I agree. The point isn't the level of the top of the bar, it's the level of the brake hoods, where the hands are for most of time, and this hasn't changed much since the late '80s.

This is an example of how to do it right: I bought a frame with the proper length top tube that I knew also had a tall enough headtube as to not need a spacer stack. I have a single very small spacer under the stem, mostly just to help it mate better with the headset. I am pretty sure I won't need any more drop, if I do I can always change the length and angle of the stem.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a2...nashbardec.jpg

You haven't shown how you sit on the bike, but this looks like a very moderate and well thought out setup. You're also lucky your physique works with the proportions of your frame. And I commend your perspicacity to use a setback seat post to shift your center of gravity away from the handlebar.

Around here, the norm among recreational riders seems to be tall head tubes (a la Roubaix), upturned stems, even taller shim stacks made possible by longer steerers from the manuacturers, and stems that tend to be too short. My hunch is that these are compensations for frame design fads that started around 1980. First, the seat tubes got steep, which pitched riders' centers of gravity too far onto the hands. Then top tubes got longer, probably in emulation of Greg LeMond, who advocated "long and low." They forgot he also advocated slack seat tube angles. To compensate, many riders started riding smaller frames, which made getting a decent bar height even more difficult. To compensate, the "endurance geometry" was born, which raised the hands but left the seat tube angles. Riders could get the weight off their hands but only by sitting upright, as if they were driving a city bus.

If I were designing bikes I'd start with an early 70s bike with a slack seat tube, and modernize it with a semi-sloping top tube and shorter chain stays. The sit-up-and-beg folks would get a version with a slightly extended head tube, something like a Trek H2, but certainly nothing in Roubaix or Cervelo S5 territory. Nobody would need that because they wouldn't doing push-ups to keep their chins off the handlebar.

Spot on! Riders don't necessarily need a large bar drop to get low. If riders are balanced/positioned over the bottom bracket in such a way that less weight is on the hands, riding with bent elbows and higher bars (and aero) is easier. Check out how Moser and De Vlaeminck have hardly any bar drop, yet they're riding as low as anything. I love posting these pics. :p

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/photos...view-roger.jpg

http://www.mosercycles.com/2010_images/001bd9d9.jpg

Personally I think you chose a pretty poor example.

Modern geometries for equivalent sizes of those bikes have larger head tubes. Combine that with a threadless system and a modern bike that puts the bars in those exact same positions would have a slammed stem, or maybe with one spacer underneath.

Besides, nobody rides with their elbows bent at a 90 degree angle for hours on end. I think the point is that if you can comfortably handle the bars as low as they can go without negatively affecting performance, there's absolutely no reason you shouldn't put them there - especially if you are racing.

If you are comfortable with your arms close to straight with the stem slammed on the tops you will save energy in a cruising position (long road race). When the pace starts kicking up or if you're in front you bend your elbows more and/or get in the drops.

I thought you weren't supposed to slam the stem??? Isn't it recommended to leave at least one spacer under the stem for safety reasons? If this is not true, then I will definetly be slamming mine.

Also check out how much drop their handlebars have, probably Cinelli 66 bars. I love classic bars; Ritchey WCS Classic and that's what I still ride, have Cinelli 64 on the Eisentraut.

Check out how far below the tops of their bars their hoods are. You get the same saddle-to-hoods and saddle-to-drops drop on modern bikes with shallow handlebars and slammed or almost slammed stems.

It pays to look at the pictures once in a while in-between posting them, ":p".

The bars should be set at the lowest (drops) comfortable position for the rider.

Simultaneous C&V and hipster grail bike.

I would trade a kidney and half of both big toes for the road version.

these are good pics. before getting a real fit done with my coach, i always thought "aero = low"
but the advice i was given was to not go lower than having my elbows at 90 degrees.

getting more aero meant making my position longer, flattening out my back a bit.

It matters more to keep one (5mm) spacer on the top of the stem, which is said to prevent the steer tube from cracking.

If you don't have a spacer on top it's easy to bottom out the top cap on the steerer tube and not be able to preload the bearings enough. On cane creek integrated headsets the spacers have an inner circular protrusion (they also 'click' together when you use them in a stack) that fits into the top part of the headset, it increases the contact area considerably compared to just slamming the stem onto the top of the headset.

You also need some sort of a spacer (a cone spacer, or zero stack) under the stem to act as a bearing cap for the headset bearing.

I thought that was implied.

you can fix that just by adjusting the expander plug further down into the steerer tube.
i had that happen on one of my bikes simply because i switched to a stem that had a shorter stack height - so with the same number of spacers, the top cap wasn't going down far enough to preload the headset.

i just loosened the expander a bit, set it down another 10mm, re-tightened it.

Good point! If you look at these photos, and imagine a modern sloped tube, flat bar top, and threadless stem, it would require the stem to be way low to achieve this saddle to hood drop!

I have long legs, and relatively normal torso, so I need a large frame - and still have the saddle pretty high (80cm). That means unless I have a bunch of spacers under the stem, I'm looking at a huge saddle to bar drop. With 2.5cm of spacers now, I have a 9cm saddle to bar drop.

In other words, it depends on the frame geometry, AND rider specs.

i think we'll start seeing more of these aero stem-to-TT designs in the near future.

slammed, and it fits perfectly- 58cm frame 120mm stem, 6'2" rider

That fits you perfectly? I'd like to see a photo of you in the drops! :twitchy:

I don't know about road bikes, but some track frames already do it.

http://www.lookcycle.com/en/us/piste/cadres.html

http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catal.../596-track.png

http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catal.../9/496_zed.png

His setup sounds about right to me. I'm 5'10" with normal proportions and I ride a 54cm frame w/ 120mm stem.

I'm 5'6 and I ride the same TT and stem size, I really like the low stretched out position though.

Not everyone slams them. Sometimes people have bikes way too small for them, and have to (whatever the opposite of slam is...) their stem:
http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/l...its/Mybike.jpg