Commuting - Sloping stem

I'm wondering what the advantages are to a sloping stem (versus one that is horizontal along its' top). My last bike ( an old racing bike) had a short stem, which was horizontal and was nice to lead along the pavement. My salsa casseroll gives a twist as I power off as the handle bars want to flop sideways.
http://salsacycles.com/bikes/casseroll_single/

I notice you can buy adjustable stems .
Looking at the Salsa set up my stem is much higher and my bars are quite high... I think so I can change it until I'm satisfied.

Update
I've lowered the stem and it has a completely different feel now. It still has a little lurch to the side when I power off but now I feel as though the bike is surrounding me.

Update 2
this topic here best describes my problem:
No hands balance: What makes a bike squirrelly?
http://www.cyclingforums.com/cycling-equipment/470914-no-hands-balance-what-makes-bike-squirrely.html

Old style quill stems could be raised or lowered to get the handlebars to the desired height. Modern threadless stems can't, so you need to use stems of different angles to position the handlebars vertically. It's a huge downside to threadless stems. Really old stems had both vertical and horizontal adjustments.

You can get an adjustable stem for experimenting. A lot of people use them until they get the bars in a position they like, then they get a stem that matches that position and take off the adjustable.

So you agree a horizontal stem (if the right height) is better behaved?
Luckily my retailer left a lot of room for vertical adjustment if I move the rings around.

This is my setup so far.
Update: Later
161542163002http://www.bikeforums.net/images/misc/pencil.png

So you agree a horizontal stem (if the right height) is better behaved?
Luckily my retailer left a lot of room for vertical adjustment if I move the rings around.

I don't know the answer to that. Your problems may have more to do with the head tube angle and the design of the fork.

Every aspect of a bikes geometry is for a reason (we hope they know what they're doing).
I note that some manufacturers maintain a horizontal stem on all their road bikes.
http://www.avantibikes.com/race-endurance-road/cadent-team.aspx?bid=210

Could the sloping stem be to unify the top tube (ie cosmetics)?

This was my last bike. it was way to big and I rode it with the seat down, but it sat on the road like an arrow in flight.
163003

Every aspect of a bikes geometry is for a reason (we hope they know what they're doing).
I note that some manufacturers maintain a horizontal stem on all their road bikes.
http://www.avantibikes.com/race-endurance-road/cadent-team.aspx?bid=210

Could the sloping stem be to unify the top tube (ie cosmetics)?

The choice of stem used for catalog photos might have a lot to do with aesthetics, but a good bike shop wouldn't hesitate to replace the stock stem with a different one to suit the needs of the buyer, including switching to one that were angled up or down vs. being horizontal.

The stem on my Specialized Allez came with a special shim that allowed you to use four different angles of rise depending on whether the stem was "flipped" or not and the position of the shim. So no, that bike at least wasn't designed to be used with a particular stem angle even though it has a sloping top tube. I don't know if any of the positions aesthetically complimented the top tube angle or not.

Can somebody explain how switching stems and spacers to change the stem angle (but not affecting the position of the handlebars) could possibly change the handling characteristics?

Can somebody explain how switching stems and spacers to change the stem angle (but not affecting the position of the handlebars) could possibly change the handling characteristics?

What about the arc of the handle bar as the bike leans and how this may affect stability on take off, leading (as along pavement) and no hands?

I flipped the over and adjusted the collars. It's still twitchier than I would prefer. Riding no hands is dicey.

Could the problem just be that the Casseroll is twitchier then your old bike, and just needs some getting used to? Is everything on the headset tight?

I have the same bike (different size), and I've found it to be a bit quicker, and more responsive then some other bikes I've ridden.

I flipped the over and adjusted the collars. It's still twitchier than I would prefer. Riding no hands is dicey.

This article (http://davesbikeblog.blogspot.com/2007/05/trail-fork-rake-and-little-bit-of.html) might help explain some of what's going on. I don't think the stem is playing a role but I'm not an expert.

Best stem ever.
http://www.velo-orange.com/vothstad.html
Height adjustable "quill" AND you can swap out threadless stems.
Makes tweaking fit super easy.

Why would you want a "lively" road bike? A unicycle is "lively" ...Your mainly going in a straight line??

I just read this review:
"The Salsa is a road bike at heart. We really like the fact that the fork complements the frame size, in that smaller frames get more fork rake. This compensates for slacker head angles - keeping handling light and lively. When loaded up at the back and using just a small bar bag, it takes a little more concentration to keep it steady at the end of a long day. It's a worthy trade-off though, especially if you prefer responsiveness over slower, touring-style handling. There's some toe overlap with mudguards, but none without. Losing the guards, we decided to try out a set of lightweight road wheels. As well as dropping the weight to just over 20lbs, this boosts acceleration and proves that the Casseroll can handle fast, unladen road rides just as well as a light tour."
http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/touring/product/casseroll-07-19168

The stem has no effect whatsoever on handling. Two different stems of wildly different shapes will give the same exact handling provided they position the bar in the same position relative to the head tube.

Bicycle steering seems simple, but it's actually a complex interplay between lots of different forces that are not intuitive at first glance. The length of the stem can have an effect on the rider's perception of the handling of the bike (although not, in practice, on the actual handling). Raising and lowering the bars, by changing stems or by other means, can change the front/rear weight balance, which can affect that handling of the bike. However, two stems that put the bars in the same place will feel and handle the same, barring doing something really odd like hanging a weight from an arm attached to one side of one of the stems. :)

Here's a reasonably good article on bicycle steering dynamics (http://www.physik.uni-regensburg.de/forschung/fabian/pages/mainframes/teaching/teaching_files/Physics%20Around%20Us_files/vol59no9p51_56.pdf), although it's not entirely complete - for instance, it completely neglects the effects of camber thrust steering, and in my quick read I didn't see any discussion of countersteering or the role of the height of the center of mass (or, for that matter, the mass distribution of the bicycle and rider about the center of mass - the radius of gyration about the axis of travel, if you will). He's captured the most important elements of bike stability, though, and what he's left out is of lesser importance unless you're working in a limiting case where the steering geometry does not provide adequate stability - for instance, the case with bikes built in the 30s through the 50s as mentioned in the Moulton article that tjspiel provided a link for. Still, he references Timoshenko, and it's hard to go wrong if you start there. :)

Why would you want a "lively" road bike?

For better maneuvering in urban environments? Dodging wildlife on trails? Salsa markets the Casseroll as a sort of a "fun", "jack-of-all-trades" bike and I think the lively or twitchy handling (depending on your perspective) is part of that package. Salsa also sells some more traditional road and touring bikes for going in straight lines.

Keep riding it, you'll get used to handling.

"Salsa’s Casseroll Double is our relaxed road bike, perfect for everything from non-competitive road riding and commuting to credit card touring and charity rides.
An extremely versatile frameset is what makes the Casseroll Double so…well, versatile."
...
Mine is the single but the frame is exactly the same. I thought I was getting something between a touring bike and racing bike. My old racing bike let you take yours hands off the wheel -that's one of the main thrills of cycling, I think?
Buying a bicycle is difficult as you don't know what you've got until it's "used".

Why would you want a "lively" road bike?

A "lively" bike will be responsive, handle beautifully and will have a certain ride quality that is palpable. If one is not accustomed to this, such a bicycle will feel "nervy", "twitchy", etc.

I would imagine the comparison is somewhat like getting into a ferrari after having driven a Lincoln Town Car. Unnerving at first, addictively exciting if you 'gel' with the feel of it.

Mine is the single but the frame is exactly the same. I thought I was getting something between a touring bike and racing bike.

Maybe it's got lively handling like a race bike but longer chainstays like a touring bike.

Are you sure that it's your right size, too? Your saddle's awfully low (unless you've got short legs, anyway).

It's just a way at arriving at the handlebar position.. up angled stem and shorter steerer tube , or ...
Taller steerer tube with more spacers under the stem, and a bit shorter extension level to the horizon
will put the handlebar out in the same height from the ground and distance from the seat post.

Are you sure that it's your right size, too? Your saddle's awfully low (unless you've got short legs, anyway).

Funnily enough the guy who sold it to me thinks it's a 51, the frame, however says "Casse 49" He measured it as per the diagram on the website. I can't get 51 myself. From the center of the bottom bracket to mid point on the top tube suggests 49 (It seems to have a 765 stand over, suggesting it is a 49). If it is a 49 it has a 72 degree head tube and 74 seat tube. The wheel base seems to be about 1015. I'm 165 cm tall and my arms are fairly long in relation to my torso.
http://salsacycles.com/bikes/casseroll_single/
I suppose I'll get used to it but I keep thinking of those cyclists at the end of Tour de France cruising along at the end of the race
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/uU7Ry1qnODN/Tour+de+France+2009+Stage+Seventeen/fVfjiFbFoKV

Forget the seat tube measurement. It goes out the window the instant you adjust the seat height.

The reason I'm asking is because that frame has a sloping top tube. Traditional frames with a horizontal top tube also had a rule of thumb that if you rode with a bit more than a fistful of seatpost showing, you were on the right size of bike. On your bike, however, with a seat tube that's comparatively shorter than that of a traditional frame, your seatpost can hardly go any lower than it is in that pic.

That means that you're either 1) built with a freakishly short inseam for your height (I know a couple people like that); 2) your seat isn't nearly high enough for proper pedaling; or 3) your seat is the right height for your body, but the whole bike is way too big.

Bike fit starts from the feet up. I'm going to keep ignoring the handlebars until we're positive that you have the right seat height. If you're 5'4", Salsa's own fit chart says you should be riding that 49... so I think your seat's way too low. It shouldn't even be lower than the bars on a bike like this.

I pointed out that it had 49 on the frame but the guy who sold it to me said "no that's wrong"....?
I think I could only get the seat up another inch.
'Cold outside but I'll head for the shed and try it.
============
My seat height seems o.k but I could lower the handle bars a lot. One retailer told me that seat height should be (about 2in ? ) above handlebar height.
At my height sizing is difficult due to the use of 700cm wheels

For some reason my seat slopes up and I can't see any way to adjust it.

Funnily enough the guy who sold it to me thinks it's a 51, the frame, however says "Casse 49"

Actually, the Casseroll frames are sized funny because of the sloping top tube. It used to say on the website (and I'm not sure why they took it down, or moved it?) but to add 2-3cm to the frame size to get the standard, or effective frame size. So the 49cm (Salsa) = 51cm anything else.

I'm 5'6, and ride the 49cm Casseroll.

My seat height seems o.k but I could lower the handle bars a lot. One retailer told me that seat height should be (about 2in ? ) above handlebar height.
At my height sizing is difficult due to the use of 700cm wheels

I don't see what the wheel size has to do with it.

How are you determining your seat height? People around here forget that there are occasional riders who still want their seat so low than they can put both feet flat on the ground, so I'm wondering what you do when you adjust yours.

The quickest way to get in the ballpark is to sit on the saddle and put your heels on the pedals, then see how far your legs extend as you pedal. If, with your HEELS on the pedals, your knees lock completely straight at the bottom of the stroke, and your hips aren't rocking, you're sitting high enough, or at least within a centimeter or two. This way, when you pedal with the balls of your feet like you're supposed to, your knees will get the correct, slight bend that they need.

I'm trying to make sure you're doing this right so that you don't hurt yourself. We've had stories here and there from riders who hurt their knees by spending too much time in a bad position.


For some reason my seat slopes up and I can't see any way to adjust it.

There's a bolt underneath it somewhere that you can loosen. Most riders do well with a mostly flat saddle. The most common mistake I see is tilting it too far forward, which makes your butt slide forward and puts a lot of weight on your hands.

Just a quick seat height check note: try pedaling for a little while with your heels on the pedal's axis.
Your leg should be fully straight and barely touching the pedal.

theres accurate measuring schemes from the Pros to be found, this is just a quick check..

comfort dictates the Handle bar height relative to the saddle , performance riders with speed over comfort go lower ,

JRA casual bars at same height or a bit higher , leg length dictates Saddle height.

... as the handle bars want to flop sideways.

Make sure the headset is not loose. That could be the problem.

The retailer steered me away from a surly cross check as he said they "do something" to the geometry in the smaller sizes. I have also read about shenanagins with geometry as bikes get smaller (ie to accomodate larger wheels).
My main gripe is just that I bought this bike as a town bike that can cover fairly large distances at speed and I'm disappointed that although I can take my hands off the handle bar, on my last bike (a carlton which was way too big for me) it begged me to take my hands off. As I'm riding in the city I don't have much to dodge but I do have to look behind and change lanes.

I've got a mountain bike (size 16" with a short stem) and a civia loring (which I thought had an issue but discovered you just have to get used to - it is designed to carry a load on the front). I still want a touring bike and am eyeing a long haul trucker (50cm with 26" wheels).

Make sure the headset is not loose. That could be the problem.

If the headset were too loose, it would be clunking and banging. I'd say the real reason it flops over so easily is that it's a singlespeed and doesn't have all the usual cables (shifters, etc) that resist bar-flopping.


I still want a touring bike and am eyeing a long haul trucker (50cm with 26" wheels).

This girl took her LHT on a cross-continent tour over the past year:
http://abikeablefeast.blogspot.com/2009/02/project-bikeable-feast.html

162252 This is my set up at the moment. I put the seat up and tried riding heel on pedal and rocked as I rode so I don't think I can go higher. I seem to be leaning forwards quite a bit (ie over the handle bars).

Your bike's too big, and the saddle is tilted awfully far back.

Then again, maybe you have a really, really long torso.

You need to find a better shop if you can.

The riding position seems o.k. I don't like the lack of stability and that seems to be a matter of trail (or is it rake?). I'm just going to have to ride it and I may get to like it, but I miss my old bike as on a cold morning I could ride along with my hands in my jacket.

as far as reach, you could try a shorter stem ,so the bars are closer to the seat, keeping the handle bars at the same height.
just not needing to reach as far..

You may want to get frame and fork checked for alignment, fork has several ways it can be off, in relation to the steerer tube ..

My reach seems fine. I ride hands on the bar and in the aggressive position and I don't get tired.
I'll make enquiries about fork alignment. I would expect (eg) a sprinter to handle like mine but not a general purpose bike.

. Salsa also sells some more traditional road and touring bikes for going in straight lines.

Keep riding it, you'll get used to handling.
Which ones are they? I thought the casseroll was halfway between a racing bike and a touring bike = middle of the road bike?

I've lowered the stem and it has a completely different feel now. It still has a little lurch to the side when I power off but now I feel as though the bike is surrounding me now. I also undid the brace under the seat and turned it around; this made the seat slope down a fraction (rather than point up). I may try a mustache bar as in traffic I feel a bit more vulnerable. A mirror would be handy also. I'm experimenting with a shorter stem in the picture.
163001

http://cdn.cyclingforums.com/images/icons/icon1.gif no-hands balance: what makes a bike squirrely?
I found this thread on another forum which describes my problem:

"Didn't really know what to title this thread...but I've got a 58cm 5.2 Madone that I put about 350 miles/month on and have owned it for 3 yrs after upgrading from my trusty steelie. Smooth ride but always been curious what part of the bike geometry makes a bike unstable when you sit up/no hands for a break.

This came to light when I rode a Ridley Damocles yesterday and really noticed the difference. I used to be comfortable *bombing* down hills on the steelie with my mitts on the handlebar stem...would never attempt same on Trek. The Ridley brought back that same confidence...very stable. It was also a great deal firmer of a ride and seemed to be much stiffer in the headset area (virtually zero give in the forks under braking...my Trek forks track aft at least 1cm at the tip under braking).

Geometry specs- Trek top tube about an inch longer thus I'm just guessing that this places the center of gravity farther aft and the potential root cause of a less stable platform. Thoughts???

I knew I shouldn't have ridden that Ridely...now I know what I'm missing....:"

----
Agree hands-off stability is better than ultra-quick steering, at least for the riding I do. On high speed descents, will take a bike that takes a bit of steering effort to change direction and holds it's line over bumps rather than one that's darty any day. Plus, it's nice to be able to ride no-hands confidently when sitting up to stretch or take off the rain vest.




http://www.cyclingforums.com/cycling-equipment/470914-no-hands-balance-what-makes-bike-squirrely.html