# Stem length.



## XCkiller (Aug 26, 2007)

My bike came with a 120mm stem with a 5 degree rise. It feels like i am leaning over the front end of the bike too much when i ride, as if the only thing that makes my bike (a medium size frame) fit me, is its longer stem. I almost feel awkward when i am riding it at times:skep: I know that the length of a stem affects how twitchy the steering is and how stable your front end is at high speeds. My question is, does the length of my stem affect my ability to manual and bunnyhop? I am able to get about 4 inches off the ground, but no higher. And no matter how much i practice and work on form it feels like there is something stopping me from getting more height Is it me or the stem?


----------



## electrik (Oct 22, 2009)

Longer stems make it harder to manual and bunnyhop(sure blame the stem!), it makes the steering inputs "slower"(think of a boat tiller), it makes it harder to descend and corner but easier to ascend.


----------



## XCkiller (Aug 26, 2007)

thanks electrik, thats what i figured... now i don't feel so bad about myself


----------



## Kaba Klaus (Jul 20, 2005)

electrik is spot on. You'll typically find longer stems on XC and race bikes. The longer stem positions the rider to pedal efficiently, takes the rider a bit out of the wind and helps to weigh the front wheel on climbs.

But it sucks for all technical riding. Doesn't matter if you are looking into tricks or rough trail riding, FR or DH. For technical applications you want a shorter stem.

Now: changing the stem is a pretty easy project and stems can be purchased cheap. So it makes total sense to have more than one. For learning tricks such as bunny hops I'd recommend either a very short stem (50mm) or something with a steep angle that brings the bar up. Essentially you want to have the bar close to the head tube and high up. This makes lifting the front for a bunny hop or a manual so much easier.

Once you mastered the move - you'll find it all works with the long stem, too. But learning the move is so much easier with a short/high stem.


----------



## drz400sm (Nov 12, 2008)

keep in mind...if you get a stem thats too short you might have a hard time keeping the front wheel on the ground when climbing


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

If you're too far forward with that stem but you think you need all 120mm to get a good fit, you're on too small a frame. Total bummer.  What other lengths have you tried?

As far as length effecting your ability to manual, bunnyhop, climb, etc, the above posters are right. The good news is that I think for most of us, there's a stem length that's long enough to climb and short enough to get that front wheel off the ground. If you have a local shop with a used stem bin, check it out. Otherwise, order a shorter one, or a couple if you have the budget, from someplace cheap. You can go back to bling when you find your One True Stem length.


----------



## derailin_palin (Nov 17, 2008)

Do a search on stem length and you will find pages and pages of awakened testimonials to the effect of "I went from 120-110-100 to 80-70-60-50mm and now I am a descending god".

Personally I went from 100mm to 70mm and the difference is phenomenal. The fork doesn't blow through travel on descents or braking any more, the steering is quicker, I don't get that constant about-to-endo feeling when the bike points downward, wheelies are easier (manuals too, but I still can't do one). The kicker is, I'm riding a small size frame (Sette Flite 17") when I am 5'11" and should rightfully be on a medium, but even with the short stem I don't feel like I am cramped in the saddle, I just sit a bit more upright. The downside is front wheel wandering on steep climbs, but a fork with travel adjust fixes that.

EDIT: Here's a nice diagram of stem and bar height. 
http://www.leelikesbikes.com/shorter-stem-with-more-rise.html#more-1237


----------



## XCkiller (Aug 26, 2007)

yeah, its weird. cause im 5'11'' and on a medium frame. but i feel like if my stem were any shorter it would almost be unridable. It already seems pretty small on me as is And i was comparing my current frame dimensions to those of the potential bike i may be getting (size large), and the measurements are very similar, often times less than an inch. Now i know the geometry between all bikes are completely different, but i am concerned i will have this problem on my next bike too.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I'm 5'8" and ride a medium as well. I find it to be a pretty comfortable size.

But bear in mind that the proportions of bikes are based on the proportions of an idealized rider of a certain height. Someone with longer legs and a shorter torso would have a hard time finding a bike that had both a short enough top tube and a long enough head tube; someone with a long torso might find that bikes that put the bars in the right place didn't have enough standover clearance or put the bars far enough from the saddle but wouldn't let them be low enough.

My point being that you really need to test-ride some bikes to figure it out. A lot of people, me included, believe in a "magic number" that's more important than any other measurement on the bike - effective top tube length. It shows up in almost all geometry charts, so if your ride a bunch of bikes and find one with a fit you like, you can look up the effective top tube length and be pretty confident that another bike with the same top tube length (assuming a similar cockpit setup) will give you a good fit as well.

Stem length increments are pretty small, and the range of conventional MTB stems is about 65-120mm (last time I said this, someone jumped down my throat. Yes there are longer and shorter. They're just a little harder to find.) So if the bike companies are going to make bikes that let people choose a stem length and handlebar style based on desired handling characteristics, not just making the fit acceptable, they really shouldn't have more than about a 30mm increment on length. So yeah - that 1" or so increment is about right. But you might find an XL is a good fit for you.


----------



## derailin_palin (Nov 17, 2008)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I'm 5'8" and ride a medium as well. I find it to be a pretty comfortable size.
> ...
> My point being that you really need to test-ride some bikes to figure it out. A lot of people, me included, believe in a "magic number" that's more important than any other measurement on the bike - effective top tube length. It shows up in almost all geometry charts, so if your ride a bunch of bikes and find one with a fit you like, you can look up the effective top tube length and be pretty confident that another bike with the same top tube length (assuming a similar cockpit setup) will give you a good fit as well.


Hmm, maybe that explains why I feel fine riding a size "small" (with a stem between 70-90mm) when the geometry charts for the Flite AM say I should be between medium and large: the effective top tube is 56.5cm. I am 5'11" and ride a 56cm/22" TT road bike (with 100mm stem). The medium Flite has a length of 58.5cm/23" which seems a bit much for me. Also, my inseam is 32" and the medium has a standover height of 31.75", which is quite below the recommended 2" for mountain bikes. The small has 30.25", much more reasonable. So, despite the geometry charts, a size small seems to fit me OK, even if I have a bit more seatpost showing to make up for the 1" shorter seat tube. Mountain bike fits are kinda weird it seems, there are more variables than with road bike fitting.


----------



## XCkiller (Aug 26, 2007)

I think i am just gonna have to go with a test ride to determine the size i will need:thumbsup: But because of the technical riding i do, I have a feeling i will end up going with a large, since a shorter stem is preferable for the type of riding i do.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

derailin_palin said:


> Hmm, maybe that explains why I feel fine riding a size "small" (with a stem between 70-90mm) when the geometry charts for the Flite AM say I should be between medium and large: the effective top tube is 56.5cm. I am 5'11" and ride a 56cm/22" TT road bike (with 100mm stem). The medium Flite has a length of 58.5cm/23" which seems a bit much for me. Also, my inseam is 32" and the medium has a standover height of 31.75", which is quite below the recommended 2" for mountain bikes. The small has 30.25", much more reasonable. So, despite the geometry charts, a size small seems to fit me OK, even if I have a bit more seatpost showing to make up for the 1" shorter seat tube. Mountain bike fits are kinda weird it seems, there are more variables than with road bike fitting.


You need to be a little careful about comparing top tube lengths across bicycle types. A typical road bike configuration might be a 100mm stem, drop bars, and aero brakes. The current fashion is to ride with one's hands on the brake hoods. The drop bars and aero brakes add a few inches to the reach.

An old-school flat bar with no bend would not change the reach at all, but most of us have at least a little sweep on our mountain bikes. Depending on the amount of sweep, the bars will subtract a fraction of an inch from the reach.

Of course, most people who ride both types of bikes also have different riding positions. I'm enough of a geek to record the reaches on my "fun" bikes. Seat post to bar clamp on my 'cross bike is 24", on my road bike is 26" and on my mountain bike is 27". So including hoods, the longest reach is on my road bike and my mountain and cross bikes are probably about the same. However, my top tube lengths are pretty different from bike to bike.

OP, you're right - riding a lot of bikes is the only way to figure it out. Off-road if at all possible.


----------



## Drth Vadr (Jul 24, 2009)

XCkiller said:


> yeah, its weird. cause im 5'11'' and on a medium frame. but i feel like if my stem were any shorter it would almost be unridable. It already seems pretty small on me as is And i was comparing my current frame dimensions to those of the potential bike i may be getting (size large), and the measurements are very similar, often times less than an inch. Now i know the geometry between all bikes are completely different, but i am concerned i will have this problem on my next bike too.


At 5'11 your what I like to call a tweener. A medium feels just a little small and a large feels just a little big, but that's just the 100mm XC stem that comes on most bikes that exaggerates the cock pit during the fitting at the LBS, so when you change the stem (like we all do) the bike all of a sudden doesn't fit as well.. Get a frame with a 24" TT length and then you could ride shorter stems and still have a comfortable cock pit for all day epics. As a tweener you will not be able to throw the LG bike around as easily as your M. It will feel a little slow, sluggish and clumsy in turn (especially switch backs) at first. but that will change with seat time and a little tweek-n.


----------



## bradjammin (May 22, 2014)

Hey folks,
Newbie here.
For what it's worth I just bought my first setup, all XL as I'm 6'2".
Stem is roughly 110mm and I find A LOT of my weight is on my hands. 
Been recommended to fit a shorter stem (58mm on it's way) and see how that goes.
B


----------



## Travis McOuat (Jan 14, 2015)

This is my reply to a similar post, it' time for me to give back to the community! As mentioned throughout, fit is different for everyone, so it is hard to give this type of advice. However, I have some info that is worth noting.

This is just my two cents. I don't have a specific riding style. I love to climb and with fast downhills. I also ride single track and technical stuff sometimes.

The main thing I want to point out here is to just be careful when changing up stem/handle bar lengths. This is ESPEC true if you have been riding with a certain set up for a long period of time. There are definitely some benefits to wider bars and shorter stems, but as mentioned before, individual body mechanics get used to a certain position over time.

For 20 years I had my set-up very narrow, 420mm bars with a 120mm stem. No one would ever set a bike up that way now, but the idea was to have strong climbing and it was great for that. I had no problems with downhill speed. The main reason I changed up was for fatigue and circulation problems in certain areas. Wider, 730mm riser bars helped right away with that. The problem was that the long stem did not work well with the wide bars. Crazy tire wander and trouble steering. I decided to move to a 100mm stem. That improved things some what. 

Then the real problem occurred, I moved to a 50mm stem. This all happened with 45 days or so. This was a big mistake. My body was just not prepared for the change. The problem was with climbing. I was so back heavy and so accustomed to pulling hard with my upper body that it was crazy squirrelly.

Long story (ha) short I couldn't keep my front tire down, fell backwards and broke my wrist.

I have been riding off-road for 30 years. That's right, I was on the trail back in the old days. So my experience level is high. I have plenty of war-wounds but nothing like this has ever happened. It is 100% due to the stem length and bar width. Wrong set-up for me and also too much too fast.

So be careful and take it slow!

I cut my bars to 680mm and run a 100mm stem, which is perfect for me.


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

I have to agree greatly that when buying a bike they need to have multiple stem/bar length options.

Also u can shorten a stem to bring your weight back while adding longer bars so open up the cockpit a bit so you dont feel cramped.

Also as I learned, as long as while wearing padded shorts (so package is supported close to body) as long as things aren't being pushed up inside, stand over clearance when it comes to bike fit I grossly overrated. But seems more often now the more aggressive style the bike is built for, the more the tt is lowered to clr things. Based on old school stand over 19" for xc hardtail was biggest I could go, but damned If a 21" Fs didn't fit me like a glove, and because of lowered tt, I have the same stand over. 21" by same manufacturer in hardtail is interestingly close. But 21" I got funny look when I told guy at demo to lower the seat, with the dropper he lowered it almost all the way (not the dropper but at seat tube).

There is so many things to consider when it comes to fit, but stand over is the last one I worry about now, as long as tt isn't trying to give me a sex change when I first throw my leg over.


----------



## jekylljim (Nov 10, 2014)

I remember the days when it was next to impossible to find a short stem. Then some started to flow through in the late nineties, for example, Azonic developed the "Shorty" for the new era DH World

I never liked long stems. I also remember cutting down straight XC bars to as narrow as you dare!

I think its all personal preference but for AM/FR/DH I would personally chose a short stem. Much more control at high speeds and easy to pull up the front end to roll over/manual stuff.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

I am riding a Giant Trance X 29er 0 and it came with a 90mm stem. I thought it was correct, but now I realize it is too long. Took me over 400 miles of technical riding to really start to know enough to want the change.

My hands fall asleep on the bars, so I have too much hand pressure. It is hard for me to wheelie or bunny-hop. On descents I have to lean back a lot to not endo. On climbs even, I have to lean back to not lose rear-wheel traction. When you are leaning back on climbs, something is wrong.

I am trying 60mm (shortest Giant makes for their OD2) and see what happens.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

jekylljim said:


> I remember the days when it was next to impossible to find a short stem. Then some started to flow through in the late nineties, for example, Azonic developed the "Shorty" for the new era DH World


My 1995ish Merlin came with a 130mm. But the frame was sized to factor that in. Meaning, I can't just put a shorter stem on that geometry as then the reach would be too short. Top tubes were more level back then.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

XCkiller said:


> yeah, its weird. cause im 5'11'' and on a medium frame. but i feel like if my stem were any shorter it would almost be unridable. It already seems pretty small on me as is And i was comparing my current frame dimensions to those of the potential bike i may be getting (size large), and the measurements are very similar, often times less than an inch. Now i know the geometry between all bikes are completely different, but i am concerned i will have this problem on my next bike too.


Each brand is different. In Giant, you are still in a medium. Your seat may be too far forward. Check that.

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/_upload_au/rider_height_frame_size.pdf


----------



## andytiedye (Jul 26, 2014)

I put adjustable stems on my bikes.

Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


----------

