Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Road Cycling (https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/)
-   -   Bullhorn+STI okay for group rides? (https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/1224835-bullhorn-sti-okay-group-rides.html)

rubiksoval 03-02-21 08:14 PM


Originally Posted by msu2001la (Post 21948476)
What you're describing in this thread sounds more like just cutting the drops off of a standard drop bar and keeping the brake hoods in their usual position. It would look something like this, which is a bike someone built specifically for Everesting and was looking to cut weight wherever they could, and found an extra 50 grams by sawing the ends off the drop bar. Note that the shape of the bar that extends below the hood is curved a lot more than the bullhorn above:
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6938f63f9e.jpg

Cuts the bars in half to save 50 grams... runs dura ace wheels that are 400 grams heavier than lightweight tubulars...

Yeah. That makes a ton of sense. :foo:

burnthesheep 03-02-21 09:04 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21949515)
Cuts the bars in half to save 50 grams... runs dura ace wheels that are 400 grams heavier than lightweight tubulars...

Yeah. That makes a ton of sense. :foo:

And the heavier ospw that likely shifts like dog doo. No way that bigger cage is lighter.

msu2001la 03-03-21 08:49 AM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21949515)
Cuts the bars in half to save 50 grams... runs dura ace wheels that are 400 grams heavier than lightweight tubulars...

Yeah. That makes a ton of sense. :foo:

Those are tubulars.

msu2001la 03-03-21 08:57 AM


Originally Posted by burnthesheep (Post 21949575)
And the heavier ospw that likely shifts like dog doo. No way that bigger cage is lighter.

This bike has 3 gears. I doubt shifting performance was much of a factor, and I have to think the weight difference between the cages amounts to a few grams at most.

In Ronan McLaughlin's own words:
“I robbed the
CeramicSpeed OSPW system off my TT bike. [I mostly did this] for the decreased chain articulation angles rather than for the ceramic bearings in the pulley wheels. I figured with the watts and the nature of the delivery of power on this ride this would provide a gain worth having, especially considering I already had it on another bike in the house.”

6.2kg, three gears and cut-off drops: The bike used for the Everesting record

burnthesheep 03-03-21 09:49 AM


Originally Posted by msu2001la (Post 21950017)
This bike has 3 gears. I doubt shifting performance was much of a factor, and I have to think the weight difference between the cages amounts to a few grams at most.

In Ronan McLaughlin's own words:
“I robbed the
CeramicSpeed OSPW system off my TT bike. [I mostly did this] for the decreased chain articulation angles rather than for the ceramic bearings in the pulley wheels. I figured with the watts and the nature of the delivery of power on this ride this would provide a gain worth having, especially considering I already had it on another bike in the house.”

6.2kg, three gears and cut-off drops: The bike used for the Everesting record

Fair enough. Just playing devil's advocate or a turd for fun............What about the that TT bike Tri-rig front break? That's not the new lightweight version in the picture. I own the brake that's pictured. It ain't light. It's definitely heavier than the carbon TRP brakes I have laying around in the parts bin. The newest Tririg aero front brake is pretty light, but looks totally different than that one.

I point this stuff out simply because I literally get the same kind of questions about my TT bike "what's that, why that instead of that.....etc...".

msu2001la 03-03-21 10:03 AM


Originally Posted by burnthesheep (Post 21950114)
Fair enough. Just playing devil's advocate or a turd for fun............What about the that TT bike Tri-rig front break? That's not the new lightweight version in the picture. I own the brake that's pictured. It ain't light. It's definitely heavier than the carbon TRP brakes I have laying around in the parts bin. The newest Tririg aero front brake is pretty light, but looks totally different than that one.

I point this stuff out simply because I literally get the same kind of questions about my TT bike "what's that, why that instead of that.....etc...".

He talks about the front brake in the article, selected primarily for aero, not for weight (though it is slightly lighter than the Campy Record caliper it replaced):

A TriRig Omega X brake was purchased for the front of the bike, something McLaughlin figured would be better on the descent than the stock Campagnolo Record direct mount caliper. Coincidentally this turned out to be slightly lighter than the stock caliper (by 12 g), but was certainly done with aero savings in mind. “I will keep these after the bike is rebuilt — I just wish I had a matching rear one,” he said. “I find the braking on them is fine but braking is never top of my list of most important features on a road bike.”

He also talks about how he did this build on a budget, and acknowledges that there are more weight savings to be had if he was willing to spend more money. Considering the bike was just 6.2kg and he broke Alberto Contador's Everesting record with this setup, I'd say he did just fine.

burnthesheep 03-03-21 10:27 AM

FWIW, I love that brake. It is strong but modulates fine. It's also a nice aero token for bikes that put the brake on the front of the fork.

Weirdly enough, some geeks did an informal aero study on the "egg" syle and Tririg style brakes and found that with the Tririg in this specific model I own that it is MORE aero with using a brake cable liner all the way to the body of it versus using the threaded ferule up near the stem then running bare wire in front of the head tube.

I think I recall they listed their theory on this as it acting as a small "trip" for the head tube, effectively making the head tube's aero profile longer. You would think the opposite be true, more aero with the bare brake wire.

I only run it that way because the threaded part on my stem for that retaining nut to run bare wire is obscured. So I can't run bare wire.

This is why I question a lot of the behind the fork brakes. They wind up running an exposed cable outboard of the frameset between the bars and brake. Meaning, it doesn't trip the air for any other part of the bike in a beneficial way. Just those parts of a gram of drag per inch of exposed cable. When a cable is run in front of something like a head tube, it might provide a mild benefit being there instead.

Like with a Giant Trinity, or my road bike Propel. Often those have nearly a foot of exposed front brake cable.

Fun stuff!

rubiksoval 03-03-21 04:35 PM


Originally Posted by msu2001la (Post 21950006)
Those are tubulars.

And they're nearly a pound heavier than lightweight tubulars.

rubiksoval 03-03-21 04:38 PM


Originally Posted by msu2001la (Post 21950136)

He also talks about how he did this build on a budget, and acknowledges that there are more weight savings to be had if he was willing to spend more money. Considering the bike was just 6.2kg and he broke Alberto Contador's Everesting record with this setup, I'd say he did just fine.


That's not the point.

The point is the absurd step of cutting and ruining a handlebar when there is, quite literally, 8 TIMES as much weight savings that can easily be obtained in the wheels. Hell, you can buy clinchers for the same price (or cheaper) as those dura ace tubulars that are nearly a 100 grams lighter!

It's a genuine lack of logic.

urbanknight 03-03-21 04:49 PM


Originally Posted by big john (Post 21947577)
You should ask the group you want to ride with. It would be ok with my club if you can handle the bike.

It might make them nervous until they find out though.

WhyFi 03-03-21 04:56 PM


Originally Posted by urbanknight (Post 21950860)
It might make them nervous until they find out though.

Eh, just one more thing added to the list.

asgelle 03-03-21 05:07 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21950841)
It's a genuine lack of logic.

The logic makes perfect sense if you listened to any of the interviews. He did what he thought was best given the equipment available to him. What he had in his garage wasn't purchased specifically for an Everest attempt or even with Everesting in mind. Then the morning of the attempt, it occurred to him he could save some weight* by cutting off the ends of the bars so he did. That was a perfectly reasonable and logical choice for that moment.

*it also cuts down on drag

big john 03-03-21 05:10 PM


Originally Posted by urbanknight (Post 21950860)
It might make them nervous until they find out though.

True. I was thinking about a trusted rider showing up with bull horns. Most of us could handle that.

big john 03-03-21 05:12 PM


Originally Posted by asgelle (Post 21950887)
The logic makes perfect sense if you listened to any of the interviews. He did what he thought was best given the equipment available to him. What he had in his garage wasn't purchased specifically for an Everest attempt or even with Everesting in mind. Then the morning of the attempt, it occurred to him he could save some weight by cutting off the ends of the bars so he did. That was a perfectly reasonable and logical choice for that moment.

Years ago we made jokes about weight weenies taking a hacksaw to their chain hanger and pump peg.

rubiksoval 03-03-21 05:24 PM


Originally Posted by asgelle (Post 21950887)
The logic makes perfect sense if you listened to any of the interviews. He did what he thought was best given the equipment available to him. What he had in his garage wasn't purchased specifically for an Everest attempt or even with Everesting in mind. Then the morning of the attempt, it occurred to him he could save some weight by cutting off the ends of the bars so he did. That was a perfectly reasonable and logical choice for that moment.

Destroying equipment is not a reasonable and logical choice. Especially for 50 grams. He could have eschewed an undershirt or socks for the same amount of weight. Could have lost the computer and mount for 3x the weight...

genejockey 03-03-21 05:31 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21950918)
Destroying equipment is not a reasonable and logical choice. Especially for 50 grams. He could have eschewed an undershirt or socks for the same amount of weight. Could have lost the computer and mount for 3x the weight...

If he managed to break the record, I'm inclined to cut him some slack on his choices.

rubiksoval 03-03-21 05:34 PM


Originally Posted by genejockey (Post 21950928)
If he managed to break the record, I'm inclined to cut him some slack on his choices.

Besides the point. And 50 grams didn't matter in the first place. Probably lost 2000 grams plus over the course of the ride any way.

asgelle 03-03-21 05:34 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21950918)
Destroying equipment is not a reasonable and logical choice. Especially for 50 grams. He could have eschewed an undershirt or socks for the same amount of weight. Could have lost the computer and mount for 3x the weight...

Assuming he wore socks and an undershirt, it's odd that you would compare things which have some utility with something which was totally useless during the record attempt.

rubiksoval 03-03-21 05:35 PM


Originally Posted by asgelle (Post 21950934)
Assuming he wore socks and an undershirt, it's odd that you would compare things which have some utility with something which was totally useless during the record attempt.

It's odd you're trying to defend the action as anything short of irrational and pointless.

asgelle 03-03-21 05:36 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21950933)
Probably lost 2000 grams plus over the course of the ride any way.

Will no one rid me of this meddlesome false dichotomy?

genejockey 03-03-21 05:37 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21950933)
Besides the point. And 50 grams didn't matter in the first place. Probably lost 2000 grams plus over the course of the ride any way.

I suspect a good part of it was just emotional, but I have seen elsewhere that cutting off the drops is a popular modification for hill climbing bikes in Merry Olde England.

rubiksoval 03-03-21 05:39 PM


Originally Posted by asgelle (Post 21950940)
Will no one rid me of this meddlesome false dichotomy?

Then remove it from the equation.

50 grams still didn't matter.

surak 03-03-21 06:54 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 21950918)
Destroying equipment is not a reasonable and logical choice. Especially for 50 grams. He could have eschewed an undershirt or socks for the same amount of weight. Could have lost the computer and mount for 3x the weight...

For a record attempt, having a computer (or two) is absolutely necessary to actually... record the attempt, not to mention invaluable for pacing.

And are you really suggesting riding for 7 hours without socks? We're not triathletessavages here.

cubewheels 03-03-21 07:51 PM

With all the talk about the everesting bike, I ended up ordering the bullhorn! It only costed me $8.40 + shipping so what the heck?!:roflmao2:

I'm going to set it up to look like the handlebar on Ronan's bike. It's only $8.40 wasted anyway if I make a mistake and I can always recycle it or even sell it if I end up ditching it. The h*** with group rides for now with the bullhorn!

Just don't like the fact it makes the bike look a bit more like a TT bike.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...51e8eab6a4.jpg

Darth Lefty 03-03-21 07:56 PM

Shimano Metrea groupset has a brifter for bullhorns... or rather more specifically for their own brand “h-bar” which did not have the turned up ends. It was not marketed here in the States.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...4e34dd504.jpeg


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:58 AM.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.