|
I ave this to say: I don't know which model I have but I love it. They are on my commuter and whenever I switch to my modern road bike, those bars just feel wide. It is on my list to replace them with rando bars at some point.
|
I've got two sets of Nitto Grand Randonneur 135 bars. Both vintage off Cannondale ST800s. I can't ride 'em has they are much to narrow at the hoods to have been put on a 27" bike. They look much more comfortable than normal bars though.
|
Sorry to yet again revive this thread..
I'm looking into buying rando bars, I don't really like my current Soma Hwy1 bars (too much drop). I was thinking about either the 132 because of the shorter drops (I'm using bar-ends). But now there is also the 136 :twitchy: what is the difference? My fitter said I should get a bike with 2cm less top-tube, a comment which I find strange because my body measurements are pretty standard and as you can see in picture my saddle is already pretty high. I'm guessing my problem is actually too wide handlebars, which these rando fix by being narrower. http://i.imgur.com/vOXN1m0.jpg |
2 cm shorter top tube? I think he's trying to sell you a new bike. :eek:
It would make much more sense to change to a stem with shorter reach. The one in your picture (is that your bicycle?) looks longer than 80 mm, and I'm pretty sure you could go to 80 mm or shorter. Nitto, Soma and Velo Orange all have versions of rando bars (Nitto and V.O. also offer stems - not sure about Soma). Check their sites for drawings with dimensions. |
Shorter stem and/or shorter reach bars should take care of your 2 cm difference, I would think.
|
Yeah the guy did some good things like proper seat height and fore-aft adjustment, but he was probably thinking about modern compact geometry racing bikes when he was fitting.
Yes, that is my bike the day after the fitting. I have leveled the saddle since then. The stem is from Tange, 85mm 0º. I was thinking about a Technomic either 80 or 70mm plus rando bars. The position on the flats is good enough and by bringing the bars further I'll also be reducing reach. These ones are simply to wide, which also contributes to more reach. At the moment I'm thinking about going for a Nitto B132. They have more reach than the 135, but the drops are shorter that is nice for the bar-ends and they are slightly more raised (12mm vs 7mm on the 135). |
Originally Posted by John Nolan
(Post 18632735)
Shorter stem and/or shorter reach bars should take care of your 2 cm difference, I would think.
|
2 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by mariachi
(Post 18632850)
At the moment I'm thinking about going for a Nitto B132. They have more reach than the 135, but the drops are shorter that is nice for the bar-ends and they are slightly more raised (12mm vs 7mm on the 135).
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=511310http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=511311 The grey bike ('88 Schwinn KOM) is a vintage MTB so the top tube is crazy long (61 cm), but the short reach bars and short stem (Dirt Drop 80) make it fit. |
Bars come in multiple widths. How wide are yours, Mariachi?
|
Originally Posted by USAZorro
(Post 18633361)
Bars come in multiple widths. How wide are yours, Mariachi?
I don't feel that reach to the bars is a problem, maybe they are too low because my neck gets a bit sore after 40-50km. Below a picture from two days after the fit, not the best I know. I'll probably start a new thread about it. http://i.imgur.com/a0DunoI.png In any case my complains with the Soma are that the drops are too deep, I need to put myself in an akward position to break from the hooks because of the bend's shape and I feel they are too wide when riding on the ramps. From what I've read I believe rando bars will help due to the upswept ramps and shallower drops. |
I think your position looks pretty good in that picture. I would try to stay reasonably close to that. It would be a good idea if/when you make changes to take a stick and make marks on it to record sit bones to hoods, sit bones to drops, etc.
The randos are nice bars. You will probably like them. |
Thanks, do you know how much do the 135 and 132 flare up? I need to bring my bars up by 3,5cm and that will affect how long of a quill I need.
|
Originally Posted by mariachi
(Post 18635269)
Thanks, do you know how much do the 135 and 132 flare up? I need to bring my bars up by 3,5cm and that will affect how long of a quill I need.
If I lay a straightedge on top of the bends behind the hoods and measure down to the stem clamp sleeve, I get something like 8-10 mm. It's similar for both the 132 and 135, and difficult to measure accurately. Bear in mind that the rando bars - especially the 135 - have a shallow drop, so you will gain some height there. I would begin by getting the 135 bars and shimming them with the stem you have. If you have access to a trainer or rollers, you can get a decent idea of fit before you go to all the trouble of finishing your cabling and taping the bars. |
For me the most comfortable bars (rando or "regular" drop) have tops and drops that are very close to parallel. Take a look at the side views on the first page. On the 135 and 177, the tops slope down quite a bit compared to the drops. On the 132 they're both pretty much horizontal. THAT's the big difference in my book. And that's why I use 132's.
SP OC, OR ps - if you're looking for a wider rando bar, VO sells one that goes out to 48cm, IIRC. |
Originally Posted by rando_couche
(Post 18635738)
For me the most comfortable bars (rando or "regular" drop) have tops and drops that are very close to parallel. Take a look at the side views on the first page. On the 135 and 177, the tops slope down quite a bit compared to the drops. On the 132 they're both pretty much horizontal. THAT's the big difference in my book. And that's why I use 132's.
SP OC, OR ps - if you're looking for a wider rando bar, VO sells one that goes out to 48cm, IIRC. |
Originally Posted by due ruote
(Post 18635808)
I guess that's why they make chocolate and vanilla. I have and like both bars, and understand the point about parallelism, but for me the 135 wins by virtue of the longer drops; ie. they extend farther rearward.
SP OC, OR |
To me that biggest difference is the width at the hoods. Because the bars are measured at the ends, and the ends flare out- a bar that's measured at 44 ends up measuring 37 or so at the hoods or ramps- where I usually ride. That gets goofy for me having a handlebar bag on there- ESPECIALLY when having Command Shifters- there's no room for the shifters with a handlebar bag on there.
By comparison- the B177 doesn't flare out as much, so a 44 feels really wide in comparison to the B132. I think I have the actual B132 bars that the Colonel was referring to, I really like them in terms of comfort and feel and hand positions and look- but that distance between the hoods is a killer. I also really like the B177s- I'd love to try out all the fancy pants bars- I think my next set of bars is going to be a set of the Compass/Grand Bois Maes Parallel bars, but the B135, 136 and 176 bars are all in the running. I'll have to get a cockpit pic of the B132s, but here's a cockpit pic of the B177s: http://i1294.photobucket.com/albums/...psf1de2099.jpg For what it's worth the Colonel's post of the 132, 135 and 177 bars is like the Rosetta Stone of handlebars. I wish there were the same pix for the 136 and 176 around. I'm sure they're probably on some QBP site that I can't get to... |
Originally Posted by mariachi
(Post 18632850)
Yeah the guy did some good things like proper seat height and fore-aft adjustment, but he was probably thinking about modern compact geometry racing bikes when he was fitting.
Yes, that is my bike the day after the fitting. I have leveled the saddle since then. The stem is from Tange, 85mm 0º. I was thinking about a Technomic either 80 or 70mm plus rando bars. The position on the flats is good enough and by bringing the bars further I'll also be reducing reach. These ones are simply to wide, which also contributes to more reach. At the moment I'm thinking about going for a Nitto B132. They have more reach than the 135, but the drops are shorter that is nice for the bar-ends and they are slightly more raised (12mm vs 7mm on the 135). |
From that photo your fit looks pretty good, but you look a bit uncomfortable and stiff, as if you want to be more upright. I'd raise your stem a bit (a couple cm?) by however you want to do it, and gradually lower it a few mm a month or something, until you have comfortably arrived at a more optimum position.
Or just keep a more upright position. There's nothing wrong with it, except you'll be fighting the wind more, and it puts more of your weight on your rear and less on your hands. One thing I do notice is your saddle position looks quite high, but I can't see your knee bend that well obviously since it's on the other side. Also, I'm from an era when a much lower saddle position was used. Still, I would try lowering it a bit. It may improve your comfort level. |
Originally Posted by The Golden Boy
(Post 18637895)
To me that biggest difference is the width at the hoods. Because the bars are measured at the ends, and the ends flare out- a bar that's measured at 44 ends up measuring 37 or so at the hoods or ramps- where I usually ride. That gets goofy for me having a handlebar bag on there- ESPECIALLY when having Command Shifters- there's no room for the shifters with a handlebar bag on there.
By comparison- the B177 doesn't flare out as much, so a 44 feels really wide in comparison to the B132. I think I have the actual B132 bars that the Colonel was referring to, I really like them in terms of comfort and feel and hand positions and look- but that distance between the hoods is a killer. I also really like the B177s- I'd love to try out all the fancy pants bars- I think my next set of bars is going to be a set of the Compass/Grand Bois Maes Parallel bars, but the B135, 136 and 176 bars are all in the running. I'll have to get a cockpit pic of the B132s, but here's a cockpit pic of the B177s: For what it's worth the Colonel's post of the 132, 135 and 177 bars is like the Rosetta Stone of handlebars. I wish there were the same pix for the 136 and 176 around. I'm sure they're probably on some QBP site that I can't get to... |
Originally Posted by mariachi
(Post 18641494)
Thanks for the picture! btw: any reason why you're not using the stem's cable stop?
|
Originally Posted by The Golden Boy
(Post 18637895)
I wish there were the same pix for the 136 and 176 around. I'm sure they're probably on some QBP site that I can't get to...
|
The B135 is like what Specialized got, from Nitto, for the Expedition, Touring bike I Got in '85.
Later I got 2 even narrower Sekai Rando bars cut them up and combined the width of the center sleeves in a stem with a 4" wide faceplate. |
Originally Posted by ColonelJLloyd
(Post 18642515)
Nitto will make a rack or handlebar for you to your specifications. I'm sure CAD files, etc are necessary. When they produce the item there is an agreement (I assume always, but not certain) that Nitto can market and sell the design as a Nitto product in addition to providing you with your designed product. I suspect the B136 is essentially the Grand Bois Randonneur bar with a 26mm clamp instead of 1".
|
Originally Posted by mariachi
(Post 18633482)
I don't feel that reach to the bars is a problem, maybe they are too low because my neck gets a bit sore after 40-50km. Below a picture from two days after the fit, not the best I know. I'll probably start a new thread about it.
To prevent the neck problem you probably need to be able to ride comfortably with your shoulders dropped and your arms slightly bent. Core and upper body strength helps with this too, but perhaps you need a level seat positioned for more setback? And this will require bringing your bars back to meet you so you aren't too stretched out. A long reach bar like one of the Nittos being discussed might not be the best choice unless you can reduce your stem length (or TT length) by a good bit too. What did your fitter say about the neck soreness? It sounds like you already did the seat levelness thing. How did you react to so little saddle setback? What about a second opinion on fit from a different fitter? |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:39 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.