So, what are the pro and cons for each? Since most of the mfg’s build with a high stack, seems there must be some good reason?
Since I ride a low stack bike now, just seems if you have a larger stack bike it is just harder to get lower without messing more with the front?
Some bikes with integrated front ends like the speed concept compare favorably to lower stack bikes. For instance, I can fit on a size small speed concept 7.5 and up but would likely have trouble getting low enough on the 7.0 series with the standard bar and stem.
Many triathletes have a high position on the bike. A higher stack reduces the number of risers needed at that stem and aerobar pads.
You get the lowest bike you can fit. I am not flexible so I got a higher stack bike.
Most AGers are not flexible. So by building a higher bike you increase the number of people you can sell to.
You get the lowest bike you can fit. I am not flexible so I got a higher stack bike.
Most AGers are not flexible. So by building a higher bike you increase the number of people you can sell to.
But could you not solve the same issue by just using spacers?
Another positive for a low stack is it is easier to get ones leg over. When I get of the bike tired, it is amazing how high that bar is. I have fallen a few times not being careful enough.
Higher stack frame + low stack aerobars is most often slower aerodynamically than a low stack frame and getting your stack by adding risers under the elbow pads.
But could you not solve the same issue by just using spacers?
Another positive for a low stack is it is easier to get ones leg over. When I get of the bike tired, it is amazing how high that bar is. I have fallen a few times not being careful enough.
No. If your fit needs 400 reach and 300 stack. Frame A has 400 reach and 280 stack. Add 20 spacers cool. Frame B has 420 reach and 200 stack. Well yes 100 spacers gets your Y right, but then you are 20mm too far on your reach. Negative reach gets iffy after a while (I think Felt B series for example can do up to 60mm neg reach, but there are limits)
Higher stack frame + low stack aerobars is most often slower aerodynamically than a low stack frame and getting your stack by adding risers under the elbow pads.
This is true for stack, but stack and reach usually come together.
If someone needs a high stack, they often need less reach (because, physics).
So the lower stack frame + risers will be too long.
If I fell over trying to get on the bike I think that’s my cue to call the day over and collapse on the couch.
If I fell over trying to get on the bike I think that’s my cue to call the day over and collapse on the couch.
If you fell over on the bike it was because you didn’t use powercranks enough.
If I fell over trying to get on the bike I think that’s my cue to call the day over and collapse on the couch.
Well, latest time was when I was getting off the bike at Sprint worlds. Yep, was pretty tired so not a lot of focus.
.
Higher stack frame + low stack aerobars is most often slower aerodynamically than a low stack frame and getting your stack by adding risers under the elbow pads.
This is true for stack, but stack and reach usually come together.
If someone needs a high stack, they often need less reach (because, physics).
So the lower stack frame + risers will be too long.
No idea the physics. I have a low stack and long reach bike. Am 6’5" so I need all the reach I can get.
Have spacers and I guess a high stack C2 aerobars. (132mm drop from seat to elbow pads.)
If I get on a bike with a high stack just feels weird to have the top tube so high. Guess I could get used to anything.
Hoping to compare a P2 and Felt DA side by side at a LBS in 2 weeks, and ideally try assuming they have bikes there.
.
No idea the physics. I have a low stack and long reach bike. Am 6’5" so I need all the reach I can get.
Have spacers and I guess a high stack C2 aerobars. (132mm drop from seat to elbow pads.)
If I get on a bike with a high stack just feels weird to have the top tube so high. Guess I could get used to anything.
Hoping to compare a P2 and Felt DA side by side at a LBS in 2 weeks, and ideally try assuming they have bikes there.
.
Again, if you fit on a low stack bike, why would you even look at a high stack bike? It’s not made for you.
No idea the physics. I have a low stack and long reach bike. Am 6’5" so I need all the reach I can get.
Have spacers and I guess a high stack C2 aerobars. (132mm drop from seat to elbow pads.)
If I get on a bike with a high stack just feels weird to have the top tube so high. Guess I could get used to anything.
Hoping to compare a P2 and Felt DA side by side at a LBS in 2 weeks, and ideally try assuming they have bikes there.
.
Again, if you fit on a low stack bike, why would you even look at a high stack bike? It’s not made for you.
Because basically no one builds a low stack bike so just looking for folks thoughts. Anything wrong with gathering data and opinions?
And what does low even mean? What is low? How what does high mean, what is high?
.
Swing your leg behind the seat to dismount, no need for a low top tube.
How far above the head tube is your aerobar pad? You might not need as low a stack as you think.
Swing your leg behind the seat to dismount, no need for a low atop tube.
How far above the head tube is your aerobar pad? You might not need as low a stack as you think.
This is why I am hoping to take my bike with me to the LBS event and hope they have a felt DA 58 and PS 58/61.
This way I can measure each right next to each other. I might find out it does not matter assuming I can get
all the specs from my fit on a new bike. Or I might find it makes a huge difference on how far down I can get
in front.
.
But could you not solve the same issue by just using spacers?
Another positive for a low stack is it is easier to get ones leg over. When I get of the bike tired, it is amazing how high that bar is. I have fallen a few times not being careful enough.
No. If your fit needs 400 reach and 300 stack. Frame A has 400 reach and 280 stack. Add 20 spacers cool. Frame B has 420 reach and 200 stack. Well yes 100 spacers gets your Y right, but then you are 20mm too far on your reach. Negative reach gets iffy after a while (I think Felt B series for example can do up to 60mm neg reach, but there are limits)
Those aren’t even remotely close to realistic numbers, so I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you saying don’t buy a bike that doesn’t fit right?
But could you not solve the same issue by just using spacers?
Another positive for a low stack is it is easier to get ones leg over. When I get of the bike tired, it is amazing how high that bar is. I have fallen a few times not being careful enough.
No. If your fit needs 400 reach and 300 stack. Frame A has 400 reach and 280 stack. Add 20 spacers cool. Frame B has 420 reach and 200 stack. Well yes 100 spacers gets your Y right, but then you are 20mm too far on your reach. Negative reach gets iffy after a while (I think Felt B series for example can do up to 60mm neg reach, but there are limits)
Those aren’t even remotely close to realistic numbers, so I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you saying don’t buy a bike that doesn’t fit right?
Yes. h20 is not understanding why they make bikes with different geometries. And why all bikes are not “low stack where you just add spacers”. Was trying to explain in easy numbers.
But could you not solve the same issue by just using spacers?
Another positive for a low stack is it is easier to get ones leg over. When I get of the bike tired, it is amazing how high that bar is. I have fallen a few times not being careful enough.
No. If your fit needs 400 reach and 300 stack. Frame A has 400 reach and 280 stack. Add 20 spacers cool. Frame B has 420 reach and 200 stack. Well yes 100 spacers gets your Y right, but then you are 20mm too far on your reach. Negative reach gets iffy after a while (I think Felt B series for example can do up to 60mm neg reach, but there are limits)
Those aren’t even remotely close to realistic numbers, so I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you saying don’t buy a bike that doesn’t fit right?
Yes. h20 is not understanding why they make bikes with different geometries. And why all bikes are not “low stack where you just add spacers”. Was trying to explain in easy numbers.
Your numbers make no sense. Want to try with some real ones from real bikes?
.
Your numbers make no sense. Want to try with some real ones from real bikes?
.
Sure, want to try my bike fit?
Fit = 681 stack, 414 reach to back of pad.
A middle of the road stack - reach bike is the p2.
Look at p2 geometry chart. http://www.cervelo.com/...9-7343cad65732-0.pdf
56 frame has 531 stack and 429 reach. So I would need 150 in stack added by the system, and -15mm of reach.
You can get kinda sorta close if you jerry rig the right stuff. But not awesome.
A fairly high stack bike is the Felt B.
Look at a Felt B 56cm http://www.feltbicycles.com/...ilable-in-650c-.aspx .
420 reach, 554 stack. So I only need to add 130 stack with my system. And I need to only add -6mm reach.
So play around with spacers and aerobars and stems, but at the end of the day I have less spacers going on with the Felt, and I am less behind the basebar with the Felt.
I think there are bikes that are even lower and longer than the P2 that would show the example even more clear, but I just spent some time playing with numbers on these 2 bikes…
I don’t actually know anything about bikes, but have spent the last month playing with numbers and looking at bikes, so it is kind of sucked my brain over. Really hard to sort through all the data, because you have 10 % of the people telling you “always get a Cervelo, its the best”, 10% telling you “Always get a Felt, its the best value”, 10% telling you things that make no sense, etc.
My info my be totally wrong, but it is the best I can come up with playing with bikes and stems and tape measures. If there is a magic way to put the cevelo p2 at my same exact coords, and handle no worse than the Felt B, then I wasted a lot of brain power for nothing. I did not find this magic way however.