We reported to you about this new “alt bar” offering in this post a while back. Now Twenty Nine Inches has received a Carnegie’s Bar for testing and I have bolted it to the Salsa Big Mama for a bit. Here is a quick look at the bar and some initial impressions on the new offering from Ragley.
Just shy of 28 inches wide overall, the Carnegie’s Bar should be plenty wide for most folks. (Gotta clean the table!)
Pertinent info follows: (From Brant hisself)
“Width is 685mm tip to tip, but puts your hands effectively in the same
position as my old 700mm wide bar. Geometry is 25deg sweep with a 33mm forward
wiggle to keep the controls in the right sort of place. It nominally has a 38mm
rise, though this is lessened a bit when you angle the bar back and down for
comfort.”
Yeah, yeah……my hydraulic hoses need trimming, so what. Pay attention to the bar, ya’all!
Thoughts So Far: 310 grams is a decent weight for a bar you can hammer on. Very comfy bend. A bit less than a FuBar, but otherwise these two bars are very similar in layout. I like the 31.8mm clamp for something like this because with as much back sweep as these types of bars have, you need a great grip on that bar with the stem. Bigger clamp diameter equals more clamping surface area which gives me peace of mind. Plus Brant tests the livin’ daylights out of his stuff, so I don’t have to worry. Good deal.
I’ll have more on the Carnegie’s Bar later, but first I have Interbike. Look for exclusive Interbike coverage from myself and Grannygear starting next Monday from Bootleg Canyon!
GT- I’ll be definitely waiting to see your thoughts on this bar. I’m really liking my Titec H-bar on my rigid/SS, however I think this bar may be a little more in the sweet spot. 20 degrees didn’t feel right to me, and the H-bar seems maybe just a hair too much. (Maybe).
I don’t care for bars without enough room for the controls. These look real close to maxed out.
These look perfect for me. Less sweep than the Mary but more than the Salsa 17deg. bar. I agree that one shortcoming of (all of) these bars is less room to adjust controls. The upside is much better wrist ergonomics, better arm alignment, no hand numbness. Waiting to see where I can buy these. When will they be shipped stateside?
I’m really fussy about controls not being too close to my grips. I really like a nice gap between grip and lever. The bends in this are at the right position to maximise centre clamp area (for lights) and grip clamp area (for levers and stuff) without having too sharp bends (which are bad news).
Here’s a pic of my bars, complete with Gravity Dropper lever, Poploc control etc…
http://www.shedfire.com/2009/08/19/the-kids-let-me-play-on-their-ramps-even-with-funny-bars-too-many-wires-though/
GT — are you gonna try a set of Rawland Antlers next? Definitely more alt than most.
h.
http://milltowncycles.blogspot.com/2009/08/rawland-cycles-antlers.html
I love my Mary’s but always have trouble running lights. I love that this has been addressed with the Carnegie! Can’t wait to try them.
@Wish I Were Riding: No, no! These bars have plenty of room. I could move my brake levers out even a bit more, but I already have it so my index finger just hooks the end of the lever. Actually, I was thinking today I may move the brake levers inboard a smidge. I also have a Pop Loc lever in there on the right. Really…..unless you are sporting bear paws for hands, these should work for most folks.
@hal: Just saw those. Yes! I have a bike that will be just perfect for those. Can’t wait to give ’em a whirl!
I echo what Jeff said.
Also, what about strength? How is that addressed with this bar? Just clamp size?
I now have a *steel* Mary bar because of off-road strength issues with the original Mary.
Here’s the lab stress test on the bar – http://www.shedfire.com/2009/07/14/en-test-report-carnegie-test-pass/
Exceeds the CEN standard (very high fatigue test).
Um, not being an engineer, I´m not really sure how to interpret those results! 🙂
How did those results compare to the alloy Mary?
Dave: “CEN” standards are the most stringent tests that component makers have to submit to in the industry. They were pretty tough before, but about a year or so ago, the standards were raised. Lots of components that passed before were failing the new standards. (Most notably were carbon road forks)
If Brant’s Carnegie’s Bar is exceeding the newest standards then you can be assured that the bar is strong. Strong to the point that if you did break it, you would probably have more to worry about than a broken Carnegie’s bar. 😉
Now that’s in layman’s terms, but Brant may chime in with something technical.
Well, that is good. The anecdotal information about alloy Mary breakage certainly left folks with ¨more to worry about¨ in the form of some injuries. The steel Mary I have now is a bar I have no concerns with.
I like the larger clamp diameter and larger distance between bends to give more room for lights, computer, etc.
Looks good so far.
Any word on where to find these in the US?
Like the 29er itself I was late to commit to it and I have resisted these bars as well so far. For what ever reason i imagine trying to maneuver my beach cruiser through single track pushing and pulling left and right on the bars. Like driving a school bus Do they really perform or are they just comfortable? I am interested in trying them out
@ BigChris,
For me the sweep bars (Mary, 37 degree) work nicely. It is a bit different for everyone. My arms are able to pull directly from torso through the bars, and my wrists have a much straighter angle. With riser/straight bars, climbing goes through your forearms and wrists are bent more. Climbing while standing with the sweeps is almost like having barends.
Some feel their elbows are forced in to their sides on downhills with the swept bars. For me running the bars perfectly level helps this. Technically I think I actually ride a bit better with the sweeps now. My hands don’t get numbness either.
As always everyone’s mileage will vary.
@tproc: No U.S. source as yet. Hotlines in the U.K. is the place to get them for now.
@Big Chris: Like t0m says, it isn’t for everyone, but I am very impressed so far with the way my handling has been affected by changing to the Carnegie’s bar. I’ll report more when I get more time in on them. But for now I am very positive on these.
“Now that’s in layman’s terms, but Brant may chime in with something technical.”
Not really my style 😉
The bar is made by the same factory that make our Nukeproof DH bar. A bar that’s 760mm wide, and World Cup DH rated. Infact the DH bar is slightly LIGHTER than this one – we were a touch cautious with material spec (added a bit more)
It’s also 7075 aluminium which is very very strong.
Good to know. I think the weight is a couple hundred grams lower than the steel Mary I have. (I do not recall the specific weight off-hand)
I may just have to retire the steel Mary to my commuter/monstercross bike that now has a space bar on it… not sure I trust that one either.
I ran a set of the Groovy Luv Handles for a while on my SS. The Luv Handles are pretty close to the hand position of these bars from what I can tell. While I loved the climbing and cruising position the sweep provided, I never could bet used to them when things got fast and twisty. It was hard to get moto, if you know what I mean. I felt like it was difficult to get on top of the front end….like I was steering a really fast wheelbarrow.
But, that is just me.
I have this bar and it indeed doesn’t provide much space for cockpit adjustments. Maybe the ergon grips I’m using are wide comparatively but still there is absolutely no room left. Hand position and steering is real great though.
http://www.twentyniner.ch/phpbb3/download/file.php?id=149&mode=view
I just noticed – I run my shifters inside my brake levers with the shifter moved out (I think) on the 2 position clamp.
I forgot.
Try that.
http://www.shedfire.com/2009/08/19/the-kids-let-me-play-on-their-ramps-even-with-funny-bars-too-many-wires-though/
What a revelation, after about 25 miles of trail riding Friday (and with numb spots at the outside of my grip under my pinky fingers) I started looking at my bar and grips and thinking about it. I came to the realization that a bigger sweep bar may solve that issue. I had no idea there was a whole MTB subculture around this type of Bar! H-Bar, J-Bar, Carnegie, Mary, etc etc etc.
Very cool.
I’m just not in a position to be able to go buy a bunch of bars and run with the one I like best.
This Carnegie bar, would you generally mount it to the existing stem or is a stem swap out recommended?
Thanks!
Randy
@randyharris: You may want to just try it as is, with your current stem. I found that it shortened my effective reach by maybe 15-20mm at most, but it wasn’t an adverse effect for me. Quite the opposite actually.
Is anyone interested in a group buy, here in the US? Or, does anyone have one they want to get rid of?
i laugh every time i read anything with CEN in it. Whilst a more stringent satandard it covers a small part to do with the actual failure mechanics of carbon frames bars forks .Due to its ability to resist fatigue a properly designed carbon component is will sit on the test rig and pass a fatigue test all day long .
Theres an area where the failures lie which people havent considered in carbon components and its become pretty obvious in every carbon part we have tested