Road Cycling · Public discussion

Compact Frame sizing

Started by Sparky · · Last activity · 38 posts · 1,450 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
22 September 2007
Last activity
27 September 2007
Original author
Sparky
Posts
38
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,450
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 38
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
    the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
    are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
    a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
    MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    --
    I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
    You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

  2. Sparky said:

    I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
    the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00.

    Disc brakes on a road bike are all hype. Put some Kool-Stops on
    whatever calipers you get and you'll stop just fine. Discs limit your
    ability to mount fenders and racks which are far more important on a
    commuter.

    I'd recommended a touring bike like the Jamis Aurora or wannabe
    cyclocross bike like the Bianchi Volpe.

    Seriously, those disc brakes are more trouble than they're worth on a
    road going bike. Linear pull brakes or cantilevers are more than
    powerful enough, cheap, and decrease the theft value of your bike. The
    reason you see them on so many so-called "commuters" is fashion,
    nothing else. They certainly are useful for when you're bombing down a
    northwest soggy trail at at 30mph, but I doubt that's what this bike
    will see. ;-)

    If you're planning on traveling light and your terrain is flat, I
    can't recommend a Redline 925 fixed/ single speed bike enough. Nuclear
    blast proof, and only $500. Yes I'm biased, as I own one, but it's
    insane. I ride it road and trail, through glass, over curbs, and it
    begs for more.

  3. Sparky said:

    . Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
    current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched, or
    just right.

  4. In article
    <[email hidden]>landotter

    Quoted message said:
    Sparky said:

    I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes
    (for the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00.

    Quoted message said:

    Disc brakes on a road bike are all hype. Put some Kool-Stops on
    whatever calipers you get and you'll stop just fine. Discs limit
    yourability to mount fenders and racks which are far more important
    on a
    commuter.

    I used to commute all year round, and I have slid into the back of a
    car due to water on the rims keeping the brakes from grabbing. the
    reviews I have read have been very positive toward the disc brakes on
    the road bikes. I appreciate your opinion, but I'm not convinced that
    discs are a waste of time.

    --
    I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
    You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

  5. In article
    <[email hidden]>landotter

    Quoted message said:
    Sparky said:

    . Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    Quoted message said:

    It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
    current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched,
    orjust right.

    Thanks. that sounds like a useful approach. My current bike has
    straight bars, and I am looking to go to drops. Is there any
    adjustment needed to the virtual top tube length? Drops seem to extend
    the reach. Thanks.

    --
    I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
    You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

  6. Sparky said:

    In article
    <[email hidden]>landotter

    Quoted message said:
    Sparky said:

    I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes
    (for the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00.


    Disc brakes on a road bike are all hype. Put some Kool-Stops on
    whatever calipers you get and you'll stop just fine. Discs limit
    yourability to mount fenders and racks which are far more important
    on a
    commuter.

    I used to commute all year round, and I have slid into the back of a
    car due to water on the rims keeping the brakes from grabbing. the
    reviews I have read have been very positive toward the disc brakes on
    the road bikes. I appreciate your opinion, but I'm not convinced that
    discs are a waste of time.

    --
    I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
    You can download it athttp://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

    Well, you're a Mac user, so I guess you need a bit of a handicap--but
    I've been commuting near twenty years rain and dry with caliper
    brakes, and they work fine.

  7. Sparky said:

    In article
    <[email hidden]>landotter

    Quoted message said:
    Sparky said:

    . Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.


    It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
    current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched,
    orjust right.

    Thanks. that sounds like a useful approach. My current bike has
    straight bars, and I am looking to go to drops. Is there any
    adjustment needed to the virtual top tube length? Drops seem to extend
    the reach. Thanks.

    I ride the same top tube length on my flat bar city bike and my drop
    bar bike, which probably doesn't mean much.

  8. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    . Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    Quoted message said:

    It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
    current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched,
    orjust right.

    Thanks. that sounds like a useful approach. My current bike has
    straight bars, and I am looking to go to drops. Is there any
    adjustment needed to the virtual top tube length? Drops seem to extend
    the reach. Thanks.

    If this is your first road bike with drop bars, I would definitely recommend
    against buying one without riding first. There are a whole lot of things
    that go into proper fit on a road bike, and getting one set up properly will
    save you a lot of grief (and possibly a lot of money if the original idea
    didn't work out and became a very expensive garage decoration). Even if it
    means traveling a pretty good distance to find a shop that can help you out,
    it could very well be worth it. Once you're dialed in and all, buying bikes
    without test rides will be a lot less risky (although still an issue).

    Especially for the price range you're talking about, there will be benefits
    to having a good shop standing behind not just the fit, but the assembly and
    any warranty issues that might come up as well.

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

    "Sparky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In article
    <[email hidden]>landotter

    Quoted message said:
    Sparky said:

    . Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    Quoted message said:

    It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
    current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched,
    orjust right.

    Thanks. that sounds like a useful approach. My current bike has
    straight bars, and I am looking to go to drops. Is there any
    adjustment needed to the virtual top tube length? Drops seem to extend
    the reach. Thanks.

    --
    I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
    You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

  9. Sparky said:

    I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
    the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
    are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
    a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
    MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
    a compact frame is a very bad idea.

    As one major bicycle manufacturer wrote: "there's a disturbing trend
    among some bike companies to re-tool their road frames by shortening the
    seat tube and slanting the top tube down from the head tube. This new
    design "breakthrough," they argue, saves frame weight. And if you take
    their claim literally, they're right - a shorter seat tube does make a
    bare frame a little lighter. What they don't tell you is that their
    complete bicycle actually weighs more than a bike with a conventional
    geometry. Why? You have to use longer (and therefore heavier) seatposts
    and stems on smaller frames to fit the rider properly, and their added
    weight more than off-sets the few grams saved by their sloping top tube
    frames."

    Disc brakes are rare on road bikes, as they really are unnecessary, even
    in rain, but if you've got your heart set on disc brakes on a road bike
    look at the Novara Element, "http://www.rei.com/product/744808#"

    With the REI dividend it'd be under $1000. Get an REI Visa card first,
    and save another 5%. Or wait for a sale, as often REI has 15-20% off on
    Novara bicycles (no dividend but the 5% for the Visa card still applies
    on sale items).

    If the size isn't right, REI gives you no trouble on exchanges,
    something that is not the case at most other bicycle retailers.

  10. SMS said:
    Sparky said:

    I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
    the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
    are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
    a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
    MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
    a compact frame is a very bad idea.

    [drivelsnip]

    That's [censored]. 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
    [censored] to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
    frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.

  11. landotter said:

    That's [censored]. 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
    [censored] 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.

  12. In article <[email hidden]>

    SMS said:

    Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most
    riders, a compact frame is a very bad idea.

    The Schwinn Super Sport DBX is the bike I am most interested in, and
    it happens to have a compact frame. I have no religious affiliation to
    them one way or the other.

    Quoted message said:

    Disc brakes are rare on road bikes, as they really are unnecessary,
    even in rain, but if you've got your heart set on disc brakes on a
    road bike look at the Novara Element,
    "http://www.rei.com/product/744808#"

    Quoted message said:

    With the REI dividend it'd be under $1000. Get an REI Visa card
    first, and save another 5%. Or wait for a sale, as often REI has
    15-20% off on Novara bicycles (no dividend but the 5% for the Visa
    card still applies on sale items).

    Quoted message said:

    If the size isn't right, REI gives you no trouble on exchanges,
    something that is not the case at most other bicycle retailers.

    That one is also in my sights. It looks like a great bike. However, I
    am looking at scoring a new Schwinn DBX for about $700, which is a few
    hundred less than the Element.

    It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
    truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the wrong
    side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he pulled out
    of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down. Scary, I had
    to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and the bike into
    the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking their horns, as
    he was an oblivious SOB.

    --
    I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
    You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

  13. Sparky said:

    In article <[email hidden]>

    SMS said:

    Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most
    riders, a compact frame is a very bad idea.

    The Schwinn Super Sport DBX is the bike I am most interested in, and
    it happens to have a compact frame. I have no religious affiliation to
    them one way or the other.

    Quoted message said:

    Disc brakes are rare on road bikes, as they really are unnecessary,
    even in rain, but if you've got your heart set on disc brakes on a
    road bike look at the Novara Element,
    "http://www.rei.com/product/744808#"
    With the REI dividend it'd be under $1000. Get an REI Visa card
    first, and save another 5%. Or wait for a sale, as often REI has
    15-20% off on Novara bicycles (no dividend but the 5% for the Visa
    card still applies on sale items).
    If the size isn't right, REI gives you no trouble on exchanges,
    something that is not the case at most other bicycle retailers.

    That one is also in my sights. It looks like a great bike. However, I
    am looking at scoring a new Schwinn DBX for about $700, which is a few
    hundred less than the Element.

    That's a fair enough price I guess. Considering the no-name wheel
    components, it certainly isn't worth the retail 1300 bucks.

  14. Quoted message said:

    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 hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    landotter said:

    That's [censored]. 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
    [censored] 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.

  15. Sparky said:

    It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
    truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the wrong
    side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he pulled out
    of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down. Scary, I had
    to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and the bike into
    the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking their horns, as
    he was an oblivious SOB.

    I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off coupons
    for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't usually
    exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate, and it's down
    to $836 versus $700.

    In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best $1000
    bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this bicycle a long
    time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200 difference soon enough.
    Run like hell away from any compact frame road bicycle.

  16. Mike Jacoubowsky said:
    Quoted message said:

    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.


    That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also an
    advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
    could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss? Inventory
    has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike shop, especially
    in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes to wait.

  17. SMS said:
    landotter said:

    That's [censored]. 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.

    Quoted message said:

    You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
    [censored] 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.

    Please regal us with all the details, oh Wise One!

  18. landotter said:
    SMS said:
    Sparky said:

    I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
    the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
    $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
    are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
    a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
    MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
    be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.

    Quoted message said:

    Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
    a compact frame is a very bad idea.

    [drivelsnip]

    That's [censored]. 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.

    Agreed. For someone who wants a high(er) handlebar position, a sloping
    TT makes a whole lot of sense.

    Quoted message said:


    You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
    [censored] to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
    frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.

  19. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    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.


    That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also
    an advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
    could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss?
    Inventory has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike
    shop, especially in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes
    to wait.

    Inventory is unquestionably a nightmare. To cover all the sizes, models &
    colors available is simply impossible; a retailer must try to balance the
    needs of their own customers with the correct available product. But sizing
    is not an area where corners should be cut, at least not if you give more
    than lip service to the idea that people come in more variations that small,
    medium & large.

    Giant did try to eliminate a whole lot of sizes by claiming that their
    innovative compact design allowed more flexibility for fit. Dealers loved
    it, at least initially, because they could stock so much less inventory,
    *and* it gave customers the idea that sizing was no more difficult for
    buying a road bike than socks. But ultimately market forces (and
    intelligence) won out and people recognized that frame "height" was no more
    important than effective top tube length ("effective" meaning the distance
    forward from the bottom bracket).

    People are reasonably adaptable; the need for 1cm frame height increments is
    generally recognized as wasteful (added complexity with little benefit). But
    3cm increments is probably the limit, with the issue often being that the
    reduction on available sizes yields too great a difference in top tube
    length.

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

    "Mike Kruger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Mike Jacoubowsky said:
    Quoted message said:

    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.


    That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also
    an advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
    could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss?
    Inventory has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike
    shop, especially in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes
    to wait.

  20. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Mike Kruger said:
    Mike Jacoubowsky said:
    Quoted message said:

    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.


    That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also an
    advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
    could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss? Inventory
    has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike shop, especially
    in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes to wait.

    Sounds like the best of both worlds to me: the manufacturer offers as
    many sizes as anyone could want (short of a custom frame) and compact
    sizing (and the concommitant availability of long seatposts and more
    stem sizes) allow for smaller frame inventories, if that's what the shop
    desires.

    For my part, I see compact sizing from the perspective of a used-bike
    trader: fewer frame sizes means a greater chance that a given used bike
    will fit a given buyer.

    --
    Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
    "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
    to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.