Stem Length .....?

zak3737

I know that a shorter stem is likely to sharpen the steering etc, and make things a little 'twitchier', but in reality, is changing from a 110mm to say a 90mm likely to make a noticeable difference ?

Thx

styxd

I'd suggest either a frame that fits you better, or refining your position on the bike.

diamonddog

I fitted a longer stem to one of my bikes and it didn't feel as 'twitchy' so IME I would say yes a shorter one would have the opposite effect.

fudgey

I thought about changing my stem for a shorter one as i felt quite stretched on my colnago.
Then noticed one day on a good climb that if i did i would smash my knees on the bars if i did as they were brushing already.
So i adapted my position, and rotated the bars slightly towards me.
This seems to have worked pretty well now for me.

Bobbinogs

I found that handling gets twitchy at ~80mm but it is very dependent on a number of factors, such as wheelbase, etc. 90mm should be fine though. Get a cheapo stem off ebay to try for size before splashing any big cash (you can always relist to recoup any outlay). In fact, no real need to spend more than £40 on a stem anyway, for mere mortals.

darkhairedlord

it depends on the bars, the forks and the steering angle. Only one way to find out for sure and that is to pop a 90mm stem on it and try it out.

madasahattersley

There's only one rule of stem length, and that is that it's directly proportional to what you're hiding down below.

Always been a 58cm + 140mm man myself but thinking of taking the step down to 56 so I can whack a 160 on there and make all the ladies faint as I ride past (albiet at the expense of vast amounts of comfort and handling stability, but let's not talk about that).

Don't go for the 90, drop a frame size or 3, add inches to your stem and be not embarrassed by thy frontward pointing rod.

Dippydog3

Dropping a frame size is not a cheap option.

I have 90mm stems on all my bikes.

So far I have not twitched!

zak3737

Dropping a Frame size certainly aint a cheap option !

Sounds like a 'suck it and see' scenario.......*shuffles off to the Bay to seek*

madasahattersley

(btw, not srs)

Max P

madasahattersley wrote:

There's only one rule of stem length, and that is that it's directly proportional to what you're hiding down below.

Always been a 58cm + 140mm man myself but thinking of taking the step down to 56 so I can whack a 160 on there and make all the ladies faint as I ride past (albiet at the expense of vast amounts of comfort and handling stability, but let's not talk about that).

Don't go for the 90, drop a frame size or 3, add inches to your stem and be not embarrassed by thy frontward pointing rod.

Eh? Nothing wrong with a 90mm stem. I'm just under 5ft 9" and use a 90mm Deda (actually measures 95mm) and set up is perfect on both my 52cm (54ish top tube) fixed and geared road bikes.

Just by going to a shorter stem you won't find yourself wildly careening off bends or losing control - so many of these myths get repeated over and over.

All depends how stretched/flexible you want to be or what suits you - none of this stuff is set in stone or determined by some 'perfect' idea of a one size-formula fits all bike-fit.

ai_1

Fudgey wrote:

I thought about changing my stem for a shorter one as i felt quite stretched on my colnago.
Then noticed one day on a good climb that if i did i would smash my knees on the bars if i did as they were brushing already.
So i adapted my position, and rotated the bars slightly towards me.
This seems to have worked pretty well now for me.

Changing the reach of the bars has the same effect as changing the length of the stem when you're on the hoods or drops but the tops obviously stay where they are.
There's a little more work involved in switching bars than stems but it's still relatively simple job and need not cost much.

I presume you're out of the saddle when your knees are close to hitting the tops? If so, it doesn't necessarily mean a shorter stem would spell disaster. The position of the bars largely dictates your position out of the saddle. A shorter stem may well move your knees back as much as it does the tops do that you don't actually have the predicted knee smashing problem.

debeli

If it feels right, 90mm is fine. Likewise 110mm. If it feels right, you'll know.

I have a box full of road stems from when my children were working their way up through frame sizes. We had (and they all used at various times) 43cm, 48cm, 52cm and 54cm frames. As they stepped up to the next size, I used to muck about with stem, bar angle and seat post to get something like a fit.

To an extent, a road bike is twitchier on a 50mm stem than on a 100mm, but it's all relative. Road bikes can be twitchy anyway; some would say they should be. Perhaps not on a fast descent....

The recent obsession with stem length (fnarr...) is a function (in the mass market at least) of the sad demise of the quill stem. It's almost one of those 'first world problems'.

Everyone has their favourite method of getting it right. I use the plum line from the patella to get the saddle position and then set the stem length by finding the bar position that makes the bars obscure the front hub when I'm on the hoods. If that means a 90mm stem, just do it. If you wobble, ride through it.

MichaelW

styxd wrote:

I'd suggest either a frame that fits you better, or refining your position on the bike.

You change stem length to refine your position on the bike. If you have a short upper/long lower body, then short stems are the obvious solution.
In my experience, for a medium sized frame, +-2cm of stem length makes almost no difference to handling.
Smaller frames look better with proportionately smaller stems and 6cm seems OK on the smallest size.

bernithebiker

Long stems are cool.

Big negative angles even cooler….

Paul 8v

http://www.geocities.ws/clary_mtb_info/

Just out of interest, this is quite a useful tool I found for changes in stem length and angle

jonomc4

I have used the same bike with a 120mm stem and a 80mm stem - there is feck all difference after the first mile - your brain can more than accommodate the difference with ease.

Pituophis

I used a very short stem (70mm) as a newbie as my original cheapo frame was too big. Without giving it any thought, I swapped it onto my new, correctly sized frame along with all the other components and rode that set up for 12 months.
After a proper bike fit, the fitter pointed out that I should add 20mm to the stem.
While the new set up was more comfortable, the effect on steering to me was completely none existent.

team47b

jonomc4 wrote:

I have used the same bike with a 120mm stem and a 80mm stem - there is feck all difference after the first mile - your brain can more than accommodate the difference with ease.

I agree, I have a 120 and a 60 and after 1.609344 Kms you're brain adjusts your arms reaction

fat_cat

When I bought my current bike I was advised to go for a larger frame with a 90 mm stem rather than a size down with a longer stem. The guy in my LBS did call me lanky, and I do have long legs for my height, so I guess it depends on how you're put together as we're all different. If in doubt ask someone you trust at your LBS.

gbs

I changed from 110/120mm on 3 bikes to 80mm. After 5 mins or so on each bike I felt "at home".

Matthewfalle

I always ride 57 cm frame, 110 mm stem (done so for 10 years or more). 4 bikes use this combo.

I was then given a 120 mm stem to run on the 57 cm winter bike. All are "race geometry" so basically the same.

Absolutely no difference at all to feel, handling, weight etc. then again, I won't be changing the time honoured combo in a hurry.

If it's cheap, light, looks good then go for it so long as it feels right when riding it. Loads of deals on in the sales so you can experiment.

The human body is an amazingly adaptable thing.

But that's just me.

keezx

The geometry of the front of the bike has more infuence on the steering than stem length.