's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

Compact VS standard(8 posts)

Compact VS standardPeter E
Jun 1, 2001 8:42 AM
I'm a bit intrested in the differences between a compact frame and a standard one. I know that a compact frame is lighter and stiffer, but is there any more to it. What are the wins and loses whit a compact frame??
re: Compact VS standardPsyDoc
Jun 1, 2001 10:06 AM
I am not sure there are any substantial wins or losses, for the consumer, with a compact frame or a traditional frame. Yes, a certain amount of weight is saved and compacts are supposed to be stiffer, but I am not sure of the quantitative gains in stiffness are. For example, Merlin recently released the new Extralight compact ( ). The weight of the frame ranges from 2.65 pounds for a small to 3.1 pounds for an extra-large. The "regular" Extralight ranges from 2.4 pounds for a 49cm to 3.3 pounds for a 63cm. I am sure there are quantitative differences in weight gain/loss and frame stiffness, but I am unsure about the qualitative differences.
re: Compact VS standardAD14
Jun 1, 2001 3:41 PM
The compact merlin uses straight guage while the extralight is a butted tubeset.
re: Compact VS standardAD14
Jun 1, 2001 3:45 PM
I retract that statement. The website says the compact uses a butted tubeset. If the compact frames use less tubing wouldnt they all be lighter?
re: Compact VS standardIan
Jun 1, 2001 4:32 PM
You pretty much have it covered, a compact frame should be a little lighter and a little stiffer. You will also have more standover, but if a traditional frame fits you correctly, that should not be a problem anyway. I like some compact frames and disapprove of others. The main other being the Giant. I don't care what anyone says, you can't fit everyone, or even come remotely close, with only three frame sizes.
re: Compact VS standardVaMootsman
Jun 1, 2001 9:28 PM
...and remember...a smaller frame needs a longer, and quite possibly more flexy post. So, you'll need a stouter type post: read - heavier, so the weight savings in the frame is made up in the post. I haven't quite figured out the compact frame thing....what is the point, didn't 'old' frames fit just fine?
I have bothDuane Gran
Jun 2, 2001 8:52 AM
I have a Trek 5200 "standard" frame and a Giant TCR Team compact frame. Aside from material differences, I find that the Giant corners better but I like the ride of the Trek much more. This difference may have more to do with the fork style though, as the Giant has a straight bladed fork (no rake) and the Trek has a fairly standard raked fork. This affects the wheelbase. On the Giant I do feel more like I'm "on top of the bike". I can't quite describe it.

Anyhow, I like both styles. As another reader said, get a good seat post with compact frames. I'm fond of Thomson personally.
Fork rakeIan
Jun 2, 2001 1:55 PM

I would bet that the fork rake on both your bikes is very close. Just because a fork is straight bladed does not mean it does not have rake. The rake is compensated for via the angle of the steerer tube in relation to the legs instead of through a curve in the legs.