Yes, the LBS did a nice job with fit. Stem was looked at only after the seat/leg position was found. I have short torso relative to height, so we were anticipating doing some stem adjustment.

If you have experience with this, would putting a 60mm stem on a bike that came stock with 90mm be of concern as far as handling goes?

no, if you welded the handle bars directly to the steer tube, that would be fine, shorter stem will not affect handling adversly

The bike will steer "fast" or "twitchy" with a stem that short.

hmm...two differing opinions in two posts...I like it!

well i agree with what carlfreddy said, but to a degree. shortening the stem will make steering faster, and a little more abrupt, but you will get used to the way it operates and it will be a non issue.

its the difference between driving a corvette and a 1983 ford f-150, sure, if you turn the wheel quickly you will get more response from the vette than the pick-up, but once you've driven it for a while, you adjust yourself accordingly.

Corrected that for you. You're right that it will make it more sensitive to steering input.

Whether it makes the handling unacceptably twitchy will depend on the geometry of the bike to start with, your weight distribution, etc.

My daughter had a 48mm Trek WSD 1500 with the shortest stem possible (essentiall long enough to allow it wrap around the handlebar) and the bike handled fine.

I'd put the 60 on and see how it rides.

It depends on the bicycle itself and your weight distribution on it. It's really not possible to make a blanket statement about it. All you can do is try it and see how it goes.

I ride with a 60mm stem at the moment and I've used a 50mm stem in the past. The bike handles just fine. It is however just a little more sensitive to steering inputs, its a little harder to maintain a straight line when looking over your shoulder although this can be a problem for anyone and when your in a full bore out of the saddle sprint its not as stable as with a longer stem but its nothing you don't learn to deal with.

Fitting a 60mm stem isn't going to make the handling impossible to deal with.

Regards, Anthony

I normally have a 100 mm stem on my Cervelo R3 but I hurt my back and wasn't comfortable so I put on a 50mm mountain bike stem I had laying around. It took me about 10 minutes to get used to the steering. It definitely was a little "twitchy" but again I got used to it in a few minutes. I could easily live with the 50mm but when my back is a little better I will go back to a little longer stem. It really isn't a big deal either way in terms of bike handling. I wouldn't say that the steering is worse with shorter stem - just different. In some ways, "twitchy" seems good.

If the handlebars are your primary means of controlling where the bike goes, you're doing it wrong. You should be steering the bike mostly through your hips by shifting your weight around slightly, in which case it doesn't really matter how long the stem is.

Going from a 90 cm stem to 60 shouldn't be a problem at all-- my GF typically runs a short stem, and doesn't have problems with it making the bike twitchy.

Thanks for all the feedback...very helpful. I took the bike out for our first ride this morning...Tarmac Comp, picked it up yesterday (will post obligatory pics after removing the 47 Gerolsteiner and other stickers). It was nice. Was taking it easy, going with a new rider.

along those lines, my younger brother got a bike yesterday too, but entry level road. To his credit, he got steel... Jamis Satellite. After our ride, I hopped on his. Don't get me wrong, I love my Tarmac. Boy, was that Satellite smooth, though. WSD geometry, long stem...l leaned further over into a culdesac turn than I've ever leaned before...and comfortably. I'll get there with Tarmac...from what I'm gathering by your posts, I'll just need to control the stability on my own a little more, with the shorter stem and springier bike.

Steel+long stem=ready made stability; carbon+short stem=learned stability? (with snap to boot )

You know, those racing bikes people are buying or almost forced to buy nowadays are way too stiff for most people who will be riding them. It's like riding a bike made of granite.

I can see that the technological changes over the past 15 years or so have been necessary to accommodate the needs of the bigger, stronger riders in the pro peloton compared to the past. For the average road bike user, this is fine if you happen to also be a big, heavy, powerful person, but it's totally inappropriate for most people. You want a certain compliance for normal riding. This may or may not come from a high-quality steel frame (I think it does to some extent, not from any given tube, but just from the overall package including the stays and fork), but it definitely does come from the wheels, the stem and the handlebars which road bikes used to be equipped with. I think this may be why many of us prefer the feel of steel. It's not just the steel. I personally prefer the more ethereal look of a fine steel frame. It's hard not to prefer that over the big, chunky, robotic-looking bikes of today.

I'm of the opinion that a very short stem means you're either a very short person (a woman racer laughed at her stem because it's so short, but she's a petite one to start with, and she calls her stem "cute") or the frame is not appropriate for you.

One should not have to learn too much when adapting to cornering. It should be natural within a few corners, maybe a 30 minute ride.

A frame with a shorter top tube would be more appropriate rather than a 60 mm stem. This will get the front wheel closer in, put more weight on it, and make the bike much more stable in turns. Such a frame might be marketed as a "comfort" bike but I would ignore the marketing words around the various frame types and focus on top tube length, head tube length, and chainstay length.

Top tube length for your reach, of course.

Head tube length to replicate your stem height. Ideally it'll be about the same ht height for a shorter tt length. This is one thing that distinguishes "race" from "comfort" bikes.

Chainstay length because this will change the way the bike feels when cornering hard or when out of the saddle. I notice it more out of the saddle since I rock the bike aggressively. This is something that gets changed frequently between "race" and "comfort" bikes.

"Comfort" usually means a taller head tube for a given frame size. You may find yourself able to fit a smaller frame, with a shorter top tube, without dropping the bars at all. This would be ideal.

cdr

Probably more in the geometry of the bike, and the front end (head tube & fork) in particular.

my girlfriend went from riding 110 mm to 60mm. she said it took a few days to get used to (trackstanding was tougher, last minute steering became overly dramatic), but once she got used to it, everything went OK. she actually prefers it now, as she's able to adjust and correct her line much quicker. at the same time, i wouldn't recommend using aerobars with anything shorter than 90mm...

I looked quite a bit at top tube lengths, etc., while scouting for a new bike. Bottom line, I've already bought it, and there's alot I like about the Tarmac. I am a bigger rider, weight-wise, and fairly powerful in legs, so I like the snappier, tighter feeling bikes, and feel sluggish on things that are too comfort oriented.

That said, it might be worth my while, next time I hunt for bikes, to look at women-specific geometries, or get a custom frame if I can afford it. I want to settle in and like this bike, though. The search process has gone on long enough. It was a tricky time of year to buy, because frames were largely sold out, waiting for next year to come in. And with heavier sales last year, shops were low.

I think I got a good bike, though. It felt good on the ride this morning. I didn't push like usual, because, like I said, I was with a newer rider, but I enjoyed it. Just wanted some feedback (reassurance?) from others on the stem. (I just have a short reach for 5'9"...alligator, I s'pose).

why not? haven't used aeros before, but considering getting the rigging for it, for the couple of sprint tri's a year that I plan to do.

The steering input will be "quicker" is all. It should still be stable. The exact effect will depend on the geometry of the rest of the bike. Try it. Just don't immediately take it down a 50 mph hill until you know how it handles at high and low speed.

Steering input with aerobars is already pretty "twitchy". Shortening the stem might make this worse. Again, try it, gingerly at first. If it works, great.

Signed,

Grant from Rivendell

Wouldn't "bringing the front wheel closer" shorten the wheelbase and make the bike less stable?

My buddy runs a 60 mm on a 54 cm frame and it handles just fine.

I just wanted to add that if your concern is stability, as you say in the thread title, then it's not really the stem that influences this. I mean, an inherently stable bike can be ridden no hands, and with no hands, a slow and high speeds, the stem doesn't even factor into it. I think what you mean is more how quickly the bike responds to input. As far as that goes, it should be fine if you keep within what is a reasonable stem length proportional to the size of the frame.

Ah yes, and there's the question. You worded it better than I did. If a bike comes set up with 90mm, does 60mm get into the range of throwing off bike proportions, to be concerned with?