# Why Compact Handlebars?



## caad4rep

I've searched and researched the internet thoroughly for a few days and have yet to find a definitive answer. I do realize there probably isn't one but I'll ask anyways.

I've been away from cycling since 2001 and have recently jumped back in and it seems every bike out there comes with these compact bars? Back in 2001 the anatomical bars were just picking up speed, they don't seem to be the rage anymore. I purchased a C'dale CAAD 10 and I've noticed with the compact handlebars, when I go into the drops I feel like I'm just lowering myself another inch or two, there is no additional stretch. Is this normal? At first I figured I'd just switch the bars out but as I've researched it seems that each mfgr has one set of "classic" bars and everything else is compact or a variation of anatomical bars. Am I too old school to see the advantages with these bars? Is there any "new technology" that I'd be missing by putting on one of the classic bars? 

BTW, I'm about 6'2" with fairly big hands <--does this make a difference on the bars?


----------



## erict

Go to "ruedatropical.com" and click on the link for "Road Drop Bar Geometry" - and competitivecyclist.com and search for "FSA Compact Handlebars" in the review section.


----------



## Kuma601

You can find all types of bends and drops to suit your preference so however you are comfortable. If there is 26.0 sized bar your prefer, you can find oversized stems with 26.0 bar clamp if you don't want to run the shims. I have a handful of old school 26.0 bars I really like but luckily there are comparable bends in more recent offerings.


----------



## minutemaidman

For me the compact bar is more comfy. I find it hard to breath well with a large drop. I find anatomical bars less comfy. I dont ride in the drops a whole lot, mostly on the hoods. I have 2 bikes, one with a Nitto Noodle bar and the other with an FSA SL-K Carbon Compact. Both are comfy, with the less drop and reach. The noodle weighs a lot at close to 400g and the FSA is light at 209g. I also prefer the look of the compact bars on more modern bikes. The larger bars from back in the day look awkward to me.


----------



## Ventruck

The big point on compact bars is the stated lesser drop/reach - more specifically the difference of the respected figures between points all over the handlebar. The drops are more usable, the transition between all positions is less so you can change up hand placement in more places for comfort measures.

In my own case: I want more reach at the hoods, yet I don't want to change the reach at the hooks+drops. With a classic bend, the only measure to increase reach at the hoods is a new stem, but then that makes everything else longer. A compact bend, not so much. The drops are swept back already and the hooks are right under the hoods - not ahead like with a classic bend.

And in that same case, the diagonal reach between the hoods and top of the bar are likely to be lesser with a compact bend, so nothing strays too far from the set comfort zone.


----------



## Kontact

The notion of fit and "cockpit" has convinced everyone that their position on the bike should be as fixed as Tron characters on their light cycles. Bending over further to get into the drops isn't appealing, so the drops have been moved up to better suit people's idea of what their position must be.


----------



## cwg_at_opc

i had a pair of FSA compacts(wing pro compact-2025Al) which i really liked; i now have the 3T ergonova pro on my S1 which i also like.

i think the only thing i'd prefer is a second choice of reach, ie, a bit more past the curve right before the hoods(the flat section before the hoods), with the same shape/curve from the hoods down.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

the rising popularity of cycling has made become the new golf.

more and more out of shape people is coming into the sport looking for a bike that looks like a racing bike but is comfortable, so the producers have to produce compact cranksets, handlebars, geometries etc.

all that is very good, welcome to all the new cyclists into the sport ! but it would be good that when your shape and performace increases you also "graduate" to real racing bikes.


----------



## dcl10

People want the "pro" look of a lot of bar drop, even when they can't really handle it, so they drop their bars as low as they can manage on the tops. Then they complain they can't stay in the drops for more than 10 minutes. As a result manufacturers make bars with drops so shallow they are pretty much pointless...and everybody's happy.


----------



## AndrwSwitch

I like the transition from the ramps to the brake hoods better.

I suspect that when bikes are set up in a more pro/racing style, compact bars are being placed lower than traditional bars used to be, and the drops may be staying in about the same place because of the smaller difference in reach. Have a look at some old pictures - racers sat more upright than they usually do now, but the sprinting position doesn't look that different.

Supposedly, a lot of track racers like some of the flared compacts quite a lot. They're probably putting the stem lower, so their hand positions aren't changing.

Really, these things are what you make of them. I did have a shop tell me that my body position shouldn't change when I went from riding the hoods to the drops. That struck me as making a handlebar with multiple hand positions pretty pointless. But I've only been riding for about ten years. What do I know?

I hate "anatomic" drop bars, FWIW. Give me classic, classic flared, or compact. My nicest bike has compact but it's also a little large for me. I can deal with the extra reach when I'm on the corners or hoods, but I was never able to make the drops position work for me with the stock anatomic bars. My 'cross bike is a better fit, and aside from the funky extra corners, having anatomic bars is fine. So I think I'd be happy with traditional handlebars on that bike if/when I decide to throw some money at making it more "me."


----------



## aluminum

AndrwSwitch said:


> I suspect that when bikes are set up in a more pro/racing style, compact bars are being placed lower than traditional bars used to be, and the drops may be staying in about the same place because of the smaller difference in reach. Have a look at some old pictures - racers sat more upright than they usually do now, but the sprinting position doesn't look that different.


i was just thinking the same thing. the modern racer bike position is very agressive while the classic racer was more upright


----------



## Ventruck

aluminum said:


> i was just thinking the same thing. the modern racer bike position is very agressive while the classic racer was more upright


Blah, I should've posted this earlier: comparing old and new fits between Fausto Coppi and Alberto Contador.
http://ruedatropical.com/2010/06/bike-fit-from-coppi-to-contador/

A seemingly fair analysis, as the photos were matched in wheel size (the only thing ideal as a "control"), and both riders are the same height at least. Ultimately Contador's setup has higher hoods than Coppi's, but everything else is really similar. Contador's SL3 in particular has a very short headtube (12cm), so it's not too surprising that his stem is angled higher (although it's already flipped to be lower). As Andrw noted, the bars on Contador's bike are lower to start.

As for the realm of non-pro cyclists, many may be at fault for not wanting a taller headtube really because they'd rather be caught dead on a Tarmac or TCR instead of "softer" Roubaix or Defy - as already said. Compact bars alone however aren't necessarily an indication/measure of a rider reducing drop.


----------



## Kontact

One thing compact bars are perfect for is small people. A normal drop bar is more like a deep drop bar when you are 5'2". But when you're 6' the drops of a compact aren't doing anything at all.

It is getting to the point that drop bars aren't really 3 position bars anymore. Might as well just use TT bars.

Anyone remember when triathaletes were cutting their drop bars below the brake lever?


----------



## kbwh

I run compact bars (3T Ergonovas) and I like them a lot with Campagnolo Ergolevers.
An for me altenative would be some classic shallow drop (a.k.a. italian drop) bars, like the Deda Speciale, but I'd probably lift such bars and/or shorten the stem as much as 10 mm compared to my current for proper fit.

Compact bars complement the current Campagnolo Ergolever shape very well, btw. I'd probably go classic bend if I was on SRAM, since their hoods offer fewer comfortable hand positions.

--

Nice comparison between Coppi and Contador by ruedatropical, Ventruck. Thanks. The second big difference (after the brake hood position) is where the top of the bars are.


----------



## minutemaidman

Ive also noticed a lot of compact bars in the pro peleton. I guess those guys havent graduated to real racing bikes yet?


----------



## MR_GRUMPY

The term "Compact Bars" is a name that somebody just made up to sell a product. The correct term (that has been in use for decades) is "Shallow Drop" bars. Shallow drop bars are great for people with a gut, small people, and people without flexability.
One other possibility for their use, is for riders that have their stem slammed down all the way, so that their brake hoods are already low. This might be good on a bike that is only used for racing.


----------



## wibly wobly

3T Ergonova on my road bike, FSA Omega on my cross bike and a Ritchey something shallow drop on my monstercross bike. I prefer my wrist angle with the shallow drop. I find my for-arm and wrist are straighter with them an anatomical / traditional bend bar and therefore much more comfortable. On my monster cross it's a double bonus because I have barcons on it, so the reach for them is much, much faster and easier.


----------



## erict

Here's the links I pointed to earlier that may prove helpful:

Road Drop Bar Geometry explained

FSA Compact handlebar video review


----------



## tarwheel2

Thanks for the links. The first one explaining drop bar geometry is very informative. Never knew there were so many variations in bar shape.


----------



## danl1

IMO, a lot of it is simple evolution related to the changing hood shapes and integrated shifting. 

Back when shifting was on the downtube, most 'real' riding happend in the drops. The hoods were a looser cruising position, and the tops? Maybe when climbing or trying to put on a vest. 

As integrated shifting took hold, it became more practical, and so more popular to ride on the hoods more often. And the manufacturers responded with improved ergonomics on the hoods. So, we started putting more drop to the hoods into our bike builds, because that became the defacto riding position, with the drops more nearly reserved for descending and 'emergency power' situations. But the deeper drops made them too low, so compact drops (once meant more exclusively for small folks) made more sense than before.

Also, round-bends lost favor because they squeezed many people's hands too much. The first attempt to fix the problem was the so-called 'anatomic' bar. It did some good, but caused problems like excessive brake reach and poor fitting unless you sat on the bike just as the designer expected. They were 'one position' bars, so not all that comfortable over time. 

The new 'compact' bars with an elliptical bend fix most of the problems of both the deep bend and the anatomic in terms of shaping, and better suit the STI-caused trend towards greater drop. 

Personally, I still prefer a more modest drop and relatively deeper bars, with more time spent in the drops. I feel it's a more versatile setup, creating more unique and effective positions. Other folks have differing opinions, and that's perfectly fine.


----------



## bespoke

*Pros use compact*



Salsa_Lover said:


> the rising popularity of cycling has made become the new golf.
> 
> more and more out of shape people is coming into the sport looking for a bike that looks like a racing bike but is comfortable, so the producers have to produce compact cranksets, handlebars, geometries etc.
> 
> all that is very good, welcome to all the new cyclists into the sport ! but it would be good that when your shape and performace increases you also "graduate" to real racing bikes.


Real professional racers ARE using compact cranks, handlebars and geometries; have been for years. Maybe you missed that when you were trying to study grammar and syntax.


----------



## dcorn

Salsa_Lover said:


> the rising popularity of cycling has made become the new golf.
> 
> more and more out of shape people is coming into the sport looking for a bike that looks like a racing bike but is comfortable, so the producers have to produce compact cranksets, handlebars, geometries etc.
> 
> all that is very good, welcome to all the new cyclists into the sport ! but it would be good that when your shape and performace increases you also "graduate" to real racing bikes.


This makes zero sense. I guess bikes are supposed to be one size fits all then? 

My Tarmac is set up fairly aggressively with a flat stem, no spacers under it so the hoods are already set pretty low. The bike came with a standard bend bar, which hurt my hands when in the drops and made it tough to reach the brakes. I can easily ride with my knees hitting my chest, so flexibility and being out of shape isn't an issue. The 3T ergonova bars are much more comfortable because they have a very sharp bend at the top, then a slight curve down that my hands can conform to a lot better. Feels more natural. 

But I guess it's not a real racing bike now, even though it came spec'd out exactly as Contador rode his in the '10 TdF. The bar swap makes me a wannabe noob.


----------



## parity

On both my bikes I use the 3T Ergonova. One thing about shallow or compact bars is they may not have a lot of room for your hands when sprinting. The way I was taught to sprint was to have your hands near the bar ends. On the Ergonova for example, there isn't a lot of transition there. And if you look at a more traditional bend, they tend to have more bar near the bar end. So your entire hand can fit there for sprinting. This is more evident if you look at a track handle bar.


----------



## kbwh

That is a peculiarity with the Ergonova. It may have the shortest drop section around. Comparable "short and shallow" bars like the FSA, the Pinarello MOST, the Zipp all have much longer drop sections.

I've abandoned the Ergonova myself for the roomier Deda RHM shape, which still can be considered "short and shallow".


----------



## Nicole Hamilton

Salsa_Lover said:


> more and more out of shape people is coming into the sport looking for a bike that looks like a racing bike but is comfortable, so the producers have to produce compact cranksets, handlebars, geometries etc.
> 
> all that is very good, welcome to all the new cyclists into the sport ! but it would be good that when your shape and performace increases you also "graduate" to real racing bikes.


Oh, heavens. More ergonomic is better unless you're solely interested in performance, no matter how uncomfortable it is for the rider.

Having just made the switch from _very_ traditional bars on my 1974 Paramount to the compact bars on my new Pinarello, I have to say, this is a change for the better. The big advantage is that I can stay in the drops longer. I may not be quite as low but who cares if I can stay there longer when I'm going into a wind. It's being in or out of the drops that makes the big difference in the wind, not whether the drops are a tiny bit lower.


----------



## kbwh

I dunno. In the wind at effort I'm mostly on the hoods, underarms horizontal. I catch more air in the drops, but it's a comfortable place.

(Salsa's just dangling the hook and sinker. Don't bite.)


----------



## trailrunner68

dcl10 said:


> People want the "pro" look of a lot of bar drop, even when they can't really handle it, so they drop their bars as low as they can manage on the tops. Then they complain they can't stay in the drops for more than 10 minutes. As a result manufacturers make bars with drops so shallow they are pretty much pointless...and everybody's happy.


This. 

It's posers who set their bikes up based on looks rather than fit. When they figure out that their drops are unusable, instead of raising their bars to the right height, they want the drops moved up. The whole thing is just stupid.


----------

