I have a 140mm!
But it's on my road bike though I do still have a lovely Syncros 140mm mtb stem which I used for about 5 years but then I'm tall and ride big bikes so it's not so out of proportion.
Anyway, over 80mm is not long. 80mm is short!
Most of my mtbs have 100 or 110mm stems. One has a 90mm one but it's got a very long top tube so the shorter stem provides the same reach.
Don't follow fashion for ultra wide bars and short stems - use what's right for you and the riding you do!
Is it just me or is it nearly impossible to find a decent 80mm stem?! Most stems come 50, 60, 70, 90, 100...
100mm on my race mtb, singlespeed, road bike, commuter and hack. 70mm on my 5-spot, but I've run the 5-spot at 100mm too and the difference is hardly stratospheric.
Bloody dumb magazines! 90mm is not long. 69deg head is not steep. They are obsessed with getting bikes and then setting them up and riding them in a way they weren't designed for! They slap on a silly short stem, and then grumble that the steering is too fast, therefore the head angle is not slack enough.
My bike came with a 90mm stem and "normal" geometry - surprise surprise it handles really neutrally and nicely. Just like it was designed to do.
Kit, I think I saw a Thomson X4 listed on CRC the other day at 80mm. Didn't think I'd seen one of those before. Was tempted to get if for the OH as she runs and 80 (plus I'd like to try it on my bike first).
Long stems are fine for roadies in denial, who like riding round in circles in muddy fields. Short stems are better for actual mountain biking 
120mm on my Epic race bike, suits me perfectly.
The stem on my Cove Stiffee is a 90mm one. It's an old bike (2003) so adjusted for 80-125mm travel. The 90mm stem is nice actually, perfect mid-range, it seems to handle everything well.
100mm Ritchey WRC.
In my eyes stupid short stems are damned fugly!
Grumm - short stems are for wannabe DH riderz who are in denial about their mad skillz (or lack thereof) and think that riding a bike that's set up like their MBUK heroes will make the pwn the DHs
Thank you clubber.
haha clubber - yeah basically 
90mm 0Deg rise Thomson's on mine, wouldnt want them any shorter
I should of course add that that was very tounge in cheek but I do think it's silly when you see riders riding normal trails with their bars up in the sky, 30mm stem and 12 foot wide bars (ok, maybe not quite that extreme) - great for full on DH riding but not so good for normal trails.
70mm on the blur
60mm on the ht
120mm on the cx
110mm on the old iron
If I'm riding with the possible chance of airtime (limited!) I prefer a shorter stem, therefore both mtbs are stumpy. Long stems are fine for wheels on the ground type riding IME.
Have some monstrous tillers in the spares box included a bright red (planet x?) job that must be 150mm
90mm on the switchback
used to run 80mm on the trailstar, tried a 45mm but just couldn't ride it, the front wheel just didn't feel like it was under any control
The bmx has a long (for a BMX) stem, but then its got a 21.75TT, so a short stem would make it feel very odd indeed.
Got to agree with the general "its the magazines fault" consensus though. Dirt is becomeing the new MBR=Much Better with Raisers in its insistance that all 120mm travel bikes are in fact lightweight DH bikes when you buy a size too big, give them 50% sag, and a short stem with wide bars. True as that may be I'd rather they found 30-33lb 120mm bikes with the right angles to start with and tested those, its got to be better long term than riding a whyte e-120, orange st4 etc on the bump stop?
90mm on my Coiler which is comfy enough to ride XC with, and offers enough movement and control to ride Alpine DH's. Just got an 85mm (Easton) for my "new" Nomad (I'm 5'10, both bikes are medium ~17" with sub 23" top tubes).
I started riding with 135mm on 18" bikes so to me 90mm is short, 50mm or so just looks wrong.
clubber - you're absolutely clueless!!
It's all a silly debate though, unless everybody is also going to post their top tube lengths and bar sweeps.
GW - No I'm not Specifically please state what I've said that is wrong (apart from the tounge in cheek bit which was obvious)
Lots of riders have setups that they believe will make their bike handle 'better' because some DHers or mags say so. Of course, they're probably right about DH riding/FR/etc but not about what the riders themselves are actually riding and definitely not about bikes that aren't designed to be set up DH stylee. I reckon you're the clueless one
90mm on my Enduro
100mm on my SS Rockhopper, but that's offset with Marys
i know someone who has a 120mm on a bullit with 888's whilst wearing lycra. but he's from cumbria so it's kind of understandable 
135 on one bontrager, 120 on the other and 100 on the Top Fuel. I think the Lemond is 100 but could be 110.
I just measured mine, 50mm! Nothing to do with fashion in this case, just a relatively long body and freakishly short arms! I started out with a decent length stem to suit the geometry but the rear would go alarmingly light on the mildest of descents, plus I've got painful wrist joints so getting as much weight off them as possible means that I can ride more than a couple of hundred yards! (which is nice) and the rear stays where I want it on the whole. It can feel a tad on the quick side, but broadish shoulders seem to keep it from getting all too much!
So please don't tar us all with the same brush. We're not all fashion victims, some of us are just freaks!
120 on the XTC
110 on the singlespeed
120 on all three road bikes
I'm going back from 70mm to 90mm.
Ok the steering was sharp and saved me many times but I want more weight on the front and aero ride position with less front wheel lift up when fatigued.
Hopefully lighten up the rear a bit more.
Got a Giant TranceX (M) which originally came with a 110mm stem and 640mm bars. The shop put a 100mm on.
Looking at other bikes, the geom is different: The steerer is very long with loads of spacers, long stem and short-ish effective top-tube. I went for wider bars and 75mm stem and while this affected climbing a bit, I feel more confident downhill and it hasn't compromised the steering. I'm particularly mincing on steep bits and I suspect the short and high front helps - or does it? I'm still comtempalting chopping the steerer to lower the front more - but it's a one-way ticket!
Something that can make a big difference to climbing is a long saddle. Some are quite a bit shorter, and also not very "inviting" on the nose. One of the many positive attributes of the Charge Spoon is the good length and wide-ish flat-ish padded nose, which allows you to shuffle forwards - in my view this is at least as useful as a more stretched reach, and in fact does mean that you can get away with a nice compact cockpit and still climb the steep stuff.
aracer and clubber yep. 100 on the 29er, 90 on the 5" travel full susser, 120 on both road bikes and 135 (!) on the old Stumpy "town" bike.
I agree with the comment about the Spoon saddle. I jam it's nose under one of my bum cheeks and crouch over the bars on very-steep bits.
I tried moving the saddle back to improve breathing space, but the front would pull-up too easily. With the saddle back, even sitting on the nose didn't help so I put it forward again and put up with feeling a bit cramped and upright.
BTW, I did try the large frame but it really did feel like farm gate.
120 mm (1 inch, quill stem) on my Bontrager. Flat Bars.
Suits me fine.
I should of course add that that was very tounge in cheek but I do think it's silly when you see riders riding normal trails with their bars up in the sky, 30mm stem and 12 foot wide bars (ok, maybe not quite that extreme) - great for full on DH riding but not so good for normal trails.
I dunno, I prefer to have my bike set up for maximum fun on the dh - not that bothered about climbing ability, though I can get up most things anyway.
Lots of riders have setups that they believe will make their bike handle 'better' because some DHers or mags say so. Of course, they're probably right about DH riding/FR/etc but not about what the riders themselves are actually riding and definitely not about bikes that aren't designed to be set up DH stylee.
I've only ever read about 2 mtb magazines. I have however tried lots of different stems out and I prefer the 40mm one? Also I ride a Pitch which is quite long and I am on the borderline between small and medium sizes. Is that ok? Am I allowed a short stem?
130 Ti 1" stem on my 1995 S/works steel rigid bike, with narrow bars and bar ends just how I used to race on it
Looks ace fast as fug but hurts like hell off road and handles shite ( barge like)
long stem and narrow bars = bad idea
but it is retrotastic 
100mm on my 09 heckler (that'll raise a few eyebrows!)
running a 90mm 6 degree rise race face stem on my commencal! I'm tempted to try a shorter stem but x4's aren't cheap! I'm riding quite well with my current set up too so not sure if it's worth the ££
Where did I say that short stems are inherently wrong, Grumm?
What I said was that a lot of riders are going to a short stem out of some misguided idea that short stems inherently handle better for all riding and all bikes which if it was really true would mean that we'd all be riding 30mm stems, wouldn't it?...
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
