Another good thing to note on the Albastache, is if you find the lever angle doesn't work for you (which was my issue), Velo Orange makes a flat bar style lever that works on 23.8mm road bars, including the 'stache. Then you'd be able to set them up truly like an Albatross, but have the more forward ergonomics
On Thursday, 30 November 2023 at 10:47:30 UTC-8 DavidP wrote: > Hi Sarah - I'm in the process of a road-ish/commuter-ish build using > Albastache bars. I've tried moustache bars in the past with the levers in > the standard position and never liked them as much as my Albatross bars. So > this time I'm moving the levers further back to be more like Albatross in > use: > > [image: PXL_20231110_194943840-chest-1024.jpg] > > [image: PXL_20231110_195003021-chest-profile-1024.jpg] > > This gives good access to brakes from the farthest back position and the > more forward "on the hoods" position, which are the two positions I use > most on my Albatross bar bikes. The forward most "in the hooks" position > does require a hand shift to get to the brakes but it's a small one. > > So why even use Albastache bars if you're just going to set them up like > Albatross bars? A couple of reasons come to mind: > 1) Looks - the Albastache are more roadish looking. > 2) Less rearward extension means a shorter stem can be used than with > Albatross bars. I've got a 70mm stem on this bike. > > -Dave > > On Thursday, November 30, 2023 at 10:27:23 AM UTC-5 Bikie#4646 wrote: > >> Sarah, I completely understand wanting your brake levers close at hand. >> But keep in mind, as another here has said, that this is one reason for a >> short (but tall) stem. >> I use this setup for my touring bike too (a Sam) because it allows a >> chance to “stretch out” like riding in the drops on drop bars. >> This is less useful if you are riding on a commute and making many stops, >> some unexpected and abrupt. >> For longer rides, I find I am “at home” in in my Lazy Boy” on the hoods. >> This position may not work for you if your body won’t allow it. >> You might be better served by Albatross bars. But keep in mind that you >> can angle those for a bit more “aero” position on faster group rides. >> Paul Germain >> MIDLOTHIAN, Va >> >> Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS >> >> On Thursday, November 30, 2023, 9:33 AM, Sarah Carlson < >> sarahlik...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hey Paul! >> Thank you for sharing pictures of your set up, and an explanation of your >> gearing... I like what you have going here, my teen would say, "It's a >> vibe." I like the range of gears you have and I feel like that would work >> with how I ride. 36 seems like a sweet spot to ride in, while also having a >> 24 for hills, and a 46 which gives options when I am coming down hills >> because I just feel ungrounded when I'm totally spinning down hills. Great >> suggestions! >> >> I'm going to have to test ride an Albastache bar somewhere, because your >> set up looks like a good possibility to be compatible for how I like to >> ride. The only thing is I know I like to have my break levers right under >> my hands and I tend to ride with my hands on the swept back part... so I'd >> need to see how it feels to keep my hands up front like that. Luckily >> learning what we like tends to involve riding and be fun so I'm up for it! >> >> Sarah >> >> On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 8:39:10 PM UTC-8 Bikie#4646 wrote: >> >> Sarah, I would like to ditto the other recommendations for triple >> chainrings and a smaller cogset. I use a 9-speed 12/27 paired to 46/36/24 >> crankset. Also, the Albastache / Mustache handlebars, paired to an 80mm >> Nitto Dirt Drop stem. My Mustache bars with a slight tilt downward offers >> the best of both worlds for me. It fits between my drop bar bike and the >> more upright Albatross bar on my single speed daily ride. >> I'm at a point in life where I have no riding partners who don't think >> the way I do about group riding. (Which might be a new goal for you, too?) >> I would call it "spirited" but not competitive. We all have different pain >> thresholds and capabilities but everyone would think it improper to leave >> the others in the dust. Often the ride includes a bagged lunch midway. >> Even my rides which are not in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains >> are rarely over 40 miles, but a good workout nonetheless. >> I find my Homer Hilsen is the perfect bike for this. With a near-minimum >> of bag capacity, I can carry a sandwich and even a lightweight jacket or >> vest, etc. Most every need for a day ride, which would include tools of >> course. Much of what I do on the Hilsen is unpaved and hilly. The 38mm tire >> capacity (with fenders) of my 2013 (?) frame handles dirt roads well, even >> on slippery downhills. The new Hilsens with longer chain stays may take >> wider tires yet, but I suspect there is a tipping point to tire width. If >> your group rides are entirely on pavement, 35-38mm tires should be the >> sweet spot for you and you won't need the excess rolling weight of wider. >> I use a Sam Hillborne for touring and the Hilsen is noticeably livelier, >> especially without the touring racks. Since I am not spending all day on >> the bike, I can get away with a lighter, more narrow saddle. (But we all >> know that is a very personal preference.) My Hilsen set up this way for me >> is a confidence-builder and my favorite bike for adventure rides with >> others. >> >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikecrazy-paul/52784257986/in/album-72177720307152181/ >> Paul Germain >> Midlothian, Va. >> [image: IMG_7763.jpeg] >> >> On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 9:28:46 PM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote: >> >> Did someone say PIE??! 🥧 >> >> On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 6:11:51 AM UTC-8 sarahlik...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >> Yeah, going down hills in the 42 I am still spinning but then someone >> told me that is normal... I guess I am learning new things about riding >> since I've been out with a group. I'm going to do a triple on this one and >> see how it goes! I do like the sound of your set up with the 24-35-43 with >> 12 x 36. Gravity is inconvenient for me a lot these days because I like to >> fuel my engine with pie.... so I am looking forward to the 24! >> >> On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 6:38:19 PM UTC-8 Drew Saunders wrote: >> >> If you say you live in your 34, but sometimes spin out, while wanting a >> lower gear as well, then a triple is a good choice. >> >> You can set up the common 74/110 triple, like the Silver, Soma Clipper, >> etc. as a 24-34-44, and pair that with a 12-36 in the rear and have your “3 >> cassettes on one bike” gearing. I use a 24-35-43 with a 12-36 on my 1998 >> Ibis Mojo “Mountain Bike that has become a Gravel Bike.” I use the 43 on >> pavement, the 35 on almost all my off road riding, and the 24 when gravity >> becomes inconvenient. Based on my riding, a 2x10 or 11 makes more sense, >> but I’m cheap and lazy, so I’ll stick with the triple for some time. >> >> On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 7:24:42 AM UTC-8 sarahlik...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >> This is gearing math I can understand... there is a Papa bear, and Mama >> bear, and a Baby bear... and something that will be just right for everyone! >> >> On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 6:55:19 AM UTC-8 Eric Daume wrote: >> >> IMO redundant gears are more of a conceptual or theoretical concern than >> a real issue. If you’re setting up a triple, you really end up with: >> >> - a middle ring for the majority of your riding >> - a small ring for big hills, use it with the biggest cogs in back >> - a big ring for downhills or otherwise going fast. Use it with your >> medium and small cogs and back. >> >> Yes, your small/small and big/big combos will give you those redundant >> gears, but who cares? You don’t need to use them anyway. >> >> Eric >> Who lives the 1x life in flat central Ohio >> >> >> On Monday, November 27, 2023, Sarah Carlson <sarahlik...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Thank you for bringing up the redundant gears... in my brain I'm telling >> myself maybe it's overkill... but is it really such a terrible thing? >> >> On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 5:27:48 PM UTC-8 Jason Fuller wrote: >> >> You bring up a good point Ted about so-called redundant gears, which is >> something many cyclists try to eliminate as much as possible to their own >> practical detriment. It's better to approach planning a drivetrain by >> identifying how low you want your low gear to be, how high you want your >> high gear to be, and then finding the most user-friendly combination to get >> there. A big issue with wide-range doubles is that you'll find that you >> need to drop into the small ring for every hill, whereas if you have a >> triple, you can generally stay in the middle ring most of the time and save >> a lot of front shifts, even though you have more rings up there. >> >> For me, I find I don't need anything above about 95 gear inches - above >> that and I'm going to coast, maybe tuck in and get aero. Maybe 100 tops. On >> the low end, if it's used off-road or to carry loads I'll want something in >> the 18-20 gear inch range, but if it's a roadish bike, 24-25 inches is >> good. So what I tend to do is run a double but size the rings such that I >> truncate the big gears I'll almost never use, so that I can run a big ring >> on the double that I can stay in on gentle climbs. 40/28 to 11-34 is a >> great combo, for instance. Even 38/26 to 11-28 to get some smaller steps on >> the back, and 38-11 is a big enough top gear for most situations >> >> On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 1:45 PM Ted Durant <tedd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 12:34:51 PM UTC-6 Jason Fuller wrote: >> >> I would echo that triples are pretty nice - not only do you get more >> range, but the 10-tooth jumps in the front are a lot less 'disruptive' if >> you know what I mean. I find the smaller chainring jump means that when I >> hit the base of a hill I can often just drop a chainring and leave the rear >> alone, and it is a natural gear reduction .. whereas on the wide-low >> double, you would be spinning like crazy if you tried the same thing >> >> >> Excellent point, and one that launches me into bike nerd mode... >> apologies in advance if this is too much. >> >> The "standard" chainring gap became 16 teeth when "compact double" 50x34 >> combos became all the rage. That's a 39% jump, the way I measure it >> (Ln(50/34)), or about 2.5 times the 15.4% jump from 18 to 21 in back. Now, >> if you keep that 16 tooth gap but go down to 40x24, that's a ginormous 51% >> jump, which is 3.3x the 18-21 jump. I have a 42x26 on my Waterford ST-22, >> and it's definitely jarring to drop to the small ring when you hit a hill, >> requiring a bit of advance planning to shift a cog harder in the rear, >> first. I spent plenty of time riding half-step gearing, so I'm facile with >> double-shifting, but after a couple hundred kms I'm too tired for that. For >> my Breadwinner G-Road I went with 44x32, which is a gentle 32% jump. It >> means there's more overlap in the gearing, or to put it another way, I'm >> not maximizing the total range of the system, but I very much prefer to >> make that trade-off. At 41%, the 14-tooth gap on the Silver 42x28's on my >> Sams is pretty much the outer limit for me. The Wide-Low (38x24) is a 46% >> jump which is pretty high. >> >> Ted Durant >> Milwaukee, WI USA >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/yo4eRz3flb0/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1a3954ba-86af-4775-8090-f3e4bba4fa44n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1a3954ba-86af-4775-8090-f3e4bba4fa44n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/896b1b2b-8777-4482-b644-d47c7f8a41d1n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/896b1b2b-8777-4482-b644-d47c7f8a41d1n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/yo4eRz3flb0/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/b2e7da02-f042-4122-81df-5dd8dc204eb5n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/b2e7da02-f042-4122-81df-5dd8dc204eb5n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/3b5cca52-a958-404b-8927-b203b92b8fcdn%40googlegroups.com.
