reeeeeeaaaaaach...

[SouthernBelle]

Just throwing in that I love my Salsa Pocos.

[Trek420]

http://www.vintage-trek.com/images/trek/94/Trek94.pdf

A 17" 520 had a 54 cm TT - still long.

I agree, Nitto makes some nice stems which would be perfect for this.

I'm 5'1" on a tall day I was about to toss my old Trek 420 circa about the same vintage into the Bay. It hurt to ride. My LBS said the frame fit me, I needed WSD or narrower bars.

I think we kept the same stem at first.

Eventually went to Nitto along with shorter crank arms.

So if the height is right and you want shorter reach could the bars do it?

But Dedo WSD (I think they weren't really women specific, just narrower with shorter reach) and Cinnelli purple cow spot bar tape and wow, what a difference.

And only cost about 30'ish as I recall.

I agree since we can't see you I'm sure there's a good shop in the area.

[SadieKate]

Knotted, I thought a bit more about the geometry of a bike and yes, you are correct in that the reach can get shorter when raising the bars – because of the angle of the head tube. Making this simple point would have kept the conversation to a discussion.

I’m being frank and honest because I simply don’t want my statement that “raising the bars doesn't really affect the reach” to stay there and mislead someone. But most of us respond better to the how and why of a result rather than just being battered with it. I apologize for confusing the reach/rise measurement, but I won’t for interpreting your comments about bar height as recommendations for raising the bars above the saddle. I’m not the only one who thought this way; they just didn’t state it publicly on the forum.

So in a reasonable discussion . . . 3 cm seems like a lot of difference so I have to wonder if it was the combo of three things: a shorter stem than was on before, raising the stem and any rise of the stem. Since you used a longer stem (90cm) than the originally requested 80 cm you may have kept the reach the same as that achieved by an 80cm left down at saddle height. We didn’t even discuss stem angles which adds a whole ‘nother degree of complexity to the problem. Traditional old school road bikes always had horizontal stems, so I didn’t even think to go there.

And, on the topic of raising the bars, I always think that such discussions should clearly state the pros and cons: It can solve neck and back pain. It can be more comfortable for some people. But the more upright position can mean loss of power, loss of aerodynamic efficiency and a whole lot more weight on your butt which can be painful to other people. These are personal preferences that are generally dictated both by one’s riding style and by the bike’s geometry. It's a personal choice. I really don’t care if someone wants to have their bars up in the heavens, but they need to know the pros and cons – and it simply wasn’t clear from your posts.

[emily_in_nc]

Yes, that's a big bike for you. I am 5'2.5" with an average size torso, and my road bikes have had top tubes from 19" to 19.5" long (approx. 48.25 to 49.5 cm) with stems in the 6.5 cm (a Terry) to 9 cm (Aegis Swift) range. I also ride Salsa Poco bars. With this setup, I am perfectly comfortable. I test rode a Trek 5200 in a 47 cm size a few years back. It had a 19.7" top tube with a 10 cm stem, and I felt too stretched out. I might have adapted, but why be uncomfortable?

I definitely suggest the shorter stem and Salsa Poco bars, if a new bike is not in order at this point. It's better to start with the proper frame size, but that isn't always possible. Good luck and hope you can get more comfy on your bike!

[KnottedYet]

Knotted, I thought a bit more about the geometry of a bike and yes, you are correct in that the reach can get shorter when raising the bars – because of the angle of the head tube. Making this simple point would have kept the conversation to a discussion.

I’m being frank and honest because I simply don’t want my statement that “raising the bars doesn't really affect the reach” to stay there and mislead someone. But most of us respond better to the how and why of a result rather than just being battered with it. I apologize for confusing the reach/rise measurement, but I won’t for interpreting your comments about bar height as recommendations for raising the bars above the saddle. I’m not the only one who thought this way; they just didn’t state it publicly on the forum.

So in a reasonable discussion . . . 3 cm seems like a lot of difference so I have to wonder if it was the combo of three things: a shorter stem than was on before, raising the stem and any rise of the stem. Since you used a longer stem (90cm) than the originally requested 80 cm you may have kept the reach the same as that achieved by an 80cm left down at saddle height. We didn’t even discuss stem angles which adds a whole ‘nother degree of complexity to the problem. Traditional old school road bikes always had horizontal stems, so I didn’t even think to go there.

And, on the topic of raising the bars, I always think that such discussions should clearly state the pros and cons: It can solve neck and back pain. It can be more comfortable for some people. But the more upright position can mean loss of power, loss of aerodynamic efficiency and a whole lot more weight on your butt which can be painful to other people. These are personal preferences that are generally dictated both by one’s riding style and by the bike’s geometry. It's a personal choice. I really don’t care if someone wants to have their bars up in the heavens, but they need to know the pros and cons – and it simply wasn’t clear from your posts.

I never thought of any of the reach/geometry/raising the bar stuff. Didn't know any of that.

I didn't know the reach would get shorter when I raised the bars. I never said that.

I only did what my LBS recommended.

I had nothing to state and no "simple" point to make, because I didn't know any of that.

I didn't know the conversation was anything other than a discussion.

I never told anyone to raise their bars.

Thank you for educating me on all these things I didn't know.

Have a nice weekend.

Edit: I figured 120mm minus 90mm equals 30mm. Therefore, dividing by 10, I come up with my reach shortening by 3 cm with my nice new stem. I see, back a few posts, I accidentally hit a "2" instead of a "3" when reporting measurements. I certainly hope all these amazing educational developments weren't caused my my clumsy ring finger.

[Trek420]

Yes, that's a big bike for you. I am 5'2.5" with an average size torso, and my road bikes have had top tubes from 19" to 19.5" long (approx. 48.25 to 49.5 cm) with stems in the 6.5 cm (a Terry) to 9 cm (Aegis Swift) range.

Can you make a bike that's the "wrong" size for you fit? Yes. When my bike's in the shop my LBS loans me a 51 cm bike, waaaay too big for me but he makes it fit with a different stem.

Can a bike that's the "right" size not fit? Sure. Same thing, seatpost length, seat adjustment, bars and lots of chances to go right or wrong.

In Knotts post # 3

I'd be getting a shorter-reach stem before switching h'bars, unless the h'bars you have now are really driving you nuts. I have short-n-shallows, and really they didn't change the reach nearly as much as getting a 2cm less-reach stem did for me.

This is not a recommendation to raise the bars, looks like suggested shorter reach to me.

..... It can solve neck and back pain. It can be more comfortable for some people. But the more upright position can mean loss of power, loss of aerodynamic efficiency and a whole lot more weight on your butt which can be painful to other people. These are personal preferences that are generally dictated both by one’s riding style and by the bike’s geometry. It's a personal choice. I really don’t care if someone wants to have their bars up in the heavens, but they need to know the pros and cons – and it simply wasn’t clear from your posts.

She said her bar height once.

Some may think my bars are "up in the heavens". They were put there by the man whose name goes on the frame. I just went "ok, this is comfy".

I don't know centimeters from centipedes, just feel that:

I'm faster when I'm more comfortable and I'm not real comfortable with the tone of this thread.

[Triskeliongirl]

Another thought are the Eva short reach bar that Mimi put on her new bike. I did have salsa pocos once and while I did like the short reach, I didn't like the ergo bends. I know Mimi loves her Eva bar. I also second the recom. on a nitto technomic stem. And, btw, I think it is silly to argue whether bars should or shouldn't be higher than the saddle. Each body is different. Someone with a short upper body may need that in the context of how the rest of their bike is built relative to their body, to have their body be in the same position (i.e. no more or less upright) than someone with a longer upper body/arms who has their bars below their saddle. Perhaps enlisting the help of a fitter at this time is wise, otherwise you could waste money on the wrong stem, bars, etc.

[emily_in_nc]

Can you make a bike that's the "wrong" size for you fit? Yes. When my bike's in the shop my LBS loans me a 51 cm bike, waaaay too big for me but he makes it fit with a different stem.

Yes, it can be done, but with the caveat that the shorter the stem, the poorer the handling "up front" can be (i.e., more squirrely). I noticed that with my 6.5 cm Terry stem but am fine with a 9 cm stem like on my Aegis Swift. I have read recommendations that going with a stem shorter than 7-8 cm compromises handling. If a 9 cm to 11 cm stem works with your frame, then your frame size is is in the range that's normally recommended as ok for you.

[Trek420]

Yes, it can be done, but with the caveat that the shorter the stem, the poorer the handling "up front" can be (i.e., more squirrely). I noticed that with my 6.5 cm Terry stem but am fine with a 9 cm stem like on my Aegis Swift. I have read recommendations that going with a stem shorter than 7-8 cm compromises handling. If a 9 cm to 11 cm stem works with your frame, then your frame size is is in the range that's normally recommended as ok for you.

I guess each rider has to make that decision.

Say you have a frame that you looooooove and could make it fit better with a shorter stem. Sure, it could be more squirrely.

But do you toss the frame so you can use a stem in the "normal" range?

If your ride style demands precision, fast descents, sharp corners and you can swing the cost of a new frame ... maybe.

I'd be loathe to if I could get comfortable ride with such a minor swap especially if I like the frame.

I like the idea of making a bike yours and what you learn by the process.

[madscot13]

Well unfortunately I don't think I have time to make these adjustments before I fly to DC. I think I will have my dad ship my bike out there and find a bike shop that will take the time to help me with this minor problem.

Golly I should ahve said this earlier but I sort of spaced out. raising my bars makes it sort of uncomfortable on my rear end and my body angle funny. Maybe it would be something I would have to get used to but I have my seat positioned just perfectly and the reach is super crazy.

I will also look into the technomatic. it looks nice and everyone seems to endorse it, so it must function ie hold the handlebars.

Sorry I am bound and determined to stick with this frame for a a few years. It is, I don't know how to say it but, steadfast and honest. A strange way to describe a bike but it is like a good friend and that is how I would describe one.

[Trek420]

Golly I should ahve said this earlier but I sort of spaced out. raising my bars makes it sort of uncomfortable on my rear end and my body angle funny. Maybe it would be something I would have to get used to but I have my seat positioned just perfectly and the reach is super crazy.

Yes, higher bars can increase the weight on the seat, lower bars increases pressure on hands arms.

Gosh, the perfect bike fit, it's always something, eh?

Sounds like a fit appointment is in the future for you and your frame.