Is the bike industry forcing consumers on wrong size equipment?

[@GCPerformance18]

A good fit by knowledgeable fitter is one of the best tools you can use to gain speed and gain comfort, also there will be studies put out saying that shorter cranks are faster for *this person* over X amount of time, majority of these cases will result with similar conclusions to this, But fitting always comes down to your personal experience on the bike and how your body is reacting to the current equipment and your fitness level. So don't get persuaded to get something that everyone else is riding if it is not working for you. Also there is such thing as adapting to a bad fit and being stuck mentally with it, right now I could be stubborn and only choose to ride 42cm bars and 172.5 cranks and not know what I am missing out, so as of right now I ordered in a 38x110 handlebar to try this out and later down the road I will give the 165 a shot to see how it goes.... we have to keep an open mind.

[@eto2352]

I always have to account for swapping narrower bars and shorter cranks on any bike I buy. It's frustrating that there is no choice on most bikes but shops sometimes swap for free.

[@lordalfa600]

Don't go to a narrower bar for yourself. You look like a big guy. 42cm looks like your width. 172.5 is a mostly for the average Joe. I am short I run 155 to 160 cranks. Its very comfortable for me.

[@kevinhackman4506]

As a shorter legged rider I’ve ended up going substantially below the industry recommended sizing. I’m 5’10” and ride a 52 venge slammed with a 130 stem, 38 bars, and 165mm cranks. Funny thing is the roval rapide barstem isn’t even made in that size and soooo many crit racers I ride with use that sizing😂

[@Rich-zb7vc]

dunno on cranks, i want a big ass lever. i follow the logic with the narrow bars, but i think bike handling/safety also comes into play. Remco, Wout, Piddcock can ride with their eyes closed, normal guys like me coming into a sharp turn with some wind hitting my 50mm wheels and then a narrow bar, it can be really sketchy. i want narrow bars, not sure if i trust my skills (maybe i'm the only one)

[@57speed]

I think since the Covid boom, people are just realizing more what they need in a bike to be comfortable vs. an old standard that isn’t quite comfortable. Personally, doing a 3hr zone 2 ride with wide to me bars will have me feeling some pain in the trapezius area and lower neck, even with a shorter stem to mitigate the wide bars. After my bike fit and going with recommended stem length and handle bar width, I can do a 3hr zone 2 with little to no fatigue in that area…with that in mind, if I were to spend $15k on a bike, I wouldn’t mind spending the extra $ to ensure I’m as comfortable as I can be. So, imo, it’s not that many people want to be like the pros, it’s more like they’re trying to find that sweet spot in comfort. The more comfortable you are on the bike, the faster you are, and the more quality your training will be. For what it’s worth, after about 3k miles with a 36cm wide bar, I went back to a 38cm and couldn’t be happier.

[@ericrobinw]

It blows my mind that these bikes cost this much and yet you can't customize the sizing to fit you before you get it. The people buying these bikes know the specs they want, let them choose. You should be able to spec it like you can when buying a computer.

[@iMadrid11]

The only way you can spec a bike yourself is to buy a frame set. Which makes it more expensive to build a bike to buy each individual parts.

[@ericrobinw]

@@iMadrid11 exactly. Everyone will buy frames now so they can buy the components they want versus buying a fully built bike and having to still customize beyond that.

[@iMadrid11]

@@ericrobinw Not everyone can build a bike. Since most riders who are inexperienced don’t know exactly what they want or know their bike fit body measurements.

[@ericrobinw]

@@iMadrid11 my argument to that would be that they wouldn’t be buying the 10k or 14k bikes. Have those be customizable and the entry level be standard fit.

[@oliverjacobs8594]

@@iMadrid11no offense but you can literally save over a thousand by buying the frame and parts separately. The myth of getting a “better deal” from brands because they have wholesale access is a lie.

[@CMCairo]

Still running a 42 bar, haven't tried anything smaller on my 54 size bike. But the ultimate game changer for me was short cranks, I run a 160mm crank, I can get so aero and hold it way more comfortably for longer. Short cranks are a game changer, everybody should try them.

[@apair4002]

That is your opinion alone. I used 155 crank before, then I change to 170. 170 will give you the torque. It is simply basic physic science, torque = F x r. The longer the r the bigger torque u will get with the same F applied.

[@CMCairo]

@@apair4002 If you actually do the math you will see that a increase or reduction in 5-15mm in crank length has little difference in power output. This usually equates to less than a single watt. The power I can make up by being considerably more aero will earn me back those watts plus a lot more. Also power in watts is calculated by torque x rotation(rpm), so you can simply spin slightly faster to make up for it. "Basic Math"

[@thebeardedmtbiker4594]

I am 5'7 ride a 54, am in my mid 60's, and use 175's. I also use both 46 and 44 mm bars. I see no reason to change a thing.

[@LT-rk6fr]

​@@apair4002 If you ride a fixie then you are right, however, with gears available you can just shift to a larger cog on the back to increase torque. By changing the crank length you essentially "shift" your gear range, which is not a problem as long as it still covers your needs. A shorter crank reduces the peak toque you can output in the easiest gear, but it also reduces the peripheral speed (your feet move slower to achieve the same speed). You can offset the "lost" torque by using smaller chainrings (36/52 -> 34/50) or a larger casette (11-32 -> 11-36).

[@chuckyfox9284]

It's good to see the pros are finally catching up to me. 38cm 165mm at 190cm 90kg 10% is by far the most comfortable setup I've had.

[@Gregory_tottie]

Damn. I’m about the same size and I was gonna post this same thing as a joke.

[@phil_d]

Same, the most comfortable I have felt in years. 36cm bar, 155 or 160mm cranks at 165cm height.

[@riowood]

Agreed, the first thing my bike fitter did was change my crank length to 160mm. Can't believe the bike industry is so clueless, however I do think they are gradually coming around because when I converted my bike to Ultegra Di2 12 spd, I had no trouble finding 160mm cranks. Also use Coefficient AR 38 cm handlebar. I'm 172 cm tall and have a 29.5" inseam (yes, short legs).

[@edmundas919]

I'm also ride 38cm 165mm at 188cm 90kg

[@dorianjones8150]

Such an interesting topic. I debated buying A Supersix Gen 4 recently and decided to build a bike instead. It came down to the added costs of swapping cranks and bars, just didnt make sense to buy a new complete bike just to spend more money to get the fit how i like. More brands should be like factor and give you that option of crank length and bar/stem width. Also super funny how new bikes are coming out and they're "faster" but half the watts saved comes from new narrow bar. Narrow bars for $250 > new bike for $10,000

[@MrYAMAHA32177]

Aerodynamic resistance is a core focus in cycling as it is responsible for about 90% of the total resistance at speeds larger than 40 km/h on flat terrain. The majority of modern bicycles and cyclist postures are therefore optimized in terms of aerodynamic resistance The main source of aerodynamic drag is the cyclist body, from 60% to 82% of the total drag and depending on the position of the cyclist on the bicycle

[@buster.keaton]

I'm 6'1" and switched to 165mm cranks two years ago... and won't go back to longer cranks. It only took about two rides before I stopped noticing the shorter crank length, but now I can ride in a lower position w/o my knees hitting my chest, I can pedal through turns w/o hitting a pedal, and being a weight-weenie, I saved a few grams. 😉 If there is a downside to the shorter cranks, I haven't found it yet... other than bikes that fit me don't come with short cranks so I had to spend a good chunk of change to by something my bike already had (the whole point of this video.)

[@thebeardedmtbiker4594]

I am 5'7 and use 175's as well as 46 and 44 cm bars. And I am in my mid 60's. I see no reason to use shorter cranks or narrower bars.

[@JesseStarrPhoto]

@@thebeardedmtbiker4594it’s simple biomechanics. Shorter cranks opens up your hip angle, which in turn allows you to ride in a more aero position if desired and minimizes hip impingements and helps with a lack of flexibility. Shorter cranks also encourage a faster cadence, which has been shown to reduce injury.

[@thebeardedmtbiker4594]

@@JesseStarrPhoto ,...Thanks for the info. However, as I stated, I am in my mid-sixties only 5'7" and see no reason to use a shorter crank than a 175. As an older man I want to try to maximize my flexibility, going to a shorter crank only minimizes flexibility. Why would anyone want to do that unless they absolutely had to? Also, as to the aero thing, the shorter the crank, the higher the seat must be. I would think that whatever aero advantage there is with the "more aero position" is defeated by sitting higher up on the bike/in the air.

[@JesseStarrPhoto]

@@thebeardedmtbiker4594you are a bit confused. As a shorter person, you need shorter cranks. If you don’t believe me or the author of this video (who went to fitting school), ask any reputable fitter in the world.

[@thebeardedmtbiker4594]

@@JesseStarrPhoto ,...No, I am not confused as you suppose. I absolutely do not need shorter cranks. A reputable fitter telling me I need shorter cranks is like a doctor telling me I need to get vaccinated.

[@borjagarcia6858]

Totally agree: you're spending thousands of dollars/euros and you have to spend even more on top of that because they don't give you the option, it's crazy! I use a 38 cm handlebar and 170 crankset and when you get used to it feels amazing. Even more when you go to the shops and see bikes with 42 and 44 they feel like trucks

[@psilocycle]

YES, for many years the bicycle industry has been specifying components on complete builds that do not fit the rider. Handlebars too wide and cranks that are waaaaaaay to long. Major kudos to Shimano for adding a 160mm crank length as a standard option. As for bike fitting, A FIT IS NOT STATIC. Your fit numbers are not written in stone, and your fit numbers will change over time as your flexibility changes, as your fitness changes, and as your goals change / evolve. I'm an endurance cyclist, I ride 12,000 - 15, 000 training miles per year, and I primarily train for 200-500 mile races. I get a fit update 3-4 times per year.

[@huntos83]

I'm 6"2" and generally ride a 58cm bike, which always come with a massive 44cm bar, I normally ride bars at 38-40cm, which matches my shoulder width and is the most comfortable (and also professionally fitted to this size). For the vast majority of people this standard width is ridiculously big, the bike industry seems to assume that the taller a rider gets the wider they get, but the reality is that a huge number of taller people have naturally slim builds and not particularly wide shoulders. In fact often shorter people are more solidly built and broader. Yes there are some tall and broad people out there with rugby player type builds who might suit a 44cm bar, but in the cycling world this body type is pretty rare and certainly doesn't represent the average rider.

[@durianriders]

Do a video on how quickly my SL8 S-Works cracked. Only got 51.2km on it then CRACK CITY.

[@GCPerformance18]

Lmaoo lemme take a look. How did it crack??

[@meibing4912]

Shimano made a large study of crack length (unpublished - they only shared the conclusion) - they saw "no adverse effect for a wide range of riders when switching to a shorter crack".

[@rayF4rio]

I bought a new bike earlier this year. What you are talking about is exactly why I stayed away from an out of the box bike. Too many things to change - stem, bars, crank, Saddle. Better to just go to a shop that will build it to your exact specs. Ended up going with Wrench Science. Perfectly happy with the build.

[@edsinofsky]

38 cm roval rapide and 165 cranks for me. 5'6". Love the combo.

[@jojoanggono3229]

Same height here. Planning to try 38 handlebar, using 40 now. I like 165 crank I had before, seems to be less occurence of knee pain. but couldn't get it since switching to Grx groupset.

[@nerigarcia7116]

I usually run a 38 bar and have always just had 170 cranks on my all-around bikes, but for my climber I like to run a 40 bar just to get that extra leverage going up and control going down. I also run a 172.5 crank because I like the torque when I'm standing and while my position is more open. Argument is it's more to get around but I'm not spinning up hills, I'm between grinding and spinning. Depends on your riding style, power or revolution. You seem like a big guy, depending on your shoulders a 40 might be narrow enough for you? Pros are all anomalies so they can run dimensions beyond a normal bike fit. We on the other hand are not and should probably fit for comfort. I've given up caring what the pros ride, I'm not a pro. Ride what you works for you.

[@echtogammut]

I accidentally ordered a 170 crank about 12 years ago and have never gone back. I'm a gear masher, who rides in the big ring up 12%+ grades. Switching to the shorter arms increased my cadence and also bumped my saddle up a bit (more pro look). Since then I only order 165 or 167.5 and managed to convince several people in my local peloton to switch long before it was popular. I wish I had gone narrower on the bars earlier, but that took me a lot longer to discover. The odd thing is with narrow bars and short cranks my positions looks a lot more "pro" (high saddle, longer stem), that it would if I stuck with an industry standard fit.

[@lukewalker1051]

A very relevant topic, especially for you GC because you are stuck changing all these integrated cockpits which is very expensive and a PITA. I am a senior and have ridden for decades. You and I are the same height at just over 6' tall. I prefer a 40cm wide bar, measured at the hooks and about 38cm at the hoods and 165mm cranks. I rode 44cm bars and 175 cranks for decades. I believe a narrow handle is also healthier for skeleton support, shoulder blade spacing and over all blood flow to the neck. Paradigms and conventions morph. One can open there hip angle more effectively with shorter cranks. Gear ratios compensate for crank arm length. Hip impingement when trying to get one's torso out of the wind with long cranks is a real issue and shorter cranks are much easier on the hip joints. I even asked Sheldon Brown this question many years ago. He said no difference in speed and he was also our height and owned many bikes with short cranks. Good video of a very relevant topic with all the integrated cockpits created by bike manufacturers for 'profit'.

[@nicholascowen]

i'm 6'1" and I went from a 42cm bar to what measures at 38cm. The first few times you get out of the saddle it feels odd but you adapt to a quickly. I'm not a skinny guy either at 92KG so its really not an issue to go narrower. I don't get upper back stiffness anymore either.

[@erickcustomersupport3677]

THis is so true! I agree! Back in the days, bike shop would be willing to swap out or change handlebars, crank arms even saddles (saddles is another great content to talk about) I ride a size 52 and fitter recommended 143mm so I have to replace the 155mm that came with it! keep on touching this side of bike qeometry this is really good for consumers and less headache for bike shop owners! great job!

[@madmonkeycycling9098]

I'm riding 36cm handlebars for 7 years now. There is no downside to it, on the hoods, depending on my setup and handlebar, it measures 29 to 33cm. It's free speed and easier to move in a peloton. I'm not broad shouldered, my shoulders measure 44cm, but according to "classic" measurements, i should be riding 44cm handlebars. I started out cycling on 42 cm bars and those gave me more issues. Concerning sprinting, track sprinters run up to 26 cm bars & try to get as narrow as possible for aerodynamics, their handling is not hampered. Concerning crank length, 165mm are not short, I ride these on my TT bike and they allow me to get a lot more aero with a lot less hip flexor fatigue. If 165mm cranks were easily available on shimano standard cranks and powermeters are constantly in stock, I'd ride them on my road bikes too. Now they are setup with 170mm cranks and coming from 172,5mm cranks. I've noticed little downsides, only peak torque and sprinting power were a little lower( but could be also due to ageing :)). Upsides : increased RPM, better fit, less hip flexor fatigue.

[@nelsonsawyer9210]

I 'm riding a size 52 steel frame and it came with a 38cm handlebar and 165mm crank arms. I'm 168cm (5' 6" 1/4), I use clip-on aero bars and my saddle is all the way forward to be on top of the cranks. All of this fits me like a glove from way back then (1988 Centurion Accordo). Some people at Centurion (Western States Import Co. Inc.) had a forward looking vision or a crystal ball of some kind. I would not mind trying a 36cm handlebar and a 160mm cranks thought.

[@MrJhockley]

I find it really hard to find smaller components. I got my narrow handle bars from a childrens bike website, however the clamping area is very small so hard to mount, tt bars, garmin stuff and lights. Short cranks are very rare and expensive. I imported some 145mm from Taiwan. Feel amazing on the tt bike.

[@SrFederico]

I ride a 44 cm bar, STIs not turned in. That’s comfortable and stable. On smaller bars, I need to turn the shoulders inwards which is uncormfortable, and the steering gets twitchy. Both is more important than aero to me. But I’m 6"2 (188 cm) with 47 cm shoulder width, so classic bikefitting would prescribe at least a 46 cm bar.

[@bigunitcyling]

I agree that the industry needs to adapt. I went down to a 42 cm 2 years ago and the 44 cm feels more comfortable now for me that I went back to that size on my other bike. I am sticking with 175 cm cranks .

[@SrFederico]

@@bigunitcyling Yes, 172,5 feel like a kids bike. Maybe one would adapt after some 100 km.

[@huntos83]

Do you realise that shoulder width in terms of bike fitting is not measured from the outside to outside of your shoulders? You need to measure between the acromion process, this is the lump on the end of your collar bone on the top of your shoulder. It would be very unusual for this to be 47cm wide. As an example I am the same height as you, my shoulders measure 45cm across in total, but my acromiom process measurement is actually only 38cm.

[@SrFederico]

@@huntos83 Yes. My own measurement was 46, but the bike fitter in a bike store measured 47.

[@HarishChouhan]

Also want to add that fit shorter people and most women in general there are just no good options. Even women specific brands live Giant Liv, but a very wide handle bar and crank arms even on their xxs sized bikes.

[@StavrosAvramidis42]

Sadly most brands don't even sell anything smaller than 40cm

[@luisgarcia22]

I tell you what, I bought the new Allez Disc and I'm stoked with that almost 15 mm shorter reach. It fits me better and I love every minute that I'm riding it. I used to ride on a stock 42cm bar on the 2017 allez, then they switched to 40 cm on the 2020-2021 Allez and I felt much better. I'm south American, most of us here are shorter and narrower to you guys or our friends over in Europe. So it sure is nice to see those little changes, hell I even saw a few riders on the Tour de France with spacers on their bikes. It's a good sign at least in terms of sizing and fit.

[@AdrianRicalde]

I used to ride 170mm cranks and 40cm bars.. then on a new bike it came with 165mm cranks and 38cm bars.. since im smaller (5’4”) I am really digging the shorter stuff. I didn’t even know there was a meta, I was just too cheap to change over and wanted to try out the different length haha

[@LOGICAL-JAY]

Yes indeed..i got caught out there when i purchased the enve ses aero bars...i brought a size 42 about a year ago..when delivered i noticed it was 42 in the drops and 38 on the top...im 6 foot 2 with wide shoulders. It felt so weird..i had to swap them for a roval rapide 44 handlebar for more comfort..ive notice lately enve makes it their business to specify that the bars are wider in the drop and smaller on top in bold print for folks like myself that rushed and didnt read the fine print...lol

[@AtibaQuildan]

Definately reccomend going narrow but not many people consider this but going narrower does shorten your reach so you like changing crank lenght you should make the adjustments needed.

[@ShawnIsBatman]

Your debate and the questions you raised about the industry and the larger brands changing vs not changing seemed to be a compelling argument for the value of a direct to consumer fully customizable sales channel.

[@VendetaBrown]

My gravel bike has 160mm cranks. Because I have short legs and it opens my hip angle when crouched / in the drops. It’s 100% the right move for me and most likely a lot of people for a variety of reasons. Seeing an XL bike and a Small bike with the same size cranks is ridiculous; pure laziness from big brands. Glad people are catching on.

[@aisakup]

I think the crank length thing differs depending on whether or not you tend to spin with higher aerobic ability or mash with greater anaerobic ability. I am more of an aerobic guy. Currently running 165mm (at 5'6") on the road after having run 170mm. 165mm seems to increase my average RPM and as a result narrows my power band. I feel better doing threshold type efforts, but my legs just burn up at faster during max efforts as even a slight drop in RPM seems to really throw me off. Probably need to hit the gym more.

[@GCPerformance18]

no I agree totally, and I think crank arm length it 100 percent preference to ones body, there i sno right or wrong and it can all depend on rider style and also body geometry for this to work, but jsut from what I see in trends with world tour and also fitter performing fits on riders now, seems like everyone is downsizing on cranks not the drastic crank 165 but maybe a size down from what people are running and seems like majority are having a positive impact when doing so

[@concordesquadra5392]

Good video and a timely topic that the bike industry needs to address ASAP. i'm in the market for a Tarmac SL8 Pro - Ultegra Di2, to replace an aging SL5, but as a consumer, i'm not about to spend $8500+ for a bike that doesn't even fit me. not sure what the product mgr(s) at Spesh. are thinking spec'ing 44 bars and 11 stems on size 58 frames, but it seems that spec's on other sizes are similarly out to lunch. swapping bars, stems, cranks, and saddles to accommodate rider fit and/or preference should be at no-cost to the consumer, especially on high-end models. unf, the bike industry has painted itself into a corner where making a $8-10-14k sale requires convincing the buyer to spend another $500-1k just to get the bike to fit them : /

[@jianhuichua1154]

GC, you need to do 1 thing. Tell the people of the brand u're carrying now that if they just allow people to select the handlebar width and crank arm when buying the bike, their full bike will sell so much better.

[@michaelmechex]

With the amount of bikes Specialized is selling, it's impossible to cater to every customer personally. That's why if you know what really fits you, then you don't buy an 'off the shelf' bike, but either build up a naked frame or get a complete custom. Full custom 3d printed titanium bike from Tom Sturdy is about the same price as top of the range Tarmac SL8 😂

[@ruditon5816]

No even canyon does that

[@jianhuichua1154]

@@michaelmechex i believe they have more than enough data to come out with a statistic that shows the top 3 most popular handlebar width. I dont mean they allow customer to select specific width like 39.4cm or something. They can have 40 bike frame and have 20 38cm, 10 40cm, 10 42cm handlebar ready, ready to install and ready for customer to pick. If in western countries, probably lower 38cm number and have more 40 cm number.

[@jianhuichua1154]

@@ruditon5816 None did that, thats why it would be a significant advantage if one brand willing to offer it. Giant did offer fully custom and buils to order, but its in Taiwan only.

[@michaelmechex]

@@jianhuichua1154 It's nowhere near as simple. You see, Specialized doesn't sell 40 frames. They have several thousands of bikes of every single size of every model each. They can't keep like 100 000 bikes unfinished in a warehouse waiting for a customer to choose the handlebars. That's a logistical nightmare and the bigger the company, the harder it gets.

[@BrianMcDonald]

I've always been on the narrow bars boat so I'm happy there are more options available. I tried a 165mm crank and it was comfy but with my leg proportions (femurs a little longer than average compared to shin length) in addition to my position I get better power with a 172.5mm crank

[@briancastillo8014]

I totally changed up the geometry on my bike that is more aggressive but also more comfortable. Slammed -12* 110mm stem 40cm bars 0 offset seat post 165mm cranks

[@DaveCM]

I'm 6'3" and I had a guy convince me to run 172.5 in 1991. I guess he was ahead of his time.

[@devdroid9606]

There's only a 5mm differnce between 170 and 165, yet it makes a noticeable difference. It is quite easy to make a slug that fits into the crank that can be flipped around to change the crank length from 170 to 165. This should be offered on lower and middle tier cranks where the buyer cannot afford to change the cranks and won't be putting out 1500 watts. It won't significantly raise manufacturing costs and can even reduce it by obviating the need to make and distribute two crank sizes!

[@rlmurillo]

Now the Canyon adjustable handlebar on the Aeroad bike make sense.

[@dsonyay]

My 51cm BMC Roadmachine came with 42cm handlebars… first thing I did was install a 38cm carbon fiber handlebar from my old bike (Easton). Why the hell were 42cm bars standard on a small bike is a mystery to me.

[@escamunicha4276]

I think they can allow customization if the supply of smaller cranks can keep up with the demand. Almost always it is the 165mm shimano cranks that go out of stock.

[@E.T_rode_bikes_As_well]

197, 88kg here and been rocking 38cm handlebar + 170mm cranks for ages now. Can’t imagine using a 44cm bar, i would snap myself in half putting the power down.

[@PRH123]

When I was racing back in the day (80’s - 90’s), on the mid- and high- end nobody bought a pre-built, pre-speced bike…. You would select a frame first, then the components (often a complete gruppo), and then have a shop assemble it…. so you had pretty much complete control over the size and fit… Frames came in many more sizes than just the 3-4 sizes of today…

[@discbrakefan]

Bike shops that can customise a bike are always ahead of those who won’t

[@DEXVD]

Happy my Tarmac came with 165mm cranks, disappointed in the 38cm bar though, I use 38cm on my gravel/commuter bike... I will hold off a little bit to see if Roval comes out with a 36cm bar or cockpit, if not will likely go with the Enve aero bar that is 35cm at the tops.

[@Mark_Tucker]

32.5 cm bar width for the WIN! Been racing on Aerocoach Ornix bars on my SL7 all season- wins in crits and RR. Sized down from 38cm and after getting used to the 32.5cm now the 38s feel like gravel bars.

[@ChrisMillerCycling]

I knew I would find you in here somewhere 😂. From someone who tried sitting on your wheel last month, I can confirm it’s FKING fast 🤟🏻

[@Mark_Tucker]

@@ChrisMillerCycling 🫶 … just don’t sick Jesse Coyle on me 🙏. Still wiping tears about his Pit Viper remark 😂😂😂

[@allent1277]

I actually see this on the other side of things, specially in asian countries, I am seeing a size 44/42 dropbar on a size 49 with a 90 stem! that Bike would be ridden by a 168cm-165mm rider and the dimensions doesn't add up, Bike sizes,Crank Sizes, Cockpit size/length should would have a certain range for a right fit to get followed.

[@ztzexplorer]

Measure from the end of one coracoid process to the other. Mine measures 40 cm so I don’t go narrower than that for my bars. I’m 6 ft tall. I have a 76.5 cm saddle height and use 172.5 cm cranks. I don’t have an extreme femur-to-tibia ratio. Ride what fits your body.

[@mythical7thgear]

I'm small and run a 48cm frame with 38cm bar and 165mm cranks(saddle height 655 max from crank center). I can probably use 155mm but the amount of brut pedal force needed to climb 15-20% grades would make them too short regardless of gearing options(actually modified my climbing bike with a Specialities TA 33 tooth inner chainring). Unless you have really short legs I don't see the need to go super short. Try pedaling a small kids or youth bike and you will understand that there is a limit how short one can go. The only exceptions are people with challenges (proportion, symmetry, mobility issues , past injuries and limited flexibility). I understand that Triathletes like short cranks for opening up some hip angles and it allows for more aggressive positions. I do have my level 2 fitting certification and I lean towards comfort during most fitting sessions. There is also a limit to how inward the elbows can be as it can create tension below the neck/upper shoulders.

[@sebastianserwin3416]

I discovered 165mm cranks and 380mm handlebar long time ago on the fixie bike, and I moved that to the road bike to feel more comfortable

[@GCPerformance18]

Love to hear this

[@nickobec]

My fitter said 42cm bars, I kept rolling my wrists in, went to 40cm, still rolled wrists in on drops, 38cm is the sweetspot for me, though do have 36cm on my race bike. I can ride 36-40cm without really caring. 42cm feel a little wide and 44cm+ are too wide. Had a conversation with a couple of friends, same height 183-185cm tall, similar age and experience, we all ride different frame sizes, different bars widths and different crank lengths. I am on the extreme end 54cm TT frame, 38cm bars and was agnostic on crank size (so ran 172.5 and 170). Though that is about to be tested, have scored cheap 165 and 160 to experiment with. Final point the "industry standards" are base on a study done for an Italian Olympic Committee in the 1970s on young prospective riders to establish fit standards. A lot has changed since then.

[@davekashuba4730]

I don't even bother with a handlebar anymore - I just hold onto the stem.

[@jamesgage03]

Yes, they will need to change with the science and the wants of the customer. Because they need to sell bikes!

[@htukmumfie]

i'm 5'9". shoulder width 41cm. i ride 40cm on all bikes except gravel (42). changing down from 42 was the greatest benefit with fit i have had. i run 175's, 172.5's and 170s on different bikes. here's my take: if spinning and in the saddle, go short for less dead spot. (and turbo trainer). if tt or on drops go short to stop knees banging chest. if you live where the hills are mainly 12%-30% (eg yorkshire, wales) go long for better punch out of saddle. if your gears are low enough to spin up, go short. i achieve higher average power and higher max power with 175's on a long hilly ride (4-5hrs and 5000 - 10000ft). i achieve less fatigue on a fast flat with 170s. make of this what you will.

[@laneromel5667]

I have been riding for over 50 years, for comfort I much prefer a 44cm bar. My days of high cadence over 110 are over I now typically only ride at about 90, so I prefer a 175mm crank. When I used to race track in the early 70's I liked a 165mm crank. For climbing which I still love to do a lot of, 175mm crfank is the way to go. I see the young generation all crunched up on modern geometries, makes me sore just looking at them.

[@thebeardedmtbiker4594]

I am with you. I am in my mid 60's, am 5'7" and use 175 cranks and both 46 and 44, mm bars. I see no reason to change a thing.

[@proctermorris6657]

GC, the same is happening in Cross Country Mountain Bike world. The Pro's are riding XC frames with significantly bigger forks (with 34 stanchions) and often 120mm travel. What's on the market, 100mm and 32 (or less) stanchions.

[@GCPerformance18]

Yea this is true. I don’t know how well this relates to consumers. Because the pros now are running big bikes for there world courses. More features not as much flat. But the xc bikes for where I am at. The epic World Cup is so flat over here. It dominates

[@proctermorris6657]

@@GCPerformance18 , true. You can get away with a lot with 100mm travel, but bigger travel also let's you go for more rugged terrain, and it becomes a bike that is capable of so much more. If it's also raceable, then great, which is what the Pro's seem to be doing. Plus Scott for example, has just gone 120mm. World Cup XC racing is becoming more extreme really, and short travel does restrict you somewhat. I love my 100mm hardtail, but it is restrictive to a degree. I'd question whether I need or want a 100mm dual suspension race bike, I think I'd go for 120mm these days.

[@DoNuT_1985]

The real problem is that it is so complicated to get the right bar width on a full bike when you deliberately want to go narrower and brands like Specialized have these parts in stock, anyway... is it a cost thing because they just have to pile up fewer bars if they don't have to consider people going for anything from 38 to 42 cm on a mid-size frame, so pure costs and logistics?

[@huggcycles1545]

Grant you are right, the big brands need to sell like the British brand "Ribble" their website you build the bike you want and they post it to you. I went from 175mm to 170mm and noticed the improvement, my bars I went from 44cm to 42cm but regret not going to 40cm. Great content bud

[@GCPerformance18]

Thanks so much!!!

[@thedownunderverse]

Very good topic! Agree on the “credit” whereby you as a shop owner can trade cranks, bars, stems and seatpost offsets with the bike company to get your customers comfy and efficient. They should provide you with a stock of parts to have them in store at all times and managed through your B2B. Anyway. I moved from 172.5 to 170 and ultimately 165 over the course of a 15 year cycling hobby. Never going back from 165’s.

[@Flexb777]

Bought a Canyon AeroRoad CFR a few months ago and used 42cm c-c for years and adjusted the Handlebar to 38cm as it’s adjustable! It took a little while to get used to BUT the more aero position won me over!! I love it. I’ve been thinking of trying 165.0 Crank arms as the bike came with 172.5mm and have been using that length for years!! It’s gonna cost a bunch to buy new Cranks especially as it’s a PM crank using DuraAce Di2 12 speed!! Just did a bike fit as the Canyon is 2cm longer reach but he said that my 172.5mm is fine!! So I’m a little confused as if to or not!! 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Zzyyxx22]

I don’t understand why the manufacturers wouldn’t take the cost saving of shorter bars. You must be using about 5% less material for a couple cm narrower bar. That’ll add up for a company producing as many handlebars as Specialized do.

[@finances-u2i]

Margins are going to be over 50% for Specialized going direct to consumer. It's better for them to have a customer buy a second bar/stem combo.

[@my91tsi]

One of the reasons I went with a factor, was I could choose bar, steam and crank length at time of ordering. Didn’t have to spend thousands more to swap fit parts after the sale.

[@SPLSE]

What's funny is this has been going on for ages. The size charts for most complete bikes are always 1-2 sizes larger than any shop I walk into actually recommends. I wonder what the thinking behind this is? For reference, I am 185cm on a 56 Supersix. But I'm not giving up my 175mm cranks.

[@bradleybabel4814]

Custom builds for the win. IMO it’s the best thing for experienced riders unless stock fit suits you. Some companies like Orbea offer some customisation within the build spec which is where any big player needs to be from mid level up I think.

[@GCPerformance18]

its good and also bad though because then you will have people whjo are in the middle of it not knwoing what to decide and wanting to try out or maybe do a fit before hand and always have that what if scenario in there head

[@Pmor75]

Good discussion topic, for me personally shorter cranks its a no go (175 its fine). An aero bar it is something to consider...I think the pros they are riding highly optimized bikes. Riding a smaller bar is a marginal gain for them, since all the other avenues of improvement are implemented /exhausted. Amateurs are not in the same relm of optimization of their position on the bike. Playing with cranks and bar width should come only when you have dialed a very aggressive position on the bike with a low stack and a long reach (where the majority of gains come from)

[@benreich625]

This is something I’ve been contemplating on. My first road bike was $10k+ and I didn’t know better. Managed to swap to 40’s on the one bike and feels faster than the 42’s. I don’t have the highest cadence (~78 avg) so would also benefit going to 170’s. Significantly more expensive for me to switch now since I already purchased a 172.5 power meter.

[@alberts4541]

I have wide shoulders and my ideal fit is a 42cm bar. Just because a skinny tour de france rider uses a 36cm bar doesn't mean i have to as well. I know that using a 36cm bar would make me win the tour de france because a 36cm aero bar is all you need to win 😂😆😉.

[@MrJohnnyTN]

I run 165 on TT and 170 for road. I tried 162.5 and it was kind of weird.. didn't really like it for sprinting. 165 and 170 pretty much feel the same to me. I run 38 and 40 bars on all my bikes. I am 42 chest so I feel uncomfortable going lower than 38. Even on TT I have to spread the pads out a little. Some pros are so narrow, I dont know how they do it.

[@aRlyWeakCyclist]

Looks like the trend for racers is going to 165mm crank arms now.

[@nathanmcginty5755]

Bikes should be customisable, especially when you spend that much money. When I purchased my last bike, everything was customisable in size for free, and all stock parts could be changed for upgrades for a fee.

[@GCPerformance18]

yea I agree with this

[@CT_KD6-3.7]

Right, so let’s deep dive into the cause and effects of these choices (sizing/choices of components/frames). If consumer A purchases EVERYTHING their favorite PRO is using (frame, components, etc), the consumer may or may not take into account their own sizing/ability/cycling frequency and/or fitness as compared to the PRO. Consumer B does conduct their research (on the frame geo/sizing, etc), and purchases the frame and components to suit their body type, skill level (current, and/or aspiring). Which of these consumers is likely to A: enjoy the sport B) Increase their fitness level and C) Learn more about the entire process as a whole?. Awesome chat GC, as some LBS do advise consumers on these topics, while some would rather not (for fear of losing said consumer traffic and/or dollars). Safe riding!!✌🏻😎.

[@Adonis-qj1nq]

Great video and on very important topic. Given that top spec bikes cost over 10k, I think it is ridiculous we can’t just specify what stem length, handlebar width, and crank length we want. You would expect at that price the dam bike should fit out the box. Plus it is more environmentally friendly not to waste production on parts that get needlessly swapped out and go to waste.

[@Taihaki]

It's sad that i am 170cm tall and i bought 52cm frame madone slr which i need to get 38cm handle bar $590 and $534 for 100mm stem right off the bat , and now i need to figure out what to do with the original 40cm handle bar and 90mm stem... trying to sell it for like half of the retail price? would like to see Bike company or bike shop have solution towards these situation.

[@mp-_-4483]

I think building custom bikes should become the norm, you wont have to make compromises or spend extra money in the future, and just get what geometry you want right away. Could also save money on the build by catching sales as they come.

[@TheDedicatedcyclist]

Schwinn Varsity was ahead of it's time with 38 cm bars and 165mm cranks being standard equipment

[@proctermorris6657]

100% GC. In Australia, you can buy a new Kia Picanto (a small car) drive away for less than the new S-Works Tarmac. They are taking the piss now. It's mind blowing that you can't spec a $20,000Aud bicycle the way you want it. I don't see myself ever buying myself a named brand road bike again. If my 3 road bikes that I own don't get me to retirement, itll be a custom frame somewhere.

[@GCPerformance18]

even a custom voucher for the ocnusmer to use in store or something would be nice

[@Shel8008]

Thank you and you are absolutely right on the ‘white-freakin-elephant’ in the room…. Tbh, whilst most of us want what the pros have, those whom are shelling out 5 figures would understand abt fit. This was precisely what turned me off Specialized in that the salesperson gave me the ‘take it as is’ ultimatum for their bikes and to further spend an additional 800++ for a ‘better-fitted’ spec combo. I turned and walk out. Whilst fit is very individual, the wrong fit is just, wrong. I get it that the brands could generalized for the lower tier due to volume BUT from mid-high tier, options at the start should be there to prioritize the consumer who’s essentially getting a high performance spec, and performance means the spec that allows the correct performance from the box. Eventually, I decided on a frameset build (Filante) from a boutique builder and spec it out to my fit, includes a 165mm crank, wheels and tyres, which eventually turned out way cheaper than a stock bike with ‘wrong specs’.

[@enki42ea]

Narrower handlebars can give you better aerodynamics while sacrificing ergonomics. For pros that can be a big advantage but outside of wanting to look like the pros not so good for weekend warriors. That said, when you can buy a high end bike online or the ship places an order for your bike (i.e. not just buying what is in stock at a store) why not have it custom? Cranks should be easy as that is very easy to swap (no cables routed through bars)

[@enki42ea]

Saddles should also be simple for a company like specialized. You should be able to pick whichever saddle and in whatever size works best for you

[@TheCharnwoodCyclist]

It astonishes me how slow the bike manufacturers are to respond, they could make life far easier for themselves and their dealers by adopting a standard crank length of 170mm and a standard bar width of 400mm. That said, on a bike costing 14k I believe you should be able to specify the size of the components.

[@GCPerformance18]

yea I understand they dont want to give the rider so many options to where they question every change but I mean at least a one time voucher for a swap out on a bike at 14k for a handlebar and seatpost, crank is on them through shimano... but control the stuff thee can

[@bradleyandrews4007]

Spot on. Building a 56cm allez. Trying shorter cranks for the first time and 38cm bars. Have a bike that came in 38cm in a medium and felt good so trying 38 again compared to 40 but I also don’t have wide shoulders for my height.

[@GCPerformance18]

yea it is tough when you want something specific

[@marty197666]

Funnily enough I started cycling in the early 90s as a young teen. 170mm cranks we’re the norm then for a guy my size (5’10) though we did ride ridiculously wide 44cm bars 🤣

[@nickobec]

While Tom Boonen was riding 44cm, Alberto Contador 42cm, Andre Grepiel was riding 38cm bars

[@asams7255]

Had my first ride on 38 bars yesterday and they are a game changer.

[@JeffOTRCycling]

Yeah 138 will get you more speed than 142 but you loose control and also shoulder pain after long rides...To gain 1/4 mile an hour but feel like crap during and after the ride...I will stay with 142 and 172.5....I am not a professional and will sacrifice 20.25 compared to 20 mph on a 1 hour ride but FEEL GREAT!!!

[@galenkehler]

Pro riders are tiny people, most of them are sub-6' so smaller components make sense. Im 6'2" and i wouldnt ride any cranks longer than 170mm and no wider bars than 36cm. And this is 10 years now for me, glad to see people getting with the times.

[@davidcarino6500]

I'm old school Lemond is 5'10. Uses 42 -44 cm bars and 175 cranks! Big mig used 180 cranks. If you do a lot of climbing wider bars are the way to go. Those guys are very small 5'8 130 lbs they can get away with those short bars/cranks. Track riding is different.

[@logojones96]

yea smaller cranks and bars for most people just makes sense. I think most people can more comfortably ride a 36-40cm bar, the industry is behind on sizing in general. I know plenty of people/shops that push people onto frames that are a size or 2 too big as well.

[@M3GRSD]

This is unrelated to the video, but I got me some of the Muc Off Bike Protect you recommended from a previous video. That is solid stuff. Thanks for the tip!

[@GCPerformance18]

you are very welcome that stuff I use on alot of shop bikes and my own bieks as well

[@flflam]

Comfort and fit is speed. If the handlebar is 4cm narrower than your shoulder width, are you going to be more efficient on the bike? Do 95% of consumers have the physiques of the pros?

[@GCPerformance18]

depends on the market but right now majority of my market around my area are all riding pro stylew bikes and copying what they are doing, you can always adapt to this, because even for pros MVDP was running a 42cm bar when he started and now is on a 40, same with alot of these riders, tadej wasnt riding this narrow of a bar before he adapted to it to make it better for him

[@flflam]

@@GCPerformance18 2cm narrower is not a huge change. That said, most pros have small torsos/shoulders. Most consumers don't. If 42cm is my shoulder width (acromion), going to 38 won't do me good overall.

[@marcinstyle85]

For this price bike should be 100% customise , plus bike fitting included for the price as well

[@prasad530]

Bike fitting is a bike shop service, bike price is a manufacturer thing. Fittings should absolutely not be included. Lots of shops need the money from those extra services to survive. My shop always does soft fittings for new bikes, but we charge 350 for a 2 hour pro fit from someone certified, and that's how it should be.

[@hillarynoye1959]

Back to the future ..in the eighties the person crafting your ride used you physical dimensions and created a true custom ride experience. Selected the frame and then components . The person that has a long torso but short arms and legs was given an entirely different set up to the person with long legs etc .. I have been riding 167.5 cranks and 40 cm bars with 130 stem since the eighties.

[@Numeriwar]

A 36mm handlebar is too narrow for climbing with hands on top...Pro riders stay on the hoods. I agree handlebar are usually too wide, 42cm for a 54cm bike is too much. 40cm is perfect

[@podratic]

I’m 6’1” with a 34” inseam. I ride a 177.5 crank arm. I just can’t imagine a 165. It just doesn’t make sense that someone 5’4” would be riding the same crank length as me. Oh well, let’s see what happens in 5 years.

[@steveransom8134]

Great video. Looking forward to hear your real experience with the 38cm bars. It obviously will be an adjustment, but I am curious about your long term experience. Thanks again for all of your thoughtful videos.

[@GCPerformance18]

Thank you very much. I have the bars on the way right now we will see what happened :))

[@tonylo6013]

Hi GC, great video. I accidently ordered a 36cm handle bar for my winspace when I meant to order a size 38cm handle which I had on my tarmac SL6 rim brake. I thought it would be too narrow. But anyhow, I tried it out as everything was built up for the winspace. I love it. Very interesting about the shorter cranks. I want to buy power meter for my winspace, so maybe I will try shorter cranks. Would I have to change my riding geometry if I change to shorter cranks.

[@kimwarner6050]

I just bought some 140 and 150 cranks. I run 160mm on all my bikes. But according to a crank calculator I should be at a minimum running 145mm.

[@gregmorrison7320]

Pro's have always been late to the party, disc brakes, tubeless wider tires, 38mm bars, 165mm cranks.....

[@cornelhughes6763]

I can see the downsizing of cranks for persons across the spectrum, but handlebar length should be based on your shoulder width. Yes if you flexible enough and can pull in your wider shoulder, to adopt to a 38mm or 36mm handlebar, give it a try, especially if speed is your aim. However, I can't see this working for the casual rider.

[@lovenottheworld5723]

It's the shape of the shoulder joints, I think, that determines the comfortable width of the bar and not the width of the shoulders. Splayed arms doesn't look cool, but it can be very comfortable depending on how you're put together.

[@meibing4912]

Spot on! My new aero bike has 165mm cranks and 38cm bars - a first for both. Hope my body complies... 🤣

[@VideoPresence2020]

Narrower bar makes the bike less stable with only one hand on the bar; on my bikes.