Threadless Stem column adapters

ddog said:

http://www.profile-design.com/2006_product_pages/accesories/acc_converter.html

The Profile Threadless from Threaded Stem adapter above seems like the
only way a road bike can achieve the advantages of OS stems and OS
handlebars both. I've only found a Summit Adjustable stem which will
work with an OS handlebar. As well, IRD seems to be the only Road Riser
stem which will take OS bars that I've found. Of course the minimum
requirements are 2 stem bolts and 4 bar bolts for safety: which
eliminates most of them.

i wouldn't get too hung up on the bolt count, especially not for the
steerer end.

regarding the riser stem, be careful. the ird, from what i can tell, is
welded - there was a thread on that recently.

Quoted message said:

So if conversions are based on threaded stem bearings, does all the
threadless spacers for stem heights disappear and the only way to
change height is the Stem extentions you attach?

you're much better off buying a new fork and sorting out the rise with
spacers on that.

http://www.bikeusa.com/MERCHANT2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=MSGI&Product_Code=FK2483

Quoted message said:

I don't see how to get out of trying the adjustable (Summit) stem first
to find the correct height since many things effecting the end
height/depth will change. I was just hoping the oversize (2 bolt) stem
and (4 bolt) bar clamps would help solve reported problems of earlier
adjustable stems. This is the ONLY oversize bar adjustable I've found,
so that's what I was hoping any way. The IRD OS bar riser stem model
for road bikes looks nice but it would be a one-time lucky shot if it
fit me anotomically. The problem I've got is figuring out where each
bar will end up in height and in depth. All measures seem subjective
and hidden, including the conversion height differences.

in all this, the new flat bar with the conversion kit is going to end up
at pretty much the same height as the top of the drops you currently
have on there. if you need significantly more height, again, replace
the fork and use the steer tube to get maximum safe rise. and consider
a riser bar - you can get up to 2.5" iirc.

Quoted message said:

These seem like 2 recent adjustable and riser stem models so I'm not
sure if anyone would have any experience with these models, as well the
Profile Threadless column adapter 'seems' new.

Any information would be appreciated. It seems like a good change to
get OS wide handlebar grips for 'grip' carpal tunnel preventative
measures. An ME article on Sheldon's site also said the conversion
would make the frame feel more solid, but I'm not sure if he meant a
threadless head set conversion versus the threadless stem column
conversion.

threadless.

Jim,

Thanks for the valuable information. That fork you showed is a third of
the price for painting one too.
I did however want to keep the 27" wheels for frame geometry and
braking considerations.
Looking at that web sites forks, it only had one type of 27" wheel
threaded forks I saw looking briefly, so there may be no 27" wheel
threadless forks.

Again, thanks for information!

jim beam said:

ddog said:

http://www.profile-design.com/2006_product_pages/accesories/acc_converter.html

The Profile Threadless from Threaded Stem adapter above seems like the
only way a road bike can achieve the advantages of OS stems and OS
handlebars both. I've only found a Summit Adjustable stem which will
work with an OS handlebar. As well, IRD seems to be the only Road Riser
stem which will take OS bars that I've found. Of course the minimum
requirements are 2 stem bolts and 4 bar bolts for safety: which
eliminates most of them.

i wouldn't get too hung up on the bolt count, especially not for the
steerer end.

regarding the riser stem, be careful. the ird, from what i can tell, is
welded - there was a thread on that recently.

Quoted message said:

So if conversions are based on threaded stem bearings, does all the
threadless spacers for stem heights disappear and the only way to
change height is the Stem extentions you attach?

you're much better off buying a new fork and sorting out the rise with
spacers on that.

http://www.bikeusa.com/MERCHANT2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=MSGI&Product_Code=FK2483

Quoted message said:

I don't see how to get out of trying the adjustable (Summit) stem first
to find the correct height since many things effecting the end
height/depth will change. I was just hoping the oversize (2 bolt) stem
and (4 bolt) bar clamps would help solve reported problems of earlier
adjustable stems. This is the ONLY oversize bar adjustable I've found,
so that's what I was hoping any way. The IRD OS bar riser stem model
for road bikes looks nice but it would be a one-time lucky shot if it
fit me anotomically. The problem I've got is figuring out where each
bar will end up in height and in depth. All measures seem subjective
and hidden, including the conversion height differences.

in all this, the new flat bar with the conversion kit is going to end up
at pretty much the same height as the top of the drops you currently
have on there. if you need significantly more height, again, replace
the fork and use the steer tube to get maximum safe rise. and consider
a riser bar - you can get up to 2.5" iirc.

Quoted message said:

These seem like 2 recent adjustable and riser stem models so I'm not
sure if anyone would have any experience with these models, as well the
Profile Threadless column adapter 'seems' new.

Any information would be appreciated. It seems like a good change to
get OS wide handlebar grips for 'grip' carpal tunnel preventative
measures. An ME article on Sheldon's site also said the conversion
would make the frame feel more solid, but I'm not sure if he meant a
threadless head set conversion versus the threadless stem column
conversion.

threadless.

ddog said:

http://www.profile-design.com/2006_product_pages/accesories/acc_converter.html

The Profile Threadless from Threaded Stem adapter above seems like the
only way a road bike can achieve the advantages of OS stems and OS
handlebars both.

What advantages? Are you converting just to get OS bars?

Quoted message said:

I don't see how to get out of trying the adjustable (Summit) stem first
to find the correct height since many things effecting the end
height/depth will change.

They will, but adjustable stems change height and reach at the same
time, so the combo you may want may not be available.

Bar height and reach preferences tend to change over time when you're
starting riding.

I don't know what you're trying to do, but you may be better off just
buying a conventional stem with a lot of adjustable range and doing the
conversion later when your preferences firm up.

Quoted message said:

Any information would be appreciated. It seems like a good change to
get OS wide handlebar grips for 'grip' carpal tunnel preventative
measures.

"Carpal tunnel" from bikes? Where did you get that? If you want fatter
grips, the traditional solution is to use more/fatter tape.

ddog said:

Jim,

Thanks for the valuable information. That fork you showed is a third of
the price for painting one too.
I did however want to keep the 27" wheels for frame geometry and
braking considerations.
Looking at that web sites forks, it only had one type of 27" wheel
threaded forks I saw looking briefly, so there may be no 27" wheel
threadless forks.

there's only 4mm difference between 700c and 27". if the brake fits,
and i'm pretty sure it will, that fork will be fine.

Quoted message said:

Again, thanks for information!

jim beam said:

ddog said:

http://www.profile-design.com/2006_product_pages/accesories/acc_converter.html

The Profile Threadless from Threaded Stem adapter above seems like the
only way a road bike can achieve the advantages of OS stems and OS
handlebars both. I've only found a Summit Adjustable stem which will
work with an OS handlebar. As well, IRD seems to be the only Road Riser
stem which will take OS bars that I've found. Of course the minimum
requirements are 2 stem bolts and 4 bar bolts for safety: which
eliminates most of them.

i wouldn't get too hung up on the bolt count, especially not for the
steerer end.

regarding the riser stem, be careful. the ird, from what i can tell, is
welded - there was a thread on that recently.

Quoted message said:

So if conversions are based on threaded stem bearings, does all the
threadless spacers for stem heights disappear and the only way to
change height is the Stem extentions you attach?

you're much better off buying a new fork and sorting out the rise with
spacers on that.

http://www.bikeusa.com/MERCHANT2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=MSGI&Product_Code=FK2483

Quoted message said:

I don't see how to get out of trying the adjustable (Summit) stem first
to find the correct height since many things effecting the end
height/depth will change. I was just hoping the oversize (2 bolt) stem
and (4 bolt) bar clamps would help solve reported problems of earlier
adjustable stems. This is the ONLY oversize bar adjustable I've found,
so that's what I was hoping any way. The IRD OS bar riser stem model
for road bikes looks nice but it would be a one-time lucky shot if it
fit me anotomically. The problem I've got is figuring out where each
bar will end up in height and in depth. All measures seem subjective
and hidden, including the conversion height differences.

in all this, the new flat bar with the conversion kit is going to end up
at pretty much the same height as the top of the drops you currently
have on there. if you need significantly more height, again, replace
the fork and use the steer tube to get maximum safe rise. and consider
a riser bar - you can get up to 2.5" iirc.

Quoted message said:

These seem like 2 recent adjustable and riser stem models so I'm not
sure if anyone would have any experience with these models, as well the
Profile Threadless column adapter 'seems' new.

Any information would be appreciated. It seems like a good change to
get OS wide handlebar grips for 'grip' carpal tunnel preventative
measures. An ME article on Sheldon's site also said the conversion
would make the frame feel more solid, but I'm not sure if he meant a
threadless head set conversion versus the threadless stem column
conversion.

threadless.

Peter, thanks for the feed back:

Peter Cole said:

What advantages? Are you converting just to get OS bars?

Aero bars on top of low bars cramp me in too much, so OS bars would be
an added factor, like the difference between buying a normal bic pen
and a fat one that doesn't fatigue fingers on large hands. Lifting just
the aero bars up one inch difference will be a hassle, so will wait on
that discrete option and see what lifting both bars do since it is
simpler and greater range with adjustable stem.

Quoted message said:

I don't know what you're trying to do, but you may be better off just
buying a conventional stem with a lot of adjustable range and doing the
conversion later when your preferences firm up.

My ridng gate is fairly firm now. Running for twenty years makes bicyle
adaptation seem very easy, if all biomechanical aspects are aligned.
Options are very limited in conventional stems, so the stem conversion
seems to be the easiest option given other criteria and product trends
in the future.

Quoted message said:

"Carpal tunnel" from bikes? Where did you get that? If you want fatter
grips, the traditional solution is to use more/fatter tape.

Like wrists or ankles, grip is a critical repetitive trauma disorder
(rtd) since large hands on small diameter bars can cut off oxygen very
quickly to hand and then wrist (hand goes numb). Padding should not be
used in excess since it does not provide support. Support is where
chiropractic skeletal-posture alignment is achieved and maintained.
Effectively you will squeeze too fluffy of foaming to the same small
grip, which again is bad for the grip but in addition adds repetitions
squeezing which makes it a lifetime disorder.

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

Quoted message said:

Peter, thanks for the feed back:

Peter Cole said:

What advantages? Are you converting just to get OS bars?

Aero bars on top of low bars cramp me in too much, so OS bars would be
an added factor, like the difference between buying a normal bic pen
and a fat one that doesn't fatigue fingers on large hands. Lifting just
the aero bars up one inch difference will be a hassle, so will wait on
that discrete option and see what lifting both bars do since it is
simpler and greater range with adjustable stem.

Quoted message said:

I don't know what you're trying to do, but you may be better off just
buying a conventional stem with a lot of adjustable range and doing the
conversion later when your preferences firm up.

My ridng gate is fairly firm now. Running for twenty years makes bicyle
adaptation seem very easy, if all biomechanical aspects are aligned.
Options are very limited in conventional stems, so the stem conversion
seems to be the easiest option given other criteria and product trends
in the future.

Quoted message said:

"Carpal tunnel" from bikes? Where did you get that? If you want fatter
grips, the traditional solution is to use more/fatter tape.

Like wrists or ankles, grip is a critical repetitive trauma disorder
(rtd) since large hands on small diameter bars can cut off oxygen very
quickly to hand and then wrist (hand goes numb). Padding should not be
used in excess since it does not provide support. Support is where
chiropractic skeletal-posture alignment is achieved and maintained.
Effectively you will squeeze too fluffy of foaming to the same small
grip, which again is bad for the grip but in addition adds repetitions
squeezing which makes it a lifetime disorder.

I guess I'm not understanding the OS bar. The bar is only OS where it attaches
to the stem. How does this help trauma disorder?

Neal said:

I guess I'm not understanding the OS bar. The bar is only OS where it attaches
to the stem. How does this help trauma disorder?

Good point Neal:

http://www.ritcheylogic.com/web/ritchey~logic/ritchey~site/web/EN/main/product/roadcomp/bars/RoadBars_ProLogic.html

I'll have to simulate some at LBS, but the bar is bigger at stem
reduces vibration somewhat. For the bar to reduce where you can
manipulate fingers around better at the ends, it transitions from a
flat portion of the bar which effectively should support your 'main'
riding grip and wrists, with the convex part of the bar where cables go
does not have much force at all on it (unless it were very small bar,
from excess gripping to gain stability). I will measure the difference,
but the flat width of bar should be a negligable plus or minus the OS
diameter difference. Personally, I wish all products had AutoCad light
file drawings (like PDF files are used now) and material specs. From
respected owner sampling, all feedback so far say its the only way to
go.

And I have seen some bars that transition down immediately like you
assume. Ritchey bars however seemed very ergonomic though, and
economical too. Thanks for the feedback. The only way to know is to
visit LBS next weekend and bring my 15cm steel ruler (wish I had
electronic calipers, but close enough to 1/2mm measures on one side. My
bifocals can't read 1/2mm measures any way :-)

ddog said:

Peter, thanks for the feed back:

Peter Cole said:

What advantages? Are you converting just to get OS bars?

Aero bars on top of low bars cramp me in too much, so OS bars would be
an added factor, like the difference between buying a normal bic pen
and a fat one that doesn't fatigue fingers on large hands. Lifting just
the aero bars up one inch difference will be a hassle, so will wait on
that discrete option and see what lifting both bars do since it is
simpler and greater range with adjustable stem.

Quoted message said:

I don't know what you're trying to do, but you may be better off just
buying a conventional stem with a lot of adjustable range and doing the
conversion later when your preferences firm up.

My ridng gate is fairly firm now. Running for twenty years makes bicyle
adaptation seem very easy, if all biomechanical aspects are aligned.
Options are very limited in conventional stems, so the stem conversion
seems to be the easiest option given other criteria and product trends
in the future.

Quoted message said:

"Carpal tunnel" from bikes? Where did you get that? If you want fatter
grips, the traditional solution is to use more/fatter tape.

Like wrists or ankles, grip is a critical repetitive trauma disorder
(rtd) since large hands on small diameter bars can cut off oxygen very
quickly to hand and then wrist (hand goes numb). Padding should not be
used in excess since it does not provide support. Support is where
chiropractic skeletal-posture alignment is achieved and maintained.
Effectively you will squeeze too fluffy of foaming to the same small
grip, which again is bad for the grip but in addition adds repetitions
squeezing which makes it a lifetime disorder.

Cork tape doesn't compress much. I've built up sections with multiple
layers to a larger diameter than OS bars and couldn't tell any
difference other than the diameter.

jim beam said:

there's only 4mm difference between 700c and 27". if the brake fits,
and i'm pretty sure it will, that fork will be fine.

Jim,

That's too much pioneering for me and too many can of worms, especially
with brakes.

***What OS bar do you have and how wide in mm is your grip?
Or is the grip just a larger radius flat shape that emulates a larger
diameter bar?***

The flat bar shape helps make the bend cleaner so the hand grip width
can be wider, so its not a huge assumption to say its flater.

I emailed Ritchey and asked if there are any differences in grips of
standard and OS clamp bars, but haven't dealt with them yet to know
their tech service levels. If the same size grip on both, then the
clamp size for me would be a decision between vibration and
standardization product trends, versus using my aero bar lift kit
(which I'd rather return than spend $40 in shims, screws, and shipping
to fix). I still think OS, if it helps only a little, with wrist and
grip vibration, would be worth the gamble of needing to separate the
aero bar and low bar lift distance EXACTLY 1", rather than lifting both
up in an infinite range. That was a big gamble with 2 different company
aerobar parts fitting anyway (Profile Design and Synace (lifter)), but
it was only $12 extra to try out with no extra shipping cost.

I agree with your tig welding on IRD riser, so that makes the
adjustable solid stem my choice, at this time. This stuff is so
interrelated, that I hate to deal with too many systems at one time,
like the forks, wheels, and brakes too: although I would have if had a
reasonable fork choice.

Thanks!!

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

Quoted message said:

http://www.profile-design.com/2006_product_pages/accesories/acc_converter.html

Quoted message said:

The Profile Threadless from Threaded Stem adapter above seems like the
only way a road bike can achieve the advantages of OS stems and OS
handlebars both. I've only found a Summit Adjustable stem which will
work with an OS handlebar. As well, IRD seems to be the only Road Riser
stem which will take OS bars that I've found. Of course the minimum
requirements are 2 stem bolts and 4 bar bolts for safety: which
eliminates most of them.

So if conversions are based on threaded stem bearings, does all the
threadless spacers for stem heights disappear and the only way to
change height is the Stem extentions you attach?

I don't see how to get out of trying the adjustable (Summit) stem first
to find the correct height since many things effecting the end
height/depth will change. I was just hoping the oversize (2 bolt) stem
and (4 bolt) bar clamps would help solve reported problems of earlier
adjustable stems. This is the ONLY oversize bar adjustable I've found,
so that's what I was hoping any way. The IRD OS bar riser stem model
for road bikes looks nice but it would be a one-time lucky shot if it
fit me anotomically. The problem I've got is figuring out where each
bar will end up in height and in depth. All measures seem subjective
and hidden, including the conversion height differences.

These seem like 2 recent adjustable and riser stem models so I'm not
sure if anyone would have any experience with these models, as well the
Profile Threadless column adapter 'seems' new.

Any information would be appreciated. It seems like a good change to
get OS wide handlebar grips for 'grip' carpal tunnel preventative
measures. An ME article on Sheldon's site also said the conversion
would make the frame feel more solid, but I'm not sure if he meant a
threadless head set conversion versus the threadless stem column
conversion.

Thanks!

I've had severe carpal tunnel problems for years. Several thing that have
helped me:

1. I switched to wider bars that allow a straight line from my shoulders
to my wrists so that when I'm on the brake hood or drops, my wrists aren't
bent inward. I'm riding mostly 44cm bars now. I have one set of 46cm but
they seem almost too wide.

2. The Ritchey Bio Max II bars are really comfortable for me. The tops are
bent slightly rearward so my wrists are straight, not bent inward like
they would be on a standard bar. These have a groove in the front for aero
brake cables.

http://ritcheylogic.com/web/Ritchey~Logic/Ritchey~Site/web/EN/main/product/roadcomp/bars/RoadBars_ProBioMax2.html

Nitto makes a similar bar, their model 177 which Rivendale has given the
cutesie name "Noodle Bar" (Roll-y Pol-y, Ruffy Tuffy, cutsie wootsie,
don't get me started on "baby talk"😉. These don't have the aero brake
cable grooves.

http://www.rivbike.com/webalog/handlebars_stems_tape/16111.html

3. These days I ride on the brake lever hoods or on the flat area of the
bar behind them most of the time. I've moved my levers up to the top of
the bends on the bars so that my wrists are straight when riding and the
bars are sitting rolled back so that the side portion is parallel with the
ground. I have Shimano and Dia-Compe aero levers on 2 bikes. They look
geeky sitting near the tops of the bends but they fit my wide hands well.

4. I've used high density plastic foam taped to my bars for years, long
before gel came along. I also cut squares of this material about 3/8"
thick and I stuff it into my riding gloves.

This may not fit your riding style but for me these measures help prevent
numbness from CT.

Chas.

* * Chas said:

I've had severe carpal tunnel problems for years. Several thing that have
helped me:

1. I switched to wider bars that allow a straight line from my shoulders
to my wrists so that when I'm on the brake hood or drops, my wrists aren't
bent inward. I'm riding mostly 44cm bars now. I have one set of 46cm but
they seem almost too wide.

My stock 1971 Raleigh Supercourse bars are 40cm outside edge which seem
fine by themselves.
Ritchey 42cm center to center will add over 4 cm width. I want quick
reach time to brake position
in down position, so reduces chance of getting thrown over bars. Also
maximum road edge clearance to
cars. 42cm center to center will likely be my max.

Quoted message said:

2. The Ritchey Bio Max II bars are really comfortable for me. The tops are
bent slightly rearward so my wrists are straight, not bent inward like
they would be on a standard bar. These have a groove in the front for aero
brake cables.

http://ritcheylogic.com/web/Ritchey~Logic/Ritchey~Site/web/EN/main/product/roadcomp/bars/RoadBars_ProBioMax2.html

Nitto makes a similar bar, their model 177 which Rivendale has given the
cutesie name "Noodle Bar" (Roll-y Pol-y, Ruffy Tuffy, cutsie wootsie,
don't get me started on "baby talk"😉. These don't have the aero brake
cable grooves.

http://www.rivbike.com/webalog/handlebars_stems_tape/16111.html

Thanks for the product input!

Quoted message said:

3. These days I ride on the brake lever hoods or on the flat area of the
bar behind them most of the time. I've moved my levers up to the top of
the bends on the bars so that my wrists are straight when riding and the
bars are sitting rolled back so that the side portion is parallel with the
ground. I have Shimano and Dia-Compe aero levers on 2 bikes. They look
geeky sitting near the tops of the bends but they fit my wide hands well.

**I would like to see a photo if you have a digital camera and some
extra time.
Sounds interesting.**

Quoted message said:

4. I've used high density plastic foam taped to my bars for years, long
before gel came along. I also cut squares of this material about 3/8"
thick and I stuff it into my riding gloves.

This may not fit your riding style but for me these measures help prevent
numbness from CT.

Whatever works in between extremes. Every body and every case is
different.
You just try to use guiding principles from different disciplines to
optimize 'fit'.
Sounds like you've done quite a lot. It really is worth the time to
make your saddle time count.
Spinning is incredibly efficient exercise, and you shouldn't hurt
yourself while spinning.

Thanks for your recommendations! They sound worthy.

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

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

**I would like to see a photo if you have a digital camera and some
extra time.
Sounds interesting.**

Is your gmial.com address good? If so, I'll send some pics.

Chas.

* * Chas said:

I've had severe carpal tunnel problems for years. Several thing that have
helped me:

1. I switched to wider bars that allow a straight line from my shoulders
to my wrists so that when I'm on the brake hood or drops, my wrists aren't
bent inward. I'm riding mostly 44cm bars now. I have one set of 46cm but
they seem almost too wide.

I agree, the biggest change I have made over the year has been to go to
much wider bars. I'm happy now on 46cm (but I'm huge). As you say, the
key to happy hands seems to be wrist angle(s). The last time I set up a
bike, I spent a couple of hours on the trainer with the bars unwrapped
moving things around and swapping stems. It's subtle, but the cumulative
effects have been big.

* * Chas said:

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

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

**I would like to see a photo if you have a digital camera and some
extra time.
Sounds interesting.**

Is your gmial.com address good? If so, I'll send some pics.

Chas,

Yes, gmail.com address is good.
After I see your ergonomic engineering work, I should be able to better
make a decision.

Ritchey just emailed me back and said grips were the same for std and
OS clamps, so except for a possible vibration reduction, no difference.
I still suspect the radius has been enlarged by creasing the handlebar
in for cables, but its the same for either bar. Its also hard telling
which bike the different bars are on at LBS with tape on them, so that
will be a blind guess.

The OS clamp may be better for rigidity and possible vibration
reduction. However that may be a negligable difference in most cases.
The OS clamp bar owners never exactly say what the difference is, but
unless they try both size clamps on the same exact type bar, they would
not know what the difference is. So if the grip is enlarged in both
cases, it may be a peceived factor or the OS clamp by the OS clamp bar
owners.

Nobody knows, lol. Well, I may just go back with the standard bar and
open up my stem pool of alternatives including my Bike Nashbar
favorite picked out originally. I will hold on to my aerobar lift kit a
little longer (in my growing pool of unused new parts). As far as I
know, there are only 7 of the OS Summit stems in the world anyway. Not
exactly a standardized purchase solution based on a marketing trend
hunch.

Ultimately, I have to grab the bars on my bike I suppose. I knew this
would be the last and most complex man/machine interface to contend
with 2 types of bars: low and aero. Until I found my Spiderflex saddle
after trying 6 different saddles, that was the hardest interface
challenge (, on my tail bone). But, I'm about where I started on
stemless/handlebar conversion (except for low bar type) until I see
your bike and what you've done.

Thanks!!

ddog said:

jim beam said:

there's only 4mm difference between 700c and 27". if the brake fits,
and i'm pretty sure it will, that fork will be fine.

Jim,

That's too much pioneering for me and too many can of worms, especially
with brakes.

***What OS bar do you have and how wide in mm is your grip?
Or is the grip just a larger radius flat shape that emulates a larger
diameter bar?***

The flat bar shape helps make the bend cleaner so the hand grip width
can be wider, so its not a huge assumption to say its flater.

I emailed Ritchey and asked if there are any differences in grips of
standard and OS clamp bars, but haven't dealt with them yet to know
their tech service levels. If the same size grip on both, then the
clamp size for me would be a decision between vibration and
standardization product trends, versus using my aero bar lift kit
(which I'd rather return than spend $40 in shims, screws, and shipping
to fix). I still think OS, if it helps only a little, with wrist and
grip vibration, would be worth the gamble of needing to separate the
aero bar and low bar lift distance EXACTLY 1", rather than lifting both
up in an infinite range. That was a big gamble with 2 different company
aerobar parts fitting anyway (Profile Design and Synace (lifter)), but
it was only $12 extra to try out with no extra shipping cost.

it's only the clamp area thats over-sized - the rest of the bar is
standard diameter for mtb componentry. the o/s clamp area is supposed
to make the bar feel [marginally] stiffer, but the main advantage is
increased fatigue resistance. if you want fatter grips, you need to
build them up with bar tape or some such.

Quoted message said:

I agree with your tig welding on IRD riser, so that makes the
adjustable solid stem my choice, at this time. This stuff is so
interrelated, that I hate to deal with too many systems at one time,
like the forks, wheels, and brakes too: although I would have if had a
reasonable fork choice.

if you want to increase bar height, the new fork is the safer ticket.
it gives you a steel steerer with no discontinuities and some height
flexibility until you decide what to settle at.

regarding brakes, wheels, etc., you can almost certainly use your
originals. you could even reuse your original headset if you're feeling
practical and own some files.

jim beam said:

if you want to increase bar height, the new fork is the safer ticket.
it gives you a steel steerer with no discontinuities and some height
flexibility until you decide what to settle at.

regarding brakes, wheels, etc., you can almost certainly use your
originals. you could even reuse your original headset if you're feeling
practical and own some files.

Nope, fastening tools, tin snips, hacksaw, drill, and sanding pads for
drill, but no files. I am not going to do anything on front end chassis
custom except JD Weld 2 shims together if needed or attach brackets for
front rack on forks or fenders.

Until get all parts needed, I can still hold my aerobar elbow pads like
muffins palms down. Very comfortable since keeps elbows 90 degrees, and
soft foam and plastic supports bend easily. Its almost like riding
without hands (with more skill). If my aero bar fit, I'd be using it
down hills or level; but since it doesn't yet, I use the monkey grip on
my muffins in those conditions often when not going for time (or the
Post Office is about to close). The monkey grip may be my most used
position of 6 total grip positions on both low and aero bars (about 50%
of the time). When I hopefully get the aero bars adjusted and wider
main grip bars, I still can't see going below 30% with the monkey grip:
its just too cool.