Please explain long stems??

[Bonus]

I have a longer stem because it works for me.

 

I must be in between bike sizes for my height or something, because putting on a longer stem, whilst leaving saddle height and position, crank length and handle bar width alone, changed my position from uncomfortable to comfortable.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

I'll say it again - different styles of riding (and diff bikes) have different categories when it comes to "long stems"

 

DH - anything other than a direct mount stem

FR - anything over 50mm

AM - anything over 65mm

Trail - anything over 75mm

XC - anything over 80mm

 

This is purely due to the different areas of concern - DH handling is vital, pedalling efficiency less so (they stomp pedals like nobody's business when they hit a pedal section) whereas XC is low, streamlined and pedal centric.

 

 

I think where people are getting confused wrt the whole long vs short stem debate is that the different categories have vastly different focus points and setups. XC more towards climbing and all out efforts, AM more to descending after a climb and DH to descending only. That has a huge effect on which length of stem should be on your bike, or, rather, the range of stem that you should be looking at when building / fitting your bike.

 

People should rather concentrate on the frame sizing & stem length range instead of just the stem length when finding a bike size, and then use the stem as a fine-tuning accessory rather than a "I have a reach of 700mm so an ETT of 600mm will be fine with a 100mm stem" Rather look at the type of bike it is, then the range of the stem that should be used for that bike and then the frame size (ETT length) should be the resulting number. But, in this - frame style is the prevailing factor in determining stem length.

 

If, however, you know that your reach (in my case) is 645 - 650mm - My Large frame has a 610mm ETT. My existing 35mm stem fits perfectly, and is not more than the recommended maximum for the type of bike that it is.

 

If I had bought a medium, at 588mm, my stem length for the bike would have been 57-62mm (60mm for rounding up sake) which, while still within the acceptable max for a stem on an AM / FR bike, is on the top end of the scale, and would put my weight far more forward, thereby compromising the handling on the way down. On the way up, it would have been fine as I would have been over the front and low etc, but as soon as I point down, my hands would be an additional 25mm in front of the head tube, which means more twitchy handling and more of a possibility of going OTB on a bad section.

 

But - as I said earlier as well - anyone who puts a 150mm stem on their bike is just stoopid. In the MTB world, at least.

Edited January 1, 2013 by cptmayhem

[david16v]

I'll say it again - different styles of riding (and diff bikes) have different categories when it comes to "long stems"

 

DH - anything other than a direct mount stem

FR - anything over 50mm

AM - anything over 65mm

Trail - anything over 75mm

XC - anything over 80mm

 

This is purely due to the different areas of concern - DH handling is vital, pedalling efficiency less so (they stomp pedals like nobody's business when they hit a pedal section) whereas XC is low, streamlined and pedal centric.

 

 

I think where people are getting confused wrt the whole long vs short stem debate is that the different categories have vastly different focus points and setups. XC more towards climbing and all out efforts, AM more to descending after a climb and DH to descending only. That has a huge effect on which length of stem should be on your bike, or, rather, the range of stem that you should be looking at when building / fitting your bike.

 

People should rather concentrate on the frame sizing & stem length range instead of just the stem length when finding a bike size, and then use the stem as a fine-tuning accessory rather than a "I have a reach of 700mm so an ETT of 600mm will be fine with a 100mm stem" Rather look at the type of bike it is, then the range of the stem that should be used for that bike and then the frame size (ETT length) should be the resulting number. But, in this - frame style is the prevailing factor in determining stem length.

 

If, however, you know that your reach (in my case) is 645 - 650mm - My Large frame has a 610mm ETT. My existing 35mm stem fits perfectly, and is not more than the recommended maximum for the type of bike that it is.

 

If I had bought a medium, at 588mm, my stem length for the bike would have been 57-62mm (60mm for rounding up sake) which, while still within the acceptable max for a stem on an AM / FR bike, is on the top end of the scale, and would put my weight far more forward, thereby compromising the handling on the way down. On the way up, it would have been fine as I would have been over the front and low etc, but as soon as I point down, my hands would be an additional 25mm in front of the head tube, which means more twitchy handling and more of a possibility of going OTB on a bad section.

 

But - as I said earlier as well - anyone who puts a 150mm stem on their bike is just stoopid. In the MTB world, at least.

 

You sound like the pro, maybe you should be giving the pro's advice!

What you forgot to mention is setback, which will shift the weight more towards the centre, but again, you will realise once you have been for the correct setup. (For your specific riding style)

 

I laugh at all the folks above stating they installed a slightly longer stem and now feels more comfortable, it's not that simple as it all depends how flexible/nimble you are as to how the bike is setup. A certain rider might have short legs and long arms or visa versa and will then require different length crank arms.

It's a proven fact that one should choose the 'smaller' frame as its more nimble and handles better, a bike with a 35mm stem must look soooo stupid!

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

You sound like the pro, maybe you should be giving the pro's advice!

What you forgot to mention is setback, which will shift the weight more towards the centre, but again, you will realise once you have been for the correct setup. (For your specific riding style)

 

I laugh at all the folks above stating they installed a slightly longer stem and now feels more comfortable, it's not that simple as it all depends how flexible/nimble you are as to how the bike is setup. A certain rider might have short legs and long arms or visa versa and will then require different length crank arms.

It's a proven fact that one should choose the 'smaller' frame as its more nimble and handles better, a bike with a 35mm stem must look soooo stupid!

 

Yeah, because this looks soooooo stupid..

 

EDIT: BTW - the saddle was dropped for the way down.

 

Edited January 1, 2013 by cptmayhem

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

You sound like the pro, maybe you should be giving the pro's advice!

What you forgot to mention is setback, which will shift the weight more towards the centre, but again, you will realise once you have been for the correct setup. (For your specific riding style)

 

 

Yeah, you're right. Although it could be argued that if you're putting a setback seatpost, you're riding the wrong size bike as well.

 

And as for flickability and handling - if the smaller frame forces a longer stem, that will do more to affect handling than the bigger frame will. Just think of putting a big stem onto a BMX / DJ bike in order to give it the "right fit" according to XC standards. Handling would be greatly compromised.

 

Oh - and quit it with the condescending ****. You're falling back into your old habits again, D16

Edited January 1, 2013 by cptmayhem

[david16v]

 

 

Yeah, you're right. Although it could be argued that if you're putting a setback seatpost, you're riding the wrong size bike as well.

 

And as for flickability and handling - if the smaller frame forces a longer stem, that will do more to affect handling than the bigger frame will. Just think of putting a big stem onto a BMX / DJ bike in order to give it the "right fit" according to XC standards. Handling would be greatly compromised.

 

Oh - and quit it with the condescending ****. You're falling back into your old habits again, D16

 

(Shaking of head)

Same ol same ol 'pro's of the hub'.

[patches]

You sound like the pro, maybe you should be giving the pro's advice!

What you forgot to mention is setback, which will shift the weight more towards the centre, but again, you will realise once you have been for the correct setup. (For your specific riding style)

 

I laugh at all the folks above stating they installed a slightly longer stem and now feels more comfortable, it's not that simple as it all depends how flexible/nimble you are as to how the bike is setup. A certain rider might have short legs and long arms or visa versa and will then require different length crank arms.

It's a proven fact that one should choose the 'smaller' frame as its more nimble and handles better, a bike with a 35mm stem must look soooo stupid!

 

Exactly! It's discipline dependant as has been mentioned before!

 

So where exactly in SA would a Dirt Jumper, Free Rider, Downhiller or even All Mountain rider go to get a "proper bike setup" (which you obviously believe in so zealously)?

 

Or would you say that perhaps that when it comes to those disciplines, handling comes first, then comfort (as one is not spending hours and hours in the saddle riding district roads)?

 

As for the really short stems... yes, they would look stupid... on an XC bike. Likewise, longer stems look stupid on anything with more travel (as can be seen below, 85mm vs 50mm)

 

 

 

So once again, the term "mountain bike" has been thought of as only describing XC bikes. Here in SA these "proper bike fitters" only really cater for XC, road, and maybe trail riders... and remember... not everyone rides XC or road bikes.

[DubbelBuys]

@ cptmayhem:

 

I'm running a 90mm stem on my medium Shova & tried a 70mm but felt a bit cramped up.

 

Am I correct in stating than I should ride a large & a 50mm - 60mm stem on there to have better fit & handling (on the fun parts)?

 

Not doing AM or FR. Trail mostly

[Iwan Kemp]

(Shaking of head)

Same ol same ol 'pro's of the hub'.

Give us your set up experience, qualifications and background.

 

@ cptmayhem:

 

I'm running a 90mm stem on my medium Shova & tried a 70mm but felt a bit cramped up.

 

Am I correct in stating than I should ride a large & a 50mm - 60mm stem on there to have better fit & handling (on the fun parts)?

 

Not doing AM or FR. Trail mostly

I am 179cm wit a 84cm inseam and have ridden a Large and Med Shova back to back to figure this one out for myself. Setting both up exactly the same (bar, spacers, fork, tyres) with only running longer / shorter stem to give me the exact same effective reach on both.

 

First let me say if you've been riding mtb's running a long stem ( I was taught 90 - 110mm on a Med bike) with fairly narrow bars it does take some getting used to. But boy oh boy, get up to speed and it's like you've discovered single track in Narnia! In the end I settled on a Large with a 50mm stem, 720mm riser bars.

 

Control over the bike was much improved. Did suffer the odd wandering front wheel when doing super steep short technical climbs, but nothing that working on my technique could not conquer. I now only Large bikes with shorter (what is "shorter" anyway?!) stems and couldn't be happier.

[Iwan Kemp]

Exactly! It's discipline dependant as has been mentioned before!

 

So where exactly in SA would a Dirt Jumper, Free Rider, Downhiller or even All Mountain rider go to get a "proper bike setup" (which you obviously believe in so zealously)?

 

Or would you say that perhaps that when it comes to those disciplines, handling comes first, then comfort (as one is not spending hours and hours in the saddle riding district roads)?

 

As for the really short stems... yes, they would look stupid... on an XC bike. Likewise, longer stems look stupid on anything with more travel (as can be seen below, 85mm vs 50mm)

 

So once again, the term "mountain bike" has been thought of as only describing XC bikes. Here in SA these "proper bike fitters" only really cater for XC, road, and maybe trail riders... and remember... not everyone rides XC or road bikes.

And even then we have to realize that bike set up as we know it comes what was carried from road bikes in the first place. Mountain bikes are a much younger breed than road bikes so we still have a lot to learn. And as you say set up caters for ONE discipline only - XC Racing. And it just happens that that ONE discipline is at the most extreme end of the scale. For EVERYTHING else it doesn't really carry over that well as all other riding can do with a set up that aids handling, steering control and the likes.

[Iwan Kemp]

Honest question: If you're still set up to have the same reach, set up was done for you and your body's requirements and you are comfortable, what would you lose by going longer TT and shorter stem combo and what would you gain?

 

In other words, what would the argument be for NOT going shorter stem, longer TT?

[DubbelBuys]

Give us your set up experience, qualifications and background.

 

 

I am 179cm wit a 84cm inseam and have ridden a Large and Med Shova back to back to figure this one out for myself. Setting both up exactly the same (bar, spacers, fork, tyres) with only running longer / shorter stem to give me the exact same effective reach on both.

 

First let me say if you've been riding mtb's running a long stem ( I was taught 90 - 110mm on a Med bike) with fairly narrow bars it does take some getting used to. But boy oh boy, get up to speed and it's like you've discovered single track in Narnia! In the end I settled on a Large with a 50mm stem, 720mm riser bars.

 

Control over the bike was much improved. Did suffer the odd wandering front wheel when doing super steep short technical climbs, but nothing that working on my technique could not conquer. I now only Large bikes with shorter (what is "shorter" anyway?!) stems and couldn't be happier.

 

Thanx for sharing Crow!

 

That's exactly what I thought. Longer stem isn't the way to go, rather longer TT with shorter stem.

 

I'm 1,78m & standover is also around 84cm (if memory serves my well)

 

How does the standover height on the M & L shovas compare?

 

I believe it's mainly the top section of the seat tube that's longer, not so much a higher point of connection of the TT to seat tube. In other words the TT angle is very similar on the large & mediums which in turn makes for very similar standover, right?

[Bigfish]

Tell Bradley Wiggins his bike handles like a "drunk Donkey"

[Iwan Kemp]

Thanx for sharing Crow!

Pleasure!

 

How does the standover height on the M & L shovas compare?

Can't remeber the exact measurement, but I didn't notice any difference.

 

I believe it's mainly the top section of the seat tube that's longer, not so much a higher point of connection of the TT to seat tube. In other words the TT angle is very similar on the large & mediums which in turn makes for very similar standover, right?

Spot on!

 

Let me add this on "flickability". First you need to be doing dirt, or BMX or FR to really need a flick-able bike. For most of us a bike's that's stable at speed is of much better use and you get that with a longer wheelbase. Not too long though as at some point it will start having a negative effect. From experience: When I bought a Mbuzi I went with a Med to get a nimbler more flick-able bike. What a HUGE mistake. To get the bike to handle like I wanted to I was running a 50mm stem. I was chopping my ass off trying to pedal that thing to the top of anywhere. It was just too cramped and uncomfortable. Going with a longer stem wasn't an option at all as that would sacrifice too much of everything else. The fact that I was riding a smaller more "flick-able" frame also went out the window cause I couldn't get comfortable. So...I sold it. And, like I've said I am now riding a Large frame. And to add more confusion, if however I went with one of the other two on my shortlist, Yeti SB-66 or Whyte 146 I would've gone for a Medium. You see, most manufacturers have learned this and are in process of "up-sizing" their trail and AM bikes. So their Med TT length is comparable to an Ibis' Large.

 

So I won't go around saying I ride a Large bike, I say I ride a 600mm - 615mm TT.

[ramsew]

To add to what Crow said, Jeroen's set-up is catering to the XC race crowd, where total power output is reliant on a particular position on a bike, and he doesn't really worry about things like handling and control - more on the FIT side of things.

 

What we are talking about here is predominately HANDLING and the impact a longer stem has on the bike's characteristics. If you are riding jeeptrack, then the stem length & bar width shouldn't make that much of a difference and you CAN get away with a 100 - 150mm stem (dunno why you'd want to though) but as soon as things get more interesting, a long stem becomes a very dangerous thing to have on your bike.

 

Ok, I just had an Ergo fit with Jeroen Swart, who prescribed a stem length of 95. after a couple of rides I knew this was wrong for my style of riding and quickly replaced the 95 with 60 (740mm bars) - what a differrence! my riding is faster, more fluid, plus I can now transfer my weight around the bike easier to compensate for the short stem when climbing and sit over the back wheel when descending or riding roots etc

 

now I'm not criticising Jeroen as he is definitely a very smart oke, who knows what he's doing and who can defs ride a bit (check his stats on Strava!), however, I think one has to sometimes think beyond the formulas and just feel the ride.

 

here are my Ergofit parameters:

 

 

Frame Sizing :

Effective top tube length : 58.5

Parameters :

Seat height : 74.3

Saddle setback : 6.2

Reach A : 68.6

Reach B : 49.02

Drop : 3.1

Crank length : 175

Stem length : 95

Edited January 2, 2013 by ramsew

[Witkop]

Tell Bradley Wiggins his bike handles like a "drunk Donkey"

 

some thinking on the whole stem thing. A shorter stem will make the steering a bit more direct, which is good on bmx, DH and riding over obstacles where things go ugly fast. However, when you are traveling at 40km/hr in a peleton a bit of flow and predictability may be required, no one wants a jittery bike. So it makes sense that long stems will be more prevelant on bikes that go fast in straight lines (with totally insufficient braking systems) and short stems on bikes that navigate over rocks and tight turns. Mtb XC may be the twilight zone in this thesis, where you have the go fast in straight lines interspersed with rocky sections.

 

The second thing is that a longer stem pulls the centre of gravity (CoG) forward on the bike, which may be great (or even irrelevant on a road bike) but can have interesting effects on a Mtb bike. (May improve climbing and cornering and mess up decending).

 

Despite these musings the best is to decide for yourself. May cyclists have a collection of stems and start the season with short stems and as their flexibility improves lengthen the stem and drop the handle bars. I read in Lopez's book on Mtb skills that you need to shorten the stem as you raise the handle bars. This may also explain why cyclists with very aero positions have long stems.