This is a hard question to accurately answer, since it depends on how the individual frame was built and the reach of the bars. I have a slightly newer Trek in about the same size and I'd say much under 10cm was starting to be "too short". "Normal" to me would be 11-12cm. Needing a 50mm stem to me says that the frame is much too big for you. I guess it could also depend on how each person carries the weight they have, since weight distribution matters a lot.
I don't know how much stem conventions change over time and between builders.
Baird
__________________________ Baird Webel Washington DC
On Jul 14, 2007, at 8:55 PM, classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org wrote:
> ---
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:25:21 -0400
> From: <wfbibb@bellsouth.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: [CR]50 mm stem
> Message-ID: <000b01c7c644$56689a00$6101a8c0@DCV57461>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Message: 8
>
> My 1981 Trek 610 is a little too large at 56cm and I have swtiched
> to a
> 50mm handlebar stem to compensate. However, it seems to make the
> steering a bit more sensitive than I like. While acknowleding that
> steering geometery is complex and handling is a subjective topic, does
> anyone have an opinion of how short a stem it "too" short? I need to
> balance the steering with the reach and buying new Nitto stems is
> getting expensive.
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank Bibb
> Rome, Georgia USA
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> End of Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 55, Issue 46
> *************************************************