Powered by Outside

First Look: Rulezman Releases Super Short 15 & 18mm Stems

Aug 16, 2023
by Seb Stott  
photo


Based in Finale Ligure, Rulezman Suspension claims to be the oldest suspension tuning centre in Italy. It's headed up by Dave Cerutti, who you may know from his YouTube channel where he presents suspension information and opinions, and showcases long-form experiments such as comparing dual crown and single forks on an enduro bike.


He's come up with a couple of super short stems, 15 mm for single crown forks and 18 mm for downhill. He explains his reasoning for this in great detail in the video above, but here's my summary:

The backsweep of most handlebars is about 15-18 mm, so these stems place your hands exactly in line with the steering axis (not in front as with longer stems). This gives the best steering response and predictability as the forces on both hands are symmetrical and there's no side-to-side movement when steering. In order to take advantage of this you'll need a longer frame reach (by sizing up). This longer front center puts more weight on the rear wheel (less on the front) so you'll need a longer rear center (AKA chainstay length) to compensate. Interestingly, Dave says that the 10-20 mm stems pioneered by Mondraker in around 2012 weren't successful because the reach and chainstays were too short.

Personally, I do think Dave makes a good point that you can't consistently add that much load to the front tire by pressing on the handlebars anyway, so going for a shorter and taller stem probably isn't going to make a huge difference to the front wheel grip in itself. Obviously, a longer front center will reduce the load on the front wheel, so if you want to go down that route you'll need a (considerably) longer chainstay to compensate and maintain front wheel grip. That obviously means extending the wheelbase even more, which is not something everyone is keen on.

photo
Screenshot from the above video. The drawing on the left represents the steering on a bike with a very long stem, while the one on the right shows a bike with a super short stem such that the grips are in line with the steering axis.

It's also worth pointing out that a typical 40 mm stem with 15 mm of backsweep on the handlebar puts your hands 25 mm in front of the steering axis. Over a ~ 800 mm bar width that's a very small deviation from a straight line joining the two hands and the steering axis - nothing like the exaggerated comparison in the video and image above. As such I don't see a problem with riding a 40 mm stem with a modest backsweep, even though stems longer than 50 mm noticeably impair the handling in my opinion.

Still, I think it's cool to see more options for bike nerds to experiment with. Who knows? Maybe in a few years, we'll all be riding bikes with a 1,400 mm wheelbase, 500 mm chainstay and 15 mm stem.

If you want to have a go, you'd better be quick and have deep pockets. Rulezman is only making 150 stems in total; machined out of 7075 aluminum with titanium bolts; prices start at 224 Euros.

photo
HC-V3Hd (for single-crown forks)

• 31.8 mm bar only
• 15mm offset
• 147grams including all bolts
• GR5 titanium top cap
• 40mm steerer tube clamp
• 60mm bar clamp
• Zero gap clamps
• Integrated top cap
• EFBE certified DH/Ebike GR5
• 7075 alloy CNC - 5 Axis machining
• 6x GR5 titanium M5 bolts
• clear anodised high raw-gloss finish
• copper grease kit included
• 100 units numbered limited series:
• MSRP: 274 euros

photo
HC-V1 (for direct mount forks)

• 31.8 bar only
• 18mm offset
• 105 grams including all bolts
• 64mm bar clamp area
• Zero gap clamps
• EFBE certified DH/Ebike GR5
• 7075 alloy CNC - 5 Axis machining
• GR5 titanium bolts
• clear anodised high raw-gloss finish
• copper grease kit included
• 50 units numbered limited series:
• MSRP: 224 euros

For more information check out Rulezman suspension or follow them on Instagram.

photo


Author Info:
seb-stott avatar

Member since Dec 29, 2014
314 articles

311 Comments
  • 161 0
 This stem needs holes drilled for cables to be routed through the stem. Preferably though the middle of the bolts for neatness.
  • 18 0
 Needs more drilling to fit the One Up EDC system.
  • 19 0
 Make sure that there is something to route the cables at a 90 degree angle for max cable efficiency.
  • 9 0
 @nickfranko: Hopefully it’ll also make ‘em rub on the steerer too. That’s always appreciated
  • 75 6
 “Maybe in a few years, we'll all be riding bikes with a 1,400 mm wheelbase, 500 mm chainstay and 15 mm stem.“

I really hope we aren’t, because the radius of the turns won’t change.
Yea might be faster in a straight line but its going to feel barge-like in the corners and a whole lot less fun.
  • 62 45
 Meh. My bike has a 1340 wheelbase and nearly 480 chainstay at sag..... just as fast in corners as my shorter 27.5 bike, way faster and more stable on the straights. I haven't come across a corner yet that it field unwieldy. My god it is hard to manual though.
  • 108 15
 @maestroman21: I don't belive you
  • 28 2
 @maestroman21: I’m on a 1316mm wheelbase and 458 chainstays and in corners it feels like a slug.
  • 18 4
 There is obviously an upper limit to geometry. Having said that, my current enduro rig is much longer (~1300mm wheelbase in a size large, ~452mm chainstay length at sag) and slacker (~63.7 degree HTA) and also MUCH faster, than my enduro bike of 2015.

This claim of being much faster is objectively true based on my recorded segment times over 15+ years of riding the same trails. And for context - I am now closing in on 40 years old. To a certain limit, bikes with more confidence inspiring geometry and suspension performance allow the rider to carry more speed across trails, corners and obstacles, and remain rather agile and fun as a result.

That said, clearly this geometry works better for more aggressive trails - if I were primarily cruising blues or had less elevation where I live, I'd be happy on a smaller/shorter bike.
  • 17 38
flag matyk (Aug 16, 2023 at 10:44) (Below Threshold)
 As bikes get "lower, longer, and slacker," their handling gets worse and worse.
  • 20 5
 A 1400 mm wheelbase bike has a minimal cornering radius of about 1400mm (if we only consider realistic corners, otherwise it's half that). There is basically no corners that has a radius this small and you can't take it larger by adjusting your trajectory.
Longer bikes aren't that more difficult to corner, they just need to be lean more, that's a new habit to have. But longer bike can also be lower bike, and low BB makes long bikes harder to corner.
  • 3 2
 @faul: Exactly, BB height needs to be higher with longer bikes. My size L canyon torque has a 1310mm WB and doesn't inhibit me in turns at all.
  • 15 7
 @kwl1: skill issue for sure
  • 25 1
 @rideordie35: How much of your riding is on Biketrails vs. old Alpine Hiking Trails? For Bikepark or almost any kind of "build" trail you wont have Problems but try your Bike on a Switchbacktrail in the Alps and I would like to see you even manage an euroturn with it because from my expirience that gets a lot harder the longer your bike is.
  • 6 4
 Try leaning the bike over and it'll turn just fine. Paul Aston is already riding bikes with that geo!
  • 21 2
 @RockCrawler: I live in the Alps and have a 1340mm wheelbase bike. Nose turns on switchbacks requires skills not short bikes.
  • 2 1
 @matyk: That's one hell of a hot take. In your opinion, what's the best handling bike you've ridden?
  • 1 0
 @kwl1: on one hello dave? I have an xl HD with 1345mm wheelbase and 458 chainstay
  • 5 9
flag homerjm (Aug 16, 2023 at 12:59) (Below Threshold)
 @RockCrawler: Those turns are the opposite of flow and fun,even with and old 26" bike it would be the same to ride,not very fun.
  • 8 3
 @watchmen:

Gearbox, check
High pivot, check
Massive wheelbase, check
Double crown UDH fork with less than 200mm of travel, check
90deg uninterrupted seat tube, check
Crazy high stack on a direct mount stem, check
Huyyuge platform pedals, check

(Now it goes off the rails.)

Coil spring on a bike with a linear level ratio, ???? Is a linear lev ratio frame w hydraulic bottom out and varrying sizes of bottom outbumpers the future?
Gripshift, in the future we still can't figure out gearbox trigger shifter???
  • 18 0
 @homerjm: flow is the opposite of fun.

Not really, flow is fun too, but when you can get a flow state in those old walking tracks it is the best of all
  • 5 0
 @rideordie35: so is needing an ultralong bike to ride chunky, steep stuff.
  • 3 1
 @matyk: It’s not worse, I just don’t think that low, long, and slack works for everyone in all instances. My low, really long, slack bike doesn’t like tight corners, and even relatively tight corners are tricky to get through. It’s also not much fun on flow trails but then again nothing I would ride would make a flow trail fun.

Where low, really long, and slack shines is on steep, rough trails. My bike handles like a dream on such trails. On sketchy chutes where a shorter bike would feel twitchy, my bike stays composed and tracks exactly where you want it to go.

Aside from having to watch pedal strikes on uphills, it also climbs surprisingly well.

So yeah, for some people such a bike will handle worse. But for others, like myself, they really help tame steeper, gnarlier trails.
  • 2 0
 @Shitass: It’s a Kruch bike. A small, Canadian, steel frame builder. www.kruchexperience.com
  • 1 0
 @rideordie35: Skill is part of it, but my short chainstay, mid size wheelbase bike whips through corners much easier.
  • 2 2
 @valrock: Which part? I'm sure the same stance was taken in 2008 about an unwieldy 29er prototype with a 1250mm wheelbase.
  • 1 1
 @kwl1: go faster
  • 2 0
 Even longer bikes with reverse stems. Chaps, chapesses, and those for whom the choice isn't as clear; I give you the future.
  • 13 0
 @DirtCrab: I’ll answer that “best handling bike you’ve ever ridden” question, it’s my 1995 Cannondale M200. No it can’t go fast, no it can’t plow through rocks, it feels like the bike is consciously trying to escape my hands sometimes, but holy crap can that thing handle better than any of my other 4 modern mountain bikes. I get on that rigid boneshaker and it suddenly feels like the trail got 200% wider, 0 missed lines through corners, every pump successfully executed, jumps that send me soaring through that air but still keeps more “options” in the air than any other bike.

Yeah we’re gaining A LOT through modern geometry, and what we’re gaining is more important than what we’re losing, but we are still losing something
  • 8 2
 @watchmen: Aston is a great example of pushing things too far. Check out his video where he "proves" that his bike can turn. He has to square of a bikepark burm that isn't all that tight and has all the support in the world. His rear wheel ends up hugely inside his front wheel and he has to break traction with the rear wheel to avoid blowing out the turn.
  • 20 0
 @SintraFreeride: OK cool, Aston has his opinions and some of them are valid, but so do others like Jack Moir, Richie Rude, Sam Hill etc. None of these ultra long geos are on podiums or being eschewed by pros, some of them have openly complained about their bikes being too long.
  • 2 6
flag bemorebikes (Aug 16, 2023 at 16:08) (Below Threshold)
 @fielonator: You're not that far off actually. Wink

bemorebikes.com/rr-stem.html
  • 2 1
 @DCF: Kinda hard to get a long bike through tight corners going fast.
  • 15 0
 @albysnutz: we were riding with Paul Aston last week on fast tight (but not alpine endo corners) and I can tell you he was f’kin rapid on that bike! Whether it just works for him as he’s a lanky f*cker I don’t know. The grip was amazing on that bike too. All I would say is that if it wasn’t for the experimental work of Chris Porter and Paul (plus others) we’d all be riding bikes with old school geo, which I think we can all agree were crap.
  • 2 0
 @watchmen: not much has changed, but they live underwater
  • 7 1
 Horses for courses and all that, but Rulezman and Aston seem to have a preference for cart horses IMO. It also seems strange to me that Enduro pros seem to be choosing to size down their long slack bikes on trails at speeds that would seem to indicate the opposite according to the internet forums.
  • 3 1
 @kwl1: Did you go HP on that frame by any chance ? I currently have 470mm cs on a custom steel frame and the bike corners like a dream, long and short radius no problems. Comparatively my old Suprem V4 was terrible at short radius corners as the CS was increasing during cornering and the more input you give, the worse it was. Reason why I kept a normal pivot position for that frame. I also have only 15mm BB drop on full 29 to help with cornering. One thing I realised tho is that those bikes need lean angle to corner. If you try to corner it by turning the handlebars instead of leaning the bike it will not corner well. Leaning is the proper technique but I had to definitely remind myself to lean the bike to have it behave well. Short bikes are a lot less sensitive to lean angle it seems.
  • 5 0
 @SintraFreeride: I ride a tandem on alpine switchbacks. Stoker's sideway swing radius during euroturns is perfect to clean some excessive trees
  • 2 0
 @KJP1230: YOU have certainly gotten faster in those 15 years too. Logic says it's not just the bike...
  • 4 1
 @maestroman21:

Bikes have gotten so long now, that they had to go invent the “stoppie” to pivot the front wheel of the bike around corners.

Modern bike trails can be designed for it. Older hiking trails, with tight switchbacks, are very challenging for super long bikes.
  • 7 0
 @Saidrick: Ahhh yes, I recall seeing that for the first time when long bikes became a thing......

I recall a friend of mine in 2012 complaining about not being able to make it around the switchbacks on a local trail on his Trek Mamba.... because it was a 29er and simply too long.... Here we are in 2023, and I seem to have no issue on the same switchback on a much longer bike. As someone mentioned above, a corner with an actual physical limitation would be exceptionally rare. Skill limitation would be more common.

If I have a new long, slack sled, I dont think I'd be aiming to ride old hiking trails anyway.
  • 4 0
 @Saidrick: History lesson: Nico was doing the stoppie/nose wheelie turn technique in the mid 90's. There's nothing new about turns that are tighter than bike's turning radius.
  • 5 9
flag SintraFreeride (Aug 17, 2023 at 13:27) (Below Threshold)
 @AlanMck: @AlanMck: Most pros haven't tried long bikes nor are they willing to change their riding style to suit them. Most pros stick with what works for them thus using them as a reference is ridiculous. They are massively skilled riders that could ride a rigid bike faster than most of us on the latest and greatest bikes.
  • 2 6
flag SintraFreeride (Aug 17, 2023 at 13:28) (Below Threshold)
 @kwl1: It's not really...you just need to lean the bike over and drift the backend.
  • 4 5
 @Saidrick: Hiking trails with tight switchbacks require skills such as nose turns. If you know how to do them the length of your wheelbase become irrelevant.
  • 1 0
 @DirtCrab:

Nico is about as far away from the average rider as you can get. Hans Rey was also doing them back them too, off of houses. But that was more of a trials move than a trail riding move.
I feel like modern bikes need more so than 90’s bikes did. My trail bike has a wheel base that’s very close to my dh bike.
  • 1 0
 @SintraFreeride:

They do now, but they didn’t then. The trails, in my area ( San Francisco Bay Area), haven’t changed much in 40 years.

I don’t understand the whole “skill” argument. It’s kinda like saying anyone can ride the rampage if they have the required skills for it…
  • 6 2
 @SintraFreeride: I was waiting for someone to make the "pros don't want to try to learn how to ride ultralong bikes argument." It's patently ridiculous, but it also actually gets expressed by PB, when they're at their editorial worst.

Pros want to be as fast as possible. If something offers an advantage, they try it. Maybe some don't, but most will. If it works, they'll use it. Pretending people in a highly competitive sport aren't competitive is silly.

If ultralong and slack were actually better, pro riders wouldn't need to relearn how to ride to accommodate it. Your whole argument is illogical. Long/slack bikes are fine, but they aren't the pinnacle of bike evolution.
  • 6 2
 @TheRamma: If you try something different and don't become faster straight away, doesn't mean it's worse. It just means it doesn't work for your learned skillset. You need to learn to ride with a different style and body position to take advantage of a long bike, and many are not willing to take the time to learn that, especially pros. Almost everyone is riding bikes now that were deemed unrideable 5 years ago, because the change has been slow and gradual.
  • 5 2
 @TheRamma: take alpin skiing, the change from straight skis to parabolic skis could be used as an example of Pro's having a technology that was inherently faster, yet some didn't switch as they couldn't make it work for them, and quickly became irrelevant. Some managed to relearn how to ski and got to enjoy some success, and the younger generation that spent less time on straight skis were able to adapt a lot faster and win. At a smaller level it also happens when the FIS (Ski's UCI) decide to change ski radius or length, some adapt well and keep on performing, some don't and become irrelevant. Here it is worse as they don't get to choose the parameters, if FIS says new skis go from 21m to 35m radius you have to make it work, in the bike world you can just keep outdated geo number and rider how you know and just fade slowly. Look at how the kids like Goldstone who learned on long bikes and ride very long bikes can win WC in his first year in Elite, with the build of a shrimp.
And for those believing that trail bikes with small reach and steep HA were better, feel free to buy second hand bikes, they are cheap and plentyfull and then come back and tell us if it is that much better and if you now can pass the pesky hairpin.
  • 5 2
 @Balgaroth: Funny to bring up Goldstone, I know the guy who built him a custom FS park bike when he was 8 or 10. Let my daughter ride it. It's definitely not super slack or long. Nor is Goldstone's current bike "very long." Large V10 has a 460 reach and a wheelbase less than 1300mm. He does like to run the CS at 455, according to some articles, so that is the only part of his bike set up that's remotely "long." Similar numbers for Finn Iles S4 Demo. And those are world cup DH bikes, the condition where ultralong bikes should have nothing but advantages, according to their proponents.

@hirvi Your argument makes no sense. If ultralong bikes are "faster," it shouldn't take pro racers massive effort to learn to unlock this speed. The idea that commenters on PB are able to get these speed gains, and pro racers can't, is probably one of my favorite delusions on this site. Ultralong bikes are just ultrastable, so it's less effort and less scary at speed. The whole idea of speed as a criteria for making a bike "better' is always brought up by proponents of ultralong geo, then abandoned when it's shown that those bikes aren't dominating the race circuit.
  • 7 0
 @TheRamma: that is quickly forgetting that JG is 1m70 which according to Santa Cruz would put him between a S (full 27.5, 412mm reach) and a M with 437mm reach. Also DH bikes have "short" reach mostly because they have high stacks, if you do your reach at the grips rather than top of the headtube you would find similar numbers between current enduros and DHs.
  • 2 0
 ya it's pretty crazy to use JG as an example of riding a smaller bike when he's 5'7 and his bike is bigger than my L Spire, which is a huge bike. Love it though
  • 1 1
 @TheRamma: You also forget that the best in the world have honed their skills to absolute "perfection". That's why they sometimes have these weird setup quirks and are ultra picky about brake lever angles and whatever. On the top it's not as much about what is the fastest bike, it's more about what is the fastest for this particular athlete. That why all of them are not on full 29" bikes for example.
  • 5 0
 @Balgaroth: lol, that is a good point! Didn't realize he was that short. Finn Iles is 5'11", rides almost the same geo, and is #2 on the WC DH circuit. So is your strategy to ignore all the professional riders who size down or don't embrace super long geo, while talking about the one who does?

Ultralong geo has been around on the race scene for a long time (see Poles team), still hasn't shown itself to be faster. All the excuses about ultra-competitive elite athletes not wanting all those supposed advantages or not being able to figure out the new geo still sound ridiculous, to me.
  • 1 1
 @Balgaroth: +1 Thank you for injecting actual data, plus relevant perspective, into this conversation.
  • 3 0
 @Balgaroth: just caught your comment about stack. You might want to check the math. Stack height on a L V10 is 637 mm. Less than my lithium, only a few mm more than a status or ripmo. It isn't high.
  • 2 0
 @hirvi: so these are people dedicated to honing their skills to perfection, but they can't learn to ride these amazing faster bikes to win races? Doesn't pass the smell test. Pro athletes use everything they can to get an edge.
  • 6 0
 @TheRamma: Pro racers are known to use power balance and quantum BS stickers.
  • 2 0
 @faul: exactly. They'll waste money on crazy pseudoscience and expensive silly trainers just to feel like they get a benefit.

They have free access to prototype bikes. They've experimented with bike geo.
  • 2 2
 @TheRamma: Have you ever been a pro? If not, what is the basis for your claims about pro racers' product testing/evaluation?

You've made a few claims that seem logical, but aren't necessarily true. But you're not entirely off the mark either re: certain bikes being so long that the drawbacks outweigh the advantages. Hence the questions.
  • 3 0
 @DirtCrab: I actually am not making big claims. Read the thread. People say long and slack is better with no drawbacks (and provided some objective measurements for what they mean). Someone said faster.

Yet those geos haven't been dominating in races in any format. So then people start piling on dumber claims. "They hate experimentation. They can't adjust to the geo. They're stuck in old ways."

Those are just ridiculous arguments to make. Pro riders with a mechanic and a bike brand are experimenting all the time. And one Jackson goldstone doesn't disprove a whole field of other racers.
  • 2 0
 And, for the record, I have nothing against you ultra long and slack. It has benefits and drawbacks.
  • 2 0
 @TheRamma: I agree with you that there is a limit and Pole definitely found that one. Now the problem is where does long start and what is short ? I would consider short any geo before 2016/7, normal anything after, new Canyon Strive and Poles long. For reference I am 1m80 and ride 490mm reach with long CS which tends to make your reach feel a lot shorter. With short/normal CS I would go 475/480mm and I would consider anything below 465mm as short. While I don't see any real benefit in going with a super long reach as it just stretches your arms and tend to make it harder to move around on the bike, I am 100% for having my front wheel as much in front of me as possible so 63HA is my go to number and longer forks are better. So you can have a bike that is long, while keeping a reasonable reach number. My bike has a 1350mm wheelbase for instance but only 490mm of reach.
  • 2 2
 @Saidrick: The skill argument is simple. The higher your skill level the easier you can ride different terrain and different bikes. Beginners tend to turn their bikes with their handlebar rather than leaning. A long bike feels like crap if you don't lean it.
  • 4 3
 @TheRamma: If pros tried everything to get an advantage then they would be riding different bikes. Greg Minnaar is classic example. His bikes have been getting longer and longer and yet his height hasn't increased in 20 years...
  • 1 1
 @hirvi: Couldn't have said it better myself!
  • 3 1
 @TheRamma: Funny that you mentioned Pole. The Evolink was released in 2016 i think and was laughed at almost universally for ridiculous geo that just won't work on anything that includes turning. Today everyone of you are riding bikes with almost identical geometry.. Smile
  • 2 0
 @Balgaroth: It's appreciate the numbers. It would help be clearer if you said what is a long or short CS. It's also hard to discuss reach without discussing stack. I agree that most geo pre-2016 was too short for aggressive riding. also unbalanced on seated technical climbing.

For me, at 6 feet tall, I like reaches from 470-490 mm, chainstays 430-440 mm, stack 640. I'm okay with a steeper HTA 64-65 (for an FS). That's for a bike that does everything from technical trails to bike parks. If it were just for railing bermed turns at the park, I'd probably go longer on the CS, slacker on the HTA.

I also have a stupid fun bike. The large Honzo ESD. I slammed the stays at 417, with a 490 reach. It isn't stable, but since it's a hardtail, it's a blast to have that agility. I use it to ride more tame trails.

There's nothing wrong with 1350mm wheelbases, they just have drawbacks compared to shorter WB bikes.
  • 3 1
 @SintraFreeride: So wait, you're saying Greg Minnaar isn't trying new things, and your proof is that his bikes have changed over the years?
  • 2 0
 @hirvi: no need for the chip on the shoulder. Some people embraced Pole early on, including the reviewers on this site.
www.pinkbike.com/news/pole-evolink-140-review.html

I am absolutely not riding a bike with 510 reach, 455 stays. Also worth calling out how weird having the same stack height across the sizes was for that model.
  • 3 2
 @TheRamma: I'm saying pros are rather conservative. Greg Minnaar has been in the sport since the late 90s and STILL hasn't got a bike in the right size!
  • 2 0
 @SintraFreeride: so who is the reference then? Two essentially random dudes who like long bikes? Ride what works for you, that's all that matters.
  • 2 1
 @SintraFreeride: yeah, you keep saying it, with no evidence, and with an underlying logic that really doesn't pass the smell test. All to justify your personal preference and try to make it universally better.

Just give it a rest. Like what you like.
  • 3 0
 @AlanMck: You can ride whatever you like. All I'm saying is stop with the bs argument that the pros have tested everything and know best. Not to mention what the pros ride shouldn't affect what you ride because we are not riding at their speeds on their terrain.
  • 4 1
 @TheRamma: If you want to continue to drink the kool aid and believe that pros have tested the limits of geo and have access to every part they desirem you do that. I'm not trying to make anyone ride longer bikes I'm just calling out the BS I keep hearing about how long bikes don't turn, they are only good for steeps or rough terrain. Most people saying these things haven't EVEN ridden a long bike! I recommend trying stuff out for yourself and then making up your mind. If you do that and still prefer a shorter bike fair enough.
  • 2 0
 @SintraFreeride: I still don't see your point. I could say the exact same thing about the people waxing on about 520mm reachs and 495mm CS.
  • 2 1
 @AlanMck: My point is don't pass judgement if you haven't tried it.
  • 3 3
 @SintraFreeride: nice attempt at revising your argument. Your point has been "the type of bike I like is objectively the best/fastest, and anyone who disagrees either hasn't tried it, or isn't capable of riding it correctly."

That point became laughable when you applied it to professional MTBers.
  • 2 0
 @Balgaroth: I have gotten past HTA as a metric for a bike being capable....well at least, once its 66º or slacker I guess. I ride a 490 reach bike with a 65.5º HTA, and it's far more capable and confidence inspiring in the steeps than a bike with a 475 reach and 63º HTA. Why? because the thing that slack HTA is a band-aid for is too short of a front center. Push the entire head tube away from you, instead of just the front wheel away from your hands. Then you get the security of the wheel safely out in front, but not the silly floppy steering of a slack af HTA.

basically today, everyone is building 2017 Mondrakers. Including Mondraker! lol. and that's a good thing!
  • 1 0
 @Mtbdialed: Mondraker had 500ish reach in 2013 no?
  • 1 0
 @AlanMck: for an XL sure. It's 515 now. Lol
  • 4 1
 @TheRamma: I haven't changed my argument at all. You have made the assumption that "the pros are fast because they have shorter bikes" rather than "they are fast because they are great riders". I believe if many of them took the time to adapt they would be faster on longer bikes.
Having said that you can ride whatever you like.
  • 2 1
 @SintraFreeride: pick a front/rear centre length and be a d*** about it.
  • 2 2
 @SintraFreeride: I haven't made assumptions. You assured us that longer bikes are faster. Then the fact that long bikers haven't dominated competitive races came up. Then you dropped this chestnut;
" Most pros haven't tried long bikes nor are they willing to change their riding style to suit them. Most pros stick with what works for them thus using them as a reference is ridiculous."

It remains a completely unfounded assumption, and it's ridiculous on its face. Just like you what you like, and let the rest go. You've yet to make a compelling or logical argument here.
  • 2 2
 @TheRamma: A chainsaw is objectively faster than a saw to cut through a tree, yes?

Imagine a pro saw-er, he sees this new weird tech that is the chainsaw. He takes it and starts sawing. Angry, he throws it away because it's terribly slower than his saw. The grip is weird, the edge doesn't cut well ans it's so heavy! He didn't even bother to learn how a chainsaw works.
  • 3 3
 @fredink: It took you over a month to think of this terrible analogy?

Dude, just stop. Like what you like, that part is fine. Stop pretending that your taste is objectively better, especially if this is the best evidence you can bring.
  • 3 0
 @TheRamma: Pick a stem length and be a dick about for MONTHS on a thread no-one reads.
  • 6 0
 @watchmen: don’t worry I’m still reading
  • 3 2
 @TheRamma: I'm sorry, are comment sections closed after a certain time? I read the article yesterday and stumbled upon your bullshit theory that if a pro has to learn something it means it's worse. Pinkbike allowed me to react, sorry that bothers you so much.

I couldn't care less what stem length pleases your bottom. I am just shocked by the crap you spit.
  • 2 2
 @fredink: so it took you a month to misread the thread? Even weirder.

I don't need to pros to like or dislike something. Someone dusted off the old "my preference is the bestest cause it's the fastest." Then someone else launched the "pros don't have the skillz to use this new super fast tech." Dumb.

Now I'll wait for you to respond, to really show how little you care.
  • 1 0
 @TheRamma: This argument is cooling off a bit. Could you both heat it up a little?
  • 1 1
 @maestroman21: no! I definitely don't care enough to argue with anyone!!!!
  • 3 0
 @TheRamma: The above commentary has determined that was a lie.
  • 1 0
 @maestroman21: thought the sarcasm was pretty clear...
  • 1 0
 @TheRamma: hahaha, I'm halfway through my coffee. Sarcasm detector not engaged yet. Carry-on.
  • 41 3
 mullet Patrol rider here.. After riding a 35 mm stem and often losing front wheel traction I have gone longer and considering longer still.
  • 22 2
 Yuuup. Up to 50mm on my mullet Patrol. With how slack bikes are now, that longer stem to get weight over the front wheel feels great.
  • 5 1
 Agreed; mulleted Enduro with 30mm stem was scary, went to 44mm and am very happy
  • 2 2
 ^^^ This guy gets it! ^^^
  • 19 3
 CS is too short.
  • 41 1
 What is the Mullet Patrol? And how do I join? Picturing a bunch of dudes with gnarly rat-tails roaming the trails
  • 3 0
 @SunsPSD: 480mm reach + 440mm CS on a large alloy Patrol, not super short (@jgoldfield you're right, gnarly rat-tails roaming the trails on newer Transition Patrols that also have mullets).

For what it's worth, I also have a Kona Process X w/ 450mm CS. Still feel like I need a 50mm stem to get my weight back over the front wheel. But 450mm does kind of suck to manual. I get the whole "too short" CS thing, have tried my Process X in 435mm CS and it feels far too short (but it does feel awesome on tight jump trails).

Body dynamics and riding style play way more into all of this, the whole "all chainstays must get longer" trend, which I think is overblown. What I wish was more of a trend is adjustable CS length on all frames. And not 2mm here, 3mm there. Enough to actually make a difference.
  • 6 1
 This. Matching fork offset seems to feel best. Too short and the front wants to understeer and wash out.
  • 1 0
 I'm joining the Mullet Patrol in a few weeks I'm so excited! Not on a Patrol, but I will be Patrolling on a Mullet Arrival 170
  • 1 0
 I mulletted a 16 Process 134, 29 fr with 140 29er fork and -2 angleset. Washed out constantly, crashing a lot when I was tired and getting lazy. Changed the 40mm stem to a 50mm. Felt more sluggish steering wise but had hella more front wheel traction, and no more crashes. Granted the mullet setup and high stack had it raked and the seat angle sucked for climbing. But downhill it was fantastic! Longer stem 100% worked for me for front wheel traction, but should be said the 134 also had a super short, 425 27.5 chainstay.
  • 3 0
 @Blownoutrides: I have no idea if there is a relationship between fork offset and stem length but my experience is that when these two numbers are close handling is very neutral. Could just be a coincidence. Also on weighing the front wheel, I move a 5mm spacer over or under the stem depending on what I'm riding. Lower stem for local trails, higher for shuttling or visiting steeper trails.
  • 5 0
 @jgoldfield: It's like Paw Patrol but more hipster.
  • 2 0
 @McKai: when you mullet your bike and CS-length stays the same, of course, then you need a longer stem
  • 2 0
 @jgoldfield: And matching Plaid jerseys.
  • 1 0
 @McKai:
Fraezen?
Only real option I know of.
  • 3 0
 @iduckett: did you play with bar height? Imo this plays quite a role in front end grip, seems like higher bars require either a longer stem or longer cs. My 5010 v4 has short cs (426) and stem (40mm with renthals rolled forward) but with just the right bar height it still grips great. Must say I run my damper relatively hard so that keeps the weight balanced as well.
  • 1 0
 How do you lose front wheel traction on a mullet setup? The back wheel always seems to go first. This is on a 2023 reign with 32mm stem. There is so much steering it's insane.
  • 1 0
 @Bro-LanDog: you loose traction when your weight's too far back

when you mullet your bike your weight goes rearward which takes weight from the rear wheel.

if possible you could increase the chainstay length to get the weight further forward

a second option would be to ride a longer stem (which is not as ideal, please warch rulezman video)
  • 3 1
 @vhdh666: when you lean the bike properly, and your turn is dictated by the natural arc of the leaned front tire, the resistance to continuing your forward path will shift your body weight naturally to your hands and your fork will compress to generate grip. A lot of people feel they need to have some sort of manual input on the front end to maintain grip but allowing the tire to fall into it's natural turning path naturally weights the front end. I'm skeptical a longer stem does anything besides dull input and reduce people's effect of brute forcing the bars instead of leaning the bike.
  • 1 0
 @robotdave: You are ignoring the other parts of the equation, the 63.5' HTA and 160 or 170mm front fork. Both add lots of length to the front end.
The geo numbers you posted, would be fairly balanced on a short travel steeper HTA bike. But not as much on the Patrol.
  • 1 0
 @Bro-LanDog: 2.5 rear tire on a Mullet balances much better imo.
  • 1 0
 @robotdave: going with a moderately longer stem, have you noticed any unwanted amounts of "inability to steer fast enough"? I usually run stems that are on the shorter side but I have always been pretty curious about what it feels like with slightly slower steering. I'm so used to the short and snappy steering that my bike has but I wonder if it would be beneficial to use something longer.
  • 1 0
 @SunsPSD: You're ignoring my point, which is adjustable chain stay lengths on all bikes would be sweet. And like I said, there's more to the equation than just the geo of the bike. Riding style, rider body proportions, etc.

I get the whole trend of longer CS along with longer front end is supposed to help get weight over the front wheel. To me, a longer stem also accomplishes this, and with my riding style, I don't really feel any negative factors.

Having 440 vs. 450 adjustable chainstays would give some neat options, because I don't always want 450mm chain stays.
  • 1 0
 @abotchway: Not at all, but your experience may differ based on your riding style. I don't really like going above 50mm.
  • 2 0
 @robotdave: I would certainly be a proponent of adjustable CS length but am afraid that Transmission has removed that as an option for most bike designs.
I do think that too short CS length always sucks, but too a bit too long doesn't matter hurt much.
  • 1 0
 @lauwe-pokoe: Yea. I slammed the stem and used lower bars. But still no dice. Shifting 10mm directly forward was way more noticeable. (Albeit at the expense of lazier steering).
  • 1 0
 @jgoldfield: those tasked with bringing mullet wearers to justice.
  • 1 0
 @J26z: Spank Spoon! Goldilocks stem if you ask me and half the cost of the crazy billet stems
  • 1 0
 @McKai: I dunno if you know this or not, but goldilocks was a bit if a "see you next tuesday" if you know what I mean.
  • 25 1
 I onestly believe this man really knows how to work on supension components and I basically agree with his geometry theory, but he really lacks in communication and humility. I can't accept to consider top products from brands like Fox and Ohlins to be costantly defined as "crap". This guy is so aggressive on judging other brands different from Manitou or Intend: I've never believe denigrating the others to be a real strategy.

The stuff he's promoting is sent to him directly from the brands (goggles, wheels, dropper post...) and, surprise, it's the best you can find on earth... To me, this sound like a sponsor affair, but no one can say so, cause only adoring comments are allowed on his social media accounts.
  • 4 0
 @RottenFR Very well said, thanks! Exactly whats on my mind aswell. Following his work for some time now and he is a very talented, smart and precise technician, good to see his work and innovations. But his style you described is super accurate and not very intelligent behavior from his side. The kind of person who always believes that theres only one opinion and one way to go, which is obviously his, and anybody who thinks differently is stupid. I hope he can improve on that because otherwise his work is, again, superb.
  • 3 0
 100% this! I sometimes want to unfollow him on Instagram but it also gives me a laugh sometimes.
  • 5 0
 @M-a-R-c-I: yes his work is superbe regarding suspension. His attitude "what I use is the best" is subject to change though: he used to ride an 11-46 XTR cassette. That was the best. Now he's using the 10-51 Garbaruk and that is the best. I understand that someone can change his mind after experiencing it. But "the best" is maybe just the best for that person or only for a short period of time.

What I understand very well is, that 11 speed works great, maybe better than 12s. He's vocal about that and that's okay, but again, "the best" may be just very personal.

His knowledge regarding suspension is phenomenal and his vids are VERY informative and intelligent

maybe we should just take his way of "selling" his ideas with a corn of salt
  • 23 0
 I love the fact that an indie manufacturer designed something like that, sent them to EFBE for tri-test gr 5 and put the videos on his youtube channel for proof. Can't say that about many big brand stuff.
  • 14 0
 Interesting concept, and I am glad he mentions that this is only really going to work with a long chainstay. Bikes are a system working together. You can't necessarily just change one variable and make it "better". That said, given that most production bikes do have relatively short chainstays and ride quite well with 40-50mm stems, I am curious how much better a long reach/CS bike with one of these stems would perform. Is it a true upgrade in performance, or is it simply a different means of achieving the same outcome? I'd be super interested to see a comparison of some kind between the Rulezman/Aston setup and a more traditional Enduro World Cup setup to understand the pros and cons of both.
  • 17 4
 "The backsweep of most handlebars is about 15-18 mm"

Show your work, please.

My Renthal Fatbar V2 31.8 cut to 755 measures almost 30mm back at the ends, around 25mm in the middle of where my hand goes, measured parallel to the stem (more if measured parallel to the ground). And that's even with a little forward roll for my preference a bit more upsweep, which reduces the backsweep a little. Wider bars, bars with more degrees of backsweep, or setups with neutral or backward roll, are likely going to have even more backsweep.
  • 25 0
 are you saying his meth is bad?
  • 15 0
 760 bar width guys representing
  • 7 1
 @ReformedRoadie: meth is very bad, weed however.....
  • 3 0
 Also, let's try to not mathematisize all this.
Like I've heard "get a stem as long as your fork offset, your hands are aligned with the axle to that's what works best!", but that dude forgot to take backsweep into account... Still was convinced about hand-axle alignement being the reason of the good handling...

Rather trust what you feel (at least when you can try by swapping parts)
  • 2 0
 @pargolf8: 760mm is the truth
  • 4 0
 @Bro-LanDog: and im 6 feet. Kills me all my short friends running 800mm
  • 1 0
 @Uuno: just saw this on vital and makes total sense
  • 2 0
 @pargolf8: yep. 6'2" myself. You'll see dudes 5'9" with 800mm bars and their hands way outside their shoulders. They have no idea how much mobility and strength around the bike they're missing
  • 1 0
 @justinfoil: I came here to write same thing.
  • 11 0
 "Maybe in a few years, we'll all be riding bikes with a 1,400 mm wheelbase, 500 mm chainstay and 15 mm stem."

I have no interest in a bike that can not be bunnyhopped or manual'd, no matter how fast it is. I know Paul Aston disagrees but whatever
  • 2 0
 True
  • 21 8
 Aaaaand there goes the grip of your front wheel
  • 6 29
flag papaweelie (Aug 16, 2023 at 10:02) (Below Threshold)
 Not with a longer wheelbase than most bitch-bikes have. Totally getting one!
  • 15 22
flag Davebob FL (Aug 16, 2023 at 10:10) (Below Threshold)
 Seth’s Bike Hacks actually has a decent educational video about a similar product. You’re still gonna be able to weight the front wheel properly.
  • 8 0
 @Davebob: The video Seth made on this topic is entertaining and not very educational. Which is to be expected from him.

What actually educated me was trying a very short stem. I kept losing grip on my front tire when cornering on loose dirt.
  • 5 1
 @barp: he goes so hard for the joey crowd
  • 7 0
 Counterpoint - a lot of people would benefit from a higher stack height and shorter reach. When the stack is low and the stem is long many will panic and feel too forward on the bike, making them pull on the bars in the turns and then washing out the front. My experience is a higher stack and short stem makes leaning the bike easier, allowing my weight to naturally go to my hands as the front tire digs in, generating grip. I have way more steering grip on my modern bike with a 63 hta and 32mm stem with riser bars than I ever did on my 67hta 70mm stem bike because the new bike is so much easier to lean over.
  • 3 2
 @Bro-LanDog: Spot on. As a general rule, if your bars aren't at least as high as your seat at full extension, they're probably too low for you.
  • 1 1
 @pargolf8: Nailed it. Lots of clicks out there in joeyland, and clicks are what pay his bills.
  • 13 0
 So he's invented the Azonic Hammer stem from the 90's?
  • 1 0
 Good point
  • 1 0
 That was my first thought as well on seeing this!
  • 9 0
 I'm just gonna throw in my two cents here as someone who has ridden an overwhelming surplus of bikes, largely because they still break a lot. You learn to ride around the bike. Some are better at some things than others, but there is no right or wrong. Geometry is subjective. I have had 510mm reach bikes (two of which had 15mm stems) bikes with long ass chainstays, and now a moderate 470mm/445mm enduro rig with a dropped dual crown fork. They're all fun in their own way. The 15mm stem felt like it needed a steering damper. The tank slappers were no joke.
  • 1 0
 I'm interested in the 15mm stem, what make was it? thanks!
  • 1 0
 I have the same question. I cant find the mondraker stem from a few years ago and this is stem a little expensive just to try it out.
  • 1 0
 @endoplasmicreticulum: it was an on/off Mondraker stem guys.
  • 1 0
 @AlanMck: not available anymore :-(
  • 9 1
 hmm.. so how do I adjust my bar height with the single crown version? I have to carry around a couple extra forks with different steerer lengths?
  • 14 0
 That would be silly just bring along three or four bars with different rise.
  • 5 7
 @Telemahn: even easier bring 3-4 forks with different steer tube lengths
  • 5 2
 1. How often are you adjusting handlebar height that youd have to "carry around" anything?
2. I'm not sure I see how this is any different than adjusting the height of a regular stem? Admittedly I havent watched the video yet, but I dont see the difference.
3. Obviously theres a minimum height that this will work on, but seeing how there are recommendations for sizing up your bike, and ensuring long chainstays, this seems like a fairly niche product to begin with
  • 14 2
 @onawalk:
1. Don't you have a dropper steerer? Down for the up's and Up for the down's. Get with the times. L0sEr.
  • 1 0
 That's one major drawback with this style of stem, you have to cut the steerer too short to go back to a normal stem later.
  • 2 0
 @onawalk: Some riders kike to raise or lower their bars according to the terrain they're riding. In relation to your second point, if you wanted to drop this stem by 20mm how would you do it without the steerer hitting the bar? It can't be done without cutting the steerer. Then you're shafted if you want to raise it again.
  • 3 2
 @commental: wouldn’t you just allow for that in your initial setup of the stem?
I’m not looking at the shop drawings of the stem, but I’m willing to bet there’s some room to play here.
Again, we are talking about a super niche product, within a niche sport.
The Op likely isn’t considering purchasing the stem, and is just looking for something to bag on.

How many people are out adjusting stem heights for different terrain?
What do you do if you encounter a steep section of trail on a normally mellow grade, walk around cause your stem isn’t 20mm higher?
What do you do when you encounter a mellow section with yours stem raised?
  • 11 0
 inB4 PVD666
  • 5 0
 Show your work!
  • 10 0
 He's found that pinkbike comment sections aren't worthy of his presence. We've squandered the gift.
  • 6 3
 @reborn10speeder: he’s largely right.
  • 8 0
 As a trials rider with a stem longer than my cranks, I'm offended by this stem.
  • 9 1
 Hated the “DM for price” when people asked on Instagram, at least Pinkbike managed to get that out of him.
  • 1 0
 Just list the price..we can handle it…
  • 4 0
 I’ve been running a 15mm direct mount that I built on my tr11 for a while and I have to say it’s wild how good it feels. I ride a medium so it’s reach come out to like 411 l. Really short… I know. However for riding the creepy steeps in virgin it works really well for me. Even riding more normal dh tracks it feels good. A little tuning in the suspension to compensate for the balance and its money. I’ve gone a bit different than what he preaches but short bar mounts are definitely better. Rulezman knows what’s up.
  • 6 1
 How much does the average person actually turn their bars during trail and DH riding? If you ignore doing tricks and slow hairpins whilst climbing then it's probably not more than a few degrees most of the time.
  • 15 1
 That video was painful to watch. So many years of experiences and tinkering and the results is a whacky free body diagram and not one coherent theory. It's not even that we don't turn the bar that much, it's the entire cornering theory presented that's wrong.
  • 1 1
 @faul: When you have a 1400 wheelbase bike you need to turn the handlebars more to turn, maybe that's why he's so into them?
  • 1 1
 @LDG:
Wheelbase don't change the order of magnitude of the steering rotation, and it's easier to lean more than to turn the bar more. A few ° of lean will compensate for the extra input required. The difference in wheelbase will only really be significant on corners that have less than about 3 or 4m of radius, and these are really tight corners. (that would mean turning 90° in less than 4m of distance. Or, the 4Gs acceleration he mention in the video happens at speeds about 13km/h: these are tight corners)

But, when you have 1400mm of wheelbase, the free body diagrams don't change their meaning, and that's the worst part of that video.
  • 1 0
 @faul: most tight corner definitely have a radius tighter than 3-4m. what the f* else would we be talking about?
If you look at Paul Astons videos you see that even if he leans the bike a lot he also turns the handlebar way more than you would on a shorter wheelbase bike!
but hey, keep discussing with yourself! it's what internet was invented for! Wink
  • 2 0
 @LDG: Take a tape, go find a corner that you find is tight, ride it once, and try to measure the radius of your trajectory from the prints of your knobs. It's probably more than you think.

this is a corner with a radius of about 3m:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdXUzsQxsEc

Note that the inside of it is less than a meter, visually making it tighter than that, but that's not where the wheels go. Well, you'll see at the beginning of the video, that's at least not where the wheels should go.
  • 1 0
 @faul: if the diameter of the circle is about 3m which it looks like it is here (3m från outside of upper trail to outside of lower trail), how is the radius 3m?
seems like we speak of different things.
  • 1 1
 @LDG:
At the beginning of the video, the trajectory she uses is about 2 bikes wide (incl wheels), so about 4m, so about 2m radius. And she fails.
And at the end of the video, the print is a bit less than 3 bikes wide, so 6m or a bit less, so a bit less than 3m radius. I'm not sure it's the same corner tho, as the trees seems to be at the same place but the rocks looks different.
  • 2 0
 @faul: doesn't sound like what you mean is a radius is the same as what I and math means. Good luck to you!
  • 4 0
 Admittedly, I didn't watch the video. But I don't see why it would be so much better to have the center of rotation of your arms at the steering axis. My commuter bike with its moustache bar and quill stem has the hands behind the axis and I can steer just fine. My road bike has a super long stem and I can steer just fine whether I am on the hoods or at the back of the drops. With narrow bars, offsetting the center of rotation by almost half the turn radius helps to lower the ratio of angle turned per mm hand movement. A 15 vs 40 mm stem on a 800mm bar makes little difference to that.

Pick the position of your arms based on your personal preference, adjust handlebar width and backsweep angle to that position, then work out what stem length you need with the frame you have. Want as long reach as possible on your frame: that means you need as short a stem as possible. But don't turn it around and say we need different frames so we can ride with the optimal stem. That's how I see it.
  • 1 0
 Years ago I had an old bike with that handlebars and quill stem and found it very interesting. With your hands so far back,the steering is quite light,the front wheel is not loaded like in a regular modern bike. Got the same old bike with a short 40mm stem and Mtb handlebars and the change was day and night.
From sketchy handling to on rails like feel,it was quite a surprise how good it felt (or normal I would said).
  • 3 0
 Hey Rulezman, what about folks that are running riser bars with 30-55mm stems and then tilting the bars to get the axis in line or close to the steerer tube axis? Is this product catering more to the rider prefering a flatter bar?
  • 6 0
 So... Rulezman official component supplier of the Grim Donut 3.0?
  • 6 2
 So Moto have DM stems for ages with zero length and doing just fine. MTB is about style, so any ugly however functional thing will not be mass adopted
  • 2 0
 I ride a 35 mm stem now so this is really only 20mm shorter. Granted its a crap ton taller than my current setup. The problem is he priced it too high and very few people would be willing to take a chance on some thing that expensive that they may not like. thats a lot to spend to try something that may wind up a really expensive paper weight.
  • 2 0
 He’s one of those guys who think that perceived performance is more important than actual performance, regardless of what be says.
He’s equally interesting as he is tiring to listen to.
  • 5 0
 Yeah na, my 2017 bike already feels too short
  • 4 0
 If this catches on we'll have too many steerer tubes 6.5" floating around the marketplace.
  • 2 1
 Eh ok. I see this as a Rulezman is going off on his own again. It might be brilliant, but the 32min video wasn't very convincing to me. For video's sake, this girl that did the nasty OTB, could have explained the how his thing changed her life in like 2 minutes. We can blame this on the people making bikes, but I think a 0mm reach stem is going to turn my bike into a way to direct handling bike, just fighting it all the way down to the end of the trail. Kinda what changing it from 45mm stem to 40mm already did for me. I got very used to preload and driving the bike this way, going all the way to 0, I guess I will be a Bruce Lee on reaction time after a year, but it sure doesn't sound very interesting yet, maybe it's equally fun roosting down the same trail on a road bike. I like how he sells his custom enduro bike, which looks like a somewhat modified Specialized Enduro 2006 sanded down to the raw alu, but whatever.
  • 2 1
 "The backsweep of most handlebars is about 15-18 mm, so these stems place your hands exactly in line with the steering axis" That's strange. Really strange. I've been riding with the hands in line with the steering axis since 2014, with a 35mm Kore stem and a Renthal bar. And Renthal bars aren't even the ones with the most backsweep. Right now I use a 31mm stem with the bar a little more vertical. It's easy to adjust the position of the line from one hand to the other in relation to the steering axis by rotating the bar. I guess this is for those who really like to point their bars upwards. I can't imagine how one could possibly ride that.
  • 1 0
 I refer to an 800mm bar, though. If you move the hands inwards 20mm on each side (as in a 760mm bar), the line between them might extend some 5mm or so away from the steering axis.
  • 1 0
 Yeah, bar back sweep ranges from 30-50mm that I have measured. I don't know what this 15-18mm measurement is, it is for sure not the distance from center of bar to center of grips.

And it's entirely dependent on how wide the bars are. Mine are all 760mm with the above back sweep numbers (OneUp, WeAreOne, Specialized alloy).
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer where's the review of the reverse offset stem? I thought I remember you guys talking briefly about getting one at Sea Otter to test. Any chance thats still in the works?
  • 1 0
 I don't see how this can be good for a double crown fork. The knobs and air screw will both be so tight under the bar you cant adjust anything or remove cap to adjust air. Even if you got the cap off you couldn't screw in a pump.
  • 1 0
 It'd be great if some of the bigger sites like PB were to actually test these things and see what the performance benefits/negatives actually are. I've got a lot of time for rulezman/aston, and rulezman talks his products up big time. Be great to see a rulezman tuned USD forks put through the wringer by someone with arguably less bias than Aston to see what the comparison is really like.
  • 1 0
 As long as the TT allows for this I see it as a massive gain. A longer TT with a shorter stem allows for some great geometry options for bikes. Overall you will end up with a stiffer and more responsive bike that allows for a better body position.
  • 1 0
 Rulezman is specifically talking about Enduro bikes and racing them. His mindset is all about being the fastest and thus having a centered weight position for cornering is where his mindset is at. But most of us, especially if we want a more playful bike for jumping and doing other tech stuff, know longer chainstays take away all the fun. I do however think that bike brands need to have shorter chainstays for shorter riders and longer chainstays for taller riders. Some brands do this, most don't and I am sure it's for cost reasons. But I am 5' 7" tall and 435mm - 440mm chainstays is perfect for me. Someone who is 6 feet or taller should probably be riding on 460mm or longer chainstays.

Most of us don't race and we want playful bikes, not super long and slack bikes that are designed to do one thing, go fast downhill. So hopefully that is clear to the bicycle industry because we don't all want what the most elite racers needs to be riding to win races.
  • 4 0
 Just breakin' the rulez, man!
  • 5 2
 Fabien Barel who tested it and didn't like it.
  • 1 0
 Exactly...Mondraker did that for a bit, then went away from it. Pacenti also did something similar with the P-dent bar/stem combo. That didn't seem to catch on either.
  • 1 0
 @ReformedRoadie: rode a pdent bar/stem combo a couple years ago, which i believe was marketed as a 20mm stem length. i didn't feel a big difference to the 32mm stem it replaced. i might be able to claim that the bar was super stiff but again, not entirely sure. it did help bring in the long top tube feel of the size L i was on (my mistake) at the time
  • 1 2
 @ReformedRoadie: but you couldn’t rotate the bar with the p dent
  • 4 0
 @dagzin: can confirm it will rotate a decent amount. Probably within the range that most people need to adjust their normal bar/stem
  • 2 0
 @twonsarelli: did not know that.. thx
  • 2 0
 WHAT?! I have a very similar design in fusion rn. (I am an independent component designer and manufacturer.)
  • 4 0
 Make it for a decent price and I'll buy one. I really don't know why they aren't more readily available as the concept is sound and much more like (stable) motorcycle geometry.
  • 2 0
 But mine is better because it can take a 35 mm bar and I have shims for it.
  • 3 0
 idk, turning is more of a lean game and not a steer game, I am skeptical.
  • 4 2
 I bet rulezman doesn't think spoke tension has an effect on wheel stiffness
  • 1 0
 Discord components has been producing this proven concept stem for quite awhile. They make a chromo and alloy. Check ‘em out
  • 2 0
 They say they aren't really rated for mountain biking, except maybe XC:

"This is NOT an enduro bike stem. This is not a downhill or free ride stem. It is a normal mountain bike stem, or a road bike stem or a gravel bike stem or a touring bike stem. Not for big rock drops. Not for getting sendy. Gnar is fine but no sendy gnar gnar."
  • 1 0
 @wburnes: right. I said the concept. Different tolerances for specific purposes can be applied. Look at the 30mm discord alloy peeper. Virtually identical to this guys
  • 1 0
 What's the verdict on 31.8 bs 35 bars?
What do of the pros ride now?
Assuming 35 bc that's what most of their sponsors make..
  • 1 0
 Some 35mm bars might be too stiff and some are fine, whether in carbon or aluminium. I have tried all four examples. You can also get a pretty stiff 31.8 bar, but I guess even the stiffer ones won't be too stiff, like a super stiff 35mm aluminium bar, which is really not nice. And, although some might disagree, based on weight, riding style, etc., there is also such a thing as a too flexible 35mm bar, which for me the carbon Renthals are. But if you can get yourself a 35mm bar that you like, that's great, because they have a little weight advantage.
  • 2 0
 This guy and the guy making the Bright USD fork should have long conversations...
  • 2 1
 Does anyone else like the ‘forward pushing’ locked in feeling from 50mm stem? This short stem stuff just feels like the steering is super floppy and loose.
  • 1 0
 Best feeling in the world..
  • 2 0
 this thing on backards, plus as an uncut steerer, and you have the Raised Reverse Stem for $200 less!
  • 2 0
 Limited edition, add 100 euros!
  • 2 0
 Forward Geometry stems anyone?
  • 2 0
 I had similar one from RooX about 20 years ago
  • 1 0
 I had a Mr Dirt Wild Thing. They had one directly on top of the stem i.e. 0 mm length. They really increased the front end grip... because they were so heavy.
  • 2 0
 I just want more 45mm options in 31.8
  • 2 0
 I will reverse my 40 mm stem for less reach!
  • 2 0
 But how will you charge 250 euros for that? You must come up with a reason why your specially designed reversed stem is better/safer/faster/sexier than a regular 40mm stem or everyone will just do that!
  • 1 0
 @Andykmn: I realize you're being snarly, but it's actually an interesting experiment to run.
  • 2 0
 yeah, buy a damn XXL frame to put a -100mm stem on it, some people...
  • 2 0
 Have one, it does the thing, perfectly
  • 1 0
 This type of stem isn't new . Fabian Barel has been using them for years .
  • 2 0
 I wanna know what pvd thinks about all that?
  • 2 0
 Kinda looks similar to his integrated bar/stem setup.
  • 1 0
 274euro thats like $500aud For a stem! Surely that at least 5-10x the price it is really worth!
  • 2 0
 Onoff Components, standard on the Mondraker, was already doing it in 2013
  • 1 0
 Azonic were doing it in the late 90’s!
  • 1 0
 The 2001 Rocky Mountain RM7 Wade Simmons edition had a stem exactly like that. Not kidding, I lusted for that bike.
  • 1 0
 To be fair, those were the weird Marzocchi direct mount stems that had 4 bolts go under the top crown. The concept was probably taken directly from MX. I remember lusting over the 2003 Kona Stab Primo with the same setup.
  • 2 0
 There's a trade off for everything.
  • 2 0
 I just turn my stems backwards…
  • 1 0
 Please make this available to be purchased so I don't have to make one on my cnc.
  • 3 2
 Wasn't Mondraker making stems like this a dozen years ago.
  • 3 0
 I think he mentions that in the video
  • 2 0
 I've a 10mm direct mount one in spares box, also Marzocchi had a short one for shivers back in the day too.
  • 1 0
 Does he mention a steering wheel?
  • 1 0
 3rd paragraph...
  • 1 0
 Negative rise bar please...
  • 14 0
 Just flip it upside down.
  • 12 0
 @mikekazimer: ˙uʍop ǝpᴉsdn ʇᴉ dᴉlɟ ʇsnſ
  • 1 0
 Good for marketing guys!
  • 1 0
 Less than 6.5". The comment robot didn't like my Less Than symbol.
  • 2 1
 Well!! That looks silly AF. GLWS
  • 2 0
 How much?! Crikey...
  • 1 0
 Remember the Azonic hammer stem?!
  • 1 0
 Finally i can get a steering wheel for my mtb
  • 1 0
 Sam Pilgrim did it.
  • 3 3
 Someone check on Be More Bikes, See if hes ok that they stole his idea! ahahahhahahahahahah
  • 7 2
 Lol, I appreciate your concern, but this is still different. The RR (Raised Reversed) stem is notably taller and places your hands notably behind the steering axis.

bemorebikes.com/rr-stem.html

www.instagram.com/bemorebikes
  • 1 0
 Is it "Boner" or "Boaner" stem?
  • 1 0
 What’s old is new again Wink
  • 1 0
 Perfect for flatland downhill tricks
  • 1 0
 224 euros = “deep pockets”?

Lol
  • 3 0
 Easy there boss just take my X-rays and fill my cavities ok pal
  • 1 0
 @Bro-LanDog: i'm a dam chiropractor not a dentist!
  • 1 1
 @IsaacWislon82: wrong. 8 weeks of online courses versus 4-6 years of real school
  • 1 0
 I’m going to need a xl frame with 60mm dropper post.
  • 1 0
 I find that price reassuringly expensive.
  • 1 0
 Azonic Hammer reincarnated
  • 1 0
 I really like the look of it... not sure I need it though....
  • 1 0
 Some might be steered in the wrong direction
  • 1 0
 Should put a slide rail on that to allow for length adjustment
  • 1 0
 Looks sketchy. I want one
  • 1 0
 I need to order more Stan's Sealant. Thanks!
  • 2 1
 YAWWWWNNNNN
  • 1 0
 Lol
  • 1 0
 Yall need steeper trails
  • 1 0
 Roox.
  • 1 0
 one-up has left he chat
  • 2 5
 That doesn't look like it would apply even clamping load to the steerer. It will be interesting to see if they have issues with them slipping.
  • 2 5
 id say Paul aston was involved, so no chance of rubbish QC or design.
  • 1 1
 Because it's so short, the leverage on it to cause it to slip is drastically reduced.
  • 1 2
 @notsosikmik: curious why thats funny?
are you OK with the current QC in the bike industry?
Clearly your ok with paying a heap of money for a high end bike thats not even aligned/flat etc
  • 1 0
 @SonofBovril: you're primarily pushing fore/aft on the bars, not side to side. The shorter length shouldn't make any significant difference.

However, the top of the steerer clamp now has a ton of added stiffness compared to the bottom. It also has the star nut bolt pushing it open a bit. It may not turn out to be a problem. It's just a big downside that's realized when you start putting the bars over the steerer.
  • 1 0
 @SonofBovril: Most of the 'leverage' comes from bar length...
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.060334
Mobile Version of Website