There is a correlation between modern "long, low and slack" geometry and wide handlebars, but if your guess was more leverage, you'd be mostly wrong. You may need 800-millimeter handlebars to tame a 280-pound, 60-horsepower off-road motorcycle, but few riders need that much leverage to control a vehicle that weighs only one fourth of its rider. Beyond offering enough mechanical advantage to show the boulders who's the boss, the more important role that wide bars played was to transform riding styles to adapt to much slacker head angles, lengthening reach, and the trail bike market's wholesale switch to short stems.
To set the record straight, personal preference is reason enough to defend your favorite width. I'm not going to dictate which bar you should ride. This is an attempt to frame the handlebar-width/handling equation in a historical perspective that explains why at one time, exaggerated handlebar widths were beneficial (perhaps, essential), and to support why the average handlebar width is now progressing in the opposite direction among the sport's most notable bike handlers.
Wider is Better: Why that was true Not so long ago, frame geometry encouraged riders to stay well back over the bike while descending and cornering. Both downhill and trail bikes had shorter reaches, steeper head tube angles, and more compact wheelbases. On the trail bike side, 50-millimeter stems had become mandatory, (down from 90mm), but bike makers had not yet compensated for the missing 40-millimeters by lengthening their cockpits. Centered over the bike, the combined effect of those factors put more than enough pressure on the front wheel to balance cornering and braking traction on level terrain and down modestly steep trails.
That was fine and dandy until you needed to pressurize the rear wheel at the apex of a berm-turn, lower your center of mass to prepare for hard braking, or balance your weight between the wheels to maximize control on a steep descent. The solution was outstretched arms, butt behind the saddle, and heels down. It worked well, because bikes were more compact, and that's where you needed to be to keep just enough pressure on the front tire's contact patch to maintain traction and steering precision, while being in command of the rear tire at all times (or simply to prevent being pitched over the bars).
Try that on a modern DH or trail bike and the front tire will push so badly you'll probably hit the ground before you figure out what is going on. Reaches are longer, head-tube angles are much slacker and, in the case of trail bikes, additional travel and bigger wheels have lengthened forks. The combination of those factors has moved the front axle much farther forward, which means that riders must put a lot more pressure on the front of the bike to maintain traction. This is where wide bars come in to play.
Wide handlebars literally forced riders to shift their weight forward, because that's where you needed to be in order to bend your arms enough to control the bike. Get back too far and your arms quickly straighten, so you can't decouple your steering inputs from the bouncing and bashing your bike is taking. Wide handlebars were an organic, stylish and transparent solution to make the jump from old-school to new-school geometry. Shopping through before-and-after images shows a pronounced improvement in riding posture after bike makers started spec'ing bar-widths north of 760-millimeters - even Joe Blows were looking aggressive, elbows out, head forward, with their bodies low over the bike.
Why Down-Sizing Makes Sense: Balance and flow Once you know something, you can't un-know it. Most of us have adapted to rider-forward geometry by now, and it's doubtful that we'll forget to stay over the front end. So, unless you prefer the widest bar you can ride, downsizing can further improve your handling. The attack position that exaggerated bar widths create naturally tightens up your body, which isn't always helpful. Also consider that wider bars require faster and broader steering inputs to make minor corrections. Slicing off as little as ten millimeters can improve steering precision, and give you more freedom to move the bike around while negotiating technical sections. Plus, you'll be better balanced when your upper body is decoupled from lateral forces.
Stable geometry is another factor that has reduced the need for massive widths. Custom offsets, mid-stroke suspension support, and slack head tube angles have reduced the workload necessary to pilot a bike. DH bikes can straight-line sections that competitors once picked their way down and trail bikes are not far behind them. Corrected geometry makes it feel like modern bikes have power steering.
So, What's the Bottom Line on Bar Width? What feels best is always the bottom line for choosing the right handlebar. That said, if you subscribe to "wide as you can ride" and you don't have an ape index like PB's Paul Aston or Greg Minnaar, you may be in for a surprise. Just for fun, grab a couple of grips, shut your eyes and place your hands on a table where you believe the width is just right. Compare that measurement against your current bar (I was 20mm off).
Curious? Experiment with a pair of lock-on grips. Slide your grips and controls inboard five millimeters at a time. Wait for a few rides before you pass judgment. You should be searching for the point where your arms and shoulders begin to relax noticeably while you are riding at pace. You'll know you've gone too far, when steering inputs get wiggly in the corners. When you think you've found your sweet spot, ride it there for a month and then return to full width to make a fair comparison. Only then should you consider the hacksaw.
 | I was always riding an 800mm handlebar when I was a kid because that's what was on the bike. When I went to Tennessee with SRAM, they were like, "what are you doing with that bar!?" And they cut it down to 760mm. It is way better now.—Vali Höll |
Compare Your Handlebar Setup With the Pros
Height vs width for 24 of the sport's best riders
PB Even Made a Video on the Subject
362 Comments
Isn't there a committee you have to check in with on that. That feels like a micro aggression
-noun
1 . the use of irony, sarcasm,
ridicule, or the like, in exposing,
denouncing, or deriding vice,
folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse o
prose, in which human folly and
vice are held up to scorn,
derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such
compositions.
The only thing satirical in this thread is the irony in you trying to make an unfunny joke involving homosexuality yet when it's turned around on yourself you obviously got butt hurt. For Christ's sake you're still going on about it.
Try and play along. You look like less of a virtue signaling , sjw when you do.
Course, that's the point, right?
Ever wondered what a core sample of the liver might look like?
www.khq.com/news/exposed-handlebar-grip-kills--year-old-pullman-boy-in/article_18d14528-e04d-52a9-90b7-c50a4cdfb300.html
Two counterpoints:
1: pros are stronger than the average rider, so they can ride narrower bars, which in turn allows for more precise control. I wonder if somewhat wider bars could be beneficial for the casual rider that wields their bike like a bludgeon instead of a scalpel.
2: local terrain matters when choosing bars. If you ride in areas with less trees, wider bars might be better, but if you ride trails with tight clearance of trailside trees, it’s better to opt for narrower bars to avoid clipping every tree and pinballing down the trail.
I asked a pro on that list whether he dropped his bar width down to where it sit now from 800 due to preference/control or if it was for more clearance between trees because he races on tracks that can have narrow clearances. He confirmed it was exactly the latter.
Sample size of 1. Well, sample size of 2 if you count the fact that I have not yet cut my bars but sometimes think about it only because of tree clearance and no other reason.
What's the ideal width? Maybe do a bench press and measure where your hands are most comfortable for maximum strength?
Pros train for power on a bike (NOT the same as how much you can squat/deadlift) and a lot of "core" strength, and while they develop their upper body I doubt it's a huge focus. A large amount of upper body mass would probably be a detriment on a bike since every pound counts.
I'd wager anyone who's spent a few years powerlifting a few times per week can more-or-less match the pros for pure strength. That doesn't mean they'll have the same power on the bike, or that it'll somehow make them as fast as pros.
I think the biggest benefit besides the better leverage was and still is the more ergonomic posture to take hits and impacts (push up position). It was just way easier to ride elbows out and absorb hits with wider bars and that was it (and leverage advantage of course). Everything else seems to be interpreted into the story from a current view point. And I remember that time very well and my thoughts on that development.
I have one question about big bar width: Bontrager and Enve both manufacture 820mm bars, and being 6’2” 190 lbs, I bought the new Bontrager 820 bars love them on my Remedy RSL (XL frame). Could I have made a size choice mistake with getting the 820s?
Follow the steps in the article two figure out if you like a different width better.
My two cents
Nob
that's obviously completely, embarrassingly false.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
Same bars... just cut 1” off each side on the summer bars.
Years ago I got fed up with the industry standard 9 degrees back, 5 degrees up and got a Jitsie trials bar with 9.5 back, 12 up. I've never looked back. Mega comfortable for me. I'm 5'11" and have cut it down from 730 to 710 mm wide. In its original size I found I had my hands a good inch in from the ends, hence the narrowing of the thing.
Modern bars with their minimal angles and wing-like widths have nothing to offer me.
In my opinion (as someone who’s taught and done setups with thousands of riders), handlebar bar width should be related to your size and proportions, not the style of bike you ride or the decade you ride in.
I recently published a book about mountain bike setup. It’s called Dialed, and part of the book covers “anatomically correct” handlebar width.
The recommended width in Dialed is very, very close to the numbers that were provided above in “Compare Your Handlebar Setup With the Pros.”
If you’re interested, you can check out Dialed here:
www.llbmtb.com/product/dialed-the-secret-math-of-a-perfect-mountain-bike-setup
Warning for long and low bike fans,he has very sound logic on why this trend has gone too far on some bikes, suggesting many need to size down rather than up for optimal control.
Many other more established sports do exactly this, take your body proportions into account when choosing your equipment... Then mountain biking comes along with its arbitrary numbers and "ride-what-you-like" mentality(while completely contradicting itself with those exact arbitrary numbers that don't make sense), and just goes with whatever width is fashionable at the time.
I say this in jest - I love a lively cycling debate. Keep up the good work PinkBike
Amazing video too, every moment; classic.
I cut my Renthals down to 760 on my trail bike and 780 on my dh bike and I have had ZERO wrist issues since.
You guys stayed with Imperial after your independence because the French emissary who carried the pattern meter and kilogram sunk in a tropical storm at the Caribbean.
Jokes aside - I grew up in Germany, and the whole non-metric units this g is driving me nuts. But because it's what everyone around me uses, I've adapted. Sort of a when in Rome thing.
The longer the distance is from the tip of the shoulder to the center of the hand, the longer bars you will be comfortable with riding. So for most people unless gorilla armed and 3 foot wide shoulders, this is gunna be in the 750-800mm range for many riders 5'9 and taller. Height does some into play here too as the greater distance the shoulders are from the hips and hips to bars, the strongest most bio-mechanically sound angles will change. Ya I'm a science geek so I paid attention in those physics and human anatomy classes. Shred on!
I think RC's last paragraph is an excellent suggestion that tailors the decision based on practical "cockpit time". And it makes you go slow and methodically thru the process. Without spending a lot of money!!
P.S. I am 6ft
I forgot to add, that in order to keep the grips from sliding inward, I have taken two lock on rings and put them just at the end of the flange. I always leave 1 finger of space between the lock ring and the brake, this way, when I hold near the flange, my hand just rests on a big rubber cushion, because of the ring underneath.
To be clear, the bar/stem needs to be viewed as the ergonometric tuning for a bikes handling that works in conjunction with the saddle height/angle. And although a trusted combo is a good starting point, every unique geometry requires a unique bar/stem. I have a 26" trail-hardtail, a 29" XC hardtail of older design, a 29" Turner Sultan, and 27.5" KTM ebike full-squishy. Although similar, non of the bikes has the same cockpit setup, but they all fit me perfectly.
For god's sake, please put plugs in your bars if you do this.
I had a 15 YO student of mine almost die and miss 6 months of school due to a "core sample" wherein his handlebars punctured his spleen on a bail.
Just sayin'.
"#800mmaintdead"
Some people like to feel the flange or the inside ofthe grip. I like my pinky to feel the end if the grip.
I have tried to move the controls further inboards. Felt weird and kept sliding my hands back and forth.
You either hit your bars or your hands in trees.
I run my Altitude at its slackess position. I had it originally in its neutral position(1/2 degree steeper). It was too skiddish. Too quick for steering / leaning in both fast and slow speed.
8 years ago, I was running 750mm (50mm stem) on a small Nomad.
Pain / discomfort will dictate if it is too wide after a ling ride.
In the 90s at least on vancouver island and BC central interior (where I was riding) bars got super narrow, the claim was it was necessary for serious riding on narrow trails (many trails were much narrower than flow trails are now - literally singletrack). I had fairly narrow bars and I am a big guy, but my brother who has even wider shoulders had ridiculously narrow bars. I don't remember offhand but I bet it was 26-27" (650mm) I think the bars and most of his 90s Kona are in my garage. I rode that bike a few years ago and it was shocking how bad it felt with bars that narrow
My bars have been getting wider and stems shorter for a while now. I think the Honzo I put together in 2016 has 800mm bars on it and basically 0 stem extension. It rides pretty good, but my wife who is very tall with long arms can't stand the bars. So I have wondered how the majority of mini-rodent people who ride bikes (5'9'' 145lbs) - the sort of people bikes are built to survive being ridden by - are actually getting by with super wide bars.
Anyway these types of fashions are kind of comic, I assume competitive DH will soon be back to 26" wheels because they accelerate faster - maybe 24" rears will soon be back.
2. where are the ‘800mm plus’ widths? Why is 800mm the limit?
it’s a little like reach numbers, where someone 5’6 is on a 450mm reach and someone 6’3 is on a 490mm....not much of a jump for the big guys
but like 10 years ago the change from 710mm bars to the wider ones....it was wonderful!!! bike control changed a lot since that
For these pro, 95% is their job so get used to what they need to get their job done.
As well, they could probably ride tricycles on some of the stuff we want to use our “enduro” bikes. They’re that good at their job...
We have narrow trails around here but I can count on mabe 6 trees I could hit with my bars. 770mm, 5’5”, carpenter shoulders. Considering going back to 760mm.
I really like the research and perspective since it brought our position more forward on the bike. Great write up RC.
The difference with the dirt motorbikes is that the bicycle has a mass, no more than the /10nth of the rider… When ridding a motorbike the bike’s weight lowers the center of mass and the rider learns to use the momentum that is created by the mass of the machine and not just handle all that weight.
On a bicycle, the main mass is… us! So we have to deal with this and move around a lot more, actually pulling our bike along.
That’s why ridding a mountain bike will always be more demanding than ridding a motorbike.
As for the steering bar’s width, there are more factors to be considered before deciding the right width. The terrain we’re ridding (do we have to pass through trees?), how we ride (our personal style) and more.
It is good to start the measuring from somewhere, but there are more on this than meet the eye.
As far as I know, human proportions (Golden Ratio) haven't changed since Australopithecines were a thing; however, we're "suddenly" discovering "better" geometries on bikes on a weekly basis.
So, if a bike fits you properly, say, last week, how does it stop fitting properly a week later (i.e., whenever Pinkbike crowns Cool Geo Bike Company's new GeeWhizBang Enduro bike the Bike of the Week)?
I sit between a medium and large frame size. A frame's reach will determine my stem length and handlebar width.
Shorter reach, wider bars and "longer" stem. On my dually I'm on a medium with 800mm bars. On my Chromag M/L (the only frame that actually fits) I'm on 770mm bars.
Bar width (mm) = 0.7565 x Height (cm) + 631.88
Are these charts updated?
www.pinkbike.com/photo/16673030
Maybe he just doesn’t know how tall he is, somebody told him 5’10” and he’s just gone with it cus it’s easy to remember.
I met him briefly and I’d have guessed st 5’8” disregarding all else. Also looks s good 2” shorter than Maes there.
But here he is nearly as tall as a pop up gazebo www.pinkbike.com/photo/16673076
I feel we’ll get the same thing for super long/slack bikes too!
i.imgur.com/0REL2Tm.png
Somewhat applies ti handlebar rise too if u ask me.
(Still somehow i find myself riding 800mm... i'm institutionalized)