Stems and Climbing

[marle]

Interesting article in the cyclingnews discussing Chris Sutton's setup change to a shorter stem to improve climbing.

To cite a quote from the article -

'Sutton has been known as a track rider - with Chris Pascoe he was 2005 Australian Madison champion - but over the last couple of years he has made the transition to the road, a well-worn development path for young Australian riders. That transition has involved some changes to his bike set-up.

"I've gone further back and used a shorter stem," he tells Cyclingnews as we get out the tape measure and notebook to record the details of his bike. "I used to pedal with pointy toes but now I am more flat-footed," he says.

In total, Sutton has moved back 2cm over the last couple of years, a deliberate change in search of more sustained power for climbs, rather than the short bursts of power needed for track racing. "The changes help prevent cramping on longer races," he says. He's obviously doing something right as 2005 brought victories in the GP Liberazione and Coppa G. Romita, significant Italian races for young riders.'

The url is

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2006/probikes/?id=cofidis_wilier_sutton

[Sandy]

Please don't let the jerk see that picture. It would be mp to him.

It would not surprise me at all if many (or most) cyclists who went from track racing to road racing would make changes in their position. Different disciplines- Different power output for different lengths of time, and different gearing (obviously), cadence ( I assume), engagement of muscle groups, objectives, time cycling during the event, body size, .....



Different Sandy

[Fixed]

bro he will like the wheels cheers :beer:

[Dave]

Stem length has nothing to do with climbing. If the saddle was moved back 2cm, a shorter stem is inevitable to produce the same reach to the handlebars. You don't know what the starting point is for the knee relative to the pedal either.

I've done a fair amount of experimenting with saddle fore/aft position after moving to Colorado, where I ride 10-30 mile climbs regularly. Following the old sage advice for climbers to have their saddle further back, I tried positions where my knee was 2-3cm behind the pedal spindle and the weight on the ffront wheel was as light as 42%. This worked OK, but at the start of last season, I decided to try a 2cm further forward position. I also moved the saddle up 6mm, but the saddle still felt to low, so I ended up with it set about 1cm higher. With the saddle to bar height difference increased by 1cm, I found that a 1cm longer stem was comfortable and still maintained what I consider to be critical - a bit of arm to knee clearance while pedaling in the drops. The further forward position increased the weight on the front into the 45-46% range, which seemed to improve handling on the descent.

The further forward position seems to work better spinning one cog lower at a higher cadence than the further back position. I use 80-95 rpm on the climbs, which is quite a bit higher than many riders. The results of my experimentation make me think that the further back position may be favorable if you prefer a lower cadence and/or don't have a low enough gear to spin the higher cadence. I see a lot of riders slugging out a steep section in a 39/23 or 39/25 while I'm spinning comfortably in the equivalent to a 39/29 or even lower gear ratio. I've left riders behind that were kicking my butt on the easier climbs, but ran out of gear on the steep stuff.

[Dr. Doofus]

thanks for the voice of reason dave

he didn't put on a flippin short stem to improve his climbing

he moved his contact points back 2cm along the horizontal plane to improve his climbing


you guys can't use the excuse that you're improving your climbing to justify your short stems -- ok?

[Climb01742]

the guy in question, sutton, was a track rider. moving to the road, it makes sense he changed his position. track riding and road riding are different animals. and doof is spot-on...a stem change was simply a by-product of re-orienting where his glutes are.

[e-RICHIE]

...a stem change was simply a by-product of re-orienting where his glutes are.

did he get that stem here?

[merckx]

If the Wilier had a slacker seat angle, then he could use a longer stem and still have the desired 2 cm further setback position. It seems to me that the geo. of his machine is not ideal and he is using a shorter stem as a compromise. No?

[Dave]

If the Wilier had a slacker seat angle, then he could use a longer stem and still have the desired 2 cm further setback position. It seems to me that the geo. of his machine is not ideal and he is using a shorter stem as a compromise. No?

I see nothing unusual, if that's the picture of his bike, setup for climbing. The seatpost is not an extreme setback or straight up model and his saddle is pretty well centered.

The STA, by itself, only determines the type of seatpost required to get your butt where you want it. My current two LOOK frames have 74.5 and 72.5 STAs, but use the same stem length to produce the same fit. One uses a traditional 25mm setback post and the other uses a straight up Thomson post. Obviously, the TT length is not the same on both bikes.

[Argos]

Just to be clear, that is not his bike....
Chris "CJ" Sutton admits that the Wilier he wheels into the Cyclingnews offices isn't really his own personal bike. The 21-year-old Cofidis neo-pro is rolling around on a bike donated by a team-mate; but when he does get his own quiver of bikes, one of them will be virtually identical to this Wilier Cofidis Team with Campagnolo record components.

[e-RICHIE]

Just to be clear, that is not his bike....


chimeric twin situation?

[Fixed]

bro smell legal defense coming

[Argos]

chimeric twin situation?

Holy cow, when is that mess gonna be done!?!?

Even if he's guilty, this is a real leisurely pace for justice... And if he's innocent, man the screwed him outta a lot of time. Be nice to see him come back angry and have a second career like after Jaja broke himself changing a lightbulb and came back all fierce....

This is probably best saved for a T.H. specific thread, so I'll stop...

[Fixed]

beo argos t.h. was my son's hero he even got csc poster autograph from the vegas show ,,,broke his heart what happend ..... he likes jan now miles, my son still has tyler's poster next to his mag trainer though cheers :beer:

[merckx]

I see nothing unusual, if that's the picture of his bike, setup for climbing. The seatpost is not an extreme setback or straight up model and his saddle is pretty well centered.

The STA, by itself, only determines the type of seatpost required to get your butt where you want it. My current two LOOK frames have 74.5 and 72.5 STAs, but use the same stem length to produce the same fit. One uses a traditional 25mm setback post and the other uses a straight up Thomson post. Obviously, the TT length is not the same on both bikes.

Some facts. If one machine has a seat angle of 72 degs, and another machine has a seat angle of 73 degs, and the setback behind the BB is equal, and they both have the same top tube length, guess which machine has a longer reach? The type of seatpost only determines the potential for setback. If the machines have different seat tube angles with the same top tube lengths, the machine with the steeper seat tube angle will have a longer reach. This is assuming the same setback. Right?

[jerk]

the angle of the dangle is directly proportionate to the heat of the meat.

so yes.


jerk

[Dave]

Some facts. If one machine has a seat angle of 72 degs, and another machine has a seat angle of 73 degs, and the setback behind the BB is equal, and they both have the same top tube length, guess which machine has a longer reach? The type of seatpost only determines the potential for setback. If the machines have different seat tube angles with the same top tube lengths, the machine with the steeper seat tube angle will have a longer reach. This is assuming the same setback. Right?

Reach is the TT length minus setback. Setback is the cosine of the STA times the c-c frame size. A 73 STA will produce a smaller setback and a longer reach than a frame with a 72 degree STA, but only if the TT lengths are the same, just as you stated.

My post is also 100% correct. The STA by itself deteremines what type of seatpost is required to produce a given rider position and that's all. You need a TT length to evaluate the reach of the frame.

[manet]

Stem length has nothing to do with climbing.

i vote no.

[marle]

i vote no.

I vote no too It has been argued in this forum that a longer stem improves handing - transfering weight forward over the wheel. A shorter stem would, all things being equal, shift weight back.

[Dave]

Not sure what that means. Anyone who's got a bit of math ability can easily figure out that stem length makes little difference in the steering of a bike. A change from a 120 to an 80mm stem only shortens the "steering arm" by 15%.

With a given stem, a rider can adopt a number of different positions while climbing. I use three posistions regularly - hands on the brake hoods, hands several centimeters m further back on the curve of the bar (thumbs behind the ergo lever buttons) and hands on the top (straight) section of the bar. Your preferance might be affect by stem length.

Stem length makes little difference in weight balance. Two things have a significant effect on weight balance, moving the saddle fore/aft and toros angle. Changes in saddle position have a far greater effect. If you place a scale under the front wheel of a bike while it's mounted in a trainer, it's easy to see how moving from a totally upright position to a low torso angle increases the weight on the front wheel. The tiny change in torso angle than would generally occur with a bit longer stem makes little difference in weight distribution. Moving the saddle fore or aft alters the weight distribution by about 1% per cm, since the wheelbase on a bike is a bit less than 100cm.

[jerk]

jan ullrich has always used a 150mm stem as oppossed to his usual 130mm stem on tdf stages with lots of climbing. he climbs on the tops and it made the position better for him.

as for dave's comment. take a race bike to the limit with an 80mm stem and tell the jerk that it doesn't handle any different than the same bike with a 130mm stem. it matters; just because it may matter less than other things doesn't make it irrelevent.

jerk

[loctite]

jan ullrich has always used a 150mm stem as oppossed to his usual 130mm stem on tdf stages with lots of climbing. he climbs on the tops and it made the position better for him.

as for dave's comment. take a race bike to the limit with an 80mm stem and tell the jerk that it doesn't handle any different than the same bike with a 130mm stem. it matters; just because it may matter less than other things doesn't make it irrelevent.

jerk
I agree with the jerk ;)

[Hysbrian]

jan ullrich has always used a 150mm stem as oppossed to his usual 130mm stem on tdf stages with lots of climbing. he climbs on the tops and it made the position better for him.
jerk

Whats better? Why does he go longer? It seems like that would bring your torso closer to horizontal which would be bad for breathing, right?

[jerk]

I agree with the jerk ;)

loctite, can the jerk have a hug? :)

[jerk]

Whats better? Why does he go longer? It seems like that would bring your torso closer to horizontal which would be bad for breathing, right?


brian-
he goes longer because the tops become his primary riding position whereas normally the hoods are. it is no longer a sit up and relax position; but a power position requiring more hip rotation for more glute activation. (nice rhyming eh?) jan really likes to muscle the bike and bring his fast twitch muscles and his upper body into play when he is climbing and the more stretched position allows this.

jerk

[Hysbrian]

makes sense. i guess i would have to grab a pair of ADAs for full effect.

[Dave]

jan ullrich has always used a 150mm stem as oppossed to his usual 130mm stem on tdf stages with lots of climbing. he climbs on the tops and it made the position better for him.

as for dave's comment. take a race bike to the limit with an 80mm stem and tell the jerk that it doesn't handle any different than the same bike with a 130mm stem. it matters; just because it may matter less than other things doesn't make it irrelevent.

jerk

Now, you're making ridiculous suggestions. A given bike would not fit anyone with both 80mm and 130mm stems and of course it would not handle exactly the same with these two stem lengths. One length might be too stretched out for comfort and the other would probably create a lot of knee to arm contact.

IMO, it would be unusual for a rider who's already pushing his limit on reach (most pros, I'd think) to increase stem length by 20mm, but if you say that's the case, heck I'll believe you. How many others regularly follow this practice? Do you? Why not use this stem length for all stages? Perhaps you can tell us the reasoning behind this practice. Making the position "better" with a 20mm longer stem is not very informative.

Sure, a bike will handle a bit differently with changing stem length, but it's more about what you get accustomed to that matters. I'ved used 100-120mm stems on a given bike, but not with the same saddle position. I want my reach to fall into a fairly narrow range for comfort. The only reason I once tried a 100mm stem is because I moved the saddle back about 3cm. The bike did handle differently, but not like night and day different and the difference was far more attributable to the change in weight balance due to the saddle position change than the stem length change.

At that particular time, I had a C-40 and a Fondriest MDC; same stem length on both bikes, but they handled night and day different. It wasn't the stem length, it was the longer front-center and much greater steering trail on the C-40 that made it so much slower handling than the Fondriest.

FWIW, I like the high speed corneing better with 45-46% of the weight on the front wheel than only 42%.

[jerk]

Now, you're making ridiculous suggestions. A given bike would not fit anyone with both 80mm and 130mm stems and of course it would not handle exactly the same with these two stem lengths. One length might be too stretched out for comfort and the other would probably create a lot of knee to arm contact.

IMO, it would be unusual for a rider who's already pushing his limit on reach (most pros, I'd think) to increase stem length by 20mm, but if you say that's the case, heck I'll believe you. How many others regularly follow this practice? Do you? Why not use this stem length for all stages? Perhaps you can tell us the reasoning behind this practice. Making the position "better" with a 20mm longer stem is not very informative.

Sure, a bike will handle a bit differently with changing stem length, but it's more about what you get accustomed to that matters. I'ved used 100-120mm stems on a given bike, but not with the same saddle position. I want my reach to fall into a fairly narrow range for comfort. The only reason I once tried a 100mm stem is because I moved the saddle back about 3cm. The bike did handle differently, but not like night and day different and the difference was far more attributable to the change in weight balance due to the saddle position change than the stem length change.

At that particular time, I had a C-40 and a Fondriest MDC; same stem length on both bikes, but they handled night and day different. It wasn't the stem length, it was the longer front-center and much greater steering trail on the C-40 that made it so much slower handling than the Fondriest.

FWIW, I like the high speed corneing better with 45-46% of the weight on the front wheel than only 42%.

dave-
ullrich uses a much longer stem on the mountain stages because his primary riding position while climbing in on the tops....whereas his primary riding position in flatter stages is on the brake hoods. the longer stem allows him more hip flexion, and more power out-put in that position.

the jerk certainly doesn't increase his reach by 2cm ever! but then again neither does ulli. he only changes the stem length so his weight balance is altered when he climbs.

the jerk agrees with everything else you have said. fc and trail have a greater effect on handling than stem length....

jerk

[manet]

shall i be 100% comfortable or 85%... hmm

[jerk]

shall i be 100% comfortable or 85%... hmm


it's 100% or 0%. you either are or you aren't. like being dead imho.

jerk

[manet]

worser + worser