Drop bar replacements?

I said:

DavidR said:

If you lose the drop you lose the drop. Why would anything else need
to go? It frees up certain restrictions.

Some of the angles would be lost. Many of us actually like those
angles, you know! And be sure to include immediate access to brakes
from a fast long-reach position.

Also being able to slide hands sideways to vary the effective width would
be lost if restricted by short grips or things clamped to the bars getting
in the way.

~PB

"Pete Biggs" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR wrote:

I predict you and your ilk will still have problems with your hands
taking the weight in the long run if you have a racing position (or

What is this ilk of mine?

Quoted message said:

Most recreational cyclists with problems wouldn't mind a bit more of an
upright position anyway: it cures various problems.

Earlier in the year I lowered the bar by 10mm and pitched the top up
slightly nearer the horizontal. It improved slightly. If it wasn't for the
need to brake I could alter it more dramatically.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm confident that my observation is good enough to know the various
ways drop bars can be used. You've come out with so many lots of
rubbish about the ways they *have* to be used, the ways the hands
must be placed, etc -- when in fact some of what you say you want is
already possible with drops, so I don't need to "acknowledge" all
your "hand positions" -- they go without saying.

Come come. Most of it is self evident from simple geometry.

It seems not to you. You've had great difficulty accepting what
positions are useable in practice, and I think still don't accept some.
Your geometry knowledge hasn't stopped you being wrong there.

Firstly, I haven't used the word 'must' in that context. As to 'have',
well like it or not, the shapes fundamentally dictate what you can & can't
do. I get the impression now that if I said they can't make tea, you would
deny it. Ye cannae change the laws of physics cap'n.

I don't know why it is necessary to post pictures of hands on drop bars as
explanation but here goes:

http://bikesite.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/page7.html

The top one is a very typical tops position. (It is the supermarket
trolley #2 position.) Note that the knuckle is not perpendicular to the
wrists. In other words the wrists have a sideways crank. This draws elbows
in so the joints line up like door hinges (shoulder ache). Also the
fingers are gripping the bar because friction has to resist arm thrust,
rather than (a perpendicular) support. The good thing is that the palms are
resting on the bar.

The second is the textbook hoods position. The wrists are straight, good.
The problem is that the palm isn't supported and the weight has moved to
the thumbs. As you can see, my index fingers are reaching the brake levers.
That is supposed to be ideal, except for-

- when braking the position adopted in the bottom picture is not seen to be
untypical. Part of it is because the brake levers have to pushed down when
the hand wants to squeeze. So the hand moves away from the bar and the
contact point moves up the thumbs. It is certainly why I am likely to move
to the drop for braking rather than that use this position (even if I am
already there). It is predominantly due to do with bar dimensions and
layout, very little to do
with bar position relative the frame.

Speaking of the drop, the middle photo shows it below the hand: it follows
the knuckle line so it is well placed to resist thrust and it gives proper
palm support. So it has many virtues of a bar end. The slight downside with
this particular bar is that the hands are still facing together so the
elbows remain tucked in. Some bars have a camber here which ought to help.

I take the view that all virtuous characteristics should be available from
a primary position. While the ability to move around is essential, it is
not less important if some virtues are lost while doing so.

Quoted message said:

Many of us actually like those angles, you know!

Depends on which 'angles' Shirley. If you don't use you can't lose.

Quoted message said:

And be sure to include immediate access to brakes from a fast
long-reach position.

You're stuck in a loop
That is a requirement for a particular segment that is already met. There
are many users for whom this is irrelevant or inappropriate and yet that
is what they are getting served up with. It is this sort of thinking that
keeps my conscience clear if some sensibilities are upset.

Anyway, you will be pleased to know that I will be off line for a while so
this will be my last post until someone raises the subject again
in the future.

DavidR said:

like it or not, the shapes fundamentally dictate what you can &
can't do. I get the impression now that if I said they can't make
tea, you would deny it. Ye cannae change the laws of physics cap'n.

You have not acknowledged all the positions, took a long time to accept as
many as you do. The shapes vary according to the components and how
everything is setup. I should post some pics myself sometime. In your
pictures below, you have not included one of my favourites, a primary
position for me, what I've been calling the "tops" position: hands on the
horizontals towards the stem. Then there are are useable positions in
between that and the positions you picture...

Quoted message said:

I don't know why it is necessary to post pictures of hands on drop
bars as explanation but here goes:

http://bikesite.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/page7.html

Quoted message said:

The top one is a very typical tops position. (It is the supermarket
trolley #2 position.) Note that the knuckle is not perpendicular to
the wrists. In other words the wrists have a sideways crank. This
draws elbows in so the joints line up like door hinges (shoulder
ache).

No shoulder ache if you don't over-use that position with wrists and arms
too rigid, which won't be needed when either using other positions for
much of the time or when not over-extended and you don't have too much
weight on the bars.

Quoted message said:

Also the fingers are gripping the bar because friction has to
resist arm thrust, rather than (a perpendicular) support. The good
thing is that the palms are resting on the bar.

No need to grip firmly if the bars are tilted up enough and you're not
over-extended. And some of the time there will actually be negative
thrust when *pulling* on the brake levers.

Quoted message said:

The second is the textbook hoods position. The wrists are straight,
good. The problem is that the palm isn't supported and the weight has
moved to the thumbs. As you can see, my index fingers are reaching
the brake levers. That is supposed to be ideal, except for-

- when braking the position adopted in the bottom picture is not seen
to be untypical. Part of it is because the brake levers have to
pushed down when the hand wants to squeeze. So the hand moves away
from the bar and the contact point moves up the thumbs. It is
certainly why I am likely to move to the drop for braking rather than
that use this position (even if I am already there).

Particularly with modern equipment, many users don't have to do that and
favour braking from the hoods.

Quoted message said:

It is
predominantly due to do with bar dimensions and layout, very little
to do with bar position relative the frame.

It is at least to do with quality and shape of levers, and position of
levers on bars.

This isn't a problem for those with average size hands and good modern
brakes and brake levers such as new-style Campagnolo and Shimano STI,
because the levers are within comfortable reach, brake well with little
lever-force, and the "bumps" (as opposed to spikes) and bodies are
well-supportive and also grippy.

Quoted message said:

Speaking of the drop, the middle photo shows it below the hand: it
follows the knuckle line so it is well placed to resist thrust and it
gives proper palm support. So it has many virtues of a bar end. The
slight downside with this particular bar is that the hands are still
facing together so the elbows remain tucked in. Some bars have a
camber here which ought to help.

I take the view that all virtuous characteristics should be available
from a primary position. While the ability to move around is
essential, it is not less important if some virtues are lost while
doing so.

That's only possible if some features are lost. Genuinely popular
features, I think!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Many of us actually like those angles, you know!

Depends on which 'angles' Shirley. If you don't use you can't lose.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And be sure to include immediate access to brakes from a fast
long-reach position.

You're stuck in a loop
That is a requirement for a particular segment that is already met.
There are many users for whom this is irrelevant or inappropriate and
yet that is what they are getting served up with. It is this sort of
thinking that keeps my conscience clear if some sensibilities are
upset.

There are already straight bars and bar ends for those who don't need that
requirement. Don't think "many" recreational drop users don't care about
loosing or spoiling the fast positions. What you're attempting to design
is not a replacement for drops, it's a variation on straight bars. That's
fine, but it's quite a different market.

~PB

Pete Biggs said:

You have not acknowledged all the positions, took a long time to accept as
many as you do.

And that he is still on individual positions, where a drop bar gives you
a continuously variable set all along the tape and down the hoods, shows
a fairly spectacular degree of point missage AFAICT.

Quoted message said:

There are already straight bars and bar ends for those who don't need that
requirement. Don't think "many" recreational drop users don't care about
loosing or spoiling the fast positions. What you're attempting to design
is not a replacement for drops, it's a variation on straight bars. That's
fine, but it's quite a different market.

Agreed.

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 said:

Pete Biggs said:

You have not acknowledged all the positions, took a long time to accept as
many as you do.

And that he is still on individual positions, where a drop bar gives you
a continuously variable set all along the tape and down the hoods, shows
a fairly spectacular degree of point missage AFAICT.

Quoted message said:

There are already straight bars and bar ends for those who don't need that
requirement. Don't think "many" recreational drop users don't care about
loosing or spoiling the fast positions. What you're attempting to design
is not a replacement for drops, it's a variation on straight bars. That's
fine, but it's quite a different market.

Agreed.

Pete.

I missed the first part of this thread, so someone may have mentioned
this.

I have butterfly bars and they are excellent, especially for long rides
over several days. When the low position gets uncomfortable, I move my
hands up on top of the bars for a bit. I works!

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

DavidR said:

Quoted message said:

And some of the time there will actually be negative
thrust when *pulling* on the brake levers.

I am very doubtful you could support a claim that brakes can be
safely be applied by pulling with the body rather than squeezing
against thumbs or palms. Certainly, harder pedalling transfers pull
to the fingers (as it also takes bum load off the saddle - something
that can make slow leisure rides so tiring).

I mean when pulling on the brake lever bodies (or bars) to counteract
pedalling forces to assist acceleration or climbing, not applying brakes.
Weight on the hands is reduced to nothing when doing this.

~PB, still enjoying my sacred cow horns