Shawn Neer, Downhill switchback in Pemberton, BC

Some Mountain Bike Companies and Shops Want To Hurt You!

Some Mountain Bike Companies and Shops Want To Hurt You! Sounds unbelievable but it is true, James Wilson recently wrote this: ”

So what would you say if I told you that a major bike manufacturer was shipping all of their mountain bikes with a sticker that told riders not to use flat pedals? What if the sticker literally said that their bikes are supposed to be equipped only with toe-clips or clipless pedals?

And what if I told you that no one at that company can seem to explain why it is there? What if the company had been caught in several lies and that they were actually misquoting and misrepresenting laws in defense of the sticker?

And what if all of this was taking place while a lot of people in the mountain bike industry stood by and said nothing, deciding instead that a pro-clipless/ anti-flats sticker with no factual reason to be there wasn’t really a big deal?

Well, you’d probably call me paranoid and crazy. And, up until a few months ago, I would have agreed with you.

But then someone posted a picture on Facebook and I got sucked into a story that I still find hard to believe. Unfortunately, though, it did happen and the easiest way to start this off is to outline the events in the order they took place…

- A picture of a sticker was attached to one of my Facebook posts. The person who posted it said that it was off of a Trek mountain bike and that all of their mountain bikes – including their DH bike – were being shipped with them on the cranks. The sticker read:

“This bicycle is to be equipped with pedals that have a positive foot-retaining device such as toe-clips or clipless type pedals.”" More from James here: http://www.bikejames.com/strength/why-is-trek-putting-an-anti-flats-sticker-on-their-mountain-bikes/

How crazy is that? Toe-clips?! I can’t think of a more dangerous pedal type! Even clipless are quite dangerous until you train your feet/ankles to un-clip easily and consistently. Trek is openning themselves up to quite the lawsuit with this advice!

Here is an update on an article I wrote six years ago on pedals.

I get some version of the following question at least once a month and as I have continued to ride and learn my feelings on this subject have evolved.

“I do have a question, I’ve only been riding for 3 months, at what point do you think I should get clips? I’m not sure I am ready for them but I notice the people I ride with are all clipped in and they are so much faster than me. Is that a big factor in speed?

Thanks,
Ada”

This is a great question.  First you never have to get clipless pedals.  Clipless pedals (the ones you clip into) are simply a different way of doing things, barely better in some ways, not as good in other ways.  I have heard from students who say that their local shop told them they need clipless pedals and nothing could be further from the truth.  A good set of flat pedals and sticky soled shoes is a better system for many riders.

Yes, I usually ride clipped in but it took me a lot of time to get used to clipping in and out and a lot of time to get used to riding clipped in (a year before I became honestly as comfortable being clipped in as I was on flats!).  The more I ride, coach and learn the more I see the advantages of flat pedals.  I have been riding flat pedals the last few weeks and each day I like them more.

Pros of running flat pedals (with 5.10 Shoes)

Some Mountain Bike Compaines and shops want to hurt you!

Thin Flat pedals like the Canfield Brothers Crampon with 5.10 shoes is a great combination!

1. More Confidence! You can take your feet off quickly and easily making trying technical sections and learning important skills like track standing easier. I have a lot of friends who always ride flat pedals (for cross country riding) and like being able to put a foot down at will.  They say this enables them to try more technical moves and sections (especially going uphill) that they would be to scared to try clipped in.

2. Less fear for many riders (which allows the rider to stay in their comfort zone and relax!).  Fear and learning do not mix, you can not learn when scared.  Muscle Tension (which fear produces) and riding do not mix well either.

3. Flat pedals provide more feedback, giving you an idea of how you are riding. Because you are not attached to the pedals if you are riding stiff and relying on your suspension to soak up the bumps (instead of using your body) you will notice that your feet bounce all over the pedals. This is a sign that you should be more relaxed and supple on the trail.

4. Flat pedals don’t allow you to cheat when doing lifting maneuvers such as rear wheel lifts and bunny hops. This can be valuable when learning proper technique. “Proper technique” is in control, in balance and much more efficient than “muscling” or yanking your way over the obstacle.

Pros of being clipped in:

Steve Peat cornering hard and fast while clipped in!

Steve Peat cornering hard and fast while clipped in!

1. I like clips for the “attached” to my bike feel (although they have made me less smooth because of this). When you foot lands with the heel or instep on the pedal (instead of the ball of your foot) you lose the use of your ankle (which is a big part of your shock absorption) and you start plowing into the trail instead of floating smoothly.  So being attached to your pedal keeps you on the ball of your foot no matter how stiff you ride. This is the main reason I and World Champion Greg Minnaar clip in, downhill tracks are rough and it is easy when running flat pedals to have your foot bounce and end up in an awkward place on the pedal.

2. Being clipped does make pedaling a little more efficient.  Again let me repeat myself, a little more efficient, there have been no studies done that I know of.  If pedaling at 100% efficient vs. 99 or 98% efficient is more important to you than having a little more confidence clipped in might be for you. Remember, being efficient on mountain biking is more than just pedaling, smoothness, cornering ability and confidence will also help you become more efficient.  Turns out I was wrong about that, I still haven’t found a study that shows that clipless pedals or more efficient, I did find an article that shows that “pulling up on the backstroke” is a less-efficient way to pedal (it adds power at the sake of efficiency). Study here: http://wp.me/p49ApH-73

3. Being clipped in encourages you to ride and corner with correct technique and body position keeping your feet on the pedals (usually when you take a foot off your pedals you end up in an out of balance position often causing a slide out). World Champion Greg Minnaar always uses clips when racing in the mud for this reason. He said in one of our camps, “with flat pedals you take your foot out instinctively, often when you don’t need to and putting your out of position. Riding clipped in forces me to stay in balance and use proper technique”.

4. Although clipless pedals may not be more efficient they do allow you to produce more power by pulling up. This can be handy when you are climbing a super steep, challenging trail and need that extra power to help you get over the top! Sure, it isn’t quite as efficient but at that point making the climb is more efficient than stalling!

Which pedal type should you use?  Experiment!  find which pedal system you fill most comfortable on and confident riding on.

After 18 years of riding clipped in 99% of the time I now really enjoy being unclipped about 30% of the time. Riding flat pedals keeps me honest (efficient, smooth and relying on technique instead of power)!

Flat or clipless pedals are simply a different way of doing things neither is better than the other and clipless pedals are certainly not an upgrade!

This is proper body position (centered and neutral) for riding and braking.

Can Mountain Bike Handlebars Be Too Wide?

Can Mountain Bike Handlebars Be Too Wide? As someone who preaches that a short stem and wide bars will give you much better handling on a mountain bike (both climbing and descending) I get asked that question a lot. The short answer is, of course your mountain bike handlebars can be too wide, but most likely your’s aren’t wide enough!

The reasons we have been preaching about wide bars since 1999 are that they simply give you more stability, more leverage to fight sudden jerks to the side and more leverage for cornering. A quick baseline to start from is to do a push up and experiment with hand width and find out where you feel most stable and powerful. From this starting point go out a bit wider and start working your way in. What we are looking for is for your forearms to slope outward slightly from your hands to your elbows when you have lowered your chest in a “half push-up” position (see photo below). At the widest your forearms should go straight up to your elbows when in this position.

Can Handlebars be too wide?

Handlebars Correct Width

This width will give you the optimum amount of control. From this position you can absorb shock, keep the wheels on the ground over a small drop, resist twisting/jerking forces and power you way trough a corner by getting enough counter pressure leverage to give you the right lean angle.

Unfortunately as this trend has caught on I have seen a few riders who are too short (or narrow shouldered, short armed) for the widest bars made and they look like this photo below:

Can Handlebars be too wide?

Handlebars Too Wide!

I saw a lot of young riders at Whistler last summer with a setup that looked like that. Really hard to control the bike when you are stretched out like that! Those riders need to cut their bars down a bit!

Most riders, especially cross country/endurance oriented riders run bars on the narrow side (perhaps because of tradition?) and they look like this:

Can Handlebars be too wide?

Handlebars Too Narrow

This also severely hampers control (really twitchy with no leverage to fight sudden bar jerks, and no leverage for cornering pressure) and collapses the lungs a bit making it hard to breathe! It is more aerodynamic though, which unfortunately doesn’t help much at the speeds you travel at on your mountain bike and aerodynamics are not worth sacrificing control over.

The widest bars I have found are the SMAC innovations SW820 Moto Bars ( http://smacinnovations.com/bars.php , 820mm wide) and at 6’3″ I run these uncut on both my xc and dh bikes. BetterRide coach and one the best technical riders I know, Andy Winohradsky is 5’6″ and runs 30.5″ wide bars on both of his bikes. We put on camps all over the country and have not yet found a trail with trees too narrow for these bars. The tightest trees I have found are on the East Coast, in Texas and in the Mid West. In some of these places there were two to four spots an hour where I had to slow down and wiggle through some tight trees. Four, even six times an hour is no reason to compromise your handling though, I would rather you have the most control 99% of your ride and have to slow down a bit a few times an hour than be out of control for 99% of your ride and be able to go faster over about 20 feet every hour! If you honestly live in an area with more than six tree gaps less than 32″ wide in an hour ride, cut your bars!

There is not yet a scientifically proven perfect mountain bike handlebar width as there are so many variables; height, shoulder width, arm length, stem length, top tube length, reach measurement, etc. The easiest way to find out what is right for you is to start at the widest width available to you (or that you feel is appropriate, if you are 5’1″ no need to start at 820mm!) and ride at that width (on a trail without narrow tree gaps at first!) and then keep moving the grips in a bit until your arms look close the “correct” photo above and you feel like you have the most control (not necessarily what feels best as what often feels best is what you are used to which may not be correct).

 

DSC_0602

Can a Mountain Bike Stem Be Too Short? What About Frame Size?

Can a Mountain Bike Stem Be Too Short?  What About Frame Size? These are questions we get A LOT from students, newsletter subscribers and random riders that found us during a search for a new bike. Over the years there has been a lot of experimenting with stem length, bar width and frame length, by bike manufacturers, bar/stem makers, top racers, myself and our coaches and many interested riders. While there is no “standard” in the industry in general stems have gotten shorter, bars wider and the length of the front of a bike (the “reach” measurement is the best measure for front of bike length, it is measured horizontally from the bottom bracket to a plumb line dropped from the center of the top of the head tube)  has gotten longer over the last 10-20 years. There are outliers which have stayed the same or even moved in the opposite of these trends but I believe they are not providing optimum handling.

 

Can a mountain bike stem be too short

The crew at All Mountain Cyclery putting a 50 mm stem and 780 mm bars on a XC Race bike!

The stem lengths I have experimented with range from my first mountain bike which had a 150 mm stem to a zero stem that Azonic put out in the mid-late 1990′s. Bike companies have done the same, most recently Mondraker, this article explains their idea: http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/07/19/mondraker-introduces-forward-geometry-are-you-ready-for-a-10-mm-stem/  My experience was the zero stem was weird because I had to almost lean forward to keep my weight equal on both tires for cornering but, that was a long time ago when I didn’t understand body position as well as I do today and unlike the Mondraker the bike I was riding was not designed around a zero stem. As for Mondraker they tried it out for a year and I heard they handled weird and they have since gone to 30-50 mm stems. Personally I have settled into the 35-50 mm range as stems this length give the most precise and “easiest” control. By easiest I mean when riding bikes with 35-50 mm stems I am not thinking about the handling. Put me on a bike with a longer stem, even a 60 mm and it feels odd, even after 4 days of testing (enough time that the “new is weird feeling” should have vanished). I now prefer 35 mm stems but on slightly shorter bikes I run a 50 mm (still experimenting). To me this makes since has motorcycles are designed  to handle well and they don’t drastically change stem length to accommodate shorter or taller riders. For some reason many riders think a long stem climbs better than a short stem, this simply isn’t true I and some of my riding buddies can climb the steepest, most technical trails with these stems, stem length has little to do with climbing, it is all about body position. So from the Mondraker experiment I would say that at least for now 10 mm is too short. From my testing and the testing of our coaches and friends we believe the ideal is 35-50 mm and 60-70 mm a compromise for riders with frames that are too short.

Frame length (reach and chainstay) for better bike handling. This is something I have experimented with for years as different sponsors have had different opinions on how long a bike should be. Mondraker obviously has too and many companies have been lengthening the reach of their bikes. Here is where I feel there is a too short and possibly a too long. In general the longer the reach measurement the bigger the “sweet spot” on the bike (the spot where all your weight is on the pedals) and more stable the ride. Of course if a bike gets too stable it is hard to maneuver.  Another big frame aspect that affects handling is chainstay length, the longer the chainstay the more stable but less nimble the bike, too short a chainstay and the bike feels twitchy. One manufacturer’s large can have the same reach as another’s medium so to understand what I am calling a large, medium and small the measurements on the Canfield Brothers 2014 Balance, http://canfieldbrothers.com/frames/balance and Specialized Enduro 29er are what we will use. They make great starting points when discussing reach and chainstay length as I feel they have it pretty dialed (Canfield Brothers Balance has a reach 7mm shorter than Specialized Enduro and the Canfield brothers have short but not too short chainstays as does the enduro 29er). The tough thing for me is my height, I’m 6’3″ so I have no idea what it is like to be 5’2″ and ride a small. Fortunately our coach Andy Winohradsky is 5’6″ and I have discussed in length with him the differences between a small and medium for a guy his height. Andy has helped me shape my size theory below.

Metric Small Medium Large X-Large
Top Tube Length (Effective) A 563mm 584mm 607mm 627mm
Top Tube Length (Actual) B 528mm 547mm 571mm 594mm
Reach C 400mm 420mm 438mm 457mm
Standover Height (Based on 27.5″) D 681.5 726.5 744.5 754.5
Seat Tube Length E 381mm 431.8mm 483mm 508mm
Wheel Base F 1127mm 1148mm 1171 1192mm
Head Tube Angle 160mm Fork (Internal Headset) G 66.5° 66.5° 66.5° 66.5°
Head Tube Angle 160mm Fork (External Headset) H 66° 66° 66° 66°
Seat Tube Angle (Effective) I 75° 75° 75° 75°
Seat Tube Angle (Actual) 69.3° 69.3° 69.3° 69.3°
Chainstay Length J 425mm 425mm 425mm 425mm
Bottom Bracket Drop K 5.5mm 5.5mm 5.5mm 5.5mm
Head Tube length L 105mm 110mmm 120mm 125mm
Canfield Balance

Canfield Balance

All this talk on bike length as it relates to the rider, how about bike length as it relates to the trails we ride? On dirt bikes there is no real sizing for adults, just different size engines so a 5’6″ dirt biker will be riding the same length 450 cc bike as someone 6’6″ as that is the length the manufacturer feels handles best (you can shorten and lengthen the chainstay a bit but it is rarely done by most riders as it requires lengthening or shortening the chain too). If there is an ideal dirt bike length then maybe there is an ideal mountain bike length? I need to ride a few more true XL’s (remember some XL’s have the same reach as a large Canfield Balance) to test my latest theory on bike length (it used to be the longer the better for my 6’3″ body) but I am starting to feel like there might be a point where bikes are just too long for the trail. I still feel if you are between sizes move to the bigger size so you can run a nice short, great handling stem but not sure if that works if you are between a large and an XL, as I like the nimbleness of my large Enduro 29er. It is much more nimble than my XL EVO 29er and way more fun to ride but that could do as much or more with the chainstay being 26 mm shorter on the Enduro. I need to ride a XL 29er with short chainstays before I know for sure if it was the long reach or the long chainstay that made the XL EVO feel so cumbersome. I ran a 35 mm stem on the XL and I currently run a 50 mm on the L Enduro so my cockpit is only 5 mm shorter on the large but honestly, the 50 mm stem doesn’t feel as good as the 35 mm! In short I feel that bikes with 420 to 430 mm chainstays and 420 to 445 mm  reach measurements handle the best given the trails that we ride. An important to thing to remember here is this whole discussion is on bike handling, for a really long ride being a little more stretched out can feel more comfortable but doesn’t feel as nimble.

Next week we will tackle the question, “can handle bars be too wide?”.

 

 

Skeeter and his cockpit set up for his bad back.

Mountain Bike Cockpit For Riders With Back Issues and/or Tight Hips

Mountain Bike Cockpit For Riders With Back Issues and/or Tight Hips

Most mountain bikers are tenacious but riders who refuse to quit or even start riding with major back issues like fused vertebrates, degenerative disk disease, bulging disks, etc. really inspire me! I was fortunate enough to coach just such a rider this weekend, Skeeter is a 57 year old mountain biker who has been riding dirt bikes for years and has degenerative disk disease. His cockpit set up is really tall which will compromise the bikes handling a bit but it is way better than not riding or riding a bike set up for performance that makes your back hurt.  A 58 year old woman with four fused vertebrae that I coached in a camp with us in 2003  had her bike set up similarly and I explained she might have to walk a few steep climbs (because it is nearly impossible on a steep hill to keep your weight centered with your bars 3-4 inches higher than your saddle) but those climbs are only a small fraction of her riding miles. At least she is out riding! The fact that she was starting to ride at 58 blew me away, she never had a bike as a kid even!

Here is Skeeter’s cockpit setup for his back issues:

Skeeter's Mountain Bike Cockpit For His Bad Back

Skeeter’s Mountain Bike Cockpit For His Bad Back

 

This will compromise the bikes handling a bit (because it is nearly impossible when climbing a steep hill to keep your weight centered with your bars 3-4 inches higher than your saddle and your bars will be too high descending putting you in a tall and upright position) but it is way better than not riding or riding a bike set up for performance that makes your back hurt worse. See these articles on body position for more on that: http://betterride.net/blog/2011/mtb-skills-tip-w-pic-technical-climbing-wandy-winohradsky/ and http://betterride.net/blog/2010/mountain-bike-desending-body-position-101-video-demonstration/

Great to see riders of all shapes, sizes and with various performance reducing injuries/conditions still out riding and having fun on the trail!