[Closed] Riser bar height - current thinking?

Flat, or low rise bars have been around for ages in dh. Riders seem to be moving back towards slightly higher bars, but it varies on courses I believe.
Anyway, I've got full height, 38mm, renthals on my geometron.

There's only 40mm difference in height between a high DH risers and a flat bar but tyre diameters, head tube lengths and fork lengths vary more than that. And all three added together make way more difference than the bar rise.

And then there's rider height - I'm guessing what really matters is hip height in the attack position vs bar height.

What hippy said.

But expect lower rise bars to sell better as more people move to longer travel 29ers.

My 17 Trek fuel has a pretty low stack height and I'm a lanky **** so I have 20mm spacers under the stem and have just changed 40mm Renthals for 45mm SQlabs, feels bang on for me but people are different, amazingly

The 2013 Stumpy I had before had a massive amount of stack and I had to put 20mm bars with no spacers on to compensate, still felt like a gate. Bikes are different too!

I had low rise (10mm) on my older TR Covert (160mm forks) and now use 30mm rise on my TR Scout (140mm fork).
I tried various options on both bikes and that is what I settled on.
I found that my choices put my hands in the most comfortable position for all round riding.

I love to experiment to get the fit just so and will borrow bars to see what feels right. It does mean I have a huge number of handlebars in the shed. Mrs Wachowchow want to make a mobile / windchime out of them.

There's only 40mm difference in height between a high DH risers and a flat bar but tyre diameters, head tube lengths and fork lengths vary more than that. And all three added together make way more difference than the bar rise.

What hippy said.

higher renthals on the big bike - i dunno i just like it.

If you believe Chris Porter (and I remember right from his talk), shorter bikes should have higher bars and longer bikes should have lower bikes HOWEVER... for both, the bb to centre of the bars should be the same for the same person.

the bb to centre of the bars should be the same

Interesting idea. My longer FS bike has 40mm rise and shorter hardtail has 20mm rise but I can't remember what arrangement of spacers etc I have. I'm kind of interested to check the bb to bar centre on each when I get home.

Whats being got at here? Rise clearly makes a difference, or they wouldn't make (or sell) different rise bars and bar changing your fork from 160 to 120 or vice versa, I can't see how else you could change your hand position by 40mm.

That it's about fit. You just use whatever bar rise and spacers to put the grips where you want them. If your bike is a 140mm 27.5 you'll need much higher rise bars than on a 160mm 29er unless the former bike has very long head tube.

chiefgrooveguru - Member
There's only 40mm difference in height between a high DH risers and a flat bar but tyre diameters, head tube lengths and fork lengths vary more than that. And all three added together make way more difference than the bar rise.

And then there's rider height - I'm guessing what really matters is hip height in the attack position vs bar height.

This. Trail bike wise, 100mm travel 26ers were once the way, when riser bars had a big rise. I ran 130mm forks on a fs trail bike in the early noughties, which was considered quite a lot of travel back then. I'm now running 140mm on the front of my HT and my FS bike, both are 29ers, and both running no spacers under the stem with low (15mm or so I think) risers. Could easily run a couple of spacers and flat bars instead.

For the same position on a 160mm bike with the same head angle I'd be running a flat bar (assuming 5mm more sag). So we're running different bars to give the same position on different bikes, now we've decided that bars 6" below the saddle is non-ideal for general riding.

That low rise bars have been in DH for ages? Of course they have, but my question was more related to the new(er) geometry school of thought which includes short stems and wide bars are good. I wondered if there was a similar thought around rise as it has a pretty major effect on your riding position.

Just anecdotally, I think more people might be experimenting with higher bars as it's become more fashionable to ride steep trails.

I would have said the opposite to CP though, IME you can get away with higher bars on a longer bike as you don't feel so cramped when climbing.

Bars same height as the seat at least, the slammed bars n stem idea never really made sense to me Unless you were 5'2 or shorter 😆

Just anecdotally, I think more people might be experimenting with higher bars as it's become more fashionable to ride steep trails.

Lawmanmx - Member
Bars same height as the seat at least, the slammed bars n stem idea never really made sense to me Unless you were 5'2 or shorter

all good then 😉

If you believe Chris Porter...

[img] [/img]

Low headtubes, low bars, low bottom brackets; only really works if you're a very fast rider. For everyone else, something a bit taller would be more fun to ride, and they'd have more chance of being able to manual or clear the jumps at the trail centre etc.

I think height has something to do with width too. If you move your hands further apart then your torso goes down, so the bar needs to come up to counteract that.

To me headtube size isn’t proportional to rider height - a 30mm increase in headtube doesn’t equate a rider difference of between someone at 5foot odd and another rider at 6foot odd. I’m going to be more ‘over the front’ at 6’5” with a 130mm headtube than someone at 5’0” with a 100mm headtubed identical bike.
I run 75mm rise Spank bars with 20mm (iirc) spacers. Feels better than the 38mm Renthals which in turn felt better than the stock 10mm’s. Bike is a 160mm travel XL sized enduro

I think height has something to do with width too. If you move your hands further apart then your torso goes down, so the bar needs to come up to counteract that.

That occurred to me the other day. The early move to wider bars came in conjunction with shorter stems so that the overall position was about the same. People are now widening bars further with the same length stem so a small height increase needed to keep same position.

To me headtube size isn’t proportional to rider height - a 30mm increase in headtube doesn’t equate a rider difference of between someone at 5foot odd and another rider at 6foot odd. I’m going to be more ‘over the front’ at 6’5” with a 130mm headtube than someone at 5’0” with a 100mm headtubed identical bike

But that’s not the only geometry change. Your arms and torso are longer, the top tube is longer. I think short riders have more issues than tall riders - you can always make the front higher but they have real trouble getting the front low enough, especially on longer travel bikes. With short stems cant use negative rise

Rise is just one component of getting a comfy, rideable body position and to my thinking is a component of cockpit size as a whole.

Edited. Loads of waffle and others have explained it better!

Bars same height as the seat at least, the slammed bars n stem idea never really made sense to me Unless you were 5'2 or shorter

If this new geometry stuff is good, why would you want to counteract it? Just get an old geo bike, long stem and narrow bars.
I suppose my point is that the new stuff is designed to get more of your weight over the front of the bike where it should be.

Rise is just one component of getting a comfy, rideable body position and to my thinking is a component of cockpit size as a whole.

high bars give the option of bending my arms when cornering and crouching into the bike, it also lets me ride the rear more for manualing through doubles/chunder etc.

The low rise couple of years didn't really suit my riding style-much happier now decent wide & high bars are available.

If you believe Chris Porter (and I remember right from his talk), shorter bikes should have higher bars and longer bikes should have lower bikes HOWEVER... for both, the bb to centre of the bars should be the same for the same person.

Porter is wrong, that is going to flatten your back more and cause you to stoop over the bike more to bend your arms. I have to go taller the longer my bike gets.

Ill say it again, flat bars are a crutch in terms of weighting the front. Your head has enough mass to do that and veer a motorbike off course.

Ill say it again, flat bars are a crutch in terms of weighting the front.

That's not because they put you further over the back of the bike all the time, but because they allow your arms a bigger movement range and because you're leveraging the bike around the rear axle from a higher point.

You can stay in exactly the same forward attack position on a bike with higher bars, only your elbows are going to be a bit more bent - however - the vast majority of your body mass is still going to be in exactly the same place and it is still going to be weighting the bike up - for all intents on purposes in exactly the same way.

You just have to consciously weight the front more, which with practice - becomes second nature - at the same time higher bars can give you more movement range in your upper body.

If flat bars were teh awesomez for gravity riding, mxers would be doing it considering the amount of time they spend in flat corners.

That's not because they put you further over the back of the bike all the time

If you mean taller bars allow you to be thrown over the front more easily, not really - as you should be carrying most of your weight through your legs and resisting impacts by dropping your heels.

Higher bars will also give less movement, as there is less space to move.

When have you ever, seriously, run out of space by hitting your chest on the bars - except in a crash? Again, if flat bars and low stack was so great for off road riding - mxers would be doing it.

If you mean taller bars allow you to be thrown over the front more easily, not really - as you should be carrying most of your weight through your legs and resisting impacts by dropping your heels.

I dont believe for a second that you cant extert as much downward pressure on bars that are inches apart in height. You can get over the top of them and drive down into the wheels no matter what height they are set at.

It's not that you can't, it's that it's more effort.
Likewise, having a longer top tube or shorter stem doesn't enable you to exert more pressure onto the front wheel. It makes it easier to do so though. Sames.

That's not entirely true either, why else would a lot of the downhillers be running shorter top tubes and 60mm stems? They're doing it to weight the front wheel. For me, shorter stems were a way to counter wider bars and longer wheelbases whilst keeping your body in roughly the same position.

I don't think it takes more effort to exert pressure on the front wheel with taller bars. I reckon, if you put two scales on either wheel and measured weight distribution - you'd see very little difference between two bar heights three inches apart.

I always run about 25mm of spacers on my bikes. Means I can change forks to a different bike with little risk - but more importantly vary bar height to optimise it for me.

Most of the time I end up running a lower rise bar - say 10/15mm with 15mm of spacers below and 10mm above. I don’t generally want more than 25mm rise...

That's not entirely true either, why else would a lot of the downhillers be running shorter top tubes and 60mm stems?

Again, if flat bars and low stack was so great for off road riding - mxers would be doing it.

Not really joining the debate - but is the the COG on a motorbike not vastly different...? Also a person on an motobike makes up a smaller proportion of the total weight of vehicle and rider...?

I think you'll find that their TT's are longer now than they have even been.

Still way off geometrons and you still don't see that many 35mm stems floating around.

but is the the COG on a motorbike not vastly different.

I don't think it's vastly different, last time I checked I saw 45/55 numbers being thrown around - not too different to what I've seen for mtb.

I don't think it's vastly different, last time I checked I saw 45/55 numbers being thrown around - not too different to what I've seen for mtb.

The front-rear weight distribution on a modern enduro bike (e.g. 1200mm wheelbase and 430mm chainstay) is actually about 35/65 on flat ground.

Santa Cruz landed on 45/55 with their V10 didn't they.....with tall bars and tall forks. Aiming for a 50/50 even weight distribution on a course with an average gradient of 5%. Note, when they arrived at those numbers for Minaars bike - they didn't do it by dropping his bars - they did it by lengthening the chainstay.

but is the COG on a motorbike not vastly different...?

This thread started off naively ignorant and has evolved into utterly idiotic by a few contributors who have gone so far into overthinking and geeking out they seem to have forgotten that the fundamental skills required to ride a bike well still plays the greatest part. (ie. the rider)

Use whatever gets you in the right position, as said earlier it's one measurement in a bigger picture - hence all what width/length/height threads fall down at the same point. What works in one situation may not work in others. Throw in the vast range of combinations of rider height, reach, flex, comfort, ability, style and intention and it's really coming down to try and see what you like.

I'll happily ride along and see what moving back/forwards up and down feels like at times.

I think it's important to recognise the differences as well as the similarities between motocross and mountain bikes - yes, there's a reason DH bike head angles and bar widths have converged on ~MX numbers but there's also a reason other things remain different. The mass and power of the engine has a big effect on handling.

I did some bar height experimenting last summer whilst keeping everything else constant. Low was great for cornering and climbing; high was great for manualling, jumping, pedalling on the flat and generally felt more fun - but at full tilt I struggled in the turns. I ended up somewhere in between.

This wasn't big changes in bar height, this was just moving spacers on the steerer - maybe 30-40mm of total adjustment.

But it's all a personal thing and comes down to how your riding technique interacts with the bike's geometry. If you're a more capable and dynamic rider than me I'd expect you to be happier across a wider range of bar heights, but if you're racing and searching for tenths then it would be worth finding the best bar heights for each track.

NB: Comparing bar heights between hardtails and full-sussers is confusing because of how sag changes things - they look much higher on the hardtail when the bikes are side by side.

P.S. Risers bars look cooler though, don't they? 😉

Downhillers run long stems and or high bars as the top of the forks get in the way... Well that's part of it

Downhillers often ride straighter rougher tracks - and slightly longer stems are more stable. I notice a big difference in stability between 35 and 50mm stems.

And once a bike is pointing steeply downhill the reach increases and the stack decreases, a bike made for downhill should be shorter reach and higher stack when on level ground (as geometry is quoted).

I've even seen the kinematics for DH bikes being optimised for standing pedalling pointing downhill (so your centre of mass is completely different to seated pedalling, as are the forces being applied).

How far can you manual Chief?

Because. other than raising the front wheel with slightly less effort.

high was great for manualling

@gwurkers maybe it was the placebo effect? But the thing about the placebo effect is... it is an actual effect.

How far can you manual Chief?

Because. other than raising the front wheel with slightly less effort.

I'm hopeless at holding a manual. As I said, this is my experiences for me and how I ride (and obviously I'd love to ride better but practice time is very limited with two small children and my own business).

But that was my point - it's a bit easier to lift the front wheel with the bars a bit higher. Nothing I can't work around though with a lower bar position. It's easier to initiate a manual on my hardtail than my full-sus because the latter is longer out back - but the latter is easier to hold up for longer.

I liked the higher bar position - I was feeling quite converted after riding some trails I know very well. And then I hooked up with my mates, some of whom are a fair bit faster than me, and we rode some of those trails again - and riding that bit faster to chase them I was struggling for front-end grip. Dropped the bars a bit, problem solved.

This thread started off naively ignorant and has evolved into utterly idiotic by a few contributors who have gone so far into overthinking and geeking out they seem to have forgotten that the fundamental skills required to ride a bike well still plays the greatest part. (ie. the rider)

wrecker - Member

is the old philosophy that high rise bars are better for gravity type riding now defunct? Will we see flat bars ridden a bit more for enduro and DH? Or does it still hold true that a high rise bar is better for all but XC?

There are two considerations here, bar height and riser vs flat.
Bar height is personal.
Risers are better because they look cooler.
Flat bars are for XC jhey-boys.

If downhill bikes are better suited to the steep, why then did someone quote enduro bikes as having a more rearward weight bias than a V10.

Downhillers run long stems and or high bars as the top of the forks get in the way... Well that's part of it

Well, no... because most of them run so many spacers and rise you could put a 0mm direct mount stem on them.

if you're racing and searching for tenths then it would be worth finding the best bar heights for each track

Warner would tell you that you were wrong, where possible you should be keeping your bike exactly the same for consistency. Maybe tweaking compression and PSI here and there and if need be... as in going from Champerry to somewhere flat... spring rate at the rear.

Warner would tell you that you were wrong, where possible you should be keeping your bike exactly the same for consistency

If downhill bikes are better suited to the steep, why then did someone quote enduro bikes as having a more rearward weight bias than a V10.

The weight distribution of any bike when in the neutral attack position is easy to work out: Chainstay length divided by wheelbase gives you the percentage on the front wheel and whatever is left is on the rear wheel.

mikewsmith - Member
Use whatever gets you in the right position

Chief, then either your maths are wrong when taking into account the location of rider mass or the most successful DH team ever are getting the weight distribution wildly wrong. They aim for 50/50 weight distribution on an average 5 percent slope which means that they aimed with the V10 for a 45/55 weight distribution.

It stands to reason then that your enduro bike that is designed for shallower tracks would be better suited to a steeper track than the v10. Chainlines argument for longer reaches in enduro, like you, is also predicated on the basis of shallower tracks.

You are simply calculating weight distrubution of the bike under static sag, ie not weighted by the rider.

Chief's formula assumes all the weight is going through the BB ie you are standing on the pedals and not supporting any of your weight through your hands (I assume that is a "neutral attack position"). Also level ground and it ignores the bike weight component. For 50-50 a fair bit of weight must be supported through the hands even allowing for bike weight and a slope.

and yet they are managing to fo that with risers and 200mm forks.....

and yet they are managing to fo that with risers and 200mm forks.....

I can do that too for a five minute downhill run. But I don't want to do it for every corner on a five hour ride!

Also, any decent DHer has more upper body strength than a typical MTBer.

[b]"But that was my point - it's a bit easier to lift the front wheel with the bars a bit higher."[/b]

Which If you could actually hold a manual. You'd know. has very little to do with whether a bike is easy to hold a manual on or not.

My point here is simply that you are overthinking pretty much everything. (possibly because of your limited skills and time to gain them).

I can set my bars to MY optimum height very very quickly and accurately. Because I do have a ton of experience in both setting up bikes and riding them and know exactly how I like my bars set up on every type of bike I ride. infact I'm incredibly particular about bar set up.
However. none of your theories on bar height would get any of my bar heights on any of my bikes close. Why? because you've never actually met me and have no idea how I like my bikes set up.
For an experienced rider this subject really is that simple.

Wrecker. I apologise if you felt I was insulting you. I should have chosen my words more carefully.

However. none of your theories on bar height would get any of my bar heights on any of my bikes close.

I'm not sure what theories you're referring to? I thought I'd just provided some anecdotal evidence of what I'd found for me on one of my bikes.

I did think I'd made it clear that the higher bar had no bearing on the ease or otherwise of holding a manual. Clearly you're a more advanced rider than me - but maybe I'm a more advanced reader? 😉

I think you'll find what you actually said was "high was great for manualling" Something you cannot actually do.
But ok. have it your way.

Chief, you need more upper body strength to cope with flat bars. Part of the point of risers is to have you in a slightly more neutral position that fatigues you less on long descenfs.

I think you'll find what you actually said was "high was great for manualling"

Which I then clarified in my subsequent posts as you rained down smug pedantry from your ivory tower of amazing skillz.

Sometimes you do provide some valuable insight - but mostly you tell us we're all wrong and that you know better but then fail to share your wisdom. I sincerely hope you're not a teacher and that if you are a parent you're not like this with your children...

Ok. This just got a little bit too weird

Apology accepted gwurk but you need to turn your surfmatt setting down (to at least 8 please)

That's a new one on me @wrecker, what's a surfmatt setting?

It's like the Prometheus school of running away.

what's a surfmatt setting?

It's a level of awesomeness, gwurk is on eleven 🙂

Awesomeness sure sounds better than having your liver eaten by an eagle every day.

The queue for having gwurks babies, must indeed be a long one !)

The surfmatt scale is the standard international unit of measure for the most awesome level of AWESOMENESS. Prolonged use of this this particular type of awesomeness can lead to ridicule and eventually flounce. Stay safe folks.

Chief, you need more upper body strength to cope with flat bars. Part of the point of risers is to have you in a slightly more neutral position that fatigues you less on long descenfs.

Again, it isn't risers vs flats, it's total stack height (stack plus upper headset cup plus spacers plus stem plus bar rise).

For a given reach, a lower stack height will put more weight on your hands simply by leaning on the bars. To weight a high stack height you need to use your arms and shoulder more to press the bars down - but it is easier on your core because it promotes a more vertical body position.

But total reach (reach plus stem minus bar back sweep plus a percentage of bar width) affects things hugely.

Futon - The accuracy of that statement is so true it's creepy.
And talking of creepiness. Seems a few of you need to get out a little more.
and talking about not getting out. You managed to ride a bike since this thread started yet Chief?

Interesing(ish) thread...

THe thing i love about bikes is you can play about with the ‘settings’ for relatively little money..I’m a sciaentist at heart, and like to fettle!!

So..I had 740mm flat bars and a flat 50mm stem... It was ‘OK’, but never really felt great...

I wanted a little bit more height.. I got some 30mm Renthal carbon lite bars (740mm) and a 50mm Renthal stem (+/- 5mm).. Immediately the bike felt more ‘fun’ with 30mm more height on the bars... FAR easier to manual (literallly, give a little tug and you’re up....fnar fnar) and more stable on the trails...

I’ve flipped the stem and moved a few spacers so now I’m 25mm up from the previous flat bar setting - just feels ‘betterer’...

DrP

You managed to ride a bike since this thread started yet Chief?

Thanks for your concern! 😉

I've just got back from spending an hour on my hardtail, with my toddler on his balance bike, playing on the little jumps etc on the derelict grit pitch near my house.

Yesterday it was practical biking, riding to school with my daughter on her bike and then towing it back and then riding into town and back with my son on the toddler seat.

The day before I was out on a night ride, mostly in the woods, for three hours.

You managed to ride a bike since this thread started yet Chief?

...I’m a sciaentist at heart...

One that can prescribe medication too!

But yeah, these threads pour over the various theories doing the rounds and we get a few [i]"geometry extremists"[/i] and [i]"riding Gods"[/i] telling us the various ways in which we're all wrong, despite them it is still interesting to try and understand how the layout of a bike, the positioning and dimensions of the various components affect the control, comfort and efficiency of a bike for it's rider...

I was watching one of the old Sprung videos last night, turn of the century riding 15+ years ago on somewhat different looking bikes, it all still looks pretty fast 'n' stylish today, I don't think the actual riding suffered too much for the lack of "modern" geometry, perhaps it is possible to over-analyse...

I like my wider, lower bars and longer TT now, but I was able to do a proper X-up on my older bike with a shorter TT and trimmed down (2" riser) bars; different tools I used at different periods of my life for slightly different things...

I've just got back from spending an hour on my hardtail, with my toddler on his balance bike, playing on the little jumps etc on the derelict grit pitch near my house.

I have lots of kids so know very well what it can be like trying cram bike riding in around work and a family too.

Calm down Wrecker and stop looking for stuff to be offended by.

Despie the experience I have. The reason I am so non-committal on giving out advice on the subject of bar height is because it is massively subjective and as seen here it's very very easy to give out poor advice. Especially if you are partial to listening to fashion media, rumour and blind information regurgitation.

to paraphrase Cookea:

[b]There is no CORRECT height[/b]