Joe The Bicycling Science chapter did not discuss the of bars, but all the figures were the standard -17° stem with drop bars. So I would assume John Allen had drop bars in mind in his 2001 communication to Wilson. Also, Patrick's question concerned drop bars, not swept back bars.
My takeaway from the chapter is the shorter stem has no 'fatal flaws' except some reduction in stability when riding with 1 hand on the bar per a qualitative discussion and lack of any discussion on hand position vis a vis stability in the rest of the chapter on Steering and Stability. The reduction may be small and easily adaptable. As far as the zero length stems, I read the Analog description of their stem and of course they did not discussion any 'cons' or 'unintended consequences" of their design. I agree if your top tube is too long, their product is required and you need to live with the consequences. John Hawrylak Woodstown NJ On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 8:24:19 PM UTC-4, Joe Bernard wrote: > > "It seems the only stability issue with a shorter stem would be some > decrease in stability when riding with one hand on the bar." > > As far as my not-an-engineer brain can tell this would only be true in a > situation - like a flatbar- where the shorter stem moved your hands back > exactly as far as the the stem reduction. Which is not the purpose > James/Candice/Analog are marketing the 0 stem for. It's to use a frame you > can ride riser are pull back bars with, and convert it to putting your > hands in the same general spot with drops: Stem comes back, bars move > forward. There should be no change in steering between the two setups. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/1ac5617d-79b2-4c6b-a4ee-d12a0cb46d8b%40googlegroups.com.
