Originally Posted by
chas58
My bad, I was responding to the OP, not to the side discussion.
It's not a side discussion. The OP's bike might be fit too long, so the effect that fit has on handling is directly relevant.
What you are saying is (obviously) true (well, except I didn't cramp my fit).
I clarified earlier that by "cramp" I meant that swapping in a shorter stem puts the hand contact points closer to the torso. Are you denying that this is the case?
But for the OP, like I originally said - you take a bike designed for 110mm stem and just go as short as you like isn't a good idea. 90mm is fine. Much shorter than that and you will start to notice the handling difference.
This might have been true in your case if you're starting from a bike that already fits. But how do you know that using a shorter stem wouldn't make the handling closer to "normal" when starting from a fit that's too long?
Your phrasing "a bike designed for a 110mm stem" indicates that a given frame has an optimal stem length independent of the rider, but it seems like this is an assumption on your part which your experimentation has not actually characterized.
I brought up "lengthening the front center" earlier because often that's not a lot different than just choosing a larger frame size. In terms of handling geometry, many "forward-geometry" bikes are basically this, done intentionally. So "a bike designed for a 110mm stem" might be "a bike designed for a 70mm stem, with a smaller rider" in the eyes of some designers.
And a reverse example: plenty of racers - including and especially in the pro peloton - use a "too-small" frame and compensate with a huge stem. The resulting handling is seemingly fine, and probably better than if they used a stem of the "stock" length for that frame.