# What is up with all of the bending over?



## Atl (Sep 11, 2009)

I am 6'4" and I recently got into mountain biking. My wife and I bought some decent used bikes (name brand stuff) and started biking. My first experience on a long and technical trail left me feeling nearly cripp0led afterwards. Now I was using a non-suspension Trek, but the bumps didn't bother me. If you drive a truck it should be expected to ride like one. What bothered me was bending over on the bike for 2 hours. Recently my wife purchased a hybid bike for road use. She was getting frustrated with the constant bending over on her MTB as she is no midget at 6' tall. It has a very upright orientation. Recently she rode it 30 miles with no discomfort. I tried it out and it was very comfortable. So I had the idea to put the upswept bars on my Trek. They are wide and elevate 3.5 inches which afffords amore upright position. I took it over some trails today and it was comfortable and handled the technical sections with much more control. So why is all the high tech engineering put into making you bend over? Aerodynamics are a minimal influence on a tough trail so the gain you would get from a bent over position is arguable.


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

Atl said:


> So why is all the high tech engineering put into making you bend over?


Ain't that the truth, bend over and grab your wallet.

Oh wait, you meant bending over on the bike ... I prefer my handlebars at the same height as my saddle.


----------



## traffic002 (Dec 16, 2008)

It really depends on the type of riding you do.

On my road bike, my torso is about 45* angle. This is considered a comfort posiiton. Yeah, there is some aerodynamics to it. But actually, I find that it puts just the right amount of pressure on my hands/arms as my butt and my legs/feet. Actually, the harder I ride, the more my legs/feet take some of the pressures off the other points.

On my mountain bike, my torso is more like 55*. This is more to balance where I am positioned for handling.

Now I suppose I can go steeper angle. But that would put off my optimal angles for handling.

For example. If you are able to sit MORE upright, then your bars to saddle relationship is going to be tighter. When you hit a steeper climb, you're gonna feel like your bars are in your chest and you can't get enough weight forward for traction. You also risk pulling wheelies too much as you try to put the power down in a low gear.

Also, how is your saddle height? Is it set up properly for pedaling efficiency?

You may also consider getting a good bike fitment done at a reputable shop. Comfort/fit make all the difference for longer rides.


----------



## Atl (Sep 11, 2009)

I guess if I were 20 yo I would experience less pain, but at 45 I am just a little on the creaky side though I am in great condition overall. I agree handlebars and seat at the same height is comfortable, and that is the setup I am using.


----------



## Bikinfoolferlife (Feb 3, 2004)

Bikes can be set up how you want, and should be fitted to you (hard to do when picking up a few used bikes if you're not familiar with the process). Google for articles on bike fitting. What size bikes did you buy? 

Other than a higher rise bar, you can possibly also raise your stem, get a shorter stem and/or one with steeper rise to get a more upright position. If you're racing, the long and low position might be preferred, for comfort riding not so much. OTOH the long and low racing position on a mountain bike isn't really about aerodynamics, but leverage. As you get biking fit you'll also likely feel more comfortable as time goes on, as long as the bike fits you reasonably well.


----------



## Atl (Sep 11, 2009)

My wife got an 18 inch frame and I got a 21 inch frame. I researched fitting the bike before I bought them and did not choose them at random. The bikes were also about 3 and 5 years old, but almost like new from the owners never having ridden them.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Atl said:


> I am 6'4" and I recently got into mountain biking. My wife and I bought some decent used bikes (name brand stuff) and started biking. My first experience on a long and technical trail left me feeling nearly cripp0led afterwards. Now I was using a non-suspension Trek, but the bumps didn't bother me. If you drive a truck it should be expected to ride like one. What bothered me was bending over on the bike for 2 hours. Recently my wife purchased a hybid bike for road use. She was getting frustrated with the constant bending over on her MTB as she is no midget at 6' tall. It has a very upright orientation. Recently she rode it 30 miles with no discomfort. I tried it out and it was very comfortable. So I had the idea to put the upswept bars on my Trek. They are wide and elevate 3.5 inches which afffords amore upright position. I took it over some trails today and it was comfortable and handled the technical sections with much more control. So why is all the high tech engineering put into making you bend over? Aerodynamics are a minimal influence on a tough trail so the gain you would get from a bent over position is arguable.


Stems and bars are made for switching. Also, the bike was not fitted to you in particular, so don't feel like there is anything about the fit that is intentional. I've never gotten on a bike that would not need some adjusting of the cockpit (saddle height, fore/aft position, and tilt, stem rise/length and maybe a different bar) for me to be really comfortable on a long ride.


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

wv_bob said:


> Ain't that the truth, bend over and grab your wallet.


 Yeah, based on the thread title, I thought this was going to be another "I hate my LBS" thread.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Atl said:


> My wife got an 18 inch frame and I got a 21 inch frame. I researched fitting the bike before I bought them and did not choose them at random. The bikes were also about 3 and 5 years old, but almost like new from the owners never having ridden them.


That's all? I'm 5'8 and I ride an 18" frame. I'm going to venture a guess that part of your problem is that the bikes are too small for you (both of you, probably).


----------



## Bikinfoolferlife (Feb 3, 2004)

Atl said:


> My wife got an 18 inch frame and I got a 21 inch frame. I researched fitting the bike before I bought them and did not choose them at random. The bikes were also about 3 and 5 years old, but almost like new from the owners never having ridden them.


I ride 18-19" frames and I'm 5'10" and shrinking. Seat tube measurements are only so useful OTOH, top tube measurements are more relevant, did you measure those? Any idea what stem length/rise you got with the bikes? Width of bars?


----------



## Jonesy33 (Mar 18, 2008)

Couple of things... at 6'4" you ought to be riding the biggest darn frame you can find. 22, 23 24 inches would be my guess... There may be some bikes that don't even go up to sizes that are really fit for you.

Consider 29ers. They tend to have a longer wheel-base. My experience has been that the bent-over position is not as bad when it's bent-over-stretched-out isntead of bent-over-cramped-up.

Also, look at some of the 29er single speed and rigid build ups for ideas. They tend to be more focused on the 'I want to be comfy when I ride." approach to bike building.

Finally, for me... I have a race bike where I do the bakc-breaking bent-over position. It's faster (for me) and better for sustained speed as opposed to occasional out of saddle climbing etc. I don't usually ride it much outside of racing, or racing-preparation training. I don't evver ride it for longer than 90-120 minutes.

I also have some 29ers in the 'comfy to ride' department. Set-up properly, this type of bike should be comfortable for long enough that your legs and lungs give out long before you back does.


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

The upright sitting position is more comfortable, but it does have some drawbacks when it comes to the way the bike handles. The bike is made to ride with a certain amount of weight on the front wheels to aid the handling of the bike, you may find things like rock gardens a bit harder as your front wheel bounces around and gets deflected. What I find the largest problem with a upright seated position is climbing. The front wheel has a tendency to lift and wheelie when you're climbing steeper hills. Also a problem when climbing and having to change directions or avoid obstacles. 

I would take a look at your setup and see if there's anything you can do to make your ride more comfortable. A higher rise bar will help, but keep it within reason. I wouldn't add a 3" bar to your mountain bike and expect the bike to handle the same. Try and find a shop that might let you put a bar or shorter stem on and ride it around a bit.


----------



## sanjuro (Sep 29, 2004)

Atl said:


> I am 6'4" and I recently got into mountain biking. My wife and I bought some decent used bikes (name brand stuff) and started biking. My first experience on a long and technical trail left me feeling nearly cripp0led afterwards. Now I was using a non-suspension Trek, but the bumps didn't bother me. If you drive a truck it should be expected to ride like one. What bothered me was bending over on the bike for 2 hours. Recently my wife purchased a hybid bike for road use. She was getting frustrated with the constant bending over on her MTB as she is no midget at 6' tall. It has a very upright orientation. Recently she rode it 30 miles with no discomfort. I tried it out and it was very comfortable. So I had the idea to put the upswept bars on my Trek. They are wide and elevate 3.5 inches which afffords amore upright position. I took it over some trails today and it was comfortable and handled the technical sections with much more control. So why is all the high tech engineering put into making you bend over? Aerodynamics are a minimal influence on a tough trail so the gain you would get from a bent over position is arguable.


Good mountain bike position for trail riding, the compromise between XC racing position and downhill position, has you bent slightly forward when seated, elbows bent at a 45 degree angle, but with a 55/45 rearward weight balance.

Without seeing you or your wife, it is hard to say if you are properly positioned or even have the right sized bikes.

Especially given your height, you could be on a too small of a bike. Some XL's are for guys 6'2, not 6'4".

Also the era of your bike is important. Back in the 90's everyone used XC positions, including most DH riders. On my first mountain bike, it came with a 13cm stem. Then I switched it to a 12cm. Today I use a 9cm stem!

Go into a good mtn bike shop and ask them to show you XC and trail bikes and to find you the right sized machine.


----------



## sanjuro (Sep 29, 2004)

P.S. I read a later post about how recent your bikes were.

I think you got too small bikes. 

I'm 5'11, and I ride medium bikes, which is usually a 17"-18" bike. If your wife is 6'0", she should probably ride a large, or 19"-20", bike. 

Specifically, you are looking at top tube length and handlebar height. I prefer a 23" horizontal top tube with a 9cm stem for my top tube length (btw, I have slightly below average arm length).

Most women have slightly shorter torsos than the equivalent sized male, but given her tall height, she probably has similar proportions to 6' man, and would need a bigger bike.

BTW, I really dislike frame sizes given as inches. That is a seat tube measurement but it could be center of the top tube, top of the top tube, or the top of the seat tube (it always starts at the center of the bottom bracket).

As a salesman, I prefer bikes that are sold S-M-L, so it is easy for the customer and myself to recognize good fit.

For you, a 25" inch horizontal top tube is probably what you are looking at, but the next part is very complicated to measure: handlebar height. 

The way you can raise your handlebar height is with higher rise stems and handlebars. But while the bars are closer on the smaller bikes, they are also lower because the head tubes are shorter. Also fork travel has a part, i.e. a 3 inch XC fork will put you lower than a 9 inch DH fork.


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

I've rep'ed sanjuro on RM and I'd do it here if I could. 

It does sound like your bike may be too small. And if you're shopping, recognize that S-M-L-XL sizes do have a inch relation. On average it's 15"-17"-19"-21" but it changes with bike manufacturer. At your height I would recommend a XL/21" bicycle. At 6'0" I ride a 19"/L bike on which I put a 90mm stem with a 1" rise bar. Very comfortable and I can climb without having the wheel come off the ground or loose traction.


----------



## bolandjd (Jul 23, 2008)

Atl said:


> I am 6'4" and I recently got into mountain biking. My wife and I bought some decent used bikes (name brand stuff) and started biking. My first experience on a long and technical trail left me feeling nearly cripp0led afterwards. Now I was using a non-suspension Trek, but the bumps didn't bother me. If you drive a truck it should be expected to ride like one. What bothered me was bending over on the bike for 2 hours. Recently my wife purchased a hybid bike for road use. She was getting frustrated with the constant bending over on her MTB as she is no midget at 6' tall. It has a very upright orientation. Recently she rode it 30 miles with no discomfort. I tried it out and it was very comfortable. So I had the idea to put the upswept bars on my Trek. They are wide and elevate 3.5 inches which afffords amore upright position. I took it over some trails today and it was comfortable and handled the technical sections with much more control. So why is all the high tech engineering put into making you bend over? Aerodynamics are a minimal influence on a tough trail so the gain you would get from a bent over position is arguable.


There's no high technology making anyone bend over, just the bike's geometry. As other's have noted, the bent over position has many advantages besides aerodynamics. Just because the racer kids ride around all bent over with 6 inches of saddle-to-bar drop doesn't mean you have to. Change your stem, get your bars up, and ride happy. :thumbsup:

P.S. Building core strength helps alot with back problems too. (as the shoe fits, blah, blah, blah)


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I have to disagree with going by S-M-L designations, they are really no more helpful than going by seat tube length. I currently ride a large MKIII and a small Karate Monkey and both fit me very well (I actually traded a med KM for a small to get a better fit). 

I think the effective top tube is probably the most important, but even that is not a perfect system. However, compensating for the seat angle can get you even closer.


----------



## f3rg (Aug 29, 2007)

I'm horribly uncomfortable in anything other than the bent forward racer stance, and I don't even race (yet). Saddle 2" above handlebars, I say.


----------



## Starkonian (Dec 31, 2007)

Google Delta stem riser. I'm 6' 5" running a standard large sized bike. I should be on a 29'r or extra lage frame but this is what I'm running for now. I've used this riser for over a year and it's solid and gives you lot's of adjustment options.


----------



## sanjuro (Sep 29, 2004)

kapusta said:


> I have to disagree with going by S-M-L designations, they are really no more helpful than going by seat tube length. I currently ride a large MKIII and a small Karate Monkey and both fit me very well (I actually traded a med KM for a small to get a better fit).
> 
> I think the effective top tube is probably the most important, but even that is not a perfect system. However, compensating for the seat angle can get you even closer.


Well, you are talking about two radically different bikes, an all mountain full-sus and a rigid 29er.

The 29er especially because standover height becomes so critical, especially if you use a taller fork than recommended.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

You might need to consider your handle bar height & reach adjustments in relation to the seat. Assuming you've got the proper seat height and setback distances correctly for proper leg to crank extension.

It's possible to add spacers to raise the stem, but only to a point, as you can't go too high over the fork steer tube. Also a more angled up stem + riser bars will add height.


----------



## LWright (Jan 29, 2006)

People who ride for recreation or exercise do not need a racers position. as long as your frame is the right size, you should be able to reach a comfortable riding position without too much effort. Riser Bars, Shorter, hi rise stems, adding more spacers under the stem if you have the room.
See lots of mountain bikes being sold with a more relaxed position these days.


----------



## Slowand steady (Sep 7, 2009)

I was in the same or similar situation as the OP. I recommend you take a look at some of the Salsa Motoace SUL stems and maybe a set or Mary Bars or the similar Origin 8 Space Bars. 

The combo will give you plenty of rise and the salsa stem(s) will give just about any combo of length and rise you might ever need...


----------



## byknuts (Aug 9, 2008)

bent over = weight over the front wheel = traction on the front wheel for better steering

not necessary if you're just plunking along.
but offroad you need that traction to make sure your front tire doesn't wash out and you get tossed off the trail. shorter stems and higher bars are the solution for recreational riders on "mountain" bikes.


----------



## Slowand steady (Sep 7, 2009)

In order to weight your front wheel properly, part of the equation is stem length and where it positions your bar/hands in relation to the front hub. If your bar is too far back the wheel tends to pop up and unweights easily losing traction etc.

How far back is too far back? i.e. what is the recommended range that the bar (or hands in the case of mary or space bars) should be set up behind the front hub?


----------



## hygieneboy (May 25, 2009)

I put BMX bars on my mountain bikes and love it!!! Do whatever you feel is most comfortable for the type of riding you do. Everybody is different.


----------



## Integra96 (May 11, 2009)

Bump.

Are there any brands known for more relaxed riding positions/geometry? I'd like a fast(ish) XC bike, but I'm very much willing to give up some race-like qualities for comfort. My current bike is a 1990s stretched out race style rig.


----------



## Hotwheels103 (Feb 25, 2010)

Lol i love beinding over in my tight summer biker shorts if u knw what i mean  check out a short video i made of me at
http://*****/8ZTQF

Lemme knw what u think  !

Thanks. X


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Integra96 said:


> Bump.
> 
> Are there any brands known for more relaxed riding positions/geometry? I'd like a fast(ish) XC bike, but I'm very much willing to give up some race-like qualities for comfort. My current bike is a 1990s stretched out race style rig.


The 90s bikes frequently had long stems and stretched out geometry. If you go out and ride some bikes on the showroom floors then you'll find out that every bike will fit more comfortably than your current rig. As always:

Ride everything in your price range
Pick the one that fits well and is the most fun to ride


----------



## ae111black (Dec 27, 2008)

I had recently ridden a friends comfort bike to check it out. Coming right off my "performance" commuter the riding position felt rather percarious.... twitchy and sketchy being so upright! It definitely would compromise any off road riding I'd feel comfortable doing!


----------

