High bars

[Anthony]

This 2007 Blizzard is for sale on eBay for £1,450. The thing that struck me is that the bike is standing parallel to the wall and a course of bricks (including cement) is 85mm deep (3 3/8”). So we can see that the handlebars are about a brick and a half higher than the saddle, which is say five inches. The classic riding position from ‘retro’ times would have the bars anywhere from just below saddle height to four or five inches below. So this guy likes his bars between six and ten inches above the classic position.

OK I know the four-inch fork will sag when he gets on, but only by an inch. And it's not just with the long fork that creates this position, but also he has carefully added stem stackers and a riser bar.

I’d hate to have my bars that high, but am I missing something?

 

[guybe]

Well, it's all depend on the rider, I have to admit my Cannondale is a little bit like that with high rise and short stem but not as high on the front as the photo shown, at the last 12 months when I go for a long bike ride, I tend to experience neck pain on my spine as the stem had zero rise and the last ride with it, my neck was so painful that I didnt go to work at the next day, I know I had to change the set up on my bike, so I bought a Coda stem with 35 degree rise with 80mm length about 4 months ago, problem solved and never had a neck pain since which it helped me as I am tall 6'4", my Cannondale is finished and will post pics of it this week and you can leave comments good or bad, lol

I have to admit I do like the retro look of high seatpost and low stem as it looked better but it's no fun riding it if you are in pain, so maybe small guys can get away with it having the retro set up for them.

 

[jimihendrix]

That just looks like a modern suspension geometry steed to me, even if he did'nt have the risers and the spacers the bars would still be level with the saddle, also the headtube looks quite long for the size of frame.

I agree with guybe though, it's just whatever the rider feels comfortable riding, my LTS has the saddle just about level with the bars, when i first rode my Clockwork i hated it, felt like i had no control with the skinny bars and could'nt see where i was going with the lower bars and higher saddle (soon got used to it though) , the early 17" Clockwork has a very short head tube and almost level top tube compared to that modern ride, idealy i'd have a zero rise stem on it with no spacers but my back and shoulders dictate that i must use spacers and a stem with a bit of rise

 

[Anthony]

This is how a Rocky Mountain ought to be set up IMO, even a modern one.

 

[Andy R]

Here's a Blizzard the same size as the one on ebay (17.5") but 2006 frame. Unfortunately photographed on a wet morning (again!!) and not very clean either

Bar height on this is about 30mm lower than saddle height when forks are unloaded - I'm running them sagged about 25% into their travel, so that's another 30mm approx. This is with a zero rise 90mm stem and bars with a rise of about 35mm.
Head tube on these is 110mm, the same as an 18" Explosif or Kilauea, so pretty normal for that size of frame.
I find this setup works well for me (I'm 5' 10") but it all depends on the individual and the type of riding you do, of course. For me, that's a mix of moorland single/double track and rocky, rooty forestry stuff with always quite a bit of nadgery technical going.

Not the lightest hardtail in the world (around the 27lb mark with Maxxis 2.35" High Rollers) but a damn fine proper all-round trail bike in my humble opinion .