saddle height vs stem height

<[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the stem and bars should be?
What I am asking is is there a norm or is it just personal preference?

Personal preference. Taller riders tend to prefer a lower handlebar. Faster and younger riders, too.
Except for track riders, the current trend is for a higher handlebar than 20 years ago, though. Few
people have their handlebar 6 inches below their seat anymore. 1 to 3 inches is more common.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the

stem

Quoted message said:

and bars should be? What I am asking is is there a norm or is it just personal preference? To
clarify my question, if one were to draw an imaginary line parallel from the top of the saddle to
the front of the

bike,

Quoted message said:

then dropped a perpendicular line to the top of the stem, what should the distance of that
perpendicular line be? Thanks ahead of time.

Matt Payne

Saddle height is dictated by kind of riding, personal physiology, and preference. So there is no
'formula' that says if you are "X" the saddle/bar height ratio is "Y". I usually run my saddle/bars
about even, change to slightly higher bar height for longer rides and lower bar height for shorter
or more aggressive rides.

Matt Payne said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the

stem

Quoted message said:

and bars should be? What I am asking is is there a norm or is it just personal preference? To
clarify my question, if one were to draw an imaginary line parallel from the top of the saddle to
the front of the

bike,

Quoted message said:

then dropped a perpendicular line to the top of the stem, what should the distance of that
perpendicular line be?

No formula. Racers generally have more of a drop than recreational riders. Some folks prefer the
bars at the same height (or even higher than) the saddle. Others like the bars lower.

Lower bars give better aerodynamics, but can result in neck and back strain unless you are very
flexible. It also shifts more weight onto your arms and hands.

Art Harris

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the stem and bars should be?
What I am asking is is there a norm or is it just personal preference? To clarify my question, if
one were to draw an imaginary line parallel from the top of the saddle to the front of the bike,
then dropped a perpendicular line to the top of the stem, what should the distance of that
perpendicular line be? Thanks ahead of time.

Matt Payne

I find that if I have my bars too high, I have more butt pain due to more weight shifted back.
Especially on my flat bar commuter.

In Eddy Merckx's time the bars were at same height. It's like lots of other things, fashion.

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the

Quoted message said:

stem and bars should be? What I am asking is is there a norm or is it just personal preference?

Personal preference. Remember that because threadless has been forced upon us it is more difficult
to raise the bars . For racing lower bars are better - for comfort most would agree that having the
bars 1-3 inches below saddle is ideal. Bars above saddle ala cruiser is comfortable but inefficent
as all pedalling is done by quads instead of the glutes and other muscle groups. Mine are about 1.5
inches lower than saddle and I find that to be fine for me.

Whoever wrote that the current fashion is for stems to be higher than they were 20 years ago hasn't
been paying attention or only buys bikes from Grant Petersen.

The exact opposite is true, from looking in any bike magazine or any bike shop showroom floor. The
only bikes with high stems or handlebars level with the saddle tend to be "comfort bikes" aimed at
aging nonathletic baby boomers. Virtually every "proper" road bike is set up with the bars at a
height appropriate for 26 year old European professionals.

It's unfortunate, as for most people having drop bars about level with the saddle is far more
comfortable and makes the entire bar useable. The modern aero position may work for the young and
beautiful and/or the unusually flexible, but for most riders it leads to numb hands, sore neck
and shoulders, sore arms and a bike parked permanently in the garage. I exaggerate just a little,
I suppose.

My wife and I went and rode the Root River Trail in southern Minnesota on July 5 and saw hundreds of
riders. The vast majority were on "comfort bikes" and those on road bikes were riding 25 year old
ten speeds with teh bars about level with the saddle because the frames were sized so much more
sensibly than is the case nowadays. Although there were some fat middle-aged CamelBak-wearing
maillot jaunes out there grimacing in pain as they rode along at 16 mph...

Matt Payne asked:

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the stem and bars should be?

No. This depends on riding style and conditioning as much as on body dimensions. It also depends on
rider weight. When I was at 270 pounds I needed the bars higher than I do now that I'm down to 225.

Quoted message said:

What I am asking is is there a norm or is it just personal preference?

In a sense, everything is personal preference, but that's rather an oversimplification.

Quoted message said:

To clarify my question, if one were to draw an imaginary line parallel from the top of the saddle
to the front of the bike, then dropped a perpendicular line to the top of the stem, what should
the distance of that perpendicular line be? Thanks ahead of time.

Your question is perfectly clear; the answer, however, isn't.

See also: sheldonbrown.compain.htmlOpen ↗

Sheldon "Easy Question, Difficult Answer" Brown +--------------------------------------------------+
| For every complex problem, there is a solution | that is simple, neat, and wrong. | --H. L.
| Mencken |
+--------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

III said:

older backs; bigger bellies..... a personal observation

More to it than that. In older pictures, you saw the riders riding more in the drops and the bars
were not as far down or far out either. It seems more people ride the hoods and the bar can be lowe
and further away. They also used to ride longer bicycles.

Tim McNamara said:

Whoever wrote that the current fashion is for stems to be higher than they were 20 years ago
hasn't been paying attention or only buys bikes from Grant Petersen.

I agree. Petersen/Rivendell/Sheldon Brown are the only folks I'm aware of who so vocally advocate
the high stem position. Of course I'm well aware that others like this position, so just hold off
before blasting me with a retort.

Quoted message said:

The exact opposite is true, from looking in any bike magazine or any bike shop showroom floor. The
only bikes with high stems or handlebars level with the saddle tend to be "comfort bikes" aimed at
aging nonathletic baby boomers. Virtually every "proper" road bike is set up with the bars at a
height appropriate for 26 year old European professionals.

It's unfortunate, as for most people having drop bars about level with the saddle is far more
comfortable and makes the entire bar useable. The modern aero position may work for the young and
beautiful and/or the unusually flexible, but for most riders it leads to numb hands, sore neck and
shoulders, sore arms and a bike parked permanently in the garage. I exaggerate just a little, I
suppose.

Yes, I think you've exaggerated a bit. A low bar initially produces sore neck/trapezius muscles,
but I ride with the bars about 4.5 inches below the nose of the saddle and have had no soreness
after working through the initial soreness. Now that I'm comfortable in this position, I feel very
comfortable and balanced on the bike, with no soreness or excess pressure on either my hands or
crotch. In fact, I find I'm pulling UP on the bars as much as pushing down on them, or so it
seems. My hands rest very lightly on the bars and I never experience numbness, even during a 4 or
5 hour ride.

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the stem

Quoted message said:

and bars should be?

If you not very flexible or a racer probably a good place to start is have the bars high enough so
when your on the top, you have very little or no weight on your hands and arms. You can still achive
a more aggressive position by changing to the hoods or the drops but have this "bail out" position
if you start experiencing pain. Steve

Quoth Tim McNamara:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Whoever wrote that the current fashion is for stems to be higher than they were 20 years ago
hasn't been paying attention or only buys bikes from Grant Petersen.

Richard Ney said:

I agree. Petersen/Rivendell/Sheldon Brown are the only folks I'm aware of who so vocally advocate
the high stem position. Of course I'm well aware that others like this position, so just hold off
before blasting me with a retort.

I think it's rather more than just the two of us.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The exact opposite is true, from looking in any bike magazine or any bike shop showroom floor. The
only bikes with high stems or handlebars level with the saddle tend to be "comfort bikes" aimed at
aging nonathletic baby boomers. Virtually every "proper" road bike is set up with the bars at a
height appropriate for 26 year old European professionals.

This rather patronizing attitude toward "aging nonathletic baby-boomers" is typical of the
pernicious influece the racer mentality has had on cycling in general.

Racing is a teeny, relatively unimportant sub-category of cycling, but many magazines (and newsgroup
posters and bicycle product managers) lend it much more importance than it deserves.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's unfortunate, as for most people having drop bars about level with the saddle is far more
comfortable and makes the entire bar useable. The modern aero position may work for the young and
beautiful and/or the unusually flexible, but for most riders it leads to numb hands, sore neck and
shoulders, sore arms and a bike parked permanently in the garage. I exaggerate just a little, I
suppose.

This is true. Indeed, when I was at my higher weight, I suffered a great deal of wrist discomfort
and was in agony at anything over 15-20 miles. 45 pounds lighter has made a big difference.

Most Americans are, in fact overweight, and it is unrealistic to attempt to fit them as if they were
athletic ectomorphs.

I tend to believe that the typical "comfort" bike is as extreme in its own way as the flat-back
racing position in the other direction. Many cyclists in decent condition, who are not actually
"athletes", can be quite happy on a drop-bar bike _if_ the handlebars can be adjusted to a
comfortable position.

Far too many cyclists are stuck on ill-fitted bikes. Here's a test: Do you spend at least 10%-30% of
your riding time on the drops? If not, I would consider this proof that your bike is not properly
set up for you. Many cyclists, riding bikes set up with racers in mind, _never_ use the drops.

Quoted message said:

Yes, I think you've exaggerated a bit. A low bar initially produces sore neck/trapezius muscles,
but I ride with the bars about 4.5 inches below the nose of the saddle and have had no soreness
after working through the initial soreness. Now that I'm comfortable in this position, I feel very
comfortable and balanced on the bike, with no soreness or excess pressure on either my hands or
crotch. In fact, I find I'm pulling UP on the bars as much as pushing down on them, or so it
seems. My hands rest very lightly on the bars and I never experience numbness, even during a 4 or
5 hour ride.

I only know you from the phone and Internet, but I'm guessing that you're a thin
person...am I wrong?

Sheldon "My Customers Are Generally Not Racing Cyclists" Brown
+-------------------------------------------------+
| What is good for you is what is good for you. | --Peter Chisholm |
+-------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

"Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In Eddy Merckx's time the bars were at same height. It's like lots of

other

Quoted message said:

things, fashion.

IIRC, the drops on the bars were bigger than they are today.

Might be wrong... Anyone?

Mike

Since this is a handlebar thread, I have a question. I just bought a new mountain bike, and
installed a 135 mm 40 degree stem to raise the handlebars just about even with the seat. I could use
a slightly more upright posture, presumably with handlebars that have a little more rise and/or a
little more sweep. The question is: do I care which? The current position of the bars is about an
inch forward of where they are on my comfort bike, and I like that one.

Right wrong or indifferent, I tried to match the geometry of my comfort bike by going to a smaller
mtn frame (also to get standover clearance). Is it a trend that higher handlebar heights lend
themselves to shorter top tubes?

Any constructive comments would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Steve.

P.S.I tried the original stem that put the bars about 2 1/2 inches below the seat. I was in
significant discomfort 5 minutes into our group ride (still on the flat rail bed), I strained a
muscle in my neck trying to look up on the first steep downhill section, and I went over the
bars riding over a big rock (although the low bars allowed me to flip over completely, landing
on my back without a scratch on my helmet). I fail to see the benefit.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Is there a formula that should dictate how far below saddle height the stem and bars should be?

-----------

totally depends on what your goal is, and what kind of rider you are. there is a balance between
aerodynamics, "comfort", and physical efficiency. a lower/flatter position will give reduced frontal
area, hence better aerodynamics; as well as use slightly different muscles. BUT, if you are not
flexible, or a little "heavy", or looking for the last 5%, then it may not be worth the strain.

a good ballpark measure is to balance the overall discomfort.... ie. if your back hurts more than
your butt after an hour, the bars may be too low.

d

In article said:

III said:

older backs; bigger bellies..... a personal observation

More to it than that. In older pictures, you saw the riders riding more in the drops and the bars
were not as far down or far out either. It seems more people ride the hoods and the bar can be
lowe and further away.

People ride on the hoods because the bars are so far away and so low that riding in the drops is all
but impossible for most people. I think you have the formulation exactly backwards. Of course,
brifters also encourage riding on the hoods because that's the best place to operate the levers- I
personally find the Campy brifter shape to be the most comfortable brake lever ever made.

Quoted message said:

They also used to ride longer bicycles.

The bikes were longer in terms of wheelbase and geometry; but riders are now much more stretched out
on road bikes- IMHO mainly the influence of Greg Lemond's book on the expectations of US racers-
than they were 20 years ago.

In article <_13Oa.2174$7e.1673@fed1read07>,

Mike S.' mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet said:

"Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In Eddy Merckx's time the bars were at same height. It's like lots of other things, fashion.

IIRC, the drops on the bars were bigger than they are today.

Might be wrong... Anyone?

The old Merckx bend (Cinelli Mod. 66) had huge drops; modern bars tend to be shallow drops because
the bars are already so low that no one can comfortably reach those big old drops. Thus we have
"ergo" bars because the radii of shallow drop bars are uncomfortable to the hands. The reach of
modern drop bars is also shorter, as brifter bodies are much longer than the old brake lever
bodies were.

Profile made a bar with a gigantic drop in the past 10 years, and the Nitto 176 hada relatively deep
drop. Both are out of production, as far as I know.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In Eddy Merckx's time the bars were at same height. It's like lots of other things, fashion.

IIRC, the drops on the bars were bigger than they are today.

Might be wrong... Anyone?

The old Merckx bend (Cinelli Mod. 66) had huge drops; modern bars tend to be shallow drops because
the bars are already so low that no one can comfortably reach those big old drops. Thus we have
"ergo" bars because the radii of shallow drop bars are uncomfortable to the hands. The reach of
modern drop bars is also shorter, as brifter bodies are much longer than the old brake lever
bodies were.

Profile made a bar with a gigantic drop in the past 10 years, and the Nitto 176 hada relatively
deep drop. Both are out of production, as far as I know.

Which brings us back to a low position when on the bottoms of the drops again... If you look at pics
of Eddy Merckx racing, his back is just as flat as say, Greg Lemond's, or (insert name of current
pro here), but with a completely different fitting system that was in use back then.

Short HTs combined with shallow, ergo drops = roughly the same position that Eddy used to race on.
Its when you try and sit up on the hoods or tops of the old bars that the biggest fit differences
are apparent.

I happen to like the control of the hoods better when I'm in a pack: the shifting and braking are a
lot easier for me on the hoods. I can just bend my elbows a little more and get the same position as
when I'm in the drops. Sprinting from on the hoods is a completely different story, however!

Mike

"Tim McNamara" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:timmcn-

Quoted message said:

People ride on the hoods because the bars are so far away and so low that riding in the drops is
all but impossible for most people.

I was at a bike fitting clinic conducted by two staf members of the Mapei racing team, and as they
fit each rider (members of my club in New York City) they asked him/her if he/she rode in the drops
much. If the rider answered "no" the Mapei guys said "Raise your bars a little."

For bike racing, these guys also had some norms that they used when fitting people at their
headquarters, where they measure body angles of riders on trainers. For amateurs they recommended
that the trunk be 15 to 20 degrees above horizontal when the rider is in the drops. For pros they
recommended 10 to 15 degrees. They also said these are just suggestions, and the angles vary
depending on how flexible the rider is.

JT

--
*******************************************
NB: reply-to address is munged

Visit jt10000.comjt10000.comOpen ↗
*******************************************