Bike Position - Comments Please

my 2 cents. Go to your LBS and spend the $50-$70 and get fitted. They will get you dialed in just right. Better than guessing.

Option #2: do some searches on bike fitting, then make a protractor and compass out of cardboard and a ruler and  have your daughter check your fit angles.  It will be almost as good as a fitting.

Agree that the seat is still too low.

And when you take pictures...make sure your feet are at the 12 and 6 oclock positions...with the foot at 6 oclock facing the camera.  That can give people a better idea of when your seat is high enough. 

Also try to make sure you're in the same comfortable position when you take these pictures.  I'm not sure how you are balancing on your bike without something/someone holding you up...but you notice the extreme difference in elbow angle from the first and third picture you most recently posted.  You are obviously sitting differently in each picture...not sure if it's because you're trying to balance against the wall or on the grass.

Hmmmmmm OK I defer. Sort of. I agree "Nothing you can do on a bike will induce high cycle fatigue failure ..." as long as the applied cyclic stress is below that which the component was designed for. Once you raise the stem up above minimum insertion point, the stress is increased (although it's still WAY below yield strength) and all bets are off. Then you could see ductile failure (deformation present) or HCFF (no ductile deformation) years later, right? Especially if other factors present which accelerate the point at which HCFF occurs. 

So it depends on how high the stress was on the stem, right? The higher, the lower cycles to HCFF.  And if any conditions present that could accelerate the HCFF (>>> fewer cycles but still high cycle failure mode ie limited plastic deformation present after failure).  HCFF is usually characterized by 10³ to 10⁸ cycles and stress well below yield strength. 1000 cycles would still be high cycle (although low end of high cycle) …. And 1000 to 10,000 low amplitude strain cycles on a 20-year old bike isn’t all that unrealistic.  And since fatigue failure is a stociastic process (variation even under controlled repetitive trials) and is exacerbated by conditions you might get in a bike stem (surface scoring, pitting, scratching, fretting, oxidation (lesser factor on an aluminum stem) that could lower the cycles to failure and still demonstrate high cycle failure (ie limited plastic deformation) ...... hmmmmm high cycle failure is still at least relevant.

 And it sounds cool. Say it: High Cycle Fatigue Failure.

Seriously, though, we probably both agree that there is probably nothing wrong with the stem. Probably. But fatigue damage is cumulative … aluminum doesn’t recover fatigue life once cyclic stress is removed …  so the safest call on a stem that has been ridden “for a while”  at some unknown height above minimum insertion (at least when making a recommendation over the web!) is just to replace it.