Easton Havoc 35
- Thread starter Uncle Cliffy
- Start date
can i ask why ? just another new standard in industry with too many ones !
current bars and stems are plenty stiff (imho) and the weights are nothing ground breaking (other than the direct mount maybe).if this bigger diameter resulted in much lighter bars than i see the logic, but when its just the same than whats the point ?
current bars and stems are plenty stiff (imho) and the weights are nothing ground breaking (other than the direct mount maybe).if this bigger diameter resulted in much lighter bars than i see the logic, but when its just the same than whats the point ?
Well, they were able to add width, and make them lighter than the 31.8 versions.
Lighter, stiffer, stronger. DUH!
I want to meet people that ride bars wider than 750. One of the site (Dirt Maybe?) interviewed a bunch of pros in a video and measured their bars and none of the top guys were riding anything wider than 750. Do amatuers know something the pro's don't?
Those bars on his bike aren't actually 780 ( have the same pair), he runs his grips slightly hanging off the bars.
But after watching the video again, I guess there are a few guys running wider than 750.
if you are committed to riding Easton than i get it, otherwise ... ?
Not bad; Im just a little fed up with every DM stem having 'negative rise' - not everyone wants or needs or can even use a completely slammed front end. Most people I see running slammed stems still run some kind of rise in their bars, so WTH! I can get a flat bar or one with 3" of rise so leave the stem rise alone. [ Except in this case you have only slammed stem and bars to choose from.
I bet the people at Problem Solvers throw a party everytime a new standard comes out.
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mattmatt86 again.
I run 750 on my trail bikes, and 780 on my DH. I started at 800 and cut them down. If you are a big guy with long arms, then it feels really good. Even my wife is running 750 on her AM bike
Love it when people use the "well the pros run..." arguement. Pros are not normal people. Comparing them to schmoes like us is like comparing a lamborghini to a VW. They're stupid fit, stronger than bears and not at all right in the head.
Anyways, not sure this standard is really needed. It reeks of another "what other marginal improvement can we put out there to sell more junk?" The industry is really good at those.
Having stiffness issues with your bar? Buy Renthals. Bar too narrow? I dunno about that one. I am 6'3 and a 750 feels mighty wide ot me, but everybody is different and I know there are some seriously sasquatch type people on here. But I mean, at what point do you end up with bars so wide your face is resting on your stem?
Anyways, not sure this standard is really needed. It reeks of another "what other marginal improvement can we put out there to sell more junk?" The industry is really good at those.
Having stiffness issues with your bar? Buy Renthals. Bar too narrow? I dunno about that one. I am 6'3 and a 750 feels mighty wide ot me, but everybody is different and I know there are some seriously sasquatch type people on here. But I mean, at what point do you end up with bars so wide your face is resting on your stem?
a slammed stem / bar makes only sense when you lower your stanchions in the crowns to achieve a slacker headangle. buckoW mentioned that somewhere on here (can't find the post, sorry), i tried and like it.
you actually raise your fork to slacken the HA out and then use a lower bar and/or stem to correct the ride height.
don't know if that makes any sense to anyone...
you actually raise your fork to slacken the HA out and then use a lower bar and/or stem to correct the ride height.
don't know if that makes any sense to anyone...
Me too. It feels great, and I'm not that big either, about 181cm (that's a little bit over 5' 11" for you Americans who want to have your own standards for measurements
).
I know, I agree with you. I was just in a Haters Gonna Hate kinda mood.
You can't say anything "makes sense" in terms of bar heights, angles, and so on. Whatever works for a rider works for a rider, no matter what stupid standards they are supposed to adhere to.
Case in point, Fabian Barel....
Case in point, Fabian Barel....
And you still have a stiffer and stronger bar then 31,8mm it would be cooler if those bars were 35" wide.
^^
And could be paired with a set of 35" DH rims.
And could be paired with a set of 35" DH rims.
Yeah agreed. Mozartt make riser plates for below the stem. PO1NT have some good height DMs. High rise bar options would be ideal but.
True but trivial, depends on headtube lengths, fork model. and who want a mile of flexier stanchion and high BB, when an angle set would do the same.a slammed stem / bar makes only sense when you lower your stanchions in the crowns to achieve a slacker headangle. buckoW mentioned that somewhere on here (can't find the post, sorry), i tried and like it.
you actually raise your fork to slacken the HA out and then use a lower bar and/or stem to correct the ride height.
don't know if that makes any sense to anyone...
My first thoughts are NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! But maybe it will be better in the form of lighter bars and stem. Flex can be built in by tapering bar closer to stem or before a bend.
Bottom line is probably Easton want to save on tooling and raw pipe if they have a 35mm MX bar range.
Will make carbon bars more reliable.
Last edited:
It wasn't that long ago that we moved to 31.8, and lots of people happily running that stuff now had the same negative comments at the time. We'll see if 35 takes off but it makes sense to me.
I do. Why? For starters, I have a 6'5" armspan. Secondly, I have a pretty serious shoulder injury that for whatever reason is more comfortable with wider bars. Wider = less shoulder pain = happier HAB.
A friend of mine has been playing a lot of stem designs and if you want a light stem you really need a 35mm standard. It's a marginal improvement but at this point all gear improvements will be. You will see a big change only after a series of them.
Oh bummer I thought the Havoc wheels would be available in a 35er diameter.
there's a very nerdy part of my brain that suspects this really only has something to do with tubing being easier to draw at larger diameters and achieving less variation in wall thickness. or something like that.
agreed X 10....renthal bar and stem combo is F'ing bonkers...i've never felt anything like that.....i nose cased and crashed so hard recently that i pushed one side of my boxxer upper crown about 3/4ths of an inch farther down than the other side, yet my bar remained straight and my stem didn't budge....that's unheard of....i've smoked bars and twisted up stems a bunch in the past....renthal is untouchable....it's idiotic to run anything else
Last edited:
Pictures?
I'm going to counterpoint you Ian. Mostly cause I agree with your post. I just got myself a set of Fatbars recently, and they're mega stiff. They just feel bombproof.
Except, I just can't seem to dial in the bend..... I have 31.8 Havocs on my trail bike, and couldn't be happier. Takes me minutes to dial in the roll if I make a change. The Renthal bars took me a while, and after the first ride I still wasn't happy. Stiff? No doubt. But going from bike-to-bike is going to bug me. I'm not the fastest or hardest rider out there, and for those reasons I guess I'm irritated more by the little things.
When the first news of this Easton bar standard came out, I bugged my rep. fairly consistently when they were going to be available. I just wanted a wider bar for my big bike, with the same Easton bend. He told me it was going to be a while, so I went with the Renthals. (My Integra stem is still in the mail.) Easton was keeping everyone in the dark on this, so surprise. Guess my Renthal stuff's going in the classifieds.
I don't like the backsweep on Renthal bars either. 7 degrees is too little.
I bought a Renthal bar thinking it had the regular 9 degree sweep as was said on ChainReactionCycles, should have checked the manufacturer site first.
I'm used to the small sweep now and I am going to keep the bar, but I would still prefer more sweep. I find it weird that many people seem to really like the Renthal's sweep, many reviews have stated that the sweep feels very good and was natural feeling straight from the beginning.
I bought a Renthal bar thinking it had the regular 9 degree sweep as was said on ChainReactionCycles, should have checked the manufacturer site first.
I'm used to the small sweep now and I am going to keep the bar, but I would still prefer more sweep. I find it weird that many people seem to really like the Renthal's sweep, many reviews have stated that the sweep feels very good and was natural feeling straight from the beginning.
I run the 800 Gravity Lite Wide on my 303. It keeps my shoulders from imploding after a full day of riding. But I also have pretty wide shoulders, and its hard to bring my arms in around my moobs.
The best part about this is the pinchbolt stem actually - way less problems with crushing thin-wall, large diameter tubes (especially carbon) compared to a standard vice-clamp stem. I'm usually the first one to sigh when a new standard is released, but this one doesn't force you to change anything at all except for the bar/stem, and it seems to be legitimately lighter/stronger/stiffer. I'd buy one.
strange you say that because it's one of my favorite parts of that bar....my hands just feel comfortable on them moreso than other offerings in terms up up and backsweep....i like the idea behind the 35mm interface, but i just hope they increase they offerings in height.....renthal offers 4 heights...pretty sick
ok, i'm so called out, i don't save pictures of all of the parts i destroy....i don't have time for that man, sorry....and i also think it's lame to post pics of busted products on the internet (especially with no frame of reference)
Anyone back up that "Taiwan is pushing it" statement?
35mm does seem to make more sense. Who pulled the diameter 31.8mm out of the bag anyway? Seems incredibly specific to have just been kicked out to the market.
As for bar widths the pro thing with smaller bars really hit me for being a shorter guy and running wide bars. I really really tried to run cut down bars but I just never got comfortable. I hypothesize it's because a) I'm not as strong as they are. b) Wide shoulders + tendency to run small sized frames c)Looks more badass.
OT: What's with the Renthal hype? I know there are softer/harder bars out there (ran soft syncros' and solid racefaces) but bar geometry is pretty standard these days and I don't see anything unique about the Renthal's. I guess that metallic beige is a pretty solid looking color though, probably be less stiff in normal black and even softer in white.
35mm does seem to make more sense. Who pulled the diameter 31.8mm out of the bag anyway? Seems incredibly specific to have just been kicked out to the market.
As for bar widths the pro thing with smaller bars really hit me for being a shorter guy and running wide bars. I really really tried to run cut down bars but I just never got comfortable. I hypothesize it's because a) I'm not as strong as they are. b) Wide shoulders + tendency to run small sized frames c)Looks more badass.
OT: What's with the Renthal hype? I know there are softer/harder bars out there (ran soft syncros' and solid racefaces) but bar geometry is pretty standard these days and I don't see anything unique about the Renthal's. I guess that metallic beige is a pretty solid looking color though, probably be less stiff in normal black and even softer in white.
Its 1 1/4 inches, it just always gets quoted in milimeters.