When we started performing this Survey, in 1992, Scott and Profile were the two companies with the great bulk of the market. This had to do with Scott holding some patents and an agreement being reached between the two. But this was a bloody battle and most other handlebar makers were scared off after noting that Scott was willing to pay serious money to defend its intellectual property.

German company Syntace bought a license and started producing aerobars in the early 90s. It soon grabbed market share all over the world with its sturdy, ergonomic designs. Meanwhile, Scott decided to exit the manufacturing sector to simply collect royalties.

The lone interlopers were Italian maker 3T and American-based Visiontech, the latter of which did not recognize Scott's patents as valid because of "prior art" in the form of aerobars used by RAAM riders prior to the introduction in 1986 of the Scott DH bar. But Visiontech made an expensive, one-piece, non-adjustable bar. While it was quite popular among certain time trialers, and was even used by Lance Armstrong in early Tour de France victories, the Vision bar never caught on among Kona riders.

As the graph shows, Syntace reached a zenith in 1999, and its decline was commensurate with its lack of innovation -- it hadn't fundamentally changed its product in a decade. To this day Syntace uses designs that are functional and utilitarian but are not that different than its early 90s offerings.

Just after the turn of the decade Visiontech acquired new owners and a cash infusion to build new designs. Its new clip-ons and one-piece bars were instant hits.

Profile Design had changed hands a few years before, and early on the new ownership's attempts to make new product were uneven. In recent years the design team was quite successful, and continues to put out good products.

In particular, both Profile Design and Visiontech have wrestled from Syntace its stranglehold over the OEM market, that is, these two companies now spec the great majority of aerobars found on complete bikes sold new.

The other post-2000 phenomenon was the foray into the aerobar field by companies testing Scott's desire to challenge their patent (which was nearing its terminus). Cinelli and ITM joined its contemporary 3T (the latter was the third most popular aerobar in Kona from 1999 to 2002), but in recent years these three Italian brands have been overshadowed in Kona by the more inventive designs from Hed, Oval Concepts and Easton. On their heels are Blackwell and Zipp.

These companies that lead the field today -- Profile Design, Visiontech Hed, Oval Concepts, Easton, Zipp and Blackwell -- share one thing in common that is singular in the bicycling industry: they are all American companies or, if not, derive their product design and engineering from Americans managing those companies. This certainly has to do with America's position as the clear leader in aerobar sales worldwide.

This American attention to design and engineering is probably less a result of initiative and more attached to that continent's market demands. A look at the changes in aerobar use just over this decade demonstrates the sophistication that has elbowed its way into Kona's bike corral. As late as 1999 almost half the riders in Kona mounted their aerobars onto road race drop bars. That is now rarely seen. In 2006 (if one excludes Syntace on the assumption that its tally in Kona primarily represents older bars on older bikes), consider the remaining largest players: Profile, Vision, Oval, Easton and Hed. Not only are these aerobars almost never mounted on road bars (they are mounted instead on pursuit bars), in Kona the more exotic one-piece variety is chosen in three out of four cases. For these brands, they choose carbon over aluminum in four out of five cases.

What portends for the future? Certainly users will more often choose carbon over aluminum, parroting that same trend in bike frames. Functionally, one hopes for a further attachment of riders to the idea of front-end systems: full aerobars, pursuit bars, plug-in brake levers, bar-end shifters, all following the tri bike geometry; and road bars, STI-style shifters and hoods, and "shorty" clip-ons following road bike geometries.

There are probably innovations in full aerobar styles yet to be seen on today's bikes. While there are plenty of carbon monocoque bike frames exhibiting highly advanced aerodynamic properties, one sees very few stylistic parallels among aerobars. What would be the aerobar analog to the high-end tri/TT frames made by Cervelo, Look, Time, Felt, Cheetah and BMC?