10mm Stem?

The Northern Monkey

WTF!

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/news/artic ... ail_uid=57

ricardo_smooth

latest fad imo..... or for people who bought a bike that's too big for them!

lawman

i think its a cool idea tbh, will be interesting to see how it rides, shame its a mondraker though, that humped toptube is fugly as hell!!

The Northern Monkey

Its gotta be twitchy as foooook on climbs though!

campbellrae1

Will be interested to ride one and see how it feels in the real world, think it would freak me out at the start though! A bit like riding a lefty for the first time.

MountainMonster

From what I read, they have countered the shortness of the stem with longer tubes to be able to still climb well. I want to try one, and that bike looks so lovely.

dhobiwallah

Latest fad - or natural development?

When changing the fork on my mid-90s bike I had to change the stem due to a 1" steerer on the original. I couldn't believe how long it was (130/140mm :shock: ?). This was a world cup bike in its day (Proflex). And even with my limited experience and knowledge of angles and the like- even with the new fork/cockpit setup it handles so differently (scarily) to my newer bikes on anything other than tame cross country.

Back in the day a 'mountain bike' was a 'mountain bike' and that was it. Now we have DH/AM/Freeride/Trials/4x/XC etc etc. While some of these are in the same gene pool try and ride a xc course on a full DH rig.

It may be another evolution on gravity based rigs - or Darwinism may see it die out. (or is it intelligent design? :P )

lawman

the one downside i can see to this, purely from looking at it, is that the extra 60mm tube length will weigh more than adding 60mm to the stem, its gotta be verging on half a pound or so, circa. 150-250g... i think that the design in principle is a good idea though, it makes sense, but i think that somewhere in between, say a 25mm longer toptube and a 30-40mm stem, coupled with say a 66 degree headangle would be sweet... i sure as hell would mind having a similar version being applied to other bikes, although stuff like the yeti sb66 are taking geometry to newer, longer and slacker setups. geometry is complicated though, but i think that bikes are gonna carrying getting more progressive in geometry terms, even in xc race applications, but for sure in trail/am terms its gotta be the way forward imo

another i thought of t'other day regarding geometry, why aren't more manufacturers fitting 170mm crank arms to trail bikes, thus being able to lower the bb even further? seems like a simple idea that no one is doing, lighter, stiffer cranks, same ground clearance, negligible difference in power delivery (for once i'm fairly sure you could test this and the average rider wouldn't notice). on the whole i think we could be getting more radical setups in the next year or so, and sensible "why didnt i think of that before" stuff

dhobiwallah

lawman wrote:

another i thought of t'other day regarding geometry, why aren't more manufacturers fitting 170mm crank arms to trail bikes,
......
on the whole i think we could be getting more radical setups in the next year or so, and sensible "why didnt i think of that before" stuff

I've never been though of as 'radical' before - 'short' maybe, but never radical

lawman

radical changes overall i meant maybe not revolution, but certainly an evolution of whats currently on offer, the thing is, in terms of radically slack geometry in terms of trail bikes, i can think of very few, devinchi dixon, last herb am, whyte 146, santa cruz blur TRc... the rest i would consider contemporary, but in no way radical, the way i see it is that some 140/150mm bikes are getting the geometry of their longer travel 160/170mm counterparts, which imo is a good thing, as has been said before in another topic, it is all down to personal taste, but i for one would love to see all these ideas implemented on a light carbon frame, circa. 5 or so lbs, and components to match, 1 x 10 with a chain guide and shadow plus or whatever sram come up with, iscg tabs, dropper post, wide bars, and decent light weight, tubeless ready tyres that actually grip pretty well, love my nobby nics i have now, but why oh why they only do them in their super hard compound i still can't get my head round, but thats another argument for another day

the technology for all this is there, whyte came close with the 146, it was let down slightly by it flex, but other than that i'm struggling to find a bike that meets this criteria, as brilliant as my HD is (yep there i said it again ) it lacks the finer points to really stand out above the rest...

tom_howard

Didn't azonic make a 0mm stem once upon a time? Like 10 or 13 years ago?

The Northern Monkey

cooldad

Is the rest of that as horrible?

MountainMonster

Considering those are fixie bars, I would assume so.

Dirtydog11

Long toptube short stem has been done before, it looks like Mondrakers take on Gary Fishers Genesis geometry.

leaflite

The problem I can see with this is that height adjustment of the bars/stem appears to be very limited- atm most people run 1 or 2 spacers above the stem so they can play around with various heights etc. With the mondraker setup, it appears that to adjust height you have to chop the steerer down, and then obviously if you change your mind again its new fork time.:roll:

supersonic

Yep, has been 0mm stems before, and I am sure have seen 10 and 20mm too. This is nothing new at all.

tom_howard

*runs off to patent the 'negative reach' stem*

No, of course it isn't a regular stem fitted backwards.... Shame on you for thinking that!