RoadBikeReview.com'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 Geometry vs. Standard Geometry(3 posts)

Compact Geometry vs. Standard Geometrylexington476
May 14, 2003 3:16 PM
What do some of you think of compact and standard geometry? I have a compact Specialized road bike right now. I am thinking of getting a new road bike and am thinking of standard. The shop I deal with carries Cannondale, Specialized, and Giant.
wow it's been a while since you posted 10 topics in a row...Frith
May 14, 2003 3:58 PM
you're questions are like machine gun fire.
As for the debate btwn compact vs trad frames, have a look around. There has been about 5 threads in the last week or two covering this. I ride compact giant tcr composite and don't really care that it's compact. It fits great and that's what counts. I would have bought it if it was traditional with the same fit. Aesthetics are another matter. My frame is a large so the slope is less exagerated. I'm not crazy about the way compacts look in small sizes but at the same time that's also where they become really usefull (additional standover). Overall I think the debate is not all that important. I'd rather talk about the colour of your bar tape to be quite honest. Buy a frame that fits.
No real differencesKerry
May 14, 2003 4:31 PM
Compact geometry: slightly lower frame weight, heavier seat post, a bit stiffer frame, more flex from the seat post. The reall difference is a bit more standover height and the chance that you can't put a large water bottle in the seat tube cage in the smaller frame sizes. Any other differences between two bikes are due to design choices in frame dimensions, tubing choices, etc. NOT due to the so-called "compact geometry."