# want a shorter stem



## ionlylooklazy (Aug 26, 2009)

Hey, I bought a Trek 1.1 a few weeks ago.

When I bought my bike, they told me I had long legs and had trouble attaining the proper reach on my handlebars. When I tried a smaller frame, my legs felt cramped. The person suggested that I would have trouble finding a good fit without buying a shorter stem.

I went to the LBS today to ask about stems. They suggested this stem to me:

http://store.trekbikes.com/jump.jsp...ath=1,2,442,451&iProductID=2004&bShopOnline=1

Which is different than the stem on my bike.

On my bike the stem has written, 105mm, 10degree rise. It's got the Bontrager B logo on the front and SPORT written down the side.

I'd like to find a stem thats 80mm ideally.

Whats with the bontrager sport stem? I cant find any info online.


----------



## suprcivic (Apr 10, 2009)

first off, a reputable bike shop should have swapped the stem out for you free of charge when you bought the bike. this is standard fare and the reason you buy local.

secondly, don't worry about the brand of stem you replace it with. unless you are going for a high end, light weight stem, those in the middle of the pack are mostly created equal. get the one with the correct length, clamp size and rise. the one you linked is a reasonable price for a reasonable stem. 

if you are compitent with an allen wrench you can buy a different one and install it yourself. it is really easy to do and should take about 10 minutes.


----------



## ionlylooklazy (Aug 26, 2009)

suprcivic said:


> first off, a reputable bike shop should have swapped the stem out for you free of charge when you bought the bike. this is standard fare and the reason you buy local.
> 
> secondly, don't worry about the brand of stem you replace it with. unless you are going for a high end, light weight stem, those in the middle of the pack are mostly created equal. get the one with the correct length, clamp size and rise. the one you linked is a reasonable price for a reasonable stem.
> 
> if you are compitent with an allen wrench you can buy a different one and install it yourself. it is really easy to do and should take about 10 minutes.



Yeah, this was the LBS, to be fair to the LBS, I was pretty intent on riding away in my bike after spending the week trying out lots of bikes at different LBS's.

I found this stem, it comes in 80mm with the same rise, and for about the same price.

http://www.bikesomewhere.com/bikesomewhere.cfm/product/7/35/34275

would this be compatible with my trek 1.1?


----------



## pdh777 (Oct 7, 2005)

looks like your bike has standard bars with a 26mm clamp - verify this.

If true those would be fine for your bike.

Note - most modern bars have an oversized (OS) clamp - 31.8mm. Again verify your clamp size, then it's all good.


----------



## suprcivic (Apr 10, 2009)

^ agreed.

check your bars. they will usually say the diameter right on the front.


----------



## ionlylooklazy (Aug 26, 2009)

Yup, 26.0mm thanks for the help!


----------



## andulong (Nov 23, 2006)

Might be worth a try to go back to the shop and tell them you are still not happy with the fit. They might accomodate you with a new stem.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ionlylooklazy said:


> Hey, I bought a Trek 1.1 a few weeks ago.
> 
> *When I bought my bike, they told me I had long legs and had trouble attaining the proper reach on my handlebars. When I tried a smaller frame, my legs felt cramped. The person suggested that I would have trouble finding a good fit without buying a shorter stem.*
> I went to the LBS today to ask about stems. They suggested this stem to me:
> ...


The bolded statement makes me wonder if you even have the right sized frame or, the best geo for your proportions. Seriously. IMO, if you do, you wouldn't be looking at 80 mm stems. Generally speaking, stem lengths between 100 - 120 are the norm, and while going to an 80 isn't detrimental, it does point up the possibility that your weight distribution on the bike isn't ideal. 

At minimum, I agree with andulong that you should revisit the LBS for a proper fit session, but I'd go further and discuss options to resize with the LBS owner/ manager. IMO bikes with a shorter effective top tube would be a better choice.


----------



## ionlylooklazy (Aug 26, 2009)

thanks for the advice, I think I'll try riding it back to the LBS and ask to try some shorter stems.


also, about weight distrobution, how much weight should I be putting on the saddle, pedals, handlebars?

I like the fit of my bike when I'm attacking hills, but when I'm just cruising around flats with my butt planted on the seat is when my arms are almost fully extended with my hands on the grips


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ionlylooklazy said:


> thanks for the advice, I think I'll try riding it back to the LBS and ask to try some shorter stems.
> 
> 
> also, *about weight distrobution, how much weight should I be putting on the saddle, pedals, handlebars?*
> ...


It's not so much about weight_ you put on _saddle/ bar, etc. as it is the weight _that is on _them, which is dictated by sizing/ fit - your position on the bike. You're correct that weight distribution relates to contact points, but the 'measurements' (so to speak) are front/ rear - 40/60 being near ideal, respectively.

If you're otherwise comfortable on your bike it's most likely sized correctly (for you) and a shorter stem is all that's required, but I'd work something out with the LBS for swaps, and keep the changes small - trying a 90 mm first.

For a more detailed description of proper weight distribution (and the reasons it's important), see the link below:
http://www.cptips.com/bkefit.htm
Scroll down to *Weight distribution *


----------



## ktuck (Jul 3, 2008)

I'm trying to get some of this stuff figured out also, but last year I made some big changes in my posture and tried going from a negative angle 110 to a positive angle 90. The difference in handling was shocking - with the higher 90, my bike was very squirrely and I was afraid to descend at normal speeds.

I eventually tried shallow/compact bars and solved my problem without having to use a shorter stem.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ktuck said:


> I'm trying to get some of this stuff figured out also, but last year I made some big changes in my posture and tried going from a negative angle 110 to a positive angle 90. The difference in handling was shocking - with the higher 90, my bike was very squirrely and I was afraid to descend at normal speeds.
> 
> I eventually tried shallow/compact bars and solved my problem without having to use a shorter stem.


You don't say the degrees changed in angle or if you added/ removed any spacers, so I couldn't calculate the saddle to bar change, but I suspect your perceptions of a change in handling played more of a part that any real change. 110 - 90 wouldn't cause handling to change to any discernable degree. 

If your 'fix' of going to short reach/ drop bars worked for you, that's great, but the thing to keep in mind is that option only changes reach and drop when the rider is in the drops and, depending on bar shape, hoods (to a lesser degree), but the tops are unaffected because saddle to bar drop stays the same.


----------



## ktuck (Jul 3, 2008)

Is a more upright position, like when I flipped and shortened my stem, inherently less stable than a lower position? It seemed to me that it might be. (And actually, it was 120 to 90, if that makes a difference.)

And, I'm not above thinking that there was a psychological component involved. I had read that a shorter stem changes the "leverage" over the wheel creating a less stable configuration. (A friend told me that a medication I took caused muscle soreness so I immediately had sore muscles. A pharmacist told me that it didn't and the discomfort went away. I'm a believer!)

The shallow bars brought my hoods and drops in much closer without moving my bar tops in too close. It used to be that either the tops or the drops were in the right position. Now they both feel good.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ktuck said:


> Is a more upright position, like when I flipped and shortened my stem, inherently less stable than a lower position? It seemed to me that it might be. (And actually, it was 120 to 90, if that makes a difference.)
> 
> And, I'm not above thinking that there was a psychological component involved. I had read that a shorter stem changes the "leverage" over the wheel creating a less stable configuration. (A friend told me that a medication I took caused muscle soreness so I immediately had sore muscles. A pharmacist told me that it didn't and the discomfort went away. I'm a believer!)
> 
> The shallow bars brought my hoods and drops in much closer without moving my bar tops in too close. It used to be that either the tops or the drops were in the right position. Now they both feel good.


In your last post you mentioned going from a negative to positive angle, so I knew it meant flipped up , but you didn't say what the angle was. 

110 to 90, 120 to 90 doesn't matter. Generally speaking, anywhere between about 80 and 130 and the steering of a bike isn't adversely affected. Yes, I've read all about the 'leverage' theories, but if you notice, once you get up any appreciable speed, you don't so much _turn_ your bars to make a turn, rather, _you lean _into the direction of the turn. This is why when people talk about the danger of toe overlap, it's only when they're putting along at about 3 MPH, because a rider will turn the wheel a little more at such a slow speed. Bottom line, as long as it feels good, don't fret about that magnitude of change. And no, flipping the stem up (or down, for that matter) won't make any difference either, except to bar height.

Regarding the bar change. Yes, short reach/ drop bars will bring the hoods and drops closer, but because the top fastens at the stem, unless you changed _both_ stem length _and_ bars, the tops of bars maintain the same reach. If you think otherwise, I'd have to agree with that psychological component remark.


----------



## ktuck (Jul 3, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> ...Yes, short reach/ drop bars will bring the hoods and drops closer, but because the top fastens at the stem, unless you changed _both_ stem length _and_ bars, the tops of bars maintain the same reach. ...


 Right, but I liked where my tops were. However, I couldn't ride comfortably in my drops for any length of time. And, I was in a little more aggressive position than I wanted when on the hoods.

Anyway, back to the original poster's dilemma. What worked for me was figuring out how to quickly change out my stem and then trying several from a place that would accept returns. I first thought I could sort things out with a pencil, paper, and a bit of geometry, but the best solution came from trying several different stems on long rides. (If your local shop won't cooperate, www.performancebike.com will take just about anything back, at almost any time.)

PJ352 - thanks for the link to sizing articles. I'm going to be building up a new bike soon and I'll use those articles to double-check my current setup before I duplicate it.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ktuck said:


> PJ352 - thanks for the link to sizing articles. *I'm going to be building up a new bike soon *and I'll use those articles to double-check my current setup before I duplicate it.


_Very_ cool, one of my favorite things to do!! :thumbsup: 

Unless the geo of your new frame matches your current, I think you'll find that some aspects of fit, while coming close, will require some tweaks along the way. But measuring (a couple of times) is a given.

I'm sure you have a handle on things, but during the process if anything crops up you have questions/ concerns about, post or let me know. I'm always interested to hear how builds progress.

To the OP: Sorry, 'slightly' off topic, I know.


----------



## ionlylooklazy (Aug 26, 2009)

it's ok!


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

I have a 90 on my Trek and it handles like a dream yet......so I suspect that you will have no problem with a shorter stem


----------



## NJgreyhead (Jun 27, 2009)

Thanks very much for the link!

Ride on.


----------

