# Oversized handlebars vs standard ones?



## -=phelan=- (Nov 11, 2006)

What's the advantage of having an OS 31.8 bar vs the smaller one? I would think the 31.8 would always be at a disadvantage because of the added weight? no? 

(not much of a weight weenie but seriously what's the point?)


----------



## taikuodo (Jul 3, 2006)

Oversized anything usually means its stronger.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

having a larger diameter tube at the stem allows for a stiffer, stronger bar


----------



## grandsalmon (Oct 24, 2005)

31.8 stem/bar is stiffer. as i have gravitated to such with a couple of my bikes, i do notice a difference- *this is impressive*. as for a weight penalty- a matter my LBS friend pointed out- is actually very minimal, so he was just speaking from a "not worth it - don't have it" position. if you can imagine the extra material needed for the OS connection, you will see it is so nominal.
it is a worthy design/function change. *go for it!*


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

I've used them both and I can't tell a difference on my xc bikes to be completely honest.


----------



## Slyp Dawg (Oct 13, 2007)

the OS bars are stiffer and more durable without much added weight, but the regular bars absorb a little more impact. it's just a matter of preference for most


----------



## ducktape (May 21, 2007)

Yep I reckon it's mostly to do with looks - OS just looks more burly. With the school crowd they're probably considered "cooler".
Stiffness and strength without much weight compensation also. 
Take Race Face Deus Lo Rise bars as an example:
195g for the 25.4 dia
200g for the 31.8 dia
Dues XC bars
So for an extra 5g you can have bars that look burlier and are possibly stronger.

Personally I like the look of OS, Easton EA30 OEM bars are the only 25.4s that I've found to be more flexy than I would have liked, OS bars no chance of that! Short stems & OS risers just go hand in hand. It's entirely personal preferance.


----------



## Mr.P (Feb 8, 2005)

-=phelan=- said:


> What's the advantage of having an OS 31.8 bar vs the smaller one? I would think the 31.8 would always be at a disadvantage because of the added weight? no?


Theory: Wider = stiffer

Marketing distortion zone: in full effect

BUT... I found it to be true.

25.4 set up: Thomson 80mm stem w/ Azonic 400g WF DH handlebars is less stiff than

31.8 set up: Cheapy OEM Specialized 90mm XC Stem & handlebars

IME.

Go figure.

I thought it was all marketing but my smaller diameter setup should have been nearly as stiff as it comes and the 31.8 set up should have been a noodle.

I notice the difference only when I am doing SS type riding (harsh stand and mash).

P


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

OS is stronger, look at a dirtbike handlebar. Renthals which are not OS need a brace bar in the middle whereas ProTapers do not. And those are high stress environments...


----------



## Psycho Mike (Apr 2, 2006)

The engineering of it (been a while since I took statics or dynamics, so forgive any errors) is that for the same wall thickness, the wider diameter will be heavier due to more material but more resistant to deflection (stiffer) due to the larger moment of inertia. 

You'll get more "buzz" though an OS bar as it just won't flex as much to eliminate the vibration. Personally, I prefer them due to my size.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

the real reason for 31.8 is that it is the same diameter as road bikes have moved to thus allowing manufacturers to move towards a standard where all stems are the same diameter. Over time we may gravitate towards a global standard but since us mountain bikers as such a stodgy group of SOB's I doubt it will ever happen.

that said 31.8 will be stiffer like an aluminum frame over a steel frame. Larger diameter = greater surface area = stiffer interface. 

Pluses are that you can use a light road stem if you want, negative of this is that a road stem may not be designed to withstand mountain bike impacts. 

Stiffness at the bar will translate to better steering control at the expense of comfort in the hands, shoulders and neck from increased low amplitude shock transmission that a flexier bar would mitigate (possibly).


----------



## jrcxu (Oct 23, 2007)

All this talk about stiffness.

Is stiffer better? Do you really think its going to be that much of a steering control difference? I'm not leaning one way or the other, but unless you're the toppest (just made that word up) of the top pro, you're not going to notice a significant difference in one or the other.


----------



## CougarTrek (Jan 27, 2007)

jrcxu said:


> All this talk about stiffness.
> 
> Is stiffer better? Do you really think its going to be that much of a steering control difference? I'm not leaning one way or the other, but unless you're the toppest (just made that word up) of the top pro, you're not going to notice a significant difference in one or the other.


I just switched from the FSA riser that came stock on my bike to a Salso Pro Moto flat bar (both OS). I immediately noticed the vast improvement in steering, handling, responsiveness, etc. Now, I don't know enough to tell you what caused that. Could be that I'm better positioned on the bike now, could be the "nicer" bar, could be "stiffer" (it's certainly not more "noodley" so it's either the same or stiffer...), could be flat vs. riser and my riding style, could even be a figment of my imagination (the "you think it's going to help so it does" phenomenon).

Point being that yes I did personally notice a difference in the handling properties of my bike based only on a bar change and I am so far from a pro biker it's not even funny...

Disclaimer: individual results may vary


----------



## norm (Feb 20, 2005)

Rod said:


> I've used them both and I can't tell a difference on my xc bikes to be completely honest.


Same here. Cant notice either....


----------



## bm5er (Nov 30, 2009)

CougarTrek said:


> I just switched from the FSA riser that came stock on my bike to a Salso Pro Moto flat bar (both OS). I immediately noticed the vast improvement in steering, handling, responsiveness, etc.


Your evaluation seems to be between riser and flat bars, as they were both OS.


----------



## Sideknob (Jul 14, 2005)

Oversize looks a whole lot better IMO.

I can't pick any difference otherwise - the stiffness aspect is often pushed, but really they are mounted on a bike that's ridden on variable terrain, with soft, squishy tyres and suspension. MTB stiffness isn't like roadie stiffness...


----------



## tduro (Jan 2, 2007)

It seems the trend over the last decade or so has been toward longer bars, riser bars, AND larger diameter tubing. Perhaps they all go hand-in-hand (pun intended). 

A longer bar has to be stronger to support the same weight. Larger diameter tubing can do this. Also, a bent bar is naturally weaker, so it needs to be made of stronger tubing.


----------



## blazemaster83 (May 8, 2008)

I dont mean to hi-Jack this thread, but do 31.8 and 25.4 bars use the same size grips? I am looking at getting a 31.8 to replace my older 25.4 bars, but i cant find anything about grip size.


----------



## gabe23 (Aug 28, 2010)

blazemaster83 said:


> I dont mean to hi-Jack this thread, but do 31.8 and 25.4 bars use the same size grips? I am looking at getting a 31.8 to replace my older 25.4 bars, but i cant find anything about grip size.


The 31.8 refers to the size at the clamp, but the grip ends are a standard size. BTW, this is a 3 year old thread revived by a spammer, so probably best to let it die again.


----------

