"Shorter headtube/+17d stem" vs. "taller headtube/0d stem"

[SlackMan]

Looking for some advice here: I have long legs and a relatively short torso. And given that I compression-fractured three vertebrae last year in an accident, most off-the-shelf frames have a headtube that creates too much saddle-to-bar drop for me to be comfortable unless I use a +17d stem and/or lots of spacers. I bought a used frame/fork with the steerer already cut down by the prior owner. With a +17 degree 120mm stem and 15mm of spacers (the max given the steerer length), I am reasonably comfortable on the bike.

Aside from better aesthetics, would there be an improvement in actual handling or ride if I were to go to a new fork with longer steerer tube so I could use a 0d or otherwise "flatter" stem but with more spacers?--I envision all key contact point dimensions would stay the same. And separately, aside from better aesthetics, would there be an improvement in actual handling or ride if I were to go to a custom bike with a taller headtube so I could use a more normal stem / spacer combination?

Thanks for any advice.

[rnhood]

I think most manufactures specify not more than 30mm of spacers - although I've seen more on bikes. Then again, you have quality bikes out there with taller head tubes, like the Specialized Roubaix and H2 & H3 Trek Madones. There should be plenty of front height with these bikes when you include the spacers. An angled up stem remains an option in extreme cases.

Handling is not going to suffer from spacer height, but a steerer tube fracture becomes a risk at some point when more and more spacers are used, if the tube is carbon.

[wallymann]

if you do the math, a 0deg stem will get you a more direct connection and lower weight (shorter stem and shorter steerer-tube) but those difference will be really insignificant.

these 3 bikes have the exact same saddle/bar position. stems range from 0deg, to -6deg, to -17deg (with corresponding changes in the spacer/HT setups to get the same rise)

http://majortaylorcycling.org/bikes/walter_colnago_c40hp-nuovo-retro.jpg
http://majortaylorcycling.org/bikes/walter_colnago_c50hp-world-champ.jpg
http://majortaylorcycling.org/bikes/walter_colnago_master-rabobank.jpg

[JAGI410]

This tool is great for this stuff: http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/stem.php

[SlackMan]

So, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Why is the "norm" not to do short headtube / steerer tubes with plus 17d stems instead of longer headtubes/steerer tubes with 0 or -17d stems? I get that the -17d stems look more like the old quill stems, which I like too, but why are +17d stems frowned upon?

[Chance]

if you do the math, a 0deg stem will get you a more direct connection and lower weight (shorter stem and shorter steerer-tube) but those difference will be really insignificant.

these 3 bikes have the exact same saddle/bar position. stems range from 0deg, to -6deg, to -17deg (with corresponding changes in the spacer/HT setups to get the same rise)


It is correct for the three bikes you depicted, but if you do the "math" for all bikes then a stem that is turned up, like +17 degrees, will save much more length in steerer and head tube lengths than it will add in actual stem length, thereby resulting in a "theoretically" lighter bike. Agree though that it's insignificant. Or should be insignificant unless rider counts grams.

[Chance]

So, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Why is the "norm" not to do short headtube / steerer tubes with plus 17d stems instead of longer headtubes/steerer tubes with 0 or -17d stems? I get that the -17d stems look more like the old quill stems, which I like too, but why are +17d stems frowned upon?

Handling shouldn't be affected. Steering axis remains the same in all cases. Aesthetics is a major reason why it's not done by design. If it works with +17 degree stem leave it alone and enjoy the bike. Even +30 degree stems don't bother me, but then my goal is not to impress others with my bike's appearance.:)

[SlackMan]

Handling shouldn't be affected. Steering axis remains the same in all cases. Aesthetics is a major reason why it's not done by design. If it works with +17 degree stem leave it alone and enjoy the bike. Even +30 degree stems don't bother me, but then my goal is not to impress others with my bike's appearance.:)

Thanks, Chance. If the issue is primarily aesthetics, I at least know how to think about the tradeoff.

Shane

[roydyates]

I really like how the brick wall gives you the grid to compare one bike against another.
if you do the math, a 0deg stem will get you a more direct connection and lower weight (shorter stem and shorter steerer-tube) but those difference will be really insignificant.

these 3 bikes have the exact same saddle/bar position. stems range from 0deg, to -6deg, to -17deg (with corresponding changes in the spacer/HT setups to get the same rise)

http://majortaylorcycling.org/bikes/walter_colnago_c40hp-nuovo-retro.jpg
http://majortaylorcycling.org/bikes/walter_colnago_c50hp-world-champ.jpg
http://majortaylorcycling.org/bikes/walter_colnago_master-rabobank.jpg

[rain dogs]

There is really no difference. Unless there is...

Most frames with a shorter headtube will be a smaller size, and taller... larger.

Unless it's not.

The important thing is you get your three contact points in the best position for your back.

Find the frame that gets you closest to those contact point location you need (with as close to proper reach, drop or not, and setback.) and then fit it the best with stem, post etc.

In addition to being comfortable, you want your weight distribution correct. So find out where your contact points need to be and find the best fitting frame. Likely shortish TT, tall seattube, tall headtube and short seatpost... but that's just a guess.

[eddief]

is custom with long headtube, 20 mm of spacers and 0 degree or -6 stem. Ths photo is with 0 stem. Bike now has 25 mm of spacers and -6 stem.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-XEZLwP4tJlM/UcOZTye_UmI/AAAAAAAACrE/_ZkvnXSYD3Q/s800/IMG_2313.JPG

[wallymann]

fwiw...all 3 are 61cm bikes from the same mfg. differences in apparent sizing are due to differences in material and changes in design philosophy over time.

C40 = minimal HT
C50 = somewhat extended HT
steel master = freuler extended HT

I really like how the brick wall gives you the grid to compare one bike against another.

[eddief]

Just for my curiousity...what is your age and how tall are you? Those saddle to bar drops make my back ache.

fwiw...all 3 are 61cm bikes from the same mfg. differences in apparent sizing are due to differences in material and changes in design philosophy over time.

C40 = minimal HT
C50 = somewhat extended HT
steel master = freuler extended HT

[cmg]

"but why are +17d stems frowned upon? " some of us who grew up during the era of quill stems preffer the 0d horizontal stem. mountain bike riders are use to riser stems so that aesthetic is acceptable. i'm not a fan of the no spacer stem slammed against head tube but if that fits you, who cares?

The Masi in the classifieds had 3.5cm of spacers under the stem because i could'nt stand the look of a +17d stem. Some of my fellow riders ridiculed the setup.

[wallymann]

Just for my curiousity...what is your age and how tall are you? Those saddle to bar drops make my back ache.

6'1" height, 91cm inseam (long of leg), 11cm saddle-bar drop (racy, but not quite wiggins extreme drop). started riding when i was 18 so i've just carried this position for the last 27 years. whats funny is that i cant touch my toes, but i can get a reasonably tucked position.

http://majortaylorcycling.org/events/2013_tosrv/DSC07801.jpg

[Steve in SLO]

I am in the same boat, having a 36 inch inseam at 6 feet tall. I tend to run 7 to 8 cm of saddle to stem drop, So I have experimented in the same area that you have. In terms of steering, there is frankly not much difference, although the physics would favor the shorter head tube/upright stem combination. It really boils down to the aesthetic you want: either the appearance of an extended head tube/flat stem a la Pegorettii, or a short headtube and 'slammed' upright stem. Another option is to get a headtube extender, which generally adds 2 to 2 1/2 cm of height, then place the headset on top of that. The look ends up being that of less spacers, and a less upright stem--like a Peg.

[RedRider]

The spacer-stem angle-stem length selection is about handling! The aesthetic consideration is personal preference and weight a non issue when making the decision.
The higher you raise the bars or saddle the more frame you need to support the higher center of gravity. Think of the proper weight/stability as a pyramid. Adding a lot of spacers and a big angle positive stem is like putting a flagpole on top.
This photo shows what not to do.

[Chance]

We shouldn’t confuse structural integrity, which could affect safety, with function as it affects handling. These are two different subjects. And aesthetics is a different subject still.

[SlackMan]

I am in the same boat, having a 36 inch inseam at 6 feet tall. I tend to run 7 to 8 cm of saddle to stem drop, So I have experimented in the same area that you have. In terms of steering, there is frankly not much difference, although the physics would favor the shorter head tube/upright stem combination. It really boils down to the aesthetic you want: either the appearance of an extended head tube/flat stem a la Pegorettii, or a short headtube and 'slammed' upright stem. Another option is to get a headtube extender, which generally adds 2 to 2 1/2 cm of height, then place the headset on top of that. The look ends up being that of less spacers, and a less upright stem--like a Peg.

Have you tried a headtube extender? I have seen those on the web. Eightinch, for example, has a 2cm one that presses into the headtube. They advertise them as being for the fixie crowd to put underneath the head tube so one can spin the handlebars while doing wheelies--something I don't do very often.;) In all seriousness, I can't imagine why an extender couldn't also be used up top like you suggest. Just curious whether you actually tried it.

[Chance]

Have you tried a headtube extender? I have seen those on the web. Eightinch, for example, has a 2cm one that presses into the headtube. They advertise them as being for the fixie crowd to put underneath the head tube so one can spin the handlebars while doing wheelies--something I don't do very often.;) In all seriousness, I can't imagine why an extender couldn't also be used up top like you suggest. Just curious whether you actually tried it.

On top it isn't as bad as on the bottom, but it's not a great idea from a safety standpoint in either case. Lots has been written about them on this forum. You can do a search. A stem turned up is simpler and safer by comparison.

[SlackMan]

On top it isn't as bad as on the bottom, but it's not a great idea from a safety standpoint in either case. Lots has been written about them on this forum. You can do a search. A stem turned up is simpler and safer by comparison.

Thanks. I'll take your word for it and just pass on the extender option.

[bicycletricycle]

more head tube is always the right answer, least unsupported steerer tube the better.

[Steve in SLO]

Have you tried a headtube extender? I have seen those on the web. Eightinch, for example, has a 2cm one that presses into the headtube. They advertise them as being for the fixie crowd to put underneath the head tube so one can spin the handlebars while doing wheelies--something I don't do very often.;) In all seriousness, I can't imagine why an extender couldn't also be used up top like you suggest. Just curious whether you actually tried it.

Yes, I installed one onto my Moots Psychlo-X. Looks good and I feel slightly tighter front end, which may be my imagination. Make sure to use a good anti-seize just in case.
And yes, I put it up top. I don't spin my handlebars on purpose.

[Steve in SLO]

On top it isn't as bad as on the bottom, but it's not a great idea from a safety standpoint in either case. Lots has been written about them on this forum. You can do a search. A stem turned up is simpler and safer by comparison.

I sure don't recall any safety issues with the extenders installed on top of the tube. I know it can be really hard to remove the headset cup from the extender, but safety should not be an issue.
Perhaps you can site a thread?

[Chance]

I sure don't recall any safety issues with the extenders installed on top of the tube. I know it can be really hard to remove the headset cup from the extender, but safety should not be an issue.
Perhaps you can site a thread?

It's come up more than once so it won't be that hard to find threads if you are interested in reading what has been stated before.

Extenders load the head tube differently than they were originally designed to be loaded. At the bottom the load is greater, but at the top it also exist. Basically it makes the head tube into a two-piece head tube that is held together by friction of a tight press fit. And that's fine for those who feel safe with that arrangement. It's not for me though. Cycling is dangerous enough without going out of my way to add to it unnecessarily when there are safer choices.

By the way, I'm aware Serotta sold some. That in itself doesn't sway me completely. It's a lot like using pedal extenders. It doesn't mean they won't work, and hold up for the most part, but they will load the crank arm to a greater degree.

[Steve in SLO]

It's come up more than once so it won't be that hard to find threads if you are interested in reading what has been stated before.

I had searched 'headtube extender' and 'headtube extenders', and had not read anything negative about safety from actual users, just theoretical concerns from one non-user, hence my question.
Cheers

[bigreen505]

Looking for some advice here: I have long legs and a relatively short torso.

It depends on your measurements and what you mean by long legs, short torso, and limited flexibility, but in general there is no mass produced bike that will fit you and it's not even worth looking. I've been there and done that. The correct answer is a custom frame, which can be found starting about $1,500. If that is out of your budget, have a shop that knows what they are doing fit you on a size cycle and start trolling the internet for something that will get you close.

My last attempt at an off the peg frame was a 56 cm carbon Cannondale Synapse. I spent two years trying to get comfortable on that frame before giving up. It's spent two years collecting dust in my basement and I just need to post it for sale. I'm riding an aluminum Primus Mootry and saving up for a steel Pacenti.

The issue with playing the stem game is you can adjust stem, seat post and saddle and find a position that is comfortable, but that won't necessarily put you in the correct position relative to the wheels and BB. In other words, you can either be in a position that is comfortable, a position that is powerful, or a position that balances your weight evenly between the wheels, but probably not all three. An average size person can be made to fit nicely on an average geometry frame. Sure, different companies have different geometries, but they are all pretty close. If you need a 20 cm head tube on a 53 cm frame (what I need, and yes, I still have 5 cm bar drop even with a +24d stem), you are not going to find that in a shop.

There are a lot of things you can do in terms of cross training (like yoga and pilates) that will help quite a bit, but there is no replacement for a fitter and custom frame builder who can work with your body type and existing injuries to get you a bike that rides properly.