Pretty cool idea. I like his thinking. I like when people push the edges of the rules to try to find an advantage.

Bar interference in the drops (sprints) and issues with leverage in climbing are tradeoffs of the design. Many races are won/lost in climbs and sprints, so it makes for a tough sell i am sure.

So it really shines in solo efforts off the front. All good unless you need to climb to get there. It may have a niche however.

Agreed 100%. It seems combining it with a highly flared bar mitigates some of the interference issue for a sprint effort, and if you could climb in the drops on such a flared bar it should still give decent lateral control. This could be combined with the same thing on Slowman's gravel bars to keep the STI's at a reasonable angle.

I suppose narrow bars aren't overly novel, but I quite like his idea of using the combination of a very short reach stem and very long reach handlebar in order to get the tops nearly under his elbow.

Seems like the next logical step would be to raise the bar so that the "drops" position was equivalent to the normal "hoods" position. For ITU, spend most of the time in the drops and use the hoods-based aero position for solos and bridging.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

I don't think there's really a handicap while sprinting and climbing. Wider bars *might* be preferable when really honking out of the saddle, but no one does a lot of that. And standing-sprinting in the drops is no problem at all as the width is similar. The drops could be narrower IMO.

I'd prefer less bar reach though. I don't think it's necessary to have your elbows nearly on the tops as you won't usually be in that position for long periods.

Yeah, the short stem, long reach was clever, combined with a longer top tube bike.

I think the next evolution are forearm shaped carbon recesses from the hoods back to truly support the arms. I had thought of a similar idea in passing.

But if this got any traction at a pro level, i am sure the uci would quickly ban it.

The current "rule" is pretty wide open to interpretation:

"The traditional type of handlebars must be used in road races, cyclo-cross and track races (apart from track time trials and pursuits). The attachment of any additional handlebar component or extension is prohibited in these events."

In theory you might get away with a lot of cool mods to support an aero position... but maybe none at all. I don't recall anyone even trying to get away with bars that had an integrated "aerobar".

I watched the video earlier today and all I can say is I’d much prefer Gustav Iden’s ITU roadbike and position than the one featured.

Just sayin’.

---

-------------------
Madison photographer Timothy Hughes | Instagram

The idea is brilliant and if he can ever produce these bars, I will be purchasing a set for sure. I like the idea of the narrow shifter mount area with the flap top on the drops and the flair on the bottom.

This is a very narrow aero drop gravel bar combo.

Right now you could certainly slip these past an official who doesn't give a crap. But the spirit of current mass-start road rules is, I would say fairly obviously, to inhibit bars that simultaneously offer a hand grip and elbow support. (Theoretically for safety, but I think also to force aero to require an upper-body effort tradeoff. There's an element of aesthetics and race dynamics there.)

It would suck if this type of bar became accepted without an explicit rule change. If bars offering aerobar-like grips and support are deemed to not be a part of mass-start road racing, these should definitely be banned. And if the UCI decides to back off on that, then they should just throw their hands up and allow aerobars full stop. Whatever they go with, having the sport in an uncertain half-baked compromisebar situation is bad for everyone.

Of course, the UCI being the UCI, they'll likely allow it for a few events and then flip the rules to ban them on the morning of a major race.

I disagree as you can technically use a narrow aero drop bar and do the same thing. You can almost get there with what is current.

So I just thought of something. UCI allows aerobars, but they can not extend beyond the hoods, right?

why not have a long bike, short stem, and long reach bars, but with aero bars. The long stem would solve the short aero bar issue. make the aero bar a v shape on the tops to prevent wrist contact in sprints. No need to go narrow on the bars either. aside from loss of a tops position for climbing, I think it would be a better solution.

Nope. See rruff's post above.

Can't picture what you mean, but UCI don't allow aero bars on group stages.

ITU racing might have an application here, otherwise the only people it would make sense for are breakaway specialists.

yea, it did not make sense as i really described it poorly, and should do a picture. Incorrect use of aero road bar, and aero bars. . And you are right about ITU... so my idea is a moot point anyway.

Are Lemond Drop in bars by Scott a shape that is still legal? There were also Scott aero https://images.app.goo.gl/dMYYUAVgqkRZf6xA9. That seemed very aero at the time.

https://images.app.goo.gl/AxJyFyoe3Eyt9jiU6

Nope.

I think if you want to go aero, just make some 28cm wide normal looking bars with a aero top.

I'm guessing if these ever showed up at a ProTour race, the UCI would disallow them on safety grounds due to how narrow the hoods position is. I don't think there is anything banning a drop bar from being say 20cm wide, but nobody would want to ride in a pack with that guy.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Have a look at Jan-Willem Schip's handlebar; he's riding for Dutch Roompot pro-team and uses some very narrow track bars in road-races.
CN even did an article on him/his bike:
https://www.cyclingnews.com/...-in-the-pro-peloton/
I think this comes closest to what I've seen used in the peloton.

Actually I think narrow bars are great in a pack.

I agree with your comments. A 28cm aero drop bar with a flaired bottom out to say 38cm and you just rotate your levers in a bit. I would buy these right away for a couple of my bikes.

I have been looking for a light weight aero shorty bar for years that can be integrated into a nice aero drop bar and really there is nothing available unless you are creative and do something bespoke. With the dropbars we are discussing, with an aero top and shifters rotated in, you do not require a shorty aerobar at all.

For climbing I have my hands close to the stem most of the time, for descending you have the bars flared so you are pretty close to a standard set up and for flat sections you are in a more aero position on the hoods.

Thinking outside the box a little and looking at that other picture of the Lemond Scott drops. Is there a rule in place that would prevent you from running a carbon round tube across the front of the handlebars that would attach to the shifters or the front of the bar just under the shifters. This would give you something to grab onto for an aero position when resting your arms on the aero tops and would not go past the front of the shifters. It would be impossible for someone to get hurt with this. Not the most aero item but maybe possible

Saw this the other day on FB



Pretty narrow.

Personally I ride 33 on track on (as narrow as I can find) and 36 on road (narrow as I can find without making some quality of life sacrifices) I even did my Madison training on 33cm bars... and my terribleness at the madison isn't the bars fault. I'd like to try 28-30 on the track, but nothing (non-custom) exists for mortals.

---

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com

Even if it was integrated it would definitely be "non-traditional". And you can't add any component or extensions.

Technically speaking the aero drop bars are not traditional either or a drop bar that is integrated. I do follow you but where is the line drawn?

So to that extent why could you not run a computer mount with a bit more structure out in front of the stem further than standard and just hold that?

It's very clearly drawn by sending a sample to the UCI for their approval, along with a sizeable $$$ donation to the UCI's travel, party and retirement fund...