Reach

[aprivat]

Hi,

On my new bike for 2025, I will move from Shimano Dura Ace 12-speed to the new SRAM Red group. I will also move from a 39 cm handlebar to a 36 cm handlebar. Both the old and new handlebar have a reach of 72 mm.

Can anyone figure out what the effective change (if any) in reach will be due to these changes?

[pmprego]

Hi,

On my new bike for 2025, I will move from Shimano Dura Ace 12-speed to the new SRAM Red group. I will also move from a 39 cm handlebar to a 36 cm handlebar. Both the old and new handlebar have a reach of 72 mm.

Can anyone figure out what the effective change (if any) in reach will be due to these changes?

None.

[TobinHatesYou]

Hi,

On my new bike for 2025, I will move from Shimano Dura Ace 12-speed to the new SRAM Red group. I will also move from a 39 cm handlebar to a 36 cm handlebar. Both the old and new handlebar have a reach of 72 mm.

Can anyone figure out what the effective change (if any) in reach will be due to these changes?

None.

Due to how our shoulders roll forward, I have found that for every 2cm taken from bar width, I want almost 1cm more stem length to compensate. Think about how much farther out a pair of skis are on a TT. As well you’ll want to recover some leverage by going longer otherwise you’re reducing the radius in your steering control surface, which would affect the twitchiness of your bike.

[aprivat]

Many thanks for the answer. That makes sense to me.

Does going from Dura Ace 12-speed to Red make a difference in itself? I have read various places that the new Red has a longer reach. Or is that only relative to the old Red?

[lukaszzsch]

They are almost the same. New red and Ultegra 8100 on board and barely noticeable length difference.


Wysłane z iPad za pomocą Tapatalk

[pmprego]

Hi,

On my new bike for 2025, I will move from Shimano Dura Ace 12-speed to the new SRAM Red group. I will also move from a 39 cm handlebar to a 36 cm handlebar. Both the old and new handlebar have a reach of 72 mm.

Can anyone figure out what the effective change (if any) in reach will be due to these changes?

None.

Due to how our shoulders roll forward, I have found that for every 2cm taken from bar width, I want almost 1cm more stem length to compensate. Think about how much farther out a pair of skis are on a TT. As well you’ll want to recover some leverage by going longer otherwise you’re reducing the radius in your steering control surface, which would affect the twitchiness of your bike.

Your end result was that (longer stem) but I believe it was due to a confirmation bias. You wanted to go narrower and longer so you went and your mind said "yeah, this is good".

This might also happen with the op. I meant from a radius perspective and given the length of our arms, 2cm narrower does not make a change.

If you start to shoulder roll or accept that a bit more weight can be placed on the front (back muscles are stronger than shoulder muscles) due to having arms closer to each other (tt-ish) then your fit changes and the 2:1 you mentioned might work. Dunno

[hannawald]

Many thanks for the answer. That makes sense to me.

Does going from Dura Ace 12-speed to Red make a difference in itself? I have read various places that the new Red has a longer reach. Or is that only relative to the old Red?

New Red is 5-7mm longer vs old Force but if I put it side by side to Dura Ace it seems the same.

[TobinHatesYou]

Your end result was that (longer stem) but I believe it was due to a confirmation bias. You wanted to go narrower and longer so you went and your mind said "yeah, this is good".

This might also happen with the op. I meant from a radius perspective and given the length of our arms, 2cm narrower does not make a change.

If you start to shoulder roll or accept that a bit more weight can be placed on the front (back muscles are stronger than shoulder muscles) due to having arms closer to each other (tt-ish) then your fit changes and the 2:1 you mentioned might work. Dunno

A good way to visualize the changes is to substitute the actual numbers with extreme values. This is what I intended with the TT reference, but I guess it got glossed over. Let’s pretend that the user steps down to a 1cm wide bar. What length stem would he need to maintain a reasonable amount of steering control?

Also a shoulder roll is the expected result when moving your hands inward. Look at yourself in the mirror. If we merely rotate our arms inward while isolating shoulder movement, then our reach actually decreases. When you move your hands in along the same vertical plane, your scapula is already spreading itself a bit.

Plus a change in bar width is itself already a “fit change”

[pmprego]

Your end result was that (longer stem) but I believe it was due to a confirmation bias. You wanted to go narrower and longer so you went and your mind said "yeah, this is good".

This might also happen with the op. I meant from a radius perspective and given the length of our arms, 2cm narrower does not make a change.

If you start to shoulder roll or accept that a bit more weight can be placed on the front (back muscles are stronger than shoulder muscles) due to having arms closer to each other (tt-ish) then your fit changes and the 2:1 you mentioned might work. Dunno

A good way to visualize the changes is to substitute the actual numbers with extreme values. This is what I intended with the TT reference, but I guess it got glossed over. Let’s pretend that the user steps down to a 1cm wide bar. What length stem would he need to maintain a reasonable amount of steering control?

Also a shoulder roll is the expected result when moving your hands inward. Look at yourself in the mirror. If we merely rotate our arms inward while isolating shoulder movement, then our reach actually decreases. When you move your hands in along the same vertical plane, your scapula is already spreading itself a bit.

Plus a change in bar width is itself already a “fit change”

Yeah... But I guess that shoulder rotation happens when you start to going narrower than your shoulder width. Before that I think one can lock scapula so shoulders do not really rotate. But I see your point.

I guess I'll have to consider that in my next handlebar. I was considering going to a 1cm narrower and struggling to decide reach. I think I can assume I'll get some leeway in that.

[wltz]

Tobin, you on the money here, as always, but I am not sure increasing the reach is always warranted. The extra arms length one gets from rolling the shoulders can be used to steepen the angle in the elbows, which will be a useful aero intervention if one can sustain such angle.

[toxin]

Aerodynamically, a more open elbow angle is better (assuming forearms fully parallel with bars)

[Mr.Gib]

Your end result was that (longer stem) but I believe it was due to a confirmation bias. You wanted to go narrower and longer so you went and your mind said "yeah, this is good".

This might also happen with the op. I meant from a radius perspective and given the length of our arms, 2cm narrower does not make a change.

If you start to shoulder roll or accept that a bit more weight can be placed on the front (back muscles are stronger than shoulder muscles) due to having arms closer to each other (tt-ish) then your fit changes and the 2:1 you mentioned might work. Dunno

A good way to visualize the changes is to substitute the actual numbers with extreme values. This is what I intended with the TT reference, but I guess it got glossed over. Let’s pretend that the user steps down to a 1cm wide bar. What length stem would he need to maintain a reasonable amount of steering control?

Also a shoulder roll is the expected result when moving your hands inward. Look at yourself in the mirror. If we merely rotate our arms inward while isolating shoulder movement, then our reach actually decreases. When you move your hands in along the same vertical plane, your scapula is already spreading itself a bit.

Plus a change in bar width is itself already a “fit change”

It might depend on the individual. How much does a shoulder "roll" if the hand moves a single centimeter inward? And what if a rider naturally rolls their shoulders a particular amount regardles of a 1cm difference in hand position one way or the other? Or maybe a rider deals with the change in hand location by pronating the upper arm instead of manipulating the shoulder. FWIW when I want to get "narrow" I tuck my elbows in tight under my torso and lower my torso to the max. Excess shoulder roll could force the elbows out for some riders in this postion if they are not flexible. I think you have to start by looking at fit with a narrower bar as a trigonometry problem.

Is it theoretically possible that a narrower bar will be a further reach than a wider bar? If the hand position on the wider bar is perfectly 90 degrees from the shoulder joint and less degrees on the narrower bar, doesn't that make the reach on the narrower bar the hypotenuse of a right angle triangle and thus a longer distance?

[wheelsONfire]

Hi,

On my new bike for 2025, I will move from Shimano Dura Ace 12-speed to the new SRAM Red group. I will also move from a 39 cm handlebar to a 36 cm handlebar. Both the old and new handlebar have a reach of 72 mm.

Can anyone figure out what the effective change (if any) in reach will be due to these changes?

I have decreased bar width with 3cm recently. I also went from that idea, that i needed to increase reach. But i didn't like it at all.
I think you need to test this before you go for longer reach. To be honest, i also have noticed that i didn't like the decreased width. It works for awhile with narrower bars, but the longer i ride the more i understand that nope, i just don't like it.
I went from 40 to 37cm (Deda Superzero RS to Trek RSL aero bar).