My riding style has always included more out-of-saddle riding than average, and I’ll pretty much always be standing on short climbs and alternating standing and seated on longer ones. While I’ve embraced the current trend towards narrower bars to some extent, I do find very narrow bars a little unstable when standing, due to the reduced leverage counteracting the lateral pedalling forces.
As when climbing you’re usually on the hoods, extremely flared bars don’t help at all.
Wondering if anyone else has pondered this compromise and what solutions they have landed on for performance. In my case, I find 38mm at the hoods is as narrow as I want to go on a general purpose road bike. I’m 175cm, 64kg.
What were you riding before 38? Honestly, I don’t notice much difference with 2 cm except for comfort over long rides. (I do notice a difference switching between bikes with 4 cm of difference in bar width.)
I was probably running 40 and 42 for years in the dim and distant, but in the last couple of years I’ve experimented in the 36 - 40 range. For me, 38 seems to be the sweet spot, largely because 36 is just a little too unstable when powering out of the saddle.
I kinda notice? I have 40s on my gravel bike and 38s on the road bike (so not a perfect comparison) and it’s maybe a little easier on my gravel bike. But I think I mostly just end up pulling a little more with the other hand on the 38s and then don’t really notice a whole lot. But I also don’t do a ton of out of the saddle climbing except for attacks or just to mix up my position for a moment.
But I also don’t really have a problem with this feeling when I go from my 750mm MTB bars to my 380mm road bars. It’s obviously different but not really in a way that makes a difference.
Getting used to sprinting and climbing out of the saddle on 165mm cranks going from 170’ proved to be challenging however
This is one reason I’ve stuck with 172.5 mm. I’m pretty sure that for me personally, I’d miss the leverage when climbing out of the saddle. I’m sure I’d quickly adapt to seated pedalling though and might even prefer the shorter length.
But this also relates to why I brought up the handlebar width topic. Most of these choices are compromises, and more importantly, ones for which the optimal solution depends a lot on riding style. Discussions of crank length and efficiency generally assume a seated riding position. I’ve hardly seen any discussion of how shorter cranks imapct on climbing out of the saddle. As someone who spends a greater proportion of my time out of the saddle than average, my own ideal solutions may be different.
I suppose this is as good a place as any to mention something else I’ve pondered about crank length. We know that shorter cranks mean a more open hip angle, which is obviously going to be beneficial to people with limited hip flexibility. But let’s assume you have very good hip flexibility and crank length isn’t limiting for power transfer and position on the bike. Especially as you get older, might it actually be beneficial to long-term flexibility to keep using the full range of motion of your hips while pedalling, rather than restricting it..? Obviously this assumes you are efficient and pain-free with a greater range of motion.
I must be like you in that I stand on climbs a lot. However, my question is, why go to narrow bars just because the pros do? IMHO it makes a lot more sense to ride what works for you and not something that you are not comfortable with.
That’s sort of my point, except it’s more nuanced. There are obvious advantages to narrower bars - up to a point. But where that point is will vary.
The pros are riding narrower bars because they’re demonstrably faster when tucked in and going in a straight line. But there are trade-offs in other situations, and what the ideal is for any individual is a pretty complex problem. For me personally I reckon it’s 38 mm.