range of *body positions* than other configurations.
Just because I assert that the middle handholds are poorly shaped does not
deny the existence of those extreme positions.

I also see the drop as having a specific purpose (getting the body low for
possible aerodynamic gain) and doesn't take much part in the *hand
position* variety game - even if it is about the only properly hand shaped
part of the bar.

DavidR said:

Of course it is a reasonable comparison for those riders that never/very
rarely use the drop.

The *whole bar* is a continuously variable line so you can put your
hands anywhere, in any orientation or grip you like. I very rarely use
the drop on drops, but I /do/ use most of the top surface from the stem
to beyond the hoods.

Quoted message said:

Besides, when I don't use a drop bar I am not "stuck" in a single
position. What an odd notion you have.

But if you have beautifully "hand shaped" grips in a single place as
you've been on about then if you come off them you'll be in just the
sort of non-optimum shape/angle setup you've been complaining about the
whole time.

You're not comparing like with like. Again.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Besides, when I don't use a drop bar I am not "stuck" in a single
position. What an odd notion you have.

But if you have beautifully "hand shaped" grips in a single place

I hear the mooing of sacred cows...

There can be two interpretations of the above statement.

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

(') said:

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Besides, when I don't use a drop bar I am not "stuck" in a single
position. What an odd notion you have.

But if you have beautifully "hand shaped" grips in a single place

I hear the mooing of sacred cows...

There can be two interpretations of the above statement.

The only sacred cows around here are yours, laddie. You've been banging
on about this for literally months and have persuaded absolutely no-one.
There's a point where Being Right and not listening to what other people
have to say becomes monomania and obsession, and, what's worse, boring.

If it suits you, it suits you, and that's great. Just because it suits
you, doesn't mean it suits anyone else.

Time to change the subject.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Friends don't send friends HTML formatted emails.

DavidR said:

I hear the mooing of sacred cows...

As I ride by the field on my recumbent bike with no extra weight on my
arms at all, I don't find their noise to be a problem. A lot of the
other riders passing seem to be using drop bars very happily and not at
all awkwardly, so I guess they're not bothered either.

In an industry with enough daring-to-be-different to support complete
subcultures of cycle design that don't conform to your "sacred cow"
evaluation, if you've actually got a /point/ it shouldn't be too hard to
get what you want made and make enough money from those that agree with
you to at least cover your costs. So why don't you just get on with it?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

The only sacred cows around here are yours, laddie. You've been
banging on about this for literally months and have persuaded
absolutely no-one. There's a point where Being Right and not listening
to what other people have to say becomes monomania and obsession, and,
what's worse, boring.

Oh, would you prefer 20 postings a day about cyclists & road tax?

The fact that other people are also boring is no excuse (and they're in
the killfile anyway).

Quoted message said:

I never expected an "ah, I never thought of that" - few ideas
are original - but it is disappointing that the respondants here (all 3
of them!, claiming to represent all cycledom) have been unable to do
more than recite the stock responses.

That's because the rest of us all agree with them. The 'stock responses'
are the 'stock responses' because, errmmm, they're right. D'oh!

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; part time troll.

"Pete Biggs" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

That's terribly insulting and dismissive after so much time and care has
gone into the replies.

My apologies.

Quoted message said:

I can't help it if my responses happen to coincide with "stock"
responses,
whatever they are. In fact I read nothing about drops before I started
using them, nor did any of my friends at the time use them so peer group
pressure had nothing to do with it, and hasn't done since either. I'm
not going to make anything up if that isn't enough.

I accept that as sincere. From the way things are put I am sure that
users are sincere in general but I still feel there is no room for
discussion. Peter Clinch's "stuck in one position" really seemed to sum it
up.

Let me give you a couple of anecdotes:

A few days ago I received an email from someone who knew of my interest in
cycling through other channels (we have never met) and asked me for advice
about suitability of a particular model he had seen.

He had selected it on price and gave his intended purpose. And he added "I
do not like drop handlebars". My immediate reaction was to wonder why he
felt it necessary to say that. I was nearly tempted to reply with "Don't
worry, such feelings are completely normal..."

Today, someone noticed my whacky bars. I went over the positions of the
tops of the drop bar and explained why they don't fit the hands. Then he
said, "ah but there is still the drop". Fair enough. Possibly.
Unfortunately I never saw whether he put his money where his mouth is and
actually used the drop. I didn't see any denial about what I claim, yet
it's ok because there's a drop? Hmm.

DavidR said:

I accept that as sincere. From the way things are put I am sure that
users are sincere in general but I still feel there is no room for
discussion. Peter Clinch's "stuck in one position" really seemed to sum it
up.

Looking up through the thread the only picture I could remember looking
at was http://www.sheldonbrown.com/images/iro-584-09.jpg which doesn't
appear to let the user rove around them at will.

I realise with hindsight these aren't your bars, and the link to them
gives me a 404.

Quoted message said:

He had selected it on price and gave his intended purpose. And he added "I
do not like drop handlebars". My immediate reaction was to wonder why he
felt it necessary to say that. I was nearly tempted to reply with "Don't
worry, such feelings are completely normal..."

The same reason why, if I was choosing a car and asking for advice, I
would point out "I don't like saloon cars". It makes the advisor's life
easier by saving a waste of thinking on solutions that won't be taken.
I know many people who think similarly. But I don't think any of us
think that booted cars only exist because they are "sacred cows".

And perhaps he doesn't like drops because his experience was with poorly
setup ones? Maybe not, but how can you tell from what he says, and
assume it's just because they're [censored]?

Quoted message said:

Today, someone noticed my whacky bars. I went over the positions of the
tops of the drop bar and explained why they don't fit the hands. Then he
said, "ah but there is still the drop". Fair enough. Possibly.

But strangely they fit Pete's, and mine, and Simon's, because we realise
we can hold them any way we want and anywhere we want, our hands are
flexible things and we're canny enough to fiddle with placement and
model. Don't forget I hardly ever use the drop on drops, as I've
already pointed out to you several times.

When are you going to learn that for every anecdote you have there are
hundreds upon hundreds working the other way of people very happy with
drop bars that are correctly set up and properly selected for the
individuals concerned?

But having told me my mind is stuck in a rut and I'm not prepared to
entertain any other possibilities, it appears you're having yet another
PKB moment.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"DavidR" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I never expected an "ah, I never thought of that" - few ideas
are original - but it is disappointing that the respondants here (all 3 of
them!, claiming to represent all cycledom) have been unable to do more
than
recite the stock responses.

Put me down as somebody who agrees with the 3, but can't be arsed with the
argument (followed it briefly a _long_ time ago, then gave up when it became
apparent it was going nowhere.

So that's at least 4...

clive

in message <[email hidden]>, Clive

George (') said:

"DavidR" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I never expected an "ah, I never thought of that" - few ideas
are original - but it is disappointing that the respondants here (all
3 of them!, claiming to represent all cycledom) have been unable to do
more than
recite the stock responses.

Put me down as somebody who agrees with the 3, but can't be arsed with
the argument (followed it briefly a _long_ time ago, then gave up when
it became apparent it was going nowhere.

So that's at least 4...

Five.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Good grief, I can remember when England won the Ashes.