Compact Road Bike not suitable for tall riders?

[powinc]

I was told by one of our local bike shop staff that 'Compact frames are not suitable for tall riders'. He also said that the 'geometry goes out of whak when the frame sizes increases'.

Is there any truth to this?? Or is my local shop just pushing their Trek's too hard? Because I did test ride a Merida 903 (at a different retailer) and was told it was a semi-compact frame and it felt OK.

If this is true, it limits my choice of road bike by ~50%. i.e. Specialized, Giant, etc.

powinc

 

[SCOOBA STEVE]

I think thats ****. I am 6'2" and was bought a compact bike because of my height. The idea with the compact frame is to cut down on frame material by reducing the length of the seat tube thus reducing flex in the frame. And what better size rider to take advantage of this than a taller rider.
Its up to you but i think a larger frame in a compact style looks 100% better than standard frames.
I own a GIANT aluminium frame with all the Carbon Fibre bits and it works a treat form me, even a "A" grade club level.
I think you should get a second poin of view. Maybe this guy was trying to sell u one of the few bikes brands that do not have the compact frame in it's range.

GOOD LUCK

 

[amirm]

I believe the phenomenon of compact frames sold at mass numbers these days is more of a fashion gimmick. I'm not an expert, but I remember those days when compact frames were designed for sprinters. All the facts about their geometry is in agreement with sprinting.

Now, some bike manufacturers have found people to have a taste for the looks of compcat frames. Therefore, we are having a marketing/fashion matter rather than technical.

Originally posted by powinc
I was told by one of our local bike shop staff that 'Compact frames are not suitable for tall riders'. He also said that the 'geometry goes out of whak when the frame sizes increases'.

Is there any truth to this?? Or is my local shop just pushing their Trek's too hard? Because I did test ride a Merida 903 (at a different retailer) and was told it was a semi-compact frame and it felt OK.

If this is true, it limits my choice of road bike by ~50%. i.e. Specialized, Giant, etc.

powinc

 

[waffle]

who cares! aesthetically they look like rubbish and, as far as i can tell thankfully there has been a reversion to more traditional geometry frames in the last 12-18 months.

 

[Etxy]

Originally posted by powinc
I was told by one of our local bike shop staff that 'Compact frames are not suitable for tall riders'. He also said that the 'geometry goes out of whak when the frame sizes increases'.

Is there any truth to this?? Or is my local shop just pushing their Trek's too hard? Because I did test ride a Merida 903 (at a different retailer) and was told it was a semi-compact frame and it felt OK.

The opposite is true with me... when I went to a certain bikeshop who shall remain nameless, they tried to sell me a Giant OCR and when I told them I was after a standard geometry bike, the staff member in question became quite defensive and aggressive, informing me it was 'my own stupid loss' and making it plain that because I didn't like the OCR, they wanted me out of their shop. I was quite taken aback, and am never going back there.

Personally I don't like the look of compact road bikes, and will stick with a semi-compact or standard framed bike as long as its possible for me to do so.

 

[waffle]

when I went to a certain bikeshop who shall remain nameless,

come on, spread the knowledge and empower the consumer - name the bike store!

 

[Etxy]

Originally posted by waffle
when I went to a certain bikeshop who shall remain nameless,

come on, spread the knowledge and empower the consumer - name the bike store!

LOL, it's in the Ringwood area and ends in 'Workshop'. That's all I'm saying.

 

[byron27]

Originally posted by SCOOBA STEVE
I think thats ****. I am 6'2" and was bought a compact bike because of my height. The idea with the compact frame is to cut down on frame material by reducing the length of the seat tube thus reducing flex in the frame. And what better size rider to take advantage of this than a taller rider.
GOOD LUCK

Reduces flex in the frame but increases flex in the seatpost. i broke my seatpost and i think i would prefer my frame snapping, less painful. Anyhow, the long and short of it p ) is that i have an avanti corsa compact frame for sale, any takers??

 

[Paul J]

I bought a new bike on weekend. I have gone from a compact Giant to a traditional geometry. It's gonna take some getting used to after riding the Giant for a few years but it's not twitchy like the Giant and is definately alot smoother.

I think one of the main reasons so many makers and bike shops take on the compact geometry is to reduce inventory, therefore reducing costs. I think the larger compacts look pretty good but for comfort I am definately leaning toward the standard geometry. I'll just use the Giant for quick bursts across town from now on and the new one for doing 70km plus.

Another point about Giant is they're still using 6000 series aluminium. Most manufacturers seem to have moved on to 7000.

 

[John Stevenson]

Paul J <[email protected]> wrote in news:3fd57341$1_1 @news.chariot.net.au:

> I bought a new bike on weekend. I have gone from a compact Giant to a traditional geometry. It's
> gonna take some getting used to after riding the Giant for a few years but it's not twitchy like
> the Giant and is definately alot smoother.

TomAYto; tomAHto. I have a Giant TCR-1 I'm riding at the moment, on test for Cyclingnews.com.
Compared to my regular rig, it's very quick- handling, but nervous? I wouldn't say so. I can take my
hands off the bars at 60km/h...

>
> I think one of the main reasons so many makers and bike shops take on the compact geometry is to
> reduce inventory, therefore reducing costs.

True up to a point; that point being the one where compact becomes sufficiently popular that riders
who like the looks but demand a good fit force manufacturers to make more sizes. For quite a few
makers of compact frames, this is already happening. Litespeed springs to mind; the Ghisallo comes
in five sizes. Ditto for Fondriest.

> I think the larger compacts look pretty good but for comfort I am definately leaning toward the
> standard geometry. I'll just use the Giant for quick bursts across town from now on and the new
> one for doing 70km plus.

It seems to me that comfort is 90 percent about fit and 10 percent about tyres, and that people who
claim otherwise have missed their vocation as pea-detectors in their local mattress factory.

>
> Another point about Giant is they're still using 6000 series aluminium. Most manufacturers seem to
> have moved on to 7000.

There's such a wide range of alloys within the two series that it's nonsense to imply 7000 is better
than 6000. First, you have to look at the properties of the specific alloy, *then* you have to look
at how well it's being used. There are frames with apalling reputations for reliability made from
both materials - and great frames made from both.

 

[SCOOBA STEVE]

There's such a wide range of alloys within the two series that it's nonsense to imply 7000 is better
than 6000. First, you have to look at the properties of the specific alloy, *then* you have to look
at how well it's being used. There are frames with apalling reputations for reliability made from
both materials - and great frames made from both. [/B][/QUOTE]


I AGREE.

 

[Jose Rizal]

byron27:

> SCOOBA STEVE wrote:
> > I think thats ****. I am 6'2" and was bought a compact bike because of my height. The idea
> > with the compact frame is to cut down on frame material by reducing the length of the seat
> > tube thus reducing flex in the frame. And what better size rider to take advantage of this
> > than a taller rider. GOOD LUCK
>
> Reduces flex in the frame but increases flex in the seatpost. i broke my seatpost and i think i
> would prefer my frame snapping, less painful.

You're assuming that breaking a seatpost is inevitable. It's not. Rather than getting a new frame,
just get a stronger seatpost.

 

[Jose Rizal]

Paul J:

> I bought a new bike on weekend. I have gone from a compact Giant to a traditional geometry. It's
> gonna take some getting used to after riding the Giant for a few years but it's not twitchy like
> the Giant and is definately alot smoother.

Those things have nothing to do with the angle of the top tube, unless the chainstays are longer on
your new frame.

> I think the larger compacts look pretty good but for comfort I am definately leaning toward the
> standard geometry.

"Comfort" isn't defined by standard or compact types; from the frame, "comfort" is dictated by the
length of the chainstays. For the components, the exposed length of your seatpost contributes to
comfort (longer = increased flex = increased load absorption). Obviously your tyres, handlebar and
saddle affect comfort the most.

> Another point about Giant is they're still using 6000 series aluminium. Most manufacturers seem to
> have moved on to 7000.

And what do you think is better about the 7000 series?

 

[Jose Rizal]

John Stevenson:

> Paul J <[email protected]> wrote in news:3fd57341$1_1 @news.chariot.net.au:
>
> > I bought a new bike on weekend. I have gone from a compact Giant to a traditional geometry. It's
> > gonna take some getting used to after riding the Giant for a few years but it's not twitchy like
> > the Giant and is definately alot smoother.
>
> TomAYto; tomAHto. I have a Giant TCR-1 I'm riding at the moment, on test for Cyclingnews.com.
> Compared to my regular rig, it's very quick- handling, but nervous? I wouldn't say so. I can take
> my hands off the bars at 60km/h...
>

"Twitchy" has to do with stem length and fork rake rather than frame geometry.

 

[byron27]

Originally posted by Jose Rizal
byron27:

> SCOOBA STEVE wrote:
> > I think thats ****. I am 6'2" and was bought a compact bike because of my height. The idea
> > with the compact frame is to cut down on frame material by reducing the length of the seat
> > tube thus reducing flex in the frame. And what better size rider to take advantage of this
> > than a taller rider. GOOD LUCK
>
> Reduces flex in the frame but increases flex in the seatpost. i broke my seatpost and i think i
> would prefer my frame snapping, less painful.

You're assuming that breaking a seatpost is inevitable. It's not. Rather than getting a new frame,
just get a stronger seatpost.

Every seatpost i have had has snapped. including a dean mountain bike one. Every frame apart from a giant CFR1 i had has snapped. From my personal experience unfortunately, i feel i can make the assumption that it will snap. If you know a seat post that doesnt snap, and i mean truly has never snapped under normal riding, i am all ears.

 

[SCOOBA STEVE]

Originally posted by byron27
Every seatpost i have had has snapped. including a dean mountain bike one. Every frame apart from a giant CFR1 i had has snapped. From my personal experience unfortunately, i feel i can make the assumption that it will snap. If you know a seat post that doesnt snap, and i mean truly has never snapped under normal riding, i am all ears.

Well i ride a compact GIANT ALU frame with a GIANT blade carbon fibre seat post and it's fine. I am a big guy and race A grade and no prob's. A bit expensive but mine seams to be fine

 

[byron27]

Originally posted by SCOOBA STEVE
Well i ride a compact GIANT ALU frame with a GIANT blade carbon fibre seat post and it's fine. I am a big guy and race A grade and no prob's. A bit expensive but mine seams to be fine

what kind of giant do you have?
just saw someone this morning out on their new giant TCR (birthday present, why cant i get things like that for my bday ) and found myself seriously considering getting a new giant. How long have you had it?. I have had avanti compacts and have had VERY bad experiences with them.....cracking every 3 months!, but the new giants look the go.

 

[SCOOBA STEVE]

Originally posted by byron27
what kind of giant do you have?
just saw someone this morning out on their new giant TCR (birthday present, why cant i get things like that for my bday ) and found myself seriously considering getting a new giant. How long have you had it?. I have had avanti compacts and have had VERY bad experiences with them.....cracking every 3 months!, but the new giants look the go.

I bought a 2003 OCR1 but since i got it i have upgraded quite a bit for eg.
-GIANT CARBON FIBRE BLADE SEAT POST
-AMOEBA "SCUD" CARBON FIBRE FORKS
-TRC1 CARBON FIBRE STEM
-MAVIC KSYRIUM ELITE WHEELS
-ROLLS SEAT
-ULTEGRA PEDALS
I am pretty happy with it, but one thing i have lernt is that no matter how much cash you throw at your machine there is always something much better out there. So i think we just need to be happy with what we have got sometimes. As it really does not make that much difference in a race. I have beaten lots of $5000+ bikes on my beast

 

[byron27]

Originally posted by SCOOBA STEVE
I bought a 2003 OCR1 but since i got it i have upgraded quite a bit for eg.
-GIANT CARBON FIBRE BLADE SEAT POST
-AMOEBA "SCUD" CARBON FIBRE FORKS
-TRC1 CARBON FIBRE STEM
-MAVIC KSYRIUM ELITE WHEELS
-ROLLS SEAT
-ULTEGRA PEDALS
I am pretty happy with it, but one thing i have lernt is that no matter how much cash you throw at your machine there is always something much better out there. So i think we just need to be happy with what we have got sometimes. As it really does not make that much difference in a race. I have beaten lots of $5000+ bikes on my beast

i think the "Value for money" curve rapidly declines after $3000-$4000, not that i have ever spent that much on a bike, not yet....

 

[SCOOBA STEVE]

Originally posted by byron27
i think the "Value for money" curve rapidly declines after $3000-$4000, not that i have ever spent that much on a bike, not yet....

It all depends if you want to ride or look cool at the cafe'.