Longer stems is an advantage??? - Page 2

oldbobcat · #16 09-17.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by alienator

It's an old rule of thumb that doesn't really apply.

Right-o. I go with the 90-degree angle from the humerus to the torso guideline. Where that puts the bar in relation to the line of sight to the front hub is secondary.

swampy1970 · #17 09-17.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyzackery

FWIW, I've read that pro cyclists (primarily sprinters, i.e. Cipollini, Boonen, et al) use smaller frames (than ideal for their size) and run longish (130mm+) stems because the smaller frame is theoretically (and probably, actually) stiffer than the "correct" size frame for that individual. There is also a weight "penalty" associated with the "correct" size (aka larger) frame versus the smaller frame.

So, I don't think the prevailing wisdom is that the longer stem is the advantage, it's presumably the shorter frame giving the perceived advantage.

Take a look at some photos of pro bikes and you will see some longish stems...some regular stems too, and probably some relatively short ones as well...

That might have been true back in Cipos day but these days when you have frames that are too stiff Remember the boron/carbon frame that Armstrong rode in 05 that none of the other Disco boys would ride? How 'bout the silly stiff frames from Isaac. The trend seems to be going to frames with bottom bracket areas looking as solid as bridge stanchions than the elegant designs of a decade or more ago... Carbon frames are so light now that it's possible to build something really stiff, like the latest Cannondale with good parts at way under the UCI weight limit - and that's without resorting to $5,000+ wheels and titanium and carbon everything.

alienator · #18 09-17.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by swampy1970

That might have been true back in Cipos day but these days when you have frames that are too stiff Remember the boron/carbon frame that Armstrong rode in 05 that none of the other Disco boys would ride? How 'bout the silly stiff frames from Isaac. The trend seems to be going to frames with bottom bracket areas looking as solid as bridge stanchions than the elegant designs of a decade or more ago...

Yup. The sheep are being fed stiffness in bucket loads. Buyers just keep thinkin', "Well, it's stiffer so it must be better." Stiffness hasn't been a problem in a long time. In fact, for the last 12 years, no one has been up Alpe d'Huez faster than Marco Pantani. Yet in that time, bikes have gone from steel to aluminum to CF. The people that drink the stiffness koolaid say you need a stiff bike to climb well. Judging by the record books, stiffness made sod all difference.

tonyzackery · #19 09-18.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by swampy1970

That might have been true back in Cipos day but these days when you have frames that are too stiff Remember the boron/carbon frame that Armstrong rode in 05 that none of the other Disco boys would ride? How 'bout the silly stiff frames from Isaac. The trend seems to be going to frames with bottom bracket areas looking as solid as bridge stanchions than the elegant designs of a decade or more ago... Carbon frames are so light now that it's possible to build something really stiff, like the latest Cannondale with good parts at way under the UCI weight limit - and that's without resorting to $5,000+ wheels and titanium and carbon everything.

Cipo's bike that he rode with Rock last year...not necessarily "back in the day"...

Regardless, I get the gist of the point you're making. "Too stiff"? It's all relatively, my friend. By the sounds of it, where you'd hate the Isaac, I'd love it - just can't afford one. Us bigger, heavier, and sometimes more powerful guys tend (not saying exclusively) to gravitate towards the stiffer frames while the smaller, lighter guys complain they're harsh, etc...to each his/her own...

frenchyge · #20 09-18.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyzackery

Cipo's bike that he rode with Rock last year...

Wow, that guy's got a really stiff, powerful-looking stem. The Italian girls must swoon when they see that thing coming.

Heh, I like the "lightweight" carbon wheels. So, do y'all think those would be a big advantage?

Emp · #21 09-18.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by frenchyge

Wow, that guy's got a really stiff, powerful-looking stem. The Italian girls must swoon when they see that thing coming.

Heh, I like the "lightweight" carbon wheels. So, do y'all think those would be a big advantage?

Wow man I hope we are still talking about the stem.......heheheh

randochap · #22 09-18.-2009

Stiffness isn't all it's cracked up to be. How long can you ride? Built for comfort is where it's at.

531Aussie · #23 09-18.-2009

This is only anecdotal, but, over the years, I've stupidly bought a couple of frames that were a little too small for me (because they were great deals), and, thus, ended up needing 140mm stems on them to get comfortable. I dunno if it was other factors -- and I know it's only a cm or 2 difference -- but both bikes handled 'oddly' when I rode off the saddle. I dunno how some of those big guys can use 15cm stems

blaronn · #24 09-19.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by frenchyge

The Italian girls must swoon when they see that thing coming.

Cipo's stem? Probably a few guys swooning as well!

frenchyge · #25 09-20.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaronn

Cipo's stem? Probably a few guys swooning as well!

Forgot about that. So, does that create a performance advantage?

The S is Silent · #26 09-20.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by rplace13

First you have to have a proper fit, no debate on that.

How you arrive there could be up for debate. Assuming I could get properly fit on a 54 with more seat post showing and a longer stem or a 56 with shorter stem and less seatpost. All other things being equal I personally prefer a 54 with longer stem.

For me the more compact I can get the frame the better. I feel the bike handles better and is more responsive.

Toe overlap is a non-issue in my book, I lean to turn, I hardly ever move my handlebars more then a tiny bit unless it is at a very slow speed and sharp turn. Then I am smart enough to pedal backward and get my foot out of the way.

I'm the same way. I will always choose the smaller frame with a longer stem. The smaller frame will have a shorter head tube, which will let me get in a more aggressive aero position.

Emp · #27 09-20.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by frenchyge

Forgot about that. So, does that create a performance advantage?

No doubt,this will surely create some performance advantage!I bet the rider of the bike look at that more than the cyclometer all the time.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode