Unfortunately, using only the hole provided on the inside of the handlebar makes it difficult to route both cables through the same hole. It can be done (barely), but the housings are forced into such a small diameter bend that friction is introduced and this affects shifting performance. There also isn't any way to wrap either housing around the handlebar to utilize the unused outer hole in the handlebar. Because of the shape of the handlebar, the hole near the stem is large enough for the exit of two housings, but currently I can't get both housings to fit internally near the shift levers without introducing friction. That being the case, the only alternative seems to be to run either the brake or shift housing on the exterior of the handlebar which doesn't allow a clean installation and mostly defeats the purpose of the flattened aero section.
I've talked with Trek (Bontrager distributor), but all they've told me is the Madone 7.7 is configured with exactly this build and they're able to make it work. They also said I shouldn't attempt to modify the bars in any way or it would void the warranty.
I've used the search function about this specific issue and can't find any reference. Has anyone else addressed this problem? It looks like all I'd have to do is bevel the inside hole near the shift lever so the housings aren't forced to make a 90 degree bend in such a short distance. By beveling both the leading and trailing edge of the hole appropriately, the housings would only have to bend about 45 degrees which would help to mitigate friction. Additionally, since the hole wouldn't be enlarged appreciably, I don't think structural integrity would be jeopardized.
Any advice appreciated.
It seems stupid to me that Shimano oh as gone this route as most bars accomodate one cable exiting from Left side of shifter and one from Right side of shifter. My Enve bars have one groove in front of bar and one behind bar, and changing to DA 9000 has both cables running behind the bar now.
My Madone is still on SRAM Red using the XXX Aero bar, and I can see your dilemma. Not an ideal way to run cables at all.
Parlee Z5 XL (6055g/13.32lbs) Trek Madone 5.9 (7052-7500g)Jonesman Columbus Spirit (8680g)
Chase your dreams - it's only impossible until it's done
Another suggestion was to simply use liners instead of housings. This would not only reduce the diameter significantly but would also allow the cable to bend more freely. Unfortunately, I think it would also introduce a lot of compression into the system. After all, cable housings are specifically designed not to compress, but a small diameter plastic liner isn't. This could possibly be tolerated for the brake cable (would make brakes mushy with poor modulation), but would certainly make shifting iffy.
I do appreciate your suggestions.
I'm attempting a weight watcher build with a ready to ride weight of less than 6 KG, so every gram counts. Since these beads are able to make tighter bends and are lighter than a standard housing, they sound like the best available option.
Thanks for the suggestion
What I haven't seen addressed specifically is how well each of these four systems will tolerate a one inch 90 degree bend without introducing enough friction to adversely affect shifting or braking performance.
Does anyone have first hand comparative experience regarding the flexibility of these four systems. Does one stand out above the rest or since they're all beaded housings, do they offer comparable flexibility. Because of weight, I'll probably run Power Cordz cables through whichever housing I chose so would welcome advice on that as well.
Thanks again for your comments.
- Similar Topics
- Last post
- 3 Replies
- 785 Views
Last post by AfromD
Sun Aug 20, 2017 12:31 pm
- 17 Replies
- 1651 Views
Last post by TonyM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:36 am
- 31 Replies
- 4267 Views
Last post by lobuxracer
Sun May 13, 2018 7:39 am
- 1 Replies
- 440 Views
Last post by peted76
Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:57 pm
- 28 Replies
- 2083 Views
Last post by sennder
Wed May 09, 2018 4:26 pm