The stem Rinny used was so she could keep her Profile bar, not so she could get lower. This 31.8mm adapter stem is available from your Felt dealer if you want to de-integrate your IA front end.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

You'd be slower with Rinny's bar.

It may be possible that an aero-or-die basebarless set up is faster than the stock IA Dagger bar/stem. Truthfully we haven't tested it but convention suggests ~8s/40km improvement if my poor math is correct.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

All Felt's TT/Tri bikes with the exception of the Bayonet-less S32, B16, and B14 models use M6 hardware and up to 65mm risers that are thru-bolted top and bottom and include two fixed width bridges and an adjustable width bridge. These clip-on extensions and arm rests can be mounted to just about any non-integrated base bar.

Properly configured, the risers are stiffer than the same amount of exposed carbon steerer and spacers and far more aero.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

Awesome. I just looked on the Felt web site and don't see it for sale. Can you point me to it? I have a bunch of clients who purchased DA's who can't get low enough on their bikes but would like to. I've used flat stems taken off Kristen Armstrong's bike and maybe, just maybe, one "borrowed" from Millars bike in the lobby, but otherwise haven't seen them for sale.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Great, great aero bar. One of my favorites, for sure.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Referenced with these inventory numbers:

980100 - Stem Bayonet 3 Fixed Position 90mm x 0
980102 - Stem Bayonet 3 Fixed Position 110mm x 0

You can use the Felt webstore on the internet and select the triathlon parts and click the stem option here:

http://www.feltbicycles.com/...ed-Postion-Stem.aspx

Next select your size and click BUY.

-SD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

That's fantastic! Love it!

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

It probably doesn't. Since this isn't my native tongue, there will be the occasional misunderstanding - around here, the literal translation of the word "Aggressive" is used as the opposite of "Conservative", with conservative being used to describe the usual "Hail Mary" position you get from your shop "fitter" when a beginning rider complains of a back-ache. What, then, would be the right word to describe a position with the shoulders about level with the hips?

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Thanks Dave, I appreciate the response. By the way, I also have no intention of testing a basebar-less configuration!

---

Ironman Certified Coach

Currently accepting limited number of new athletes

Agree on this (and everything else you've said in the thread) - getting to the end of the fit and they're looking at the resulting position and struggling to comprehend that they were so comfortable with such a 'racy' looking position. I've never done a tri fit where we weren't able to go lower in the process of getting comfortable.

Or the relief on the face of someone who has been wondering "how will I get through an IM on a bike that feels this bad" on discovering that the aerobars are actually a very relaxed place to be.

listen to what the smart people on this thread are saying... Jim@ERO, AndyF, CycleNutNZ, SuperDave... they don't call it anything... they just call it the output of a competent fit process.

right/wrong, fast/slow, I *might* allow these terms. Still reductionist over simplifications and muddying the water so to speak.

A bike fit should be *just so*

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

Great thread. The real culprit behind the demise of the long / low tri bikes is the old saw about "buy the bike that fits you." Salespeople use small differences in geometry between different brands as a sales tool, even though those small differences usually do not mean much in the real world. With most fitters specing short/tall fits, moving your geometry in that direction gives the fitters a reason to sell your brand over the competition as part of the fitting process.

I'm 61 years old and I ride with more drop than most younger folks I see out there and based on the yo-yo effect that happens in hilly terrain I'm more aero than most of them as well. I currently have a 17 degree stem slammed on my medium SC7 and am looking to get a bit lower, so have been using my meager math skills to figure out how much additional drop various negative rise stems would give me. There have been a few mentions of negative rise stems without putting any numbers on the effect this has on stack, so thought I'd contribute some numbers that might be of value to those of us running conventional stems. I'm sure the fitters on this thread already know this stuff.

Ritchey sells a wide variety of high quality stem configurations, so I'm going to use their stems as an example. In addition to the usual 6/84 degree stems, they also sell 17, 25, and 30 degree stems. They also sell an adjustable stem that goes down to 32 degrees. I used to have the adjustable stem and it is very solid, but it is a bit fussy to switch angles so not something to get thinking you'll do quick height adjustments for field testing.

In a 100 mm length, compared with a standard 6 degree stem, the following angles lower your stack by this much when flipped to the low position:
17 degrees: -19 mm (this gives you a level stem, the rest of the options give you negative rise)
25 degrees: -32mm
30 degrees: -39mm
32 degrees: -42mm
(numbers are rounded to the nearest mm)

Hope this might be helpful to someone out there.

http://www.ttbikefit.com/stemcalc.html

Cool, thanks for the link, that's much easier than my spreadsheet.

Agreed. Learning a lot in this one. So I went looking for this other stuff you mention, but did not find any. Can you help and point me in the right direction?

Thanks!

---

Sr. Salitre

Most consumers really don't know better. I agree with everything you're saying, but how do you suggest filling the knowledge gap for the average triathlete so they can be more discerning and demanding for quality fits? Even as a fairly seasoned triathlete, I have no clue how optimal my fit is or if the guy who's done my fits the past 4-5 years is any good. He's very popular, a great guy, has all the expensive fit tools, certifications, etc., but none of that speaks to whether the fits are worth a damn.

As much as I'd love to get a fit done by you or another highly regarded fitter, travelling just for that is prohibitive. Conversely, as much as I'm sure you'd love the increase in business, there are too many people needing fits for all of them to funnel through the few select leaders in the field.

---

-Andrew

That's what I was saying, and what Jim Manton was getting at. We'd rather trade head tube for aero risers. Can you make risers that go to 200mm? Please?! :-)

---

AndyF
bike geek

Well hold up!
Head tube can be very aero.
Exposed steerer with round spacers is what is not aero.

But that does still create opportunities to serve both the high and low positioned athlete, by using less stack in the frame and aero risers for people who need to be high.

You could even produce base bars that angle UP for those people.

Or aero spacers

hell the P5 is kinda all set to go there, with aero spacers AND that high rise option on the aduro.

just lower the stack!

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Yep, you can always go up with aero risers and lose nothing. You cannot however always go down. I agree 100%, if P5 has geometry of P4 (or close to it), I am already on it. I guess the market is telling them that the one bike they would sell to me and Nick B is nothing compared to the hundreds they sell to people riding high up front (even though those people could fit just fine on "low" P5 with a different bar configuration).

---

Ironman Certified Coach

Currently accepting limited number of new athletes

Here is a reason to do it - now that the market is all high, you can differentiate by being low!

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

interesting thread indeed!
as one with long legs and a short torso i'm all for the short and high geometry but i can certainly see how i could be accommodated on a longer/lower bike but its difficult to go the other way around.
i see a bit of conflict in the statement that the geometry differences are small and the whole point of this thread that the differences are significant enough that long and low people are struggling to find a good fit - certainly the differences are generally not huge but clearly they can make a difference. if you are reasonably "normal" then most frames can give a good fit but some will still be more natural than others - less spacers etc so probably more aero. if you are at an extreme then there will be a limited selection of practical frames

what would be useful would be a summary of the relative geometry of some of the most popular frames. looking myself, i have noted that the trek SC seems to match my proportions very well (650 stack, 455 reach), cervelo P5 is too long for me, specialized shiv is a bit long so would need to size down from usual but the high stack means that works ok.

I think you said head tube.

zero drag < Felt aero head tube < some aerobar riser configurations < round headset spacers and steerer < parachute

-sD

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era