Originally Posted by
Rudebob
Thanks for the responses. I should explain that the nature of the injury is one that utilizes the injured tendon primarily with supination type movements (twisting or moving the hands from palms to palms up, etc). Other types of loaded movement within the hands share a greater mix of muscles and tendons-including the normal hand position on a flat bar setup.
Riding the top bar or hoods on drops is fine but it is repeated braking and shift movements on drops (muscle movement with hands positioned sideways) that I am hoping to minimize. The use of trigger shifters and brakes from a palms down position would seem preferable. It is definitely more comfortable on my mountain bike.
If being honest with myself, the acquisition of such a bike would not not just be for the exclusive purpose of my current situation but to satisfy the occasional desire to add a new toy to the stable (n + 1). I was hoping this might also provides a little more reasonable explanation for my wife as to why I need another bicycle when "you can only ride one at a time".
Basically my question is in hopes that I might get some input from someone who has actually has ridden a road geometry built bike such as this over extended distances that give me an idea has to how much lost efficiency I might experience-especially on the tail end of a century ride.
Thanks
I have, and do. To respond to your question: some, but much less than many would have you believe. I have two reasons for saying this.
1. Personal experience. I do all my road cycling on a flat-bar road bike (pictured below). I don't 'race' or do group rides; I do all my riding solo. That said, I've ridden two imperial centuries on this bike; didn't have any problems. I routinely do 50+ mile rides at least once a week during the season. I've never noticed any particular disparity between my speeds and those of other cyclists of a similar age/apparent fitness (I'm 66; pretty fit aerobically) who are on full-on drop-bar road bikes.
2. Data. I've trotted this out before, but it bears repeating. I know of only one reported genuine, disinterested attempt to compare 'drop bar' with 'flat bar' road bikes. This was a test undertaken by Brit mag Cycling+ a few years ago: the testers rode two endurance-geometry drop-bar bikes and two flat-bar road bikes -- equivalent quality, weight, tires etc. -- over a period of time over a known course approximating a 50-mile sportive. Lots of hills, lots of descents, some flats, etc. They tried to control for actual effort through hr monitors.
Result: there was a disparity, but much less than they expected to find. They found they were about 5-6 minutes quicker around the course on average on the drop-bars for the same (roughly) effort. What was interesting: they found they were quicker up the climbs on flat-bars (they attributed this to more open breathing), but that this was more than offset by their being quicker on the descents on drop-bars when in the drops: lower centre of gravity (cornering speed) + more aero. They did point out that they used the drops extensively while descending, and that in their opinion that advantage would be lost for folks who don't.
So, not a full-blown 'scientific' test but as I say it's the only attempt to make a rational, empirically-based comparison, fwiw.