Originally Posted by crushkilldstroy
not trying to be a pain in the ass, but how are horizontal top tubes functionally inferior? are we talking stiffness here? and would it even matter to someone like me who never races his bike aside from the occasional alleycat?
I'm a relative newb, so I'm not going to pass myself off as an authority. However, in this thread:
makes for a stiffer frame (smaller triangles) + more clearance for your legs when sprinting. I like em'.
and, from the previous
Bowery thread:
less material- less weight...
... stiffer frame as well. Stiffer out of the saddle, I dunno if the long post can flex when you're seated.
The UCI ban on the TCR frame was initiated by competing bike makers, that filed complaints. The advantage was that the bike could be made lighter and stiffer without resorting to spending lots of money.
A couple of years later, everyone realised that they could do the same thing and petioned the UCI to unban the compact frames and now just about everybody makes one.
So, I'm not the one saying it. I'm quoting others. To be fair, I'm quoting all that out of context - I cut all the grousing out about how ugly sloped top tubes are.
I'm not a good enough rider to tell the difference, myself. I'm just taking issue with the notion that sloping top tubes and compact frames are useless... they have functional benefits, but they're untraditional and not to everyone's tastes.