TallRider

So I'm a fan of Nitto's Technomic quill stem. Its long quill makes it very effective at getting handlebars up high, or at least higher than they would be otherwise. (On my good "fast" road bike, I've got the bars 4 inches below the saddle instead of 7 inches below, where they used to be with Cinelli XA stem. See my signature for picture of the Raleigh.)
But I contend that the "7" shape of the Technomic stem is a dumb design. (The "7" shape is where the forward-extension part is appoximately horizontal when quill is inserted into fork's steerer tube. Also known as a -17 degree rise, where 0 degree rise would be a right angle with the quill and fork's steerer tube.) Here's why I think it's a dumb design:

• The positive of a "7" shaped quill stem is that you can lower it a long way, and get your bars just above the the top of the headset stack. But no one buys a quill stem with a crazy-long quill becuase they want to get the bars really low - this certainly isn't an advantage that anyone would want to make use of with the Technomic.
• There's a certain classic road-bike aesthetic with the horizontal stem-extension, parallel to the top tube and all. Rivendell loves this. Which is ironic because Rivendell bikes don't even have a flat top tube and so don't get the parallel effect anyway. In any case, this is aesthetics not function, although I understand that it can be appreciated.
• The first downside with the "7" shape of the stem is that it uses extra material compared to a right-angled stem, or even a 15 degree rise stem. Anyone who's using the Technomic would benefit from a stem designed with 15 degree rise instead of -17 degree rise anyway, since they're not going to want to lower the bars as low as possible as a horizontal quill-extension allows. So the stem weighs more than it should or needs to for its function.
• A bigger problem with the "7" shape on a stem with such a long quill is that it's more bendy. The quill is significantly longer that it would be with a positive rise, and the upshot is that there's more material to flex. Now, I've got the Technomic on my bike, and I trust its safety - Nitto has a very good testing-and-safety record, and the stem is forged. But it's frustratingly flexy when climbing or sprinting out of the saddle. It's not a huge problem, as I've learned to pull up and down on the bars parallel to the bike's centerline, which is probably more efficient. But I never had to worry about this with my Cinelli XA stem.

Now the Technomic has been around a long time and was probably birthed back in the day when all road quill stems had a horizontal (negative rise) extension. And since there's not a big market for quill stems I don't expect Nitto to have any reason to invest in new forging dies for a new quill stem that allows you to get the bars up high but is still designed for performance. That's only going to happen with cheap welded (e.g., Zoom) stems. But while the Technomic is very good, it could be significantly better at what it does. My next good bike (in a couple of years, when I finish grad school) will probably have a threadless steering system, and by that time I'll have a very good idea of the fit that I want as I currently have four road bikes of differing sizes.

Grand Bois

There's always the Nitto Dirtdrop:

HillRider

Several years ago Specialized offered a stem rather like you desire. It was an about +10° quill stem with a smooth forged shape and a single bolt (26.0 mm no less) handle bar clamp. It had a vertical hole in the stem as a cable housing anchor for canti brakes so it was obviously intended for touring or CX use.
It also had a rather long quill so the height adjustability was very good.

I did look a bit like the photo Dirtdrop shows but not so much up-angled as the pictured stem seems to be. Maybe Nitto did make it but I haven't seen them in a long time.

I agree, the -17° shape of the Technomic is strictly old-school aesthetics and is a poor choice for its intended use.

TallRider

Yeah, the Dirtdrop is good, a smart design, except that it doesn't have an option with much forward extension. Even the 100mm extension version is mostly going into rise, so forward extension (measured horizontally) is only ~60mm.
Btw, here's pictures of the DirtDrop and the Technomic:

highlyselassie

What really needs to happen is...if people want the handlebars higher, they should start riding the right size frame(fistful of seatpost or less) and manufacturers should start producing frames with longer seat tubes than top tubes.

Nitto is just taking advantage of a generation afraid of the top tube, they didn't create the problem and you can't blame them for profiting from it. Those high rise stems are worse still, why should one have to do calculations to work out the *real* extension of a stem.

TallRider

The specialized stem sounds like exactly what I'd want to see for this usage. I'll be watching eBay for this, but not on the edge of my seat or anything.
Btw, the DirtDrop stem has a +35mm rise.

TallRider

I agree that people should be buying larger bikes, or at least with longer head tubes. There's a trend toward increased head-tube length so people can get away with fewer spacers on their threadless steering systems. And with sloping top tubes the standover height isn't an issue.
But when you're as tall as I am you can't expect to see many bikes in your size. I've got a massive Schwinn 68cm frame (two of them, in fact) that gives me ~1 inch of standover clearance if I'm wearing athletic shoes. And I've got a "normal" SR quill stem (quill isn't short or long) at full height and the bars are still two and a half inches below the saddle.

HillRider

I don't think "afraid of the top tube" was the driver behind riders buying too small frames. Trying to emulate the Pros was.

The Pros were told to buy the smallest frame you could possibly ride as it will be lighter and stiffer. To compensate, the manufacturers had to extend the top tubes to keep the stem lengths within reason and the fact the bars were very low relative to the saddle wasn't a problem for the Pros. After all, they are typically young, thin, fit and flexible and aren't paid to be comfortable, just fast.

The wannabees had to look like the Pros so they bought the same undersize frames and that drove the market. The rest of us had to compensate somehow and Technomic and up-angle stems were one solution.

highlyselassie

You have my sympathies, although someone in a classic/vintage thread pointed out a 72cm/74cm bike on craigslist, maybe something you should run to...

That's true. But it seems people that are new to road cycling or at least don't have the insight you have, seem to think there is something inherently dangerous in not having oodles of standover height. I'm sure this information has been propogated by someone/multiple people for their own interests, to such an extent that people get incredibly defensive about their inch of standover. This is a shame, because however safe they feel, they rarely feel as comfortable.

highlyselassie

tim, check the fourth post here:

Gigantique

highlyselassie

Direct link, dunno why I didn't do this the first time round...

TallRider

Wow, that frame's too big for me! The Schwinn that I pictured is max for me; 68cm seat tube and 63cm top tube; I've got less than an inch standover clearance in cycling shoes. I just used a 90mm stem instead of 100mm so I could get the bars a bit closer to me. I'm stuck with old SR (and a Dia Compe) stem that fit in the 21.15mm steerer tube on the old Schwinns.

highlyselassie

Let me tell you a secret, just between you and me. You don't need any standover clearance at all. Keep it under your hat, some people react unpredictably to such information.

BluesDawg

1- It looks right
2- You worry too much

TallRider

Yeah, I know. I mean I have an inch of standover clearance, when wearing athletic shoes, between the top tube and pelvic bone. There's less clearance between top tube and various soft tissue, some of it important. But I basically agree with you.

1- what looks right? My frame? The frame linked by highlyselassie? The bar height on my frame? The horizontal extension on the Technomic? Etc.
2- would help if I knew what I was worrying about. I'm guessing you're referring to the Technomic stem's horizontal (negative-rise) extension. In which case, I'm not worrying - I said I don't think it's going to break or anything. But I'd prefer the bars not to be rocking so much when torquing on them while sprinting of climbing out of the saddle, and a different design would cut down on the flex.

masi61

Interesting theory HillRider, one that can just as easily be argued to be hogwash. Me and many of my friends in my town were subjected to the "buy the biggest frame you can straddle, if its a little big, you'll grow into it" concept. For years I rode a too tall touring frame, and a too tall road racing frame. I always wondered why I always wanted to slide my saddle all the way forward, and also why I had to use a stem that was so short, it made the front end handle funny. Climbing out of the saddle on a too tall frame is really inefficient, and the bottom bracket flex in a steel too tall frame is excessive. To me a smaller frame with a longer top tube makes a lot of sense, this allows you to stretch out fully while still keeping a nice, compact frame for climbing. I am not young, thin or paid to ride. I have had back surgery and I'm only partly fit. I would agree that there is a strong market for "upward rise" quill and also aheadset style stems. There aren't a lot of aesthetic choices. No one mentioned Salsa - their quill stems come up on ebay all the time and you can get different degrees of rise or cm of extension. Their S.U.L. quill stem is being built once again - back by popular demand. I think Tim's Raleigh is pushing the limit of safety, the fact that you're feeling that much flex could be the beginning of a catastrophic failure. I never liked the look of these high rise nitto stems for the same reasons given although the "normal" proportioned ones ( the Pearl?) seem classy. I came upon smaller frames not as a wannabe but more by accident, and for me having a 300mm seatpost and 12cm upward rise stem on my 55cm road bike gets me into a comfortable position that feels more responsive, stiffer, climbs better, is more aerodynamic, allows for normal saddle positioning (no more way forward saddle position), allows for more intuitive hands free type steering, looks aesthetically more balanced to my eye. I do have some back soreness riding the drops but to be completely comfortable on the drops while you know you're not fully in shape is a red flag for me.
I would rather be accused of looking like a wannabe emulating a pro (How about Greg Lemond ), than to be a comfort bike cyclist with no real ability other than casual bikepath jaunts.

rideorglide

That's funny, for some of us with long torsos and short legs, it's the opposite -- to get the long top tube we want we end up with frames with longer seat tubes than we want, and less standover clearance. Personally I'd like to see more bikes with longer top tubes and shorter seat tubes.

Eventually I'll get a custom that gives me more standover, but with the length in the top tube that my torso craves.

If you know how badly riding a bike with too short a top tube sucks you'd understand why we put up with this.

Ironically the Nitto Technomic helps out raise the handlebars to a more comfortable level for some of us older/less bendable types, too.

Mine ended up with about a fistfull of seatpost as you say, but the tops/hoods of the bars are level with the saddle.

It may not be the "handle below the top tube aesthetic" but it sure can help a bike fit a funny 'ole body type.

As you say "Let me tell you a secret, just between you and me. You don't need any standover clearance at all. Keep it under your hat, some people react unpredictably to such information." -- I got about a shade less than an inch there!

roadfix

I have the Technomic and you make a valid points. I also have the Dirt Drop stem and I love it. I just finished putting this together today.

Grand Bois

[QUOTE=The Fixer]I have the Technomic and you make a valid points. I also have the Dirt Drop stem and I love it. I just finished putting this together today.

Nice looking bike! Why are micro drivetrains like that so popular on fixed gear bikes? Is it because you can get a smaller chainring in closer for chainline reasons?

Is that Dirtdrop stem shortened? I ended up shortening one of mine by about 2 inches. The one on my Peugeot above has come way down since the picture was taken.

HillRider

It's not hogwash, it's the reason so many small frames have such long top tubes.

Children are always told this since their parents don't want to buy a new bike (or shoes, clothes, etc.) every six months. I assume most riders give up on this concept when they become an adult.

TallRider

Lol! That got a good laugh on my end. I stopped growing into bikes by age 16, when I was 6'5" tall and clumsy.

My Raleigh has a 59cm top tube, but the actual ctt seat tube measurement is only 59cm. (Raleigh measured to the top of the seat collar, and called it a 62cm frame.) I think it was their largest frame at the time for their aluminum road bikes, but it sure ain't good for getting the bars up at any decent height.

Btw, DirtDrop, I've always assumed your username is from the Nitto stem, but this is a good venue for asking if it really is...

BluesDawg

OK, this is one of those situations where using as few words as possible is probably not the best idea.
The Technomic stem, with its classic angles, looks right to someone with a classic styled bike with a relatively horizontal top tube and probably lugged steel construction who wants to keep the classic lines and raise the handlebars higher than is possible with most quill stems.
Worry is probably the wrong word. I just wonder what is the value of analyzing this in such detail. If this stem is not what you want, get a different stem.

erader

yep, nitto did make stems for specialized back then. grant petersen has talked about this in the past.

ed rader

erader

i favor a higher bar position and i disagree. too big of a frame means too long for me and way too short a stem not to mention no sack clearance. just right has meant getting customs stems made by salsa at $150 a pop.

of course that was before the treadless steerer.

look at road bikes today vs the past. you see much higher bar positions because of threadless steerers and more selection of stems of various rises.

the technomic, then, was ahead of its time because while we were trying to look cool on our bikes all we really wanted was to be comfortable .

ed rader

Retro Grouch 

+1.
Those whose cup is half full can be happy that a product is available that their needs.
Those whose cup is half empty can carp about it not exactly meeting their vision.
The bottom line is that the Technomic stem is what it is and it's probably not going to be changed.