Drop bar replacements?

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven

(') said:

Simon Brooke said:

In Scotland, 'single
track' means a road wide enough for only one four wheeled vehicle at a
time, usually with regular passing places into which one can pull to
allow oncoming traffic to get past. When two cars meet on a blind
corner on such a road, one of them has to reverse back to the nearest
passing place.

Ahem.....and in the rest of the UK too

Quoted message said:

Do you really have single track road with passing places in Bucks and
Berks, or does this word have yet another definition?

Yes they do and in the rest of England and in Wales and in Northern
Ireland. I refer the honourable gentleman to rule 133 of the Highway
Code.

OK, fairy nuff. I didn't know this. I don't visit foreign parts much
these days.

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

;; I'll have a proper rant later, when I get the time.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ahem.....and in the rest of the UK too

Quoted message said:

Do you really have single track road with passing places in Bucks and
Berks, or does this word have yet another definition?

Yes they do and in the rest of England and in Wales and in Northern
Ireland. I refer the honourable gentleman to rule 133 of the Highway
Code.

OK, fairy nuff. I didn't know this. I don't visit foreign parts much
these days.

Found lots of single track in Cornwall, some in Devon and a fair amount in
Yorkshire. Cornish and Devonian single track is a bit hairy as the hedges
can be fifteen feet high and the sight lines very short. I was stunned by
the discovery of the amount single track arount Beverley (sp?). I now
actively seek the stuff out when planning rides as the traffic is very light
and the views more interesting. Never got to ride any single track in
Scotland on my LEJOG ride.

Vernon

Simon Brooke said:

OK, fairy nuff. I didn't know this. I don't visit foreign parts much
these days.

Just returning the favour of pulling people up for forgetting the UK is
more than just one of it member countries ;-)

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 12:19:35 +0100, "vernon" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I now
actively seek the stuff out when planning rides as the traffic is very light
and the views more interesting. Never got to ride any single track in
Scotland on my LEJOG ride.

Single track that is busy though can be a real pain in the neck if the
road is busy, which some can be, especially if you're going up a steep
hill with no passing places and you've got a queue of annoyed drivers
behind you...

Jim.

vernon said:

Cornish and Devonian single track is a bit hairy as the hedges
can be fifteen feet high and the sight lines very short.

Shirley not if you are riding at a speed where you can stop in the
distance you can see to be clear ;-)

Some of the ones I ride I've christened Cresta Runs as they are
downhill, twisty and with high chalk banks on both sides.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Jim Ley said:

Single track that is busy though can be a real pain in the neck if the
road is busy, which some can be, especially if you're going up a steep
hill with no passing places and you've got a queue of annoyed drivers
behind you...

Shirley not as annoyed as if another queue of cars came the other way?

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Simon Brooke said:

Errrmmmm... can we have some terminological definitions around here,
please? In the US, and increasingly among mountain bikers this side of
the pond, 'singletrack' means just that - a path or track with only
one wheel rut, too narrow for a four wheeled vehicle. In Scotland,
'single track' means a road wide enough for only one four wheeled
vehicle at a time, usually with regular passing places into which one
can pull to allow oncoming traffic to get past. When two cars meet on
a blind corner on such a road, one of them has to reverse back to the
nearest passing place.

Do you really have single track road with passing places in Bucks and
Berks, or does this word have yet another definition?

Funnily enoughy, I saw an official road sign saying "Single track road with
passing places" on that exact ride I was thinking of (near the Chalfonts) so
I was confident in using the term. Quite a few single tracks can be found
in Bucks, Herts and Essex, particularly besides and through farms. Some
paved, some unpaved, not all with proper passing places. The are loads of
little rural pockets like these left in between the trunk roads,
fortunately. It's not a /complete/ concrete jungle down here, yet.

~PB

Pete Biggs said:

It's not a /complete/ concrete jungle down here, yet.

It will be if the Scots keep leaving to move down south ;-)

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Simon Brooke wrote:
In Scotland, 'single

Quoted message said:

track' means a road wide enough for only one four wheeled vehicle at a
time, usually with regular passing places into which one can pull to
allow oncoming traffic to get past. When two cars meet on a blind corner
on such a road, one of them has to reverse back to the nearest passing
place.

Do you really have single track road with passing places in Bucks and
Berks, or does this word have yet another definition?

Yes there are single track roads south of the Wash. I know several in
Surrey (and some quite entertaining hills too).

It means exactly what it says on the tin.

I am not including de facto single track roads like most of
suburbia.[1]

...d

[1] Road narrowed to single track by abandoned vehicles allegedly
stabled on the queens highway.

David Martin said:

Simon Brooke wrote:
In Scotland, 'single

Quoted message said:

track' means a road wide enough for only one four wheeled vehicle at a
time, usually with regular passing places into which one can pull to
allow oncoming traffic to get past. When two cars meet on a blind corner
on such a road, one of them has to reverse back to the nearest passing
place.

Do you really have single track road with passing places in Bucks and
Berks, or does this word have yet another definition?

Yes there are single track roads south of the Wash. I know several in
Surrey (and some quite entertaining hills too).

plotting a route from Leith Hill back to Esher, I saw a nice little
single track road going from the A25 up to Effingham, only to find the
peak was higher than Box Hill and it was near vertical (well 18%) - it
was not nice - it was also obviously a pretty busy rat run which
didn't help.

Jim.

Jim Ley said:

David Martin said:

Simon Brooke wrote:
In Scotland, 'single

Quoted message said:

track' means a road wide enough for only one four wheeled vehicle at a
time, usually with regular passing places into which one can pull to
allow oncoming traffic to get past. When two cars meet on a blind corner
on such a road, one of them has to reverse back to the nearest passing
place.

Do you really have single track road with passing places in Bucks and
Berks, or does this word have yet another definition?

Yes there are single track roads south of the Wash. I know several in
Surrey (and some quite entertaining hills too).

plotting a route from Leith Hill back to Esher, I saw a nice little
single track road going from the A25 up to Effingham, only to find the
peak was higher than Box Hill and it was near vertical (well 18%) - it
was not nice - it was also obviously a pretty busy rat run which
didn't help.

I know that one. I think I managed to ride up it once, but I was in my
silly years where my lowest gear was 63" [1].. There are some fabulous
single track hills there. If you head towards Leith Hill through Wooton
(OTTOMH) there is a nice 1 in 5 drop, 1 in 4 rise as it crosses the
valley. Then drop into Friday Street and there are a few more there..
Only about 100-200m height gain but there are a lot of them, and for
Surrey they can be very quiet.

...d

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

DavidR

Quoted message said:

Pete Biggs

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it's just
that, when all is well, modern brake performance is so bloody amazing
that it doesn't matter.

People I have spoken to in person that have said that tend to have
fairly large hands.

I have /extremely/ small hands - smaller than a woman I know who is four
foot ten. I say that. I can lift the back wheel from the hoods
(Campagnolo Centaur Ergopower).

Exceptions excepted.

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

If you watch racing cyclists in action for any length of time,

I don't watch cycle racing but I would never suggest that what is good for
racing is necessarily good for the average punter.

"Pete Biggs" <p@melonbiggs{remove fruit}.tc> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Check. So what's the solution? There are only 2 configurations on the
market.

I didn't think we were just talking about the current market. Some
people are still riding around on Weinmann crappo levers, for instance.
A lot if not most users find modern Campag Ergos and Shimano STI hoods
comfortable.

I tried Weinman levers and I found the lever profile pretty good on
the Morphe because it allows the hoods to be set fairly high. The downside
is the cable rising from the horn.

Dia Compe and Shimano levers have different profiles to the Weinmans but
are identical to each other.

Quoted message said:

Watch the pro racers.

Do not make the assumption that what is good for racers is necessarily
useful for the average punter.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

When I do use the drop position it's for
better aerodymanics when going down steep hills, etc.

🙂 Ride north of Reading and there are not many opportunities to ride
heads down on hills. At least, on single track roads with short sight
lines, the usefulness of aero drag and an upright position definitely
outweigh other opportunities.

I was riding some single track roads in Bucks last week, on the drops for
some of the twisty short steep descents. It was after dark as well. And
I didn't know the roads at all. The idea that you need aero drag and
can't adequately see where you're going from the drops is garbage.

I didn't say that. I used the word 'useful' not 'need'. I meant that there
are only a very small number of opportunities for getting a slightly higher
terminal velocity from using the drop.

When I go on my slick tyred mtb I am invariably get to the bottom of a
difficult hill long before the droppies. OK, a lot of people don't like
charging down hill (including many flatties) but when I am on the drop bike
I go as cautiously as them. So, accessible brake levers give me quality
time.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My design came from a whim and it worked
straight away (even if it took time to make a workmanlike finish from
parts not designed for the configuration).

[ http://bikesite.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/page8.html ]

It's interesting but I can't imagine preferring it, from the look of it.

Remember that it is cobbled up from bits intended for a different purpose.
If I had Shimano's resources at my disposal it might look different.

DavidR said:

Quoted message said:

Watch the pro racers.

Do not make the assumption that what is good for racers is necessarily
useful for the average punter.

That was just one example of drop users, and you know it. The point is that
drop bars are used by different people in different ways, even when they're
doing the same thing.

~PB

"Pete Biggs" <p@melonbiggs{remove fruit}.tc> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Quoted message said:

Watch the pro racers.

Do not make the assumption that what is good for racers is necessarily
useful for the average punter.

That was just one example of drop users, and you know it.

One example certainly, but totally irrelevant.

DavidR said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Watch the pro racers.

Do not make the assumption that what is good for racers is
necessarily useful for the average punter.

I don't make that assumption at all. I'm making a more specific point.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That was just one example of drop users, and you know it.

One example certainly, but totally irrelevant.

It's highly relevant in that it proves hoods can be comfortable. Racers
would not use them otherwise, since the drop position is faster. They also
would not ride in the middle of a pack in a way that they couldn't brake
well from.

Of course this is not the only proof. You were overwhelmed with replies
from satisfied users (including non-racers) last time you raised the
subject. I agree with you that the downsides should be mentioned but I
think you go too far in your ideas about "fundamental flaws", etc.

~PB

DavidR said:

I meant that
there are only a very small number of opportunities for getting a
slightly higher terminal velocity from using the drop.

When I go on my slick tyred mtb I am invariably get to the bottom of a
difficult hill long before the droppies. OK, a lot of people don't
like charging down hill (including many flatties) but when I am on
the drop bike I go as cautiously as them. So, accessible brake levers
give me quality time.

Most drop users have accessible levers! (And accessible from two
positions). But it seems you and your droppies are different. There are a
very large number of opportunites when using the drops will be faster.

~PB

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

If you watch racing cyclists in action for any length of time,

I don't watch cycle racing but I would never suggest that what is good
for racing is necessarily good for the average punter.

Then you'd be this: flat, plain wrong.

Granted track bikes and time trial bikes and triathlon bikes are special
purpose machines, adapted to those special purposes and not particularly
relevant to 'the average punter'. But the bikes ridden by the stage-race
pelotons have to be ridden an average of over 100 miles per day -
sometimes considerably over - for up to twenty days in succession, and
for most of those riders, there is then only a couple of days break
before the next race. To win such a race you have to complete it. To be
able to complete a twenty day endurance test, you have to be supremely
comfortable. If the bikes were uncomfortable, no-one would finish the
Tour or the Vuelta or the Giro.

Consequently, any change to a racing bike which improves comfort while
retaining the diamond frame must necessarily be a change which involves
a significant increase in drag - an increase so great that it would make
even a supreme athlete uncompetitive. And, frankly, if it would make a
supreme athlete uncompetitive, I don't want it on my bike, /because/ I
am not a supreme athlete.

Given the diamond frame, the racing bike is the tuned optimum compromise
between comfort and efficiency. Frankly, if you want to make a bike more
comfortable, don't tinker with the bars. Throw away the diamond frame
and lie down on the job.

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

'You cannot put "The Internet" into the Recycle Bin.'

I submit that on or about Sun, 02 Oct 2005 17:04:21 +0100, the person
known to the court as Simon Brooke <[email hidden]> made a
statement (<[email hidden]> in Your
Honour's bundle) to the following effect:

Quoted message said:

any change to a racing bike which improves comfort while
retaining the diamond frame must necessarily be a change which involves
a significant increase in drag

Ooh! Me! Me! I know the answer to this problem!

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken