General cockpit/contact point discussion

Thank you…subscribed 

I don't have measurements for reference, but my trail bike definitely has a slightly higher saddle than bars. I have somewhat longer legs and shorter arms for my height but nothing too drastic. 

I can appreciate that a taller front end would feel better downhill (as enduro/DH bikes feel great) but, at least with my current seat tube angle (not super steep, only around ~75 degrees) I couldn't climb/balance the steepest 'climb-able' trails in my local network. To be fair, we don't have very long, or steep, or technical descents in the area but some of the climbs can be pretty punchy. I went out a few times changing where stem spacers where and basically went up until I kept almost looping out on steep climbs. Maybe if I had a steeper seat tube angle or longer rear end it would be ok, but I wanted to be able to stay on my bike as long as possible for my typical rides. 

I think you already answered yourself. You would have to go with some crazy setup just to get there.

Bikes come with different geos including stack height + rider body dimension + sizing preference + riding preference. I don't think that these kinds of rules of being at a specific height are really something to aim at.

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/importance-of-handlebar-height-mountain-b…

https://enduro-mtb.com/en/the-right-mtb-handlebar-rise/

Brands need to sort out their design an give you taller riders more stack by default - bikes coming with little stack is unacceptable, my current large has a stack of 649, which is fantastic, now i can run flatter stiffer bars instead of 40+ flexy sticks.

as far as bar height vs saddle - Theres NO standard here, Peoples bodys are all over the show.... Need to setup for yourself and what feels best. for reference my saddle is higher than my bars because its comfy... if either are changed something gets sore.

On a mountain bike, Having your bars at the saddle height or there about is only really beneficial if you are having to put down power with your legs and still control the bike for technical trail purposes. There are very few places outside of XC racing that this actually matters…

As soon as your dropper comes into play, this is a mute point.

also, a lower bar when climbing is generally considered to be better as well.

I will however agree that larger bikes generally need more stack height to get the rider into an equivalent attack position over the bike even when descending with the saddle down.

the distance between BB and hands (while somewhat of a personal preference) does not increase proportionally as sizes go up so larger riders end up more hunched forward because of the lower proportional bar position moving the weight bias and COG between the wheels forward as well.

ps. The opposite is true for small and XS riders as well. Bikes are generally tuned to suit the majority of average sized riders.

another thing that doesn’t get talked about is how the flex characteristics of a bike and it’s components change through the various sizes of the same frame design. I larger rider is generally a heavier rider, loading a frame with different forces when pushed in corners etc.

I've adapted all my bikes to bar height = saddle height and it's working well. I always purchase bikes with ~650mm or stack so it's not too outlandish, throw a set of 38mm rise bars and you are good to go.

The E-mtb has a 1340mm wheelbase and a 463mm chainstay so front end grip isn't impacted by bar height. The hardtail is more for comfort. I can ride all day on this thing and my neck/back is fine.

 I'm 6'4" and if I had my way the seat and bars would be higher, but I have to many hobbies so this this is what I run.

185cm or 6'1 in cheeseburger units

I know guys who say the exact opposite and your bars shouldn't be higher than your saddle. IMO its irrelevant and they shouldn't be compared. It is going to be affected by your specific combination of height, limb length, reach/stack and the relative proportions of each. I started bringing my bars higher a while ago, but I have proportionally long legs and arms so if I was to try bring them up above the seat it would mean siting bolt upright or stretching the front end out to a silly distance!

Just go with whatever it takes to put your body in to a relaxed/neutral position so you don't have to much weight on your arms or tipping backwards. A lot of these fit "rules" are a bit too simplistic for mountain bikes which have a ton of variables going on. 

One thing to note, bar height relative to the seat being... relative is somewhat obvious. Like @TheSuspensionLabNZ mentions, it's dependant on the length of the limbs, body, etc.

Another, more important plot twist... What are you trying to optimise bar height for? Talking about enduro/trail bikes, is it for pedalling? Then the bike sagged front and back is relevant. Which will change going uphill again. If you're trying to adjust it for descending, it's a whole other ball game again.

I have a very long reach bike and have lately found I have issues leaning it into turns with a 35 mm rise bar, 40 mm stem and 20 mm spacers under the stem (the headtube is short at 120 mm, it's a 150 mm bike, I'm 190 cm or 6'3"). I've recently change the bars to a 55 rise with and 12 and 8 degree backsweep and upsweep (from the previous 5 and 8 degree combo), a 35 mm stem and added another 10 mm spacer under the stem. I'm much more upright, the bars feel very comfortable with the bends, but I'm beginning to think I ride too much off the back of the bike and don't weight the front, the bend of the bars can theoretically pull my elbows inwards (praying mantis position instead of the attacking position), so it's not as easy as higher is better.

I'm the one who said your bars should be at least as high as your saddle. Yes, there are people with long legs or long arms, and my statement is only meant as a rough approximation.

This higher bar concept is for descending, not climbing. The raised reverse stem has shown that higher bars are more confidence inspiring when going downhill (the loam wolf set a PR on their local test track on the first run). I've ridden the RR stem and think it works well.

Couple this with the fact that stack does not grow proportionately with reach on bikes, and taller riders are in a widely different position on the bike (climbing or descending). Compared to a shorter rider, their hands are much lower relative to their body. I posed this photo before but it's worth showing again. Note how the bar heigh is nearly identical for two riders of dramatically different sizes.

Now consider how wildly different the experience is for the riders on these bikes. Think about when people talk about how adding/removing 10mm of spacers totally transformed their bike. Now take that concept to the extreme because these two riders are basically on different planets as their body positions on the bike are polar opposites.

When we talk about bike fit, we look at reach (maybe stack) and call it day. We should be looking at where our hands are relative to our feet on the bike in two dimensions (or 3 but let's save bar width for another day). Lee McCormack has his RAD system but what is even more important is his RAAD system. This measures the angle of the line going from your BB to your grips.  

 image source: https://www.pinkbike.com/u/leelikesbikes/blog/dialing-in-your-bike-for-your-riding-style.html

Higher numbers are better for descending. 63 for downhill, 60 for enduro. I have my bike set up for 61.1° RAAD. I'm running 83mm rise bars and a ton of spacers on 515 reach enduro bike. 

Who makes an 83mm rise bar? 

For enduro/Downhill I absolutely think bar to saddle is a great baseline.  You can adjust up and down depending on trail steepness, personal preference, etc. I got clued into this by an article on the "other site" https://www.pinkbike.com/news/importance-of-handlebar-height-mountain-bike.html awhile back and it totally changed my riding comfort once I came to terms with the concept that maybe the bike designer didn't actually design the large and XL frames with appropriate stack.

Here's an excerpt: 

"For example, the new YT Capra 29 has a five-size range going from small to XXL. YT recommends the small to riders around 160cm, and the XXL to riders of 197cm - that's a difference of 23% in rider height. Across that range the reach goes from 427mm to 507mm - a difference of 19% - but the stack goes from 625mm to 652mm - a difference of just 4%. Another way of looking at it is the ratio of stack to reach goes from 1.46 in the small to 1.29 in the XXL. Surely both can't be right. And I'm not picking on YT here; my point is this is entirely typical.

As I said earlier, it's the effective reach and effective stack which matter for ergonomics, but bikes are usually fitted with the same handlebar rise, stem length and number of spacers across the size range. So a lot of short riders probably have their bar height too high, and a lot of tall riders have theirs too low. Changing handlebar rise can compensate in many cases (at 190cm tall I'm fitting a 40mm-rise bar to most bikes I test) but if you're particularly small or tall this may not be enough so you might want to avoid bikes with too much or too little stack, respectively."

Suspension also has a huge effect on topped out geometry. When descending with your weight forward you naturally get more compression in the fork and likely will want to compensate by having a higher front end. More travel increases this geometry shift and a XC bike may not require as high of a bar for the same downhill grade. Being a taller rider and facing component limitations as described above, I’ve always added 10-20mm of fork travel vs the stock configuration and have found this to help with fit when crazy handlebars and stem spacer stacks aren’t reasonable. 

You should try a 60mm riser bar, and see if that doesn't make a huge difference in your riding. I see a bunch of the spank ones on sale for $40 or so which is pretty inexpensive imo for the benefit it provides.

https://madscientistmtb.com/bike-geometry-compare/

This page calculates the RAD and RAAD if you input your spacer, stem and handlebar data. I'll play with this once I get the new bike for sure. And the calculator also confirmed that my choice for going with an L instead of an XL was the correct one as just running a 'stock' 35 mm Turbine R bar and a 40 mm Turbine R stem will put me in the vicinity of where I was with the same bar/stem combo on my current XL. This is for the 160 mm travel, but I do also intend on trying out the 180 mm travel option, which might change some things.

Interesting times!

BTW, as funny (and dangerous) as it may seem, but Aliexpress offers some aluminium bars in stranger dimensions. I picked up a 55 mm rise bar with a a 12°/8° sweep combo for testing purposes and have stuck with it. Also, ZTTO has 35 and 50 mm stems that come in the 35 mm diameter but with 31,8 mm spacers. I've been running the 35 mm one for about two months now (with a Finale trip to boot) with no issues. If someone wants to save some € for testing purposes

Unless it's an XC race bike, I don't think saddle-bar drop (or rise) is very important.  Ride what's comfortable, and especially what works best when you're out of the saddle, surely?

To answer the question, I'm 187cm, my current bike (XL frame) has 648 mm stack but unfortunately they cut the steerer at the factory, so I currently have spacers maxed out at 18 mm, 10 mm rise stem and 25 mm rise bar.  I haven't experimented with the overall height much other than the stem and spacers but it feels fine while descending.  Saddle height is about +60 mm, mostly because of my long legs, so I could probably do with some more rise to reduce neck strain while in the saddle.

Surly Sunrise bar 

 I always struggle with this, I am 5’ 11” and ride a size large with a 170 mm dropper 5 inches out of the seat collar.  I would prefer higher bars for climber so I don’t have to lean over so much but feel like I am in a good position standing on the downhill. 

Lee is onto something with his RAD theories.

I've got 3 bikes that are all quite different in regards to reach/stack/HA. I've played with stem length, stack height and different bars on them to get each one to feel "right".

I plugged all the info into Lee's calculator and was amazed to find out they were within 3mm of each other in the RAD (BB to bars) measurement. And all spot on what the RAD measurement is for my body.

It's a great tool to use when setting up and picking a size for a new frame. Hardest part is determining bar setback, which you need to measure to get an accurate number.

Wow that is a flat seat angle. Is that from preference or doesn't your dropper allow you to tilt it forward anymore? 

I've been saying for years (what that photo of Roxy w/the tall guy and same bikes shows) that it's insane when you see a small 5'2" rider on a XS frame vs a 6'2" person on same frame in XL. Handlebar > too BB height about same. They are certainly NOT having the same riding experience. They have wildly different center of gravities. 6'2" rider would need to run a 80mm+ riser bar and spacers and Roxy would need to run flat bar with negative stem to have the same neutral position and CG balance. But you never see that... so who has the 'right' position?  Humans can adjust to any bike, but there certainly is an ideal position of hands vs. BB/saddle. In the above photo of Roxy, I would doubt that either of them has anywhere near the ideal handlebar height. 

In terms of what is right, it obviously varies by rider and terrain they're riding. If you're constantly riding 30% grade steep loamers, having a higher bar height is advantageous. If you're riding XC, smooth trails, lots of climbing, having a bar well below your saddle can be excellent. But in general, riders on either end of the spectrum do not have proper bar heights to be in the 'ideal zone'. XL bikes likely need to be designed with 6cm+ more stack and 40mm+ riser bars vs XS bikes. And XS sized bikes need to ship with flat bars and zero or negative rise stems. But they wouldn't look cool for either bike, and cost more for OEM parts orders, so it's not done. 

This image shows generally where their bar height would need to be to have the same riding experience (as the other person) in terms of center of gravity on the bike/weight on bars in neutral position.  

Totally! I tend to think the answer to "Who has the right bike fit?" is the rider of average height on a medium or large bike, and I tend to assume that really tall people and really short people both have suboptimal bike fit in different ways. Because, like you said, ain't no way those two bikes are both optimal for their riders.

As an aside, I had seen that Enduro-Mtb article previously. It argues that running more spacers vs. higher rise bars reduces your effective reach. It does if you run your bar roll so that the rise is perpendicular to the ground, but a low-rise bar with more spacers and a longer stem would put your hands in the same place as a high rise bar. If you prefer your bar rolled so that the rise is parallel to the steering axis, there is functionally no difference between more spacers and a higher rise bar.

I've tried the bar roll thing on a bike that was too small and you can only go so far. I put a slamset in (zero stack) no spacers and a wildly high bar to get as much reach as I could and it's a bandaid solution. Stack is king baby!

Re: Sizing, I'm 6'1 and in my late 30's, seems like every teenage male here in Aus is taller than me somehow, the average height must be increasing in developed nations via diet or chemtrails/aliens

I am 6' (183 cm) with 35' (89 cm) inseam & 75' (191 cm) arm-span on overforked (150 mm)  Polygon T7 and it's low 621 mm stack is the main problem for me: had to go with Deity High Rise 50 mm bars and stick to 175 mm cranks, in order to keep the saddle and bars height even. 

Should I have to change the frame, I will buy something with at least 640 mm stack, quite a steep SA (~79), and 440 mm chainstay. 

Something that hasn't been mentioned is crank length. I've went up in bar height slowly until they were around the same height as my saddle and that improved pressure on my hands, but then I went from a 170 crank to 165 to improve ground clearance. That meant I had to raise my saddle 5mm to get the same leg extension at the bottom of the pedal stroke when seated, but when I stand up I'm not 5cm taller with the pedals level vs. the longer cranks.

So I think level saddle and bars it's a good starting point but it's not the full story as there are other factors that affect the static and dynamic heights