How many aheadset spacers?

john

The Guv’nor
Admin
Retrobike Rider
Feedback
View
Not that retro a q really BUT how many ahead spacers is it acceptable to have on a road bike?

The pro look with zero spacers is nice but often a little too low.

One or two cm looks ok imho.

Anymore than that just looks wrong?

Am I right? Does it matter :LOL:
 
One or two cm looks ok imho.

one or two spacers looks ok...as long as they aren't too thick, but two cms is a bit too much.

Am I right? Does it matter

You've got to ride it fella, you decide........the trouble is whatever rides nicely invariably always looks a little to tall :?
 
it's not entirely a matter of aesthetics...

most carbon steerer forks have a stated limit, as the extra leverage on the steerer caused by lots of spacers can be a problem. alloy/steel steerers probably not so much, but best to check i'd think.

the only carbon fork i can quote specs for is the reynolds ouzo pro in the 1" size, for which reynolds says no more than 25mm of spacers. 1.125" carbon steerers are usually around 40mm limit.

fyi.
 
The difference is that the pros are paid to sit in that uncomfortable position :D

I can't stand the SJS Cycles huge stacks - looks really gawky, but there again they expect you to cut it down in due course once you have got used to the right height.
 
Go for the pro look with no spacers and a tiller length stem.

Agree that from an aesthetic point of view should be no more than 20mm, preferably less.

There was a long and very funny thread about Thorn's and stem spacers that ran to 30+ pages on the now defunct Cycling Plus - guy posted his Thorns and then took supreme offence and flounced around like a cycling Elton John when someone said that for them so many spacers was not a good look. At least twice, possibly three times he declared he was off and then just could not let it lie.

If I remember rightly Thorn deliberately design their bikes with short headtubes so you have to use a casino stack of spacers although I can't remember why. Regardless of any benefit it is really not a good look for me.
 
Can I have a soigneur to massage me after riding for 4 hours with my bum in the air...the fact is I don't ride 15k miles a year and my back just ain't up to a position like that. Anyway, the pros spend most of their time holding onto the tops of their STi's - the drops are there for sprinting and lone breakaways. I need it for windy days and having it a bit more reachable helps.
 
ededwards":3qta0fkc said:
Go for the pro look with no spacers and a tiller length stem.

Agree that from an aesthetic point of view should be no more than 20mm, preferably less.

There was a long and very funny thread about Thorn's and stem spacers that ran to 30+ pages on the now defunct Cycling Plus - guy posted his Thorns and then took supreme offence and flounced around like a cycling Elton John when someone said that for them so many spacers was not a good look. At least twice, possibly three times he declared he was off and then just could not let it lie.

If I remember rightly Thorn deliberately design their bikes with short headtubes so you have to use a casino stack of spacers although I can't remember why. Regardless of any benefit it is really not a good look for me.

Ah yes. Can't have too short a stem either. Most of the mechanics where I used to work were of the opinion anything less than a 13 was 'unprofessional'. (If anyone wants a 13cm cinelli still have a couple floating about :LOL: ) A road stem with rise is also not agreeable.

Can imagine a shorter headtube might somehow make the frame stiffer, and certainly lighter. However the big old stack would soon put pay to any stiffness benefits and as you say it looks a bit cack. Here's one fresh from thorn

13907thorn_xl.jpg
 
anything above 20 mil is wrong .

and yes a road stem should be 120mm , and zero or 5 degree max .
 
Back
Top