Cycling UK Forum

It won't really be a solid steel steerer, even in steel they are tubular.
As to the carbon steerers, most manufacturers have a limit of about 40mm of spacers, and require that the steerer is supported where the stem clamps to it, for example by an expanding bung. Modern carbon steerers are often inch and a half at the bottom, this isn't because they are too stiff.

Flex was mentioned as being undesirable with respect to any other material but steel in the case of the OP bike. How much provable flex will other materials suffer that would adversely affect the ride, under what conditions would these be, out the saddle efforts going uphill at low speed or head down sprinting?
Just curious because I have CF steerers on two bikes that have the stem right at the top (I have gammy shoulders so can't get as low as I used to to for long periods) and on two bikes with alu based steerers also, whilst not as extreme in length (circa 50mm) I've put over 800 watts through all at one point or another without any issues.
I don't know the length of the spacers on this or other bikes but unless you're going to be pumping out ridiculously high numbers I can't see that an alu or CF is going to be too flexy for the job. But I'm open to some hard evidence (not what a manufacturer covering their buttock might say)

The utility cyclist wrote:.........
Whilst the bike looks nice, it's what twice the price of the Sirrus, possibly 2.5x, it also looks to be too small a frame given the extremely long steerer but each to their own requirements.
happy riding

what are the merits or otherwise of smaller frame and longer steerer v bigger frame and shorter steerer? I suppose reach maybe an issue with a smaller frame? on the other hand the smaller frame will be more rigid and stronger. My Dawes 1-Down, I can nicely pick up and carry under my arm with the top tube securly under my armpit and out stretched arm hands gripping the chain stay, is a small frame ( but the largest they made ). Ive had to carry it more than once.

bohrsatom wrote:...
Thanks for researching. Evans are definitely out of stock even if it says online that they do have them - my LBS tried to buy one from them and the order eventually got cancelled. I assume they didn't hold them in stock in their own warehouse but order from the distributor who is definitely all sold out. Will get in touch with Urban Cyclery but I'm not convinced their stock is accurate as they are listing the fully built TdF 20s in stock in all sizes and they have been unavailable for months

Have you tried calling Genesis directly and finding out when they expect stock in ?

I had questions before buying my Croix de Fer and ended-up calling them directly and they were helpful. If it is something you have not done, I can PM you their phone number.

Ian

Some people seem to get worked up about the length of other people steerers and I have no idea why. If you put "Vintage touring bikes" into a google image search you'll find loads of touring bikes with quill stems where the bars are as far above the frame as on this Spa tourer. Did people go on about long quill stems? maybe they did...
Compact frames, with a sloping top tube, unsurprisingly require a longer seatpost. Now, some dislike the aesthetics of a compact frame, but I can see many practical reasons for them - Those who've grown up with mountain bikes might prefer the extra stand over clearance because it's what they're used to. Manufacturers don't have to make so many sizes and in theory we all benefit from the economies of scale. The wider range of adjustment, means getting a decent fit on a roughly correct frame is simple.
Does any of it matter? If you can get the points of contact in the right place and the bits in between do what you want it's all good.

The utility cyclist wrote:Flex, you mean if it were made of carbon fibre or aluminium, what makes you say that or do you have some evidence that suggest those materials are generally flexy for such?
From a personal POV I ride bikes with aluminium alloy and CF steerers and neither are flexy, far from it and not just slammed to the headtube. I'm no feeble 75kg rake either. ...

Alluminium is one thing, carbon fiber another. FYI most manufacturers of carbon fiber forks would not cover any fault if there is more than 40-50mm from the top bearing to the bottom of the stem. Also, not suposed to have more than 10mm above the stem, reason being, aside from the flex (yes, there will be) is that you will have a transition area where the stem is clamping a portion of the steerer that is not supported by the expander bung.
But aside from this, you will not find a carbon steerer longer than 300mm in most cases, and for the intended use of carbon fiber forks, if one has to use more than those 40-50mm of stack then he better go and get the bike properly sized up. Clearly needs a taller head tube.
It's not just adding spacers at will, a bicycle has to fit well the rider, not the other way round.

PH wrote:Some people seem to get worked up about the length of other people steerers and I have no idea why. If you put "Vintage touring bikes" into a google image search you'll find loads of touring bikes with quill stems where the bars are as far above the frame as on this Spa tourer. Did people go on about long quill stems? maybe they did...
Compact frames, with a sloping top tube, unsurprisingly require a longer seatpost. Now, some dislike the aesthetics of a compact frame, but I can see many practical reasons for them - Those who've grown up with mountain bikes might prefer the extra stand over clearance because it's what they're used to. Manufacturers don't have to make so many sizes and in theory we all benefit from the economies of scale. The wider range of adjustment, means getting a decent fit on a roughly correct frame is simple.
Does any of it matter? If you can get the points of contact in the right place and the bits in between do what you want it's all good.

Regarding the "vintage touring bikes" you need to mention that quill stems were (and still are) made out of rather thick cast alluminium.
In fact, Dutch bikes have extra long quill stems that are made of very thick stainless steel, and you can put a child seat on it!
Much different from a limited thickness of carbon fiber, isn't it?

Gattonero wrote:

PH wrote:Some people seem to get worked up about the length of other people steerers and I have no idea why. If you put "Vintage touring bikes" into a google image search you'll find loads of touring bikes with quill stems where the bars are as far above the frame as on this Spa tourer. Did people go on about long quill stems? maybe they did...
Compact frames, with a sloping top tube, unsurprisingly require a longer seatpost. Now, some dislike the aesthetics of a compact frame, but I can see many practical reasons for them - Those who've grown up with mountain bikes might prefer the extra stand over clearance because it's what they're used to. Manufacturers don't have to make so many sizes and in theory we all benefit from the economies of scale. The wider range of adjustment, means getting a decent fit on a roughly correct frame is simple.
Does any of it matter? If you can get the points of contact in the right place and the bits in between do what you want it's all good.

Regarding the "vintage touring bikes" you need to mention that quill stems were (and still are) made out of rather thick cast alluminium.
In fact, Dutch bikes have extra long quill stems that are made of very thick stainless steel, and you can put a child seat on it!
Much different from a limited thickness of carbon fiber, isn't it?

What
We're talking about a modern touring bike with a steel steerer, or at least I am. Who's talking about carbon

That's right, I said "good thing the steerer is steel and not carbon".
Although the problem of "could do with a better fitting" remains

Gattonero wrote:Although the problem of "could do with a better fitting" remains

How do you know how well that bike fits the rider? If you don't know that, where is this problem you highlight? It might by the look of it have been possible to get the same fit from a larger frame, but other than appealing to your aesthetics you haven't given a reason why that would be better. If the only reason is that it wouldn't work with a carbon steerer, then it's no reason at all because it's not.

The bike in the photo is the 57cm Spa Steel Tourer. As recommended by Spa the steerer is uncut, hence the length, and I will be experimenting with a few positions before getting it cut down to size. On my old bike the stem is much lower than the saddle, a sportier configuration but it did tend to cause aches after a long day of riding.

Ideally I did want to buy the 60cm frame due to the extra reach but the standover height would have been too much for me (i am 6ft1). A longer headtube would have been good but I'm not in the position to splash out on a bespoke frame, So 57+longer steerer it is. Still feels very secure.

To respond to an earlier comment about pricing of the Spa compared to the Sirrus. The Spa is several times more expensive, but then they are two completely different bikes. Buying a low end Sirrus and upgrading it to a Deore groupset with handbuilt wheels would have come in at around the same price once you include labour, and would have been much more hassle.

bohrsatom wrote:............Ideally I did want to buy the 60cm frame due to the extra reach but the standover height would have been too much for me (i am 6ft1). A longer headtube would have been good but I'm not in the position to splash out on a bespoke frame, So 57+longer steerer it is. Still feels very secure..............

Yes, the 60 is a big bike. I'm 5' 10" and the 54 is for me......just wheeling a 60 is like being a child again, when you can't reach the lightswitch.....top tube slope on both sizes is 60mm, so the bars aren't exactly low.

531colin wrote:

bohrsatom wrote:............Ideally I did want to buy the 60cm frame due to the extra reach but the standover height would have been too much for me (i am 6ft1). A longer headtube would have been good but I'm not in the position to splash out on a bespoke frame, So 57+longer steerer it is. Still feels very secure..............

Yes, the 60 is a big bike. I'm 5' 10" and the 54 is for me......just wheeling a 60 is like being a child again, when you can't reach the lightswitch.....top tube slope on both sizes is 60mm, so the bars aren't exactly low.

My Dawes 1-Down is a 57cm frame ( was the largest.) I am about 6'3" and at my age getting my leg over ( no jokes pls ) is hard. I used to have a Dawes Horizon 65cm classic frame bike a few years ago - goodness knows how I coped with that with 700c wheels, not now I think. bohrsatom I suggest you keep the long steerer, dont cut it down, as it looks better than ok looks "right" and better if you need to sell the bike?

My bikes are (I think) 58, 60 and 61cm, all fit me perfectly. I'm sat the same over he pedals with the same reach to the bars on all three. That it took slightly different choices in stems length, spacers, seatpost length and setback to achieve that makes not the slightest difference.

I'm 5ft 11, 32.5 IL, I ride a 62 (non sloping), a 61, 3x 59s without any bother at all, of course go with whatever frame you think is best but I'd far rather have the headtube a bit longer/next frame up than have half a foot of spacers to make the height of the bars, in fact I'd rather go with an up angled stem with smaller frame if the step over was the issue.

Still not seen a scrap of evidence to support the alu and carbon steerers being unsuitable for the OPs setup though