Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
The Wanderer
Joined
·
536 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
When I ride, I like to know that I can stop at a moments notice (well...at least attempt to). I've been giving my new Ritchey WCS bars a go and just don't feel safe with them when I'm in the drops. When I ride with my palms on the anatomic "bump", I feel comfortable. The problem is when I have to suddenly brake. I have to make an effort to slide my hands up as close to the hoods as possible and then reach for the brakes. There's no way to directly reach the brakes when riding in the "comfort" position. I can brake directly when I ride with my hands as close to the hoods as possible, with the back side of my hand resting on the anatomic "bump", therby leaving the anatomic design useless. I've been using an old Cinelli "traditional" bend bar that had gotten too old (they also don't make the model anymore) with the ability to brake without adjusting my hand position in the drops. I just think that an accident might be more avoidable when I don't have to think about sliding my hands up and then reaching for the brakes. I'm pretty sure it's not my hand size because I have long fingers and wear a large glove size. This is my first pair of "anatomic" bars. Cold it be just the Ritchey?Or do others experience the same frustration with other makes as well?

Picture 1- Current set-up
Picture 2- Hands on "bump" and can't reach brake lever
Picture 3- Hands as close to hoods as possible
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
Could you move the levers down on the bars a bit, without making riding on the hoods uncomfortable? That might make the levers come a little bit closer to the anatomic bend.
This is pretty annoying to test though because of having to redo the bar tape.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
985 Posts
Strange, I use the same Ritchey WCS anatomic bars and do not have such problems while my hands are not so big (size M gloves) and fingers rather on short side. It seems that my levers sits slightly lower on the bars, so may be you can reposition yours.

Oh, just noticed -.I use Shimano, while your levers are Campy, may be it makes a difference,

kyler2001 said:
When I ride, I like to know that I can stop at a moments notice (well...at least attempt to). I've been giving my new Ritchey WCS bars a go and just don't feel safe with them when I'm in the drops. When I ride with my palms on the anatomic "bump", I feel comfortable. The problem is when I have to suddenly brake. I have to make an effort to slide my hands up as close to the hoods as possible and then reach for the brakes. There's no way to directly reach the brakes when riding in the "comfort" position. I can brake directly when I ride with my hands as close to the hoods as possible, with the back side of my hand resting on the anatomic "bump", therby leaving the anatomic design useless. I've been using an old Cinelli "traditional" bend bar that had gotten too old (they also don't make the model anymore) with the ability to brake without adjusting my hand position in the drops. I just think that an accident might be more avoidable when I don't have to think about sliding my hands up and then reaching for the brakes. I'm pretty sure it's not my hand size because I have long fingers and wear a large glove size. This is my first pair of "anatomic" bars. Cold it be just the Ritchey?Or do others experience the same frustration with other makes as well?

Picture 1- Current set-up
Picture 2- Hands on "bump" and can't reach brake lever
Picture 3- Hands as close to hoods as possible
 

·
The Wanderer
Joined
·
536 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
qwertzy said:
Could you move the levers down on the bars a bit, without making riding on the hoods uncomfortable? That might make the levers come a little bit closer to the anatomic bend.
This is pretty annoying to test though because of having to redo the bar tape.
This is something I have been contimplating. The problem, I think, is exactly what you pointed out (being uncofortable). When on the hoods, I like them angled up just a bit. I hate having the Campy hoods level because it feels I am sliding down on to the hoods. I think if I move the hoods down, the only way to get the levers angled up a hair would be to rotate the bars up. In that position, I think my hands would be cocked "up" back towards me when riding i the drops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
In that position, I think my hands would be cocked "up" back towards me when riding i the drops.
You could try rotating the bars a bit just to see how it would feel riding in the drops at that angle, and only move the levers if the position was ok(to save having to redo the tape).
 

·
n00bsauce
Joined
·
13,507 Posts
Definitely try rotating your bars. You can then move your levers down on the bar which should make the reach to the levers more manageable. Your position on the hoods should be the same while your position on the tops of the bars behind the hoods and the anatomic portion of the bars will be altered somewhat. You'll have to decide if this is acceptable. It might make your wrist bend while on the anatomic portion of the drops uncomfortable but make your position on the bars behind the hoods more comfortable. If this doesn't work for you I think the bars are wrong for your riding preferences and need changing.

The other, much more expensive and emminently more impractical, solution is to switch to Shimano with short reach Ultegra brifters. I'd go with a new bar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,160 Posts
common problem...

I've been using Salsa Poco bars for the last couple of seasons. They have the same type of anatomic bump. I have some of the same problem, but not as severe, because I've modified my ergo levers to reduce the reach to the brake levers by about 1/2 inch.

It's doubtful that rotating the bars up and lowering the ergo lever position will fix the problem. The problem is that the bumps are just too far back. I always adjust the angle of the anatomic drop to be comfortable first, then set the brake hood to be angled up a few degrees. For me, the only way I can reach the levers is if the crook of my thumb is up tight against the inner curve of the bar.

I'd look for a bar without the bumps, or try a slight modification. Carefully applied body filler could fill in the low spot at the front of the bump, making it comfortable for the hand to rest further forward. I plan to try this the next time I change bar tape.

Deda 215 bars have a very nicely angled anatomic drop section without bumps, but it's so shallow (short) that there's barely enough room for even my tiny hands. Close but not quite perfect.
 

·
The Wanderer
Joined
·
536 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
C-40 said:
Deda 215 bars have a very nicely angled anatomic drop section without bumps, but it's so shallow (short) that there's barely enough room for even my tiny hands. Close but not quite perfect.
My fault for not staying around the bike shop while my levers were being mounted. At that moment I would have noticed the anatomic bump was too far back. I think I'm going to give new bars a shot. I looked at the Deda Newton Shallow (I believe same specs as the 215, but it's OS to go with my OS stem). Would the Deda bar design throw off my stem length?

P.S. The discription of the Deda bars says that the 215/Newton anatomic bend gives 13mm more reach to the levers than any other bar on the market. I thought the Shallow (Italian Classic) design was the best for this situation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
Just for the record

kyler2001 said:
My fault for not staying around the bike shop while my levers were being mounted. At that moment I would have noticed the anatomic bump was too far back. I think I'm going to give new bars a shot. I looked at the Deda Newton Shallow (I believe same specs as the 215, but it's OS to go with my OS stem). Would the Deda bar design throw off my stem length?
Ritchey makes an OS short and shallow traditional bend bar. I use that bar and like it alot. They alos make a their bio max in OS although its not listed on the site yet I know a few of the women on the team I wench for spec'ed that out for their set up. If you wanna go all bling bling Ritchey also makes the traditional bar in carbon and in a 40cm width.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,767 Posts
32and3cross said:
Ritchey makes an OS short and shallow traditional bend bar. I use that bar and like it alot. They alos make a their bio max in OS although its not listed on the site yet I know a few of the women on the team I wench for spec'ed that out for their set up. If you wanna go all bling bling Ritchey also makes the traditional bar in carbon and in a 40cm width.

I had Biomax bars, and they didn't help this sort of thing. I switched to Reynolds Anatomic CF bars. They have a changing radius through out the bend that helps to keep the reach to the brake levers proper. Zipp bars have the same sort of thing, and I think someone out there is doing it in Al, too.....I'm just too lazy to look.
 

·
Self-Banned
Joined
·
16,905 Posts
kyler2001 said:
My fault for not staying around the bike shop while my levers were being mounted. At that moment I would have noticed the anatomic bump was too far back. I think I'm going to give new bars a shot. I looked at the Deda Newton Shallow (I believe same specs as the 215, but it's OS to go with my OS stem). Would the Deda bar design throw off my stem length?

You are correct about the Newton vs. the 215. Over the years I've used the Newton and 215 with the classic Italian shallow and the anatomic bend.

I don't think the different style of bar presents a significant issue relating to reach and stem length.


kyler2001 said:
P.S. The discription of the Deda bars says that the 215/Newton anatomic bend gives 13mm more reach to the levers than any other bar on the market. I thought the Shallow (Italian Classic) design was the best for this situation?
I have small hands and I've been through the same issues as you're dealing with now. The 215/Newton anatomic bend doesn't give 13mm more reach to the levers than the shallow Italian classic design. I'm sure they mean that the 215/Newton anatomic bend gives 13mm more reach to the levers than any other bar with an anatomic bend on the market

Get the shallow Italian classics you won't be sorry.
 

·
The Wanderer
Joined
·
536 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
rocco said:
The 215/Newton anatomic bend doesn't give 13mm more reach to the levers than the shallow Italian classic design. I'm sure they mean that the 215/Newton anatomic bend gives 13mm more reach to the levers than any other bar with an anatomic bend on the market

Get the shallow Italian classics you won't be sorry.
Thanks for the help (all)...I'm going to go with the Newton shallows. I'll get back with some pics when I make the swap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,079 Posts
I just installed new Zipp SL bars. I also just removed WCS bars for the EXACT same reason. The Zipp bars are still anatomic however they are amazingly smooth in there design, so much better. I also run Record and they are perfect, I will post some better pics soon.

K
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts
I had the Ritchey Anatomic bars on one of my bikes for awhile-they drove me crazy! That Anatomic bump just feels like it is on the wrong place, and I feel pretty far away from the levers and don't feel that I have complete control of the front wheel. I swapped out to a Ritchey WCS Shallow Drop and couldn't be happier (although it is a bit flexy at 210g). I can get in the drops so much easier, the drop down is shorter, I feel more confident sprinting, and I can reach the levers much easier (I use Campy). Totally changed the feel of the bike (for the better).

Due to the flex of the WCS, I would probably opt for the Pro version in the shallow round drop, or the Deda Newton shallow if I did it again. Most pros who ride for teams equipped by Deda ride the Newton shallow drop (check out the cyclingnews pro bikes section-it seems like there must be 50% of the peloton on that bar).
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top