Bufort
New Member
- Mar 26, 2026
- 31
- 32
What stem doesn't spin if you don't tighten it up?!Yes, the stem spins, but not once you tighten the bolts.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What stem doesn't spin if you don't tighten it up?!Yes, the stem spins, but not once you tighten the bolts.
DH onesWhat stem doesn't spin if you don't tighten it up?!![]()
Agree to disagree,Not exactly, high rise bars don't shorten the stem, they shorten the reach. So if you reverse your stem and have -35mm reach, the high bars won't make that seem like -20mm, it will add to it, making the end result seem like -50mm. And 10mm rise is more like 2-3mm reduction in reach.
An 80mm rise bar on a reversed 35mm stem would put the bar ends approx 45mm behind the steerer tube, compared with 25mm in front of it the correct way round.
View attachment 180712
You have your bars unusually rolled forwards then. The point of the short 15-18mm stems is that bars are usually angled rearwards slightly, putting the grip 15-18mm behind the clamp, inline with the steerer.Agree to disagree,
My riser bar has a vertical rise of 70mm on a -50mm stem on 63deg headtube angle.
Center of grips is -40..-50mm behind center of steerer tube.
View attachment 181115
Bars have printed on indicator marks of rotation, with 0 deg aligned with horizontal on my bike, if anythig 0-deg-mark is pointing a few deg upwards from horizontal.You have your bars unusually rolled forwards then. The point of the short 15-18mm stems is that bars are usually angled rearwards slightly, putting the grip 15-18mm behind the clamp, inline with the steerer.
With your bars like this, when you had a normal forward facing 50mm stem, your grips would have been at ~55mm, whereas most other people's grips would have been at ~35mm.
The 0 mark on bars isn't the 'correct' setting, it's simply the angle bars have their rise measured from. But more importantly, they can't be used to compare two different bars, as the sweep on bars isn't just 2 dimensional, it's 3D, so the angle that the bars 'go up' from the clamp doesn't necessarily have any relevance to the final angle of the grips.Bars have printed on indicator marks of rotation, with 0 deg aligned with horizontal on my bike, if anythig 0-deg-mark is pointing a few deg upwards from horizontal.
The angle you have on the bars in your printout, where does it origine from ?
View attachment 181119
Awesome! I’m glad it’s coming along nicely! It will only keep getting better as you spend more time getting you and the bike dialed into it.Just took this stem out for a very long ride. Pushing 40 miles I think. Unsure as my phone died relatively early and I got lost. I'm definitely used to it now. It felt good and confidence inspiring sending it through lots of technical chunk.
View attachment 181180
Thank you!, the formula is being incorrectly quoted in places, so it was confusing.to get the ratio, Reach + chainstay / Reach![]()
Sorry answered a bit too quick.Thank you!, the formula is being incorrectly quoted in places, so it was confusing.
ok, well thank you again. Wait where is this coming from? What happened to reach? What?Sorry answered a bit too quick.
(Wheelbase - chainstays) / chainstays
reach impacts the wheelbase length from the BB (with the fork angle, offset & stack).ok, well thank you again. Wait where is this coming from? What happened to reach? What?
Reach has an effect on body position.ok, well thank you again. Wait where is this coming from? What happened to reach? What?
I’d say go for the Gen 2 90mm RR stem full -15mm offset, and likely even plus some spacers. I’m also 5’8”, and I would probably run that bike with the Gen 2 90mm RR stem and 60mm rise bars maybe even plus a few spacers for my preferences. You are within the range for sizing on that frame that I would want you to be on as I typically go for about 460mm - 480mm as a workable range at my height for the Gen 2 90mm and I would ride that quite happily for a fun and playful bike.I’m running an Intend +25mm stem and am enjoying the reduction but I want more bar rise and am limited to 20mm because of the clamp.
I’m considering a zero length stem and 50mm bars.
I’m 5’8” / 173cm tall (all in proportion!) and ride a medium Whyte Kado S with 460mm reach, 634mm stack, 1243 wheelbase and 450mm rear.
Thinking about a Null-Vorbau - Nullvorbau Vorbau Zero Stem Mountainbike Enduro stem and 50mm rise bars. Any thoughts on this set-up with my bike stats? @BeMoreBikes
Cheers!
https://theradavist.com/zero-offset-and-reduced-offset-mountain-bike-stemsbrands negative and zero offset stems:
where di you get the formula, is what I am asking, and can you point me to the original source.Reach has an effect on body position.
It does not alter the f/r ratio of the bike.
Longer reach is used to compensate for a higher f/r ratio. The ibis hd6 is a pretty good example of this.
Not sure, it's pretty much common knowledge like 2+2=4.where di you get the formula, is what I am asking, and can you point me to the original source.
I understand the ratio, but I don't think it affects the riders position, only the front centre does; the chainstay (which forms part of the equation) doesn't affect your stance, it affects handling. Two bikes with identical front-centre lengths, reach, which have the same stance, but can have different F/R ratios.Not sure, it's pretty much common knowledge like 2+2=4.
It's simply the foundational metric upon which to apply things like stack/reach/kinematics to get an idea for how a bike will perform.
Typically a bike with a ratio closer to 1.9 will have a more forward rider position, low and stretched out. A bike closer to 1.8 tends to have a more upright centralized riding position. That's painting in broad strokes though, there are always outliers.
Personally, I've found that bikes closer to 1.8 with a wheelbase around 1280-1290mm are my happy spot, but available terrain dictates desires for most people.
formula for determining whether you can run a reverse, high-rise stem is common knowledge like 2+2? Lol. Ok. Thanks. That immediately tells me the efficacy of this formula.Not sure, it's pretty much common knowledge like 2+2=4.
It's simply the foundational metric upon which to apply things like stack/reach/kinematics to get an idea for how a bike will perform.
Typically a bike with a ratio closer to 1.9 will have a more forward rider position, low and stretched out. A bike closer to 1.8 tends to have a more upright centralized riding position. That's painting in broad strokes though, there are always outliers.
Personally, I've found that bikes closer to 1.8 with a wheelbase around 1280-1290mm are my happy spot, but available terrain dictates desires for most people.
That's correct.I understand the ratio, but I don't think it affects the riders position, only the front centre does; the chainstay (which forms part of the equation) doesn't affect your stance, it affects handling. Two bikes with identical front-centre lengths, reach, which have the same stance, but can have different F/R ratios.
I think only you can decide that, with Bronson's help perhaps.formula for determining whether you can run a reverse, high-rise stem is common knowledge like 2+2? Lol. Ok. Thanks. That immediately tells me the efficacy of this formula.