Easton Part 2: EC70 AX Handlebars
“Easton's new AX series line of bars meets the needs of the growing drop bar adventure and gravel segment. Building off the highly successful and critically acclaimed line of new MCD road bars and EA70 and EC70 AX bar utilizes the same top shape and reach as well as the ergonomic drop shape but turns up the drop flare from 4 degrees all the way up to 16 degrees. The wider stance in the drops provides more control on rough terrain and long gravel assaults. Why 16-degrees? Based on extensive testing and rider feedback we determined that 16 degrees was the perfect balance of maximum bar flare that still allowed for efficient access and usage of the shifters and brakes in both the hoods and drops.”
After spending recent years riding a limited number bar shapes (and an uncomfortable experiment with a pair of Salsa flared drops) I jumped into my Easton test (backstory here) without a pre-defined sense of what I’d like or dislike. I’ve definitely banged my wrists while sprinting in the drops on road bikes, but wasn’t expecting to do much of that on either of the bikes Easton bars would wind up on. I was preparing to build a pre-production carbon Brodie Romax (now available) and custom titanium T-Lab X3 (made in Montreal!) Both bikes would be for ‘gravel,’ the Romax with a double, the X3 a single ring. The Romax would serve as my ‘fast gravel’ bike, geared to cover a broad range of speeds, and set up with my ‘gravel body-position.’ In contrast, the X3 would be for the roughest riding I do on drop-bars, wouldn’t need such a broad range of gears, and would be set up with my ‘cyclocross body-position,’ 2cm higher and shorter. I opted for the 42cm EC70 bar, which is part of Easton’s ‘AX’ line of components.
Handlebars these days are a really personal choice, and there are so many variations on offer, I can’t imagine many of us could say which are ‘ideal’ for the different styles of riding we do. It would take too much space to get into the nuances of bar shapes for different disciplines, so I’ll focus here on how the EC70 AX bars worked for me for a couple fairly different gravel bike use cases.
RESULTS and INSIGHTS
Photo: Nico Joly
Initial impressions of the AX bars centred around attention to detail and quality of finish. Easton prints torque specs on the bars, and textures the clamp area with gritty material to help ensure they don’t rotate when torqued correctly. Their finish was free of any sort of defect, including the internal aspects of the bars I could see. Shimano Di2 wire ports on the drop aspect of the bars are clean, a nice touch for the electrified set.
My ‘baseline’ bars, which I’ve been happy with for road, cyclocross and gravel, are 3T’s Ergosum. Since the EC70 AXs approximated the Ergosum’s reach and drop, I wasn’t expecting any issues. Reach sits at 80mm, while drop is at 120mm., and I paired them with Easton’s workhorse EA70 stem in 120mm.
The bar’s flare is their point of distinction, at 16 degrees. This pushes their width 34mm on each side, equivalent to a ‘normal’ bar at about 49cm wide. There are much wider bars available (this is a good overview of the spectrum).
Given the geometry I was working with, I wound up tweaking my SRAM Force HRD levers to match the bar’s flare angle. This wasn’t a surprise, as I also angle the hoods in on my non-flared bars for an ergonomic fit. Paired with Easton’s EA70 stem, it was simple to use Silca’s Ti-Torque wrench to hit the required setting.
I had no issue taping the bars completely with Silca’s Nastro Fiore bar tape, which wouldn’t be true for some of the other popular sassy tapes, which often barely cover a normal 42cm bar.
Riding the bars on my carbon Brodie Romax for the first time was an altogether novel experience. The frame and fork were completely new to me, so it was difficult, if not impossible, to parse what I felt at the bars. The overwhelming sensation was ‘stiff,’ meaning, the bars conveyed very little discernible flex. How much of this sensation was coming from the bars themselves, versus the frame and fork? I couldn’t say, but I was happy to have the Silca tape installed, which absorbs a lot of vibration.
Photo: Chris Snow
Sticking with the physical feedback topic, running the bars on my titanium T-Lab X3 felt different. In contrast to the Brodie, the T-Lab is built for resilience and a lot of passive suspension. The Brodie, while quite light, is built on the robust side, using large diameter tubes in the front end to manage the torsional loads associated with bike-packing scenarios. My T-Lab has no such fittings, and is not intended for any bike-packing outside of running a handlebar bag, saddle bag, and perhaps a frame bag. I prefer the feel of the AX bars on the T-Lab, which probably means I’ve both adapted to them and they don’t feel as stiff on the more flexible frame.
I put a few questions about stiffness and Easton’s target feel for these bars to my contact at the company. His response was really insightful. Their EC70 components use a stiffer carbon layup than their EC90 components, which lends the latter more vibration damping, while producing the same durability. Given the significant flare of the AX bars, the stiffer layup makes sense; reefing on the bars generates a lot of torque.
On the shape front, I learned a lot by contrasting the bar’s use on two fairly different builds. I rode them over 100 hours while in Europe in July, at mostly moderate effort. I enjoyed the hood placement, and was comfortable in the drops on descents. I had little cause to ride the drops on the flats, with the exception of the leg I rode from Limone Piemonte to Genova, Italy; about 170km. As I rolled through the Po Valley, the wind saw me looking for an efficient position to pound out the miles, and the drops were not that. Given the significant extra width their flare creates (almost 7cm total), the drops put my arms too far apart to effectively cheat the wind, opening my chest like a sail. My alternative was to ride in ‘ghost aero’ position, which I have many hours experience doing, fortunately. However, while I’ve set up round road bars with extra padding for this position, my AXs lacked that adaptation, and their round shape didn’t and doesn’t lend itself particularly well to arm resting.
Once I was back in Ottawa in August, I rode the bike with ‘road tires’ (28s), versus my 650b x 48mm Rene Herse balloons, for a couple high intensity training outings, still recovering from the travel. In a local criterium I struggled with both fatigue and an incredibly un-aero position in the drops, and again found the same challenge when I partook in the DSR group ride on the weekend. There simply wasn’t anything I could do in the group context to get out of the wind enough to be efficient.
My Romax isn’t meant to be a road race bike, but the reality is that riders are looking for platforms that serve numerous functions well across the seasons. It’s certainly possible to race bikes like my Romax on the road by simply adapting wheels and tires, while one will have to make compromises in terms of body position when cutting between road, gravel variants, and cyclocross. Yes, one bike can do all these things rather well, but swapping stems often poses a risk to the integrity of components, so most will opt to pick their poison, and go with a position that works OK for at least both road and ‘normal’ gravel, then swap to a stem that ’s suitable for cyclocross and the more gravel+ end of the spectrum through fall, when rides tend to get shorter and shorter anyhow. In such a scenario - a jack-of-all-trades bike - the EC70 AX is not the most appropriate option from Easton. Instead, the EC70 Aero would be the way to go. This bar has a flat top section, perfect for cheating wind in more ways than one: as arm rests and presenting a smaller surface to the wind. It also features just a little flare, which will not create too much of an aero hit while using them in high intensity or long duration situations. This is all about personal priorities. Let me expand a little.
For a fast gravel bike, where the rider’s priority is efficient speed, I’d recommend the EC70 Aero bars over the AX. Width choice will depend, again, on priorities, and there are many variables and preferences to consider. For some, width choice will be as simple as matching what the body is already accustomed to. For me, that’s a 42cm bar for endurance road and cyclocross, while I like a 40cm bar feels perfect (and comfortable) for ‘fast road’.
Normally, the 42cm EC70 Aero would be the perfect choice for my Brodie, which I expected to use for gravel races and some massive all-road adventures in 2020. However, there are no races to do, and I wound up acquiring a 44cm Aero from Easton to test next. It’s been surprisingly great in this width, and I’ve confirmed it is indeed better suited to more aero-biased gravel riding than the AX. A detailed feature on the EC70 Aero bar will follow in this series, and I’ll dig further into the nuances of sizing there.
Photo: Ian Austen
Back to the EC70 AX. On my #dropgnar gravel bike, the T-Lab, I ride mostly on the hoods, and ghost aero isn’t in high demand. The drops are comfortable when I want them, which is actually not very often. But when I reach down, I want the drops to be comfy. If/when I have a dropper post on the T-Lab, I might find myself using this positoin more (because they won’t be so ‘low’ in relation to saddle position). If you’re running a dropper post, your drop position and geometry matters more than on a bike that is optimized for predominant hoods riding, as many gravel and most cyclocross bikes are.
In cyclocross races I virtually never use the drops, so the bar’s flare was essentially irrelevant. I see a small liability in specifying such a bar for dedicated cyclocross use - less side clearance, increased likelihood of tangling bars with other riders - so would advise riders to go with another option for this specific use-case. The Aero EC70 might actually have a strong case here, as it is the more compliant of the two. I expect to use my T-Lab as a pit bike and/or ‘mud bike’ more in the future, and I won’t care about the bars being flared unnecessarily.
BOTTOM LINE
If considering bars for a gravel bike that will see little, if any racing, or perhaps used more for ‘participation,’ clearance around handlebar bags, extra control in the drops, and a more MTB feel while in that position might be priorities; the EC70 AXs are a wonderful option. I’ve built complete trust in their strength, and am confident recommending them.
Given the AX flare is significant, one should carefully consider priorities. For example, if I were to have my Brodie Romax as my do-it-all bike, I’d spec a 40cm EC70 AX with a dropper post. This combo would allow me to achieve a good aero position on the hoods for extended pedaling in the wind, just enough room for my hands on the flats when running a handlebar bag, and room at the drops for a wider bag when required. I’d add padding to the flats for ghost aero. Most riders don’t ride in the ghost aero position; we must all consider our specific use-cases. The point is, one can get away with a ‘short’ position on an ‘all-rounder’ bike IF they can ride ghost aero from time to time.
With a narrow hood position, flared drops become more and more useful; the positions fall into ‘narrow’ and ‘wide’, versus ‘normal’ and ‘really wide’. And an option for riders who don’t need a flat platform for ghost aero, but do want to maximize comfort with a little flare, the EC90 SLX is an ideal option.
As I say, this is a personal preference, and many will prefer the control of the latter. But it’s fantastic to have what might be the best of both worlds by going narrow and wide at the same time; like chainrings! I believe this is the particular allure of the EC70 AX’s geometry, a win/win.
