compact frame opinions?

dazed&confused said:

I wanted to hear some additional opinions regarding compact frames. I recently went to a bike shop and the salesman said I should be riding a compact frame. I'm long-waisted; a bit over 6 feet tall, but my inseem is only 33 inches. The salesman stated that a compact frame would fit me better since it has a lower standover height and a longer top tube. It made sense to me. Then the guy says that 40% percent of the bikes he sells are compact frames. Now I'm starting to think that either this guy has a bais towards them or has alot of them in stock and he's trying to move them.

So what is your opinion? Will a typical compact frame fit a long-waisted person like me better than a regular frame? Or does this guy have different motives for telling me this? 😕

Can't say what the guy's motives are. I was deadset on getting a standard geometry frame when I began looking this go-round, but ended up with a Merlin Agilis (compact geometry), after trying out quite a few. I am fairly long in the torso as well, though not very tall. I did find that I would have to go with either a much longer stem than I would prefer, or up a cm (or two) in frame size in many of the standard geometry mass-market frames. The effective top-tube, however, will also vary considerably among compact frames as well, so I would pay particular attention to the differences.

dazed&confused said:

I wanted to hear some additional opinions regarding compact frames. I recently went to a bike shop and the salesman said I should be riding a compact frame. I'm long-waisted; a bit over 6 feet tall, but my inseem is only 33 inches. The salesman stated that a compact frame would fit me better since it has a lower standover height and a longer top tube. It made sense to me. Then the guy says that 40% percent of the bikes he sells are compact frames. Now I'm starting to think that either this guy has a bais towards them or has alot of them in stock and he's trying to move them.

So what is your opinion? Will a typical compact frame fit a long-waisted person like me better than a regular frame? Or does this guy have different motives for telling me this? 😕

Sounds like he gave it to you strainght and didn't even throw in the BS about lighter, stiffer, and totally outperforms the traditional kind.

I agree with boudreaux; it's rare to find a salesman that doesn't present a trend (like compact geometry) with lots of hype. The fact that he sells mostly compact frames is likely more of a practical reality than a bias -- a number of major companies, like Giant, Specialized, and even LeMond, almost exclusively use compact designs these days.

And yes, compact frames can offer a break for those for a short inseam. Don't neglect the other aspects of your fitting -- if you're a bit disporportionately built and you're required to concentrate on a particular aspect of your fit, like standover height, take care to make sure you don't compromise other areas too much. Keep an eye on that reach.

Good luck!

dazed&confused said:

I wanted to hear some additional opinions regarding compact frames. I recently went to a bike shop and the salesman said I should be riding a compact frame. I'm long-waisted; a bit over 6 feet tall, but my inseem is only 33 inches. The salesman stated that a compact frame would fit me better since it has a lower standover height and a longer top tube. It made sense to me. Then the guy says that 40% percent of the bikes he sells are compact frames. Now I'm starting to think that either this guy has a bais towards them or has alot of them in stock and he's trying to move them.

So what is your opinion? Will a typical compact frame fit a long-waisted person like me better than a regular frame? Or does this guy have different motives for telling me this? 😕

That's one of the only reasons that I've heard for buying a compact frame over a standard frame that actually makes sense. The reason that 40% of the guy's bikes have compact geometry is probably just because so many manufacturers are going to that now.

boudreaux said:

Sounds like he gave it to you strainght and didn't even throw in the BS about lighter, stiffer, and totally outperforms the traditional kind.

He might've worked in the lighter, stiffer BS, but his main point to me was on fit for my mis-proportional body type.

meehs said:

That's one of the only reasons that I've heard for buying a compact frame over a standard frame that actually makes sense. The reason that 40% of the guy's bikes have compact geometry is probably just because so many manufacturers are going to that now.

Well, the bottom line is that there's very little difference, and while not necessarily lighter or stiffer than standards, there's nothing wrong with the design. You shouldn't hesitate to buy a compact frame if you prefer an example over a competetive standard-geometry model-- whether for a reason as critical as fit, or because you simply dig the color more.

Aside from the standover height aspect, it's a wash; buy what you like best.

dazed&confused said:

He might've worked in the lighter, stiffer BS, but his main point to me was on fit for my mis-proportional body type.

No. Entirely wrong attitude. You've got the properly proportioned body type. It's those freaks out there with the gangly legs that have screwed it all up.:p

boudreaux said:

Sounds like he gave it to you strainght and didn't even throw in the BS about lighter, stiffer, and totally outperforms the traditional kind.

Thanks for this discussion - as one about to change from a mtn bike to a road bike, compact vs traditional was another factor I had to wade through !!

Apart from marketing claims, is standover height the key (only ?) reason one would consider a compact frame over a traditional ???

My BF recently got the Specialized Allez Comp (He's 6' with about 33 inseam). It has a more compact frame and he loves it! I have a few other guys on my bike team that ride the Allez and really like it. If you are interested...look at the 2004's the 2005 will have less in the parts department than the 2004's.

lokstah said:

Well, the bottom line is that there's very little difference, and while not necessarily lighter or stiffer than standards, there's nothing wrong with the design. You shouldn't hesitate to buy a compact frame if you prefer an example over a competetive standard-geometry model-- whether for a reason as critical as fit, or because you simply dig the color more.

Aside from the standover height aspect, it's a wash; buy what you like best.

I agree with what you're saying. It's just that a lot of manufacturers are trying to push compact geometry as "lighter, stiffer, faster, etc..", which is complete BS. That's why I said that that's one of the only reasons I've heard that actually makes sense. One of the other reasons I'll accept is "I think it looks cooler", which is fine. Just don't try to force feed me a line of [censored] detailing all of the reasons that compact is better than standard geometry. You know? Having said that, I do think that a lot of the compact frames have a really cool look to them. There's definitely nothing wrong with compact geometry (IMO)!

bella636 said:

Thanks for this discussion - as one about to change from a mtn bike to a road bike, compact vs traditional was another factor I had to wade through !!

Apart from marketing claims, is standover height the key (only ?) reason one would consider a compact frame over a traditional ???

For me, I have a shorter torso, judging solely on standover height, I fit into a 52cm and a 54cm traditional. I didn't choose the 54 coz I was sitting on the front of the saddle and still barely have full grip of the handle bars. I could have got a shorter stem, but I felt very comfortable with a 52.

Also, I couldn't achieve the "neutral knee" thingy with the cranks at 3 and 9 o'clock. Could be that I have shorter upper leg compared to lower leg 😄
I could be I need a shorter crank, or maybe lower the seat, or maybe bring my saddle forward, etc...

Currently with my setup, I can tip-toe my bike, which many fitting guides say I shouldn't. But my legs are almost extended fully on the down stroke. Guess I have longer feet (size 9.5, not really that big for a 1.73m guy is it?).

Thing is that we all have different body types, some types of bike fit some group, some fit another group. Its a very "Grey Area", not really very specific.

To each their own. I happen to like the looks of compact frames over traditional geometry.