The much needed UCI loller thread

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
If they want to make a rule, just say that the bars can't be narrower then rider's shoulder width. Problem solved.

Or - if broad shouldered riders like Kruijswijk and Welsford are going to find that unfair - simple word it something like this:
"Handlebars cannot be narrower than 40 CM, or the rider's shoulder width - whichever is narrowest."
So a rider with 45 CM shoulder width can still go down to 40 CM handlebars, while a rider with 30 CM shoulder width can stay with that size handlebars.
(Unless, of course, it's a safety concern, and UCI is worried that too narrow handlebars will limit riders' control. In which case; surely too wide handlebars will also limit riders' control...)

Another guy weighed in:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Not that the rule isn't stupid, but it's 40cm measured from outside end to outside end, so 38cm if you measure it like normal bars. Also that weird hoods thing will be a headache with flared bars. But of course not a word about hookless, because big players in the industry are invested.
 
ok, it is actually a bit different, an overall restriction for chain meters developed per complete crank revolution. They could have made it a bit bigger, let's say 10.65m (just 20cm longer than their proposed one), so that 55x11 and 50x10 are the max size gears, but the overall idea isn't that bad (but the execution is UCI levels of stupid). I expect Sram to fight it and if it happens we'll probably end up with the max 10.65m, as I proposed, still making the bigger Sram set-up (50/35 chainrings with the cassette with the 10t sprocket) just legal (just like a hypothetical 55x11 for Shimano).

That said, the 10t cog is less efficient that an 11t one, but people like the bigger gear ratio (and Sram started it to get away with a smaller gap in chainring size at the front because of their inferior front derailor).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
This rule is ridiculous and the women teams should unite and complain to the UCI to force a change. They are making women ride with an improper bikefit.

If they want to make a rule, just say that the bars can't be narrower then rider's shoulder width. Problem solved.
Your point is 1000% valid and a variety of issues, some serious can come from using handlebars that are too wide..
that said,, things also come up from bars too narrow. UCI looks to be leaning into handling and bike safety instead of rider health. Wide bars for riders, men and women with narrow shoulders, or just find closer hand positions more comfortable need options.
Especially small female riders will suffer immediately because of hand and shoulder position being wider. The bike controls are majority located on brake shifter assembly. Yes w electronic shifting you can program a remote button (s) for shifting but braking still requires contact with the hoods. With that you don't have any options, will likely require a shorter stem in order to ride for extended periods on the hoods. Pack riding, fast riding, most fast downhill riding is not done on the tops of the handlebars.. And riding on the tops are the only place to get current more narrow shoulder position.
Deep section wheels are easy but forcing smaller riders to ride a bike that doesn't fit them, likely to cause negative health effects is a bad standard for the rules..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan