Are compact frames a trend that is ending soon?

[slingus]

I have read many of the previous posts discussing the merits of traditional vs compact frames, and I am not opening up that can of worms.

My question is whether any of you have seen evidence that the trend for compact frames has maxed out or will be ending soon?

I am looking at purchasing a new carbon fiber bike. Some that I am considering (particularly the Look 555) have a compact design. The Look 555 is a new for 2005 design.

Am I spending $$$ on a trend that has the same future as Biopace/Softride/etc.?

 

[boudreaux]

I have read many of the previous posts discussing the merits of traditional vs compact frames, and I am not opening up that can of worms.

My question is whether any of you have seen evidence that the trend for compact frames has maxed out or will be ending soon?

I am looking at purchasing a new carbon fiber bike. Some that I am considering (particularly the Look 555) have a compact design. The Look 555 is a new for 2005 design.

Am I spending $$$ on a trend that has the same future as Biopace/Softride/etc.?

Biopace and Softride work for some.Compact is a different bag of poo and isn't gong away.

 

[RC2]

There are some real benefits of compact frames (standover height), so there should always be some value associated with the design. I think other strings have concluded that largely conventional-vs-compact is an aesthetic thing, some preferring each one. Don't see it going away.

 

[waxbytes]

Being a short legged type, compact isn't going away under me any time soon.
That sloping top tube lets me have a decent bar to saddle distance and still able
to stand over the top tube without singing soprano. I'm not the only one the
compact frame helps solve sizing problems for either.

 

[Hypnospin]

the reduced standover height and raised head tube are attractive to some as a nod to the "comfort bike" niche market. and it is a marketing victory to offer frames in just 3 or 4 sizes and call it "compact geometry".

and if one fits, go for it, if you like it it will get you rollin'. might even be the "best" fit for some. but the appeal as an actual advantage for a serious road or race bike does not add up. i must admit, when they came out i was seriously lusting, as always, after the next greatest cycling thing.

I have read many of the previous posts discussing the merits of traditional vs compact frames, and I am not opening up that can of worms.

My question is whether any of you have seen evidence that the trend for compact frames has maxed out or will be ending soon?

I am looking at purchasing a new carbon fiber bike. Some that I am considering (particularly the Look 555) have a compact design. The Look 555 is a new for 2005 design.

Am I spending $$$ on a trend that has the same future as Biopace/Softride/etc.?

 

[unicos]

Compact frames I think will be around for a while. (Things stay around until people quit buying them) I wouldnt worry about if you think it is a fad/trend or not. Get a bike/frame that fits. Notice the manufacturers that have compact frames have a very limited size selection compared to standard frame manufacturers. IMO manufacturers are cutting production costs and charging more for it. Ultimately it should increase thier profit margin. I think it does another thing for the cyclist that wants to look like the pros. It gives them that really long seat post look with a frame that may fit better than buying a frame that is too small so they can have the long seat post look. Ultimately study up on how a bike should fit or visit a LBS with someone that knows about fitting and get whatever fits you best.

 

[boudreaux]

Notice the manufacturers that have compact frames have a very limited size selection compared to standard frame manufacturers.

That's nonsense.You need to look at more stuff.

 

[slingus]

Thanks for everyone that weighed in. The takeaway I heard was if it fits and rides well, don't be concerned if it is a compact or not - Compact frames are not going away.

I've read such positive reviews on this bike I can't wait to go demo one.

Thanks again.

 

[531Aussie]

That sloping top tube lets me have a decent bar to saddle distance and still able to stand over the top tube without singing soprano.

This is just a general comment because I read this often, so don't be offended.

I really don't understand the importance of standover height. I mean, bikes are designed for our feet to be on the PEDALS (believe it or not), so who stands around all day with their bikes between their legs?

It's like when people say they can't touch the ground so they lower the seat!! I usually say: "but you don't ride with your feet on the ground."

 

[Doctor Morbius]

This is just a general comment because I read this often, so don't be offended.

I really don't understand the importance of standover height. I mean, bikes are designed for our feet to be on the PEDALS (believe it or not), so who stands around all day with their bikes between their legs?

It's like when people say they can't touch the ground so they lower the seat!! I usually say: "but you don't ride with your feet on the ground."

I agree with you. I tend to like the old school road bikes where the top tube wasn't proportional to the seat tube. Excellent for non-racing types like me that value comfort over aerodynamics.

 

[boudreaux]

I agree with you. I tend to like the old school road bikes where the top tube wasn't proportional to the seat tube. Excellent for non-racing types like me that value comfort over aerodynamics.

What???....................

 

[boudreaux]

This is just a general comment because I read this often, so don't be offended.

I really don't understand the importance of standover height. I mean, bikes are designed for our feet to be on the PEDALS (believe it or not), so who stands around all day with their bikes between their legs?

It's like when people say they can't touch the ground so they lower the seat!! I usually say: "but you don't ride with your feet on the ground."

I'll go with standover clearance any day. If you don't have it the frame is likely too big anyway, or your tender parts are too old to care. There is always the Electra Bad Boy Ultra and similar **** for them that feel the need to keep butt planted on saddle and feet on ground.....enjoy.

 

[Doctor Morbius]

What???....................

Mr. Brown sums it up better than I can. I tend to favor a shorter top tube.

http://sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

From article:
In a given model, the height of the top tube would vary, but the length of the top tube and every other part of the frame would be same, whether the bike was a 19" or a 25". A person who buys a 25" bike is likely to have a longer upper body than someone who buys a 19", so the larger rider will likely feel cramped by having the same length top tube that puts the handlebars too far away from the 19" rider. The only concession to this difference was that the better builders would supply a stem with a longer reach on larger frames, and a shorter one on smaller frames.

 

[boudreaux]

Mr. Brown sums it up better than I can. I tend to favor a shorter top tube.

http://sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

From article:
In a given model, the height of the top tube would vary, but the length of the top tube and every other part of the frame would be same, whether the bike was a 19" or a 25". A person who buys a 25" bike is likely to have a longer upper body than someone who buys a 19", so the larger rider will likely feel cramped by having the same length top tube that puts the handlebars too far away from the 19" rider. The only concession to this difference was that the better builders would supply a stem with a longer reach on larger frames, and a shorter one on smaller frames.

That's long ago and far away and hardly applies in a current senario.

 

[Doctor Morbius]

That's long ago and far away and hardly applies in a current senario.

True, unless someone is willing to rob a bank to pay for a Rivendell or a custom frame.

 

[996vtwin]

True, unless someone is willing to rob a bank to pay for a Rivendell or a custom frame.

The bottome line is as one person stated earlier that for those of us with disproptionate bodies , e.g short inseam/long torso sloping is a no brainer. Riders in the pro peleton like Cunego you can see this. Considering that most traditional frames carry almost the same geometry sloping is a saviour.

 

[Claes]

I ride a compact cervelo and what I have read people claim for compacts is that the rear triangle is smaller, and thus if everythinge else is the same is stiffer. I have also read that the long seatpost aids in dampening vibration, since it can "flex" a little.
What do you guys reckon? Any truth in it?

Cheers,

 

[Doctor Morbius]

I ride a compact cervelo and what I have read people claim for compacts is that the rear triangle is smaller...

Depends on the bike. I own a Specialized Sequoia and the chain stays are a little longish. I can put 700x38 tires on that bike whereas I can't on my Allez Sport. Same company but different compact frames.

...and thus if everythinge else is the same is stiffer.

I can't really tell much difference between my Allez Sport and Sequoia Elite. The Sport rides slightly harsher than the Sequoia but I also have narrower tires on it. I'd have to be doing a pretty long ride over bad roads to care about the cush factor of one over the other. With the same wheels and tires pumped up to the max I'm thinking they wouldn't feel too different cush wise. They do handle differently though. The Sport is much more responsive. However, the Sequoia is more comfortable for me as it has a much shorter effective top tube and upright position.

I have also read that the long seatpost aids in dampening vibration, since it can "flex" a little. What do you guys reckon? Any truth in it?

Probably more marketing than anything, even if CF is used. An effective method of getting a more cushy ride is to use fatter tires such as 700x28 and let a little air out of them. That'll probably be more plush than having a long seatpost or CF rear triangle. However, the bicycle manufacturers won't ever say anything like that! Bad for business, you know.

 

[531Aussie]

I ride a compact cervelo and what I have read people claim for compacts is that the rear triangle is smaller, and thus if everythinge else is the same is stiffer. I have also read that the long seatpost aids in dampening vibration, since it can "flex" a little.
What do you guys reckon? Any truth in it?
,

the seat post debate continually rages on at Bike Forums
I think it a carbon post on a compact would have some flex, but don't the Soloists have an aero, tear drop post?


Cervelo state that the differences of sloping bikes are not significant:


"The differences between sloping and horizontal are small, especially when compared to things like tubeshapes and butting options. But if you use the same tubeset for both frames, the following differences will occur:

Slightly higher bottom bracker stiffness for the sloping frame
Slightly higher torsional stiffness for the horizontal toptube frame
Slightly lighter frame with the sloping toptube
Slightly lighter seatpost wit the horizontal toptube frame
Slightly more seatpost compliance with the sloping frame.

 

[cydewaze]

Cervelo state that the differences of sloping bikes are not significant:


"The differences between sloping and horizontal are small, especially when compared to things like tubeshapes and butting options. But if you use the same tubeset for both frames, the following differences will occur:

Slightly higher bottom bracker stiffness for the sloping frame
Slightly higher torsional stiffness for the horizontal toptube frame
Slightly lighter frame with the sloping toptube
Slightly lighter seatpost wit the horizontal toptube frame
Slightly more seatpost compliance with the sloping frame.

He forgot the most important one, and my reason for staying with a traditional frame...



You can fit a bigger water bottle in the seat tube cage.