> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than standard
> geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive. Don't fall for
> it! There are still a sufficient number of non-compact frames available,
> so you don't have to do whatever the bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
We need to differentiate between "compact" frames, which might allow a
manufacturer to cut back on the number of sizes, and "sloping top tube"
bikes, which do little more (good or bad) than allow someone with
shorter-than-normal legs to fit a given-sized bike (if that person simply
chose a smaller size, the issue would be the top tube becoming too short).
Beyond that, it's style points.
If you look at what Trek did with the '08 Madone lineup, they essentially
doubled the number if size options when they went to a sloping top tube.
Almost every model they make is available with either a standard head tube
height (as used on all prior Madones and every other Trek "racing" bike
they've made since 1992), which is called the "Pro" fit, or the exact same
frame (by exact, I mean every single dimension, angles, chainstay length,
everything) with a 3cm taller head tube, called the "Performance" fit.
Not one size (50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62cm for men's) was dropped, and in
fact they added a 64cm in some models.
Other manufacturers may or may not have done something similar. My point is
that, just because it has a sloping top tube and someone decides to call it
a "compact" frame, has nothing to do with limiting sizing options. Could
even be the opposite.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
"SMS" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
> landotter wrote:
>
>> That's ********. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
>> using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
>> comfortable height.
>>
>> You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
>> ******** to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
>> frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
>>
>
> There _is_ a tendency for shops toe sell frames that are too small.
>
> It has nothing to do with looks.
>
> You need to understand the inherent disadvantages in the compact frame
> geometry for the vast majority of riders that are of "normal" proportions.
>
> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than standard
> geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive. Don't fall for
> it! There are still a sufficient number of non-compact frames available,
> so you don't have to do whatever the bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
>
> For $1000, you don't have to compromise with a compact frame.
