I: [CR]bar width

(Example: Framebuilders)

From: "The Maaslands" <TheMaaslands@comcast.net>
Subject: I: [CR]bar width
To: Classic Rendezvous <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:18:15 -0500

Tom wrote:
> Ah he irony... Chuck will collect bikes with bars of any width and ride them, while I limit my collecting to bars, cranks, stems, etc. in "my size" and then I don't even really ride my older bikes. I like having my bikes set up "my way" so I only buy 40 to 42 cm bars, 172.5 or 175 cranks, and stems near the appropriate length (usually 120-130). For one thing, this keeps me from buying more stuff.
> Chuck, I can certainly understand why you keep a more flexible outlook. For one, you can keep all your vintage gems as originally equipped. It also allows you to enjoy a more varied riding experiece, each bike being allowed to be itself, so to speak. There are also period-dependent trends, like narrow bars on old bikes, that are just more "correct." Keep riding those old bikes!
> As for the narrow bars on older bikes, I always heard that "space in the peloton stuff," even in the 1980s. A real crit-meister uses skinny bars to fit through the gaps in corners and sprints! Whatever. Anyone have some old-logo 66-42's to sell cheap? I'll be non-period, gladly. Funny how rare those are. I guess they really did mostly use 40's back then.

You need to first decide how bars are measured. There are many ways to measure bars and a Cinelli 42 that you mention above does not necessarily correspond to anybody else's 42. It is my understanding that Cinelli initially measured from centre to centre whereas most others measured from outer edge to outer edge. This would therefore make a Cinelli 38 equal most others' 40 width bars. Once you decide how to measure: whether it be centre to centre; outer edge to outer edge; or, inner edge to inner edge, you then have to compare the bars of all manufacturers using the same measurement. Then there is the variable of drop and whether there is any splaying of the drops. A 40 width Campione del Mondo with big drop rides differently than a little drop Giro d'Italia of the same width. A Cinelli Criterium bar allows for you to ride the drops with a much more closed stance than with the other models...

It has been my personal observation that bikes that predate the alloy bars generally had 36-38 cm bars (measured centre to centre at the brake lever mounts) with splayed drops. The bikes from the 60's-70's generally went to 38-40 cm bars without the splayed tops (again measured centre to centre at the brake lever mounts). It is now generally accepted to use 42 cm bars (measured centre to centre at the brake lever mounts)

I like Chuck have no problems switching from one width to the other. I can ride anything from about a 36 cm up to about a 43 cm (measured centre to centre at the brake lever mounts) I do on the other hand have problems switching from one size drop to another. I have always liked the Cinelli Campione del Mondo and find it difficult to get used to the Giro d'Italia bend. I also have experienced some discomfort with the 44 cm bars on one of my tandems. When you go down on the drops, they are simply too wide to get proper leverage.

Lastly, to lay the 'cause' for narrow bars on space in the peloton would seem to me to be pure invention. Firstly, 2 cm width difference is nothing in a group sprint when the elbows are flying. Second, this would presuppose that everybody would be behind and trying to get through. This clearly will not be the case, as for everybody who moves up one space in a sprint or other event in a race, there is also one rider who would do everything in their power to prevent those people from getting by; hence just as many of each type who would like 'their' most appropriate bar width. I believe it has more to do with the distribution of weight that has changed over the years, as well as the average bike rider physionomy and the racing style.

Steven Maasland Moorestown, NJ

---