Was up the ladders and got wondering...... how much of a daft idea would it be to put drop bars on a 29inch hard tail mountain bike?

So, essentially a drop bar gravel bike with "proper" front suspension.

Would the geometry of a mountain bike "work" with drop bars?

Mine doesn't work for me without a big stem riser and very short stem. With them it does work for me just looks ugly, but there's been no concern over weakness and hadling if fine for me. I'm hoping to get a vagabond frame this year and swap everything across. I don't have front sus, but have thought about getting a set for rougher longer trips.

Humpert ahead stem adapter is my current solution https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/stems/humpe ... tem-black/

I did use a Humpert High carisma which is less fugly, but left the reach still a touch much for me https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/stems/110-h ... amp-black/

My experiments lead me to believe that modern stuff doesn't lend itself well to the concept. However, older bikes with their (generally) shorter TT and often longer HT, can work quite well.

In fairness most will appear to have had a good whack with the ugly stick once surgery is complete. Here's mine.

I was thinking along the lines ^ above.

An older bike (as in steeper xc geometry) would work much better. Something like the older style Karate Monkey etc.

The ugly is kina part of the cool though Here's mine (not 29)

Velo orange cigne stem would get your bars right up if needed but not sure about the LD look...or the price of them

26733926_10215661452189115_201151334050185566_n by Shawn McFarlane, on Flickr

Asposium wrote:So, essentially a drop bar gravel bike with "proper" front suspension.

For me, drop bars don't inspire the confidence on stuff that requires suspension. I use mine for the sort of on/off road non-technical mix that's fashionable at the moment. Consequently the bar height is set up to mimic my road bike as it does 80%+ road miles, and a sus fork would just be extra weight to carry about (although not much extra on the steel rigid fork!).

SuperSolo wrote:An older bike (as in steeper xc geometry) would work much better. Something like the older style Karate Monkey etc.

Et voila, my Karate Monkey, one frame size too small for a shorter TT:

Friend of mine rode the TDR on his El Mar converted to drops - said he prefered it that way. SS to boot, finished 2nd SS rider that year.

It does work, but you need to be prepared to faff with stem length and rise. Fork offset can have an impact too.

Not a daft idea. People have been bodging that kind of bike in their sheds for years. I first tried it with an On One Inbred 26" wheeled bike about 15 years ago. It received a big whack with the ugly stick to get it feeling right. Then again with an Inbred 29er couple of years ago. Finally just bought a Genesis Vagabond. I never went for suspension.

pushbikemike wrote:It received a big whack with the ugly stick to get it feeling right.

Bearbonesnorm wrote: In fairness most will appear to have had a good whack with the ugly stick once surgery is complete.

Moder-dye wrote:...it does work for me just looks ugly

There is a theme developing here. I think you have to embrace the fugly and do it with a Lauf - best (or least worse) compromise.

Dyffers wrote:

Asposium wrote:So, essentially a drop bar gravel bike with "proper" front suspension.

For me, drop bars don't inspire the confidence on stuff that requires suspension. I use mine for the sort of on/off road non-technical mix that's fashionable at the moment. Consequently the bar height is set up to mimic my road bike as it does 80%+ road miles, and a sus fork would just be extra weight to carry about (although not much extra on the steel rigid fork!).

I’m with you on this.

Did it a long time back with Midges on an Inbred:

Didn't really work for me though. Getting the bars up enough to use the drops as the primary position means the the hoods are too high and far away to be of use most of the time. Jones or similar swept bars make more sense.

The unpopular answer is:
Aerodynamics don't come into play until an object is moving forward at a speed above 20kph.
Drop bars were designed to go on road racing cycles to provide more hand positions that flat bars and, more importantly, improve aerodynamics.
How many times on a true off-road ride will you be travelling above 20kph? And, of these occasions, how many times will aerodynamics be your primary objective above e.g. braking ability, stability, trail visibility etc. etc.
Bear in mind, going full gas for 45 mins in a cross race on a fairly flat muddy field, I struggle to average much more than 17kph ... on a cross bike equipped with drop bars.

On the other hand, the non-technical, "fun" reply is: back in the Tomac days (early 90s) I tried it on my Diamond back Apex with Shimano CX bar end shifters and Cinelli 46cm bars. It was fun, but not as much fun or as fast as the original straight bars.

My reason for drop bars is due to knackered wrists. They can't take flat bars even on the road, the neutral unrotated position of hoods and drops is fine, even on rough surfaces.

Nothing to do with aero for me.

Though... invariably there are headwind or road sections where it does help. Its not the speed you're travelling that counts, but the effective airspeed; speed of the air against you combined with your forward speed. Cycle, even slowly, into a stiff headwind and tell me getting down out of the wind doesn't help compared to sitting up.

Like wise I might add on my clip on tri-bars on a longer trip to take the weight off my wrists, attach bits to and get out of the wind if necessary, it's not because I'm racing

padonbike wrote:The unpopular answer is:
Aerodynamics don't come into play until an object is moving forward at a speed above 20kph.
Drop bars were designed to go on road racing cycles to provide more hand positions that flat bars and, more importantly, improve aerodynamics.
How many times on a true off-road ride will you be travelling above 20kph? And, of these occasions, how many times will aerodynamics be your primary objective above e.g. braking ability, stability, trail visibility etc. etc.
Bear in mind, going full gas for 45 mins in a cross race on a fairly flat muddy field, I struggle to average much more than 17kph ... on a cross bike equipped with drop bars.

On the other hand, the non-technical, "fun" reply is: back in the Tomac days (early 90s) I tried it on my Diamond back Apex with Shimano CX bar end shifters and Cinelli 46cm bars. It was fun, but not as much fun or as fast as the original straight bars.

Its about apparant wind though isnt it? So 5kmh into a 15kmh headwind crosses your aerodynamic threshold ? I have spent several days plugging away into a headwind on my Fargo at about 10-15kmh and been happy of the aerodynamic benefits of a slightly more aero position

Moder-dye wrote:Like wise I might add on my clip on tri-bars on a longer trip to take the weight off my wrists, attach bits to and get out of the wind if necessary, it's not because I'm racing

If forward progress (into wind, on non-tech bits of the ride) is the goal, this is the answer, not drops, as most TD riders utilise. Either way it isn't pretty! For an all-road / gravel bike, drops and aero bars make sense, at least I hope so as that's my current project.

Its not the speed you're travelling that counts, but the effective airspeed; speed of the air against you combined with your forward speed.

I'm not sure what the difference between "the speed you're travelling" and "your forward speed" is?

Its about apparant wind though isnt it? So 5kmh into a 15kmh headwind crosses your aerodynamic threshold

So F1 cars could be shaped like trucks if they raced on wind-free circuits then?
I'm not sure what "apparant (sic) wind" is?

Apologies if I didn't clarify the difference between air resistance and wind resistance.
Any object moving forward at a speed above 20kph will have to produce an exponentially increasing amount of power to over come air resistance. This is a basic rule of physics and is as true in a hypothetical "zero wind" situation as it is in real life conditions.
Obviously, if you add in headwind or other natural variations in wind direction/speed, the energy required increases.
So if you are riding into a raging headwind doing 25kph and the headwind suddenly ceased completely, you would feel much relief, but you would still be producing a reasonable amount of energy to overcome air resistance (the forward motion of a body through the air), as oppose to previous situation when you were battling to overcome both air resistance AND wind resistance.

Philip - I think he means similar to the difference between air speed and ground speed for airplanes. There's the energy required to overcome friction between tyre and ground but that's minimal compared to the energy required overcome air resistance.

I have no interest in aerodynamics, I do have interest in my thumbs not hurting. Drop bars are comfier for me* than swept bars and personally* I feel I have just as much control with nice flared drops as a swept flat bar**.

*people like different things
**yes I am including Jones bars in that

Yeah sorry Padonbike, apparent wind is a sailing term, describes the actual wind in real terms, relative to a moving object. So for a 15kmh wind riding into it at 5kmh the "real" apparent wind is 20kmh, which is the point where you say a more tucked position is beneficial. Sorry, havent the foggiest about the F1 lorrys, air resistance and wind resistance just saying I prefer to get my head down riding into the wind and drop bars help

Yeh, I was talking about the difference between airspeed and ground speed But the sailing one works for me too

What ever the semantics or proper explanation, you don't need to be cycling over 20kph to benefit from being more aero, I just need a head wind to make it more beneficial to be aero than sitting up.

Now granted a loaded bike isn't that aero, but sitting up in a head wind is like putting the (air) brakes on.

The best thing to do if considering this is not to use your existing hard tail. The conversion goes best with a frame that's one size smaller, to mitigate a too long top tube.

Looks like the Curve guys are interested in them.

Is that a curve GMX?

I think it might be the Curve GXR. There's another picture at the bottom of this page.

https://www.curvecycling.com.au/collect ... -gxr-kevin

What shortish very upright stems are people using in those set ups?
Stuart, RestlessNative and any others?

I've recently gone with the f'ugly stem raiser as Moderdye uses and have a 25degree salsa guide stem on the way in a bid to see if I can lose the f'ugly.
But I don't care too massively, comfy is comfy. Being able to use 4 different handlebar positions is a major bonus for me. Currently.

This is the shortest stem with a good rise and a neat solution that I've found...https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/stems/110-h ... amp-black/
I do like it but it stretches me out maybe and inch or so more than I'd prefer for relaxed off road. Still very ridable though.

Not sure how that orange velo cigne stem compares in measurements, but it doesn't look 'instrument friendly' with on big curve if you want to attach stuff.

But, I can just get the hoods a touch closer with the fugly humpert stem raiser so that the reach is a touch less than my road bike along with the height too for in the drops. I might retry the high charisma now I have less belly to get in the way