https://cyclingtips.com/2020/12/the-speeco-aero-breakaway-bar-is-ultrafast-and-ultra-weird/
discuss.
.
I wish the UCI would just go back to allowing ITU-style clipons. As is riders are going to narrower bars to get aero at the expense of handling, climbing, sprinting, etc. The Speeco bar is a really innovative muddy-middle solution forced by the current rules.
Truth be told I’ve visualized a bar like that for a few years now though I always envisioned placing one’s hands in such a way that the brakes were instantly accessible. I like the idea personally. Don’t see why they had to go with an integrated stem.
I like these. I like riding in that position. Might have to give them a go
I dont get it, i ride in this position on normal bars all the time?
Just seems like it screws up your ability to grab the bar and forces you onto the hoods
they look fine, neat solution. But like the Sphinx bar of old, they aren’t long for the (legal) world.
they look fine, neat solution. But like the Sphinx bar of old, they aren’t long for the (legal) world.
I wonder on what basis they’d be banned?
I see two potential safety issues from an UCI point of view that they may focus on:
Too narrow thus reducing control - Is there an existing minimum bar width? If so, this bar should be fine as long as it satisfies that, and could be made wider while maintaining it’s other features to satisfy width requirements.
Not enough knee clearance for the tops - This is what might put me off these. I don’t want to move my hoods, and the longer surface for the forearms is accomplished here by shortening the stem 30-50mm from typical length. This will put knees pretty close to the tops for me and probably plenty others. That could be a safety concern, especially during sprints or unexpected evasive manoeuvers.
These are just drop bars with slightly different proportions. The UCI would have to dictate allowable proportions to ban them.
Track is dictated by distance from the front axle to the furthest grippable section, which is what “banned” the sphinx bars. Max width was 30 if my memory serves correctly, I believe that’s why the London gb squad track drops flared out so much on the tops, then narrowed at the drops.
My guess is that the uci will soon take some more drastic road restrictions. I suspect they’ll have some “safety” restrictions… Long computer mounts and the super tuck are probably also in danger (along with more clear sprinting rules)
Probably not until post Tokyo though, they generally have grace period of not changing anything close to the Olympics
Just my 2c
been doing this for years with Zipp.
This thread needs pictures:
I dont get it, i ride in this position on normal bars all the time?
Just seems like it screws up your ability to grab the bar and forces you onto the hoods
Customizable. You can have the tops at 36cm for when you’re off the front but the drops can flare out to 42cm for descending or sprinting.
E
I love this solution. Wish these were around years ago.
This rule is already on the books, so the UCI can just choose to start enforcing it
Position1.3.008 The rider shall normally assume a sitting position on the bicycle. This position requires that the only points of support are the following: the feet on the pedals, the hands on the handlebars and the seat on the saddle
They have obviously been letting the invisible aerobar thing go, but I suspect they won’t be keen on this because of the way it looks.
The more i look, the more I think the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
You are sacrificing some of your other positions, and definitely hindering your sprint, both important things in a road race. You’re also telegraphing to everyone “hey I want to make a breakaway” which might work in some very disorganized fields, but isn’t going to take you terribly far… or at least not in the races you weren’t going to pull away from the pack in anyways.
Would suck to be in a couple of man break, run it to the line and get outsprinted because your knees were in your bars.