Ritchey ProLite WCS bars
- Thread starter Anthony
- Start date
SeeingisBelievingGTMuseum
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
The first set I put on a bike was removed three years later when I discovered long cracks inside the bar running about four inches out from the stem clamp area on both sides. I was running with barends at the time and feel these cracks were caused by twisting and flex when pulling on the barends during climbing. They were not visible on the outside of the bar surface. Since then I have removed my grips a couple times a year and always checked the inside of my bars regardless of brand, material and weight. I still run a bar of WCS ProLites on one of my bikes. Have always liked them.
SeeingisBelievingGTMuseum
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
Scrat":2dg2nfig said:
I don't think they are. From what I remember of past days in Taiwan...they were produced by a company named Alico that made lots of handlebars and stems to their customers spec.
SeeingisBelievingGTMuseum
Old School Grand Master
- Feedback
- View
To quote the good fellows at the Bikepro site read on. What year this was actually written and what year did this holds true for one can only guess:
"The Ritchey/Easton project also yields the ProLite WCS bar, made of EA70 butted aluminum alloy, (the EA70 alloy is discussed in the Answer Hyperlite review), which seems to be the lightest aluminum only bar yet made. The ProLite WCS is understood by many to be the same handlebar as the Answer HyperLite with a different degree of bend, and a different surface treatment. The ProLite WCS surface has a brushed finish that leaves fine patterned lines running the length (longitudinally) of the tubing. The Ritchey WCS bar at just 123 grams weighs less than the HyperLite, though it is likely drawn from the same bar blank. This weight savings is achieved through a slight of hand. The Answer bar is 23" (584mm) long, while the Ritchey bar is just 22 1/8" (560mm). With a slight amount of the tubing length missing from each end, the weight is marginally less. We cut a Prolite WCS in half lengthwise to make some wall thickness measurements. The forward wall of the bulge area is 1.66mm thick, the rear wall of the bulge is 1.59mm thick. At the bend, the forward wall thickness has reduced to 1.26mm, while the rear wall is 1.31mm thick. Over the remaining 7 1/4" (185mm) the wall thickness reduces to .86mm in both the front and rear walls. (The cut bar is on display in our retail store.) The bar diameter is 7/8" (22.2mm) at the ends, where the tubing is .8mm thick. and 1" (25.4mm) at the un-knurled bulge in the center. This ATB flat bar is made in a 4 degree or 6 degree bend, and anodized to a pale Gold (Platinum) color. Made in USA. "
Weight Weenies shows the Prolite at 557mm and 127 grams and the Answer Hyperlight ar 580mm and 144 grams.
"The Ritchey/Easton project also yields the ProLite WCS bar, made of EA70 butted aluminum alloy, (the EA70 alloy is discussed in the Answer Hyperlite review), which seems to be the lightest aluminum only bar yet made. The ProLite WCS is understood by many to be the same handlebar as the Answer HyperLite with a different degree of bend, and a different surface treatment. The ProLite WCS surface has a brushed finish that leaves fine patterned lines running the length (longitudinally) of the tubing. The Ritchey WCS bar at just 123 grams weighs less than the HyperLite, though it is likely drawn from the same bar blank. This weight savings is achieved through a slight of hand. The Answer bar is 23" (584mm) long, while the Ritchey bar is just 22 1/8" (560mm). With a slight amount of the tubing length missing from each end, the weight is marginally less. We cut a Prolite WCS in half lengthwise to make some wall thickness measurements. The forward wall of the bulge area is 1.66mm thick, the rear wall of the bulge is 1.59mm thick. At the bend, the forward wall thickness has reduced to 1.26mm, while the rear wall is 1.31mm thick. Over the remaining 7 1/4" (185mm) the wall thickness reduces to .86mm in both the front and rear walls. (The cut bar is on display in our retail store.) The bar diameter is 7/8" (22.2mm) at the ends, where the tubing is .8mm thick. and 1" (25.4mm) at the un-knurled bulge in the center. This ATB flat bar is made in a 4 degree or 6 degree bend, and anodized to a pale Gold (Platinum) color. Made in USA. "
Weight Weenies shows the Prolite at 557mm and 127 grams and the Answer Hyperlight ar 580mm and 144 grams.
Thanks for that GM. As far as I'm aware EA70 is exactly the same as AL7075, but just Easton's product - i.e., it derives its premium value from the credibility of the Easton brand name, rather than any different physical characteristics.
I find it interesting that everybody here seems to have found the Ritchey ProLite bar strong enough and yet most maufacturers specify a slightly thicker tube, or even a much thicker tube. Presumably the market is more open to the 'overbuilt' principle than to the 'scarey-light' principle. I believe the version with the highest value is the Syncros EA70, which is pesumably more towards the over-built end of the spectrum?
I find it interesting that everybody here seems to have found the Ritchey ProLite bar strong enough and yet most maufacturers specify a slightly thicker tube, or even a much thicker tube. Presumably the market is more open to the 'overbuilt' principle than to the 'scarey-light' principle. I believe the version with the highest value is the Syncros EA70, which is pesumably more towards the over-built end of the spectrum?
- Feedback
- View
Anthony":2hklelij said:
Physical Charascteristic are different,
http://www.eastonbike.com/downloadable_ ... Alloys.pdf
Hmmm, they would say that. I think there may be a little of 'Daz washes whiter than Omo' in there.FluffyChicken":1f63afj6 said:
I was reading recently that Easton has been in some difficulty in the last few years because fewer and fewer manufacturers are specifying Easton for frames, owing to the high quality of so-called generic alternatives. e.g., neither Kona nor Rocky Mountain now offers a frame in Easton, and both use their own-branded generic aluminium and scandium instead.
My understanding was that this was because aluminium and scandium technology is such that there is really only one way of making it, and it was suggested that the era when a brand like Easton could give added value was almost over. Not that they've given up though.
- Feedback
- View
Fully agree they would say that and I doubt there is much to stop others producing something very similar over the 7075, just thought I post it for reading though, they must have some evidence and research for it. You know the 'researched on 57 individuals and 88% thought they saw a difference'
Probably why they've moved to nanoparticles in the Alu Alloy now
Probably why they've moved to nanoparticles in the Alu Alloy now
