Originally Posted by xrmattaz
Other than someone not caring for the appearance, what negatives can be said concerning a tighter frame??
Appearance counts, of course! But back to the question:
All things aren't created equal, of course, but if they were:
1. A compact frame has more rigid triangles because of smaller tubes, but has a longer seatpost and stem. Stem rigidity is OK with modern 1 1/8" stems, but seatpost rigidity is a limit. What it means is that a compact frame should be more rigid when you stand on pedals, but will be about the same when sitting. Since there are more stresses involved when standing, it's a benefit to the fast rider or the racer, but...
2. On a compact frame, the rear rack needs longer struts to link it to the seatstays. Longer struts mean less rigidity, and a longer seatpost swayed by the load means less rigidity, so a compact frame will be less rigid in touring situations, because one carries a load and one sits most or all the time.
3. Less possibilities for water bottles on a compact frame.
Regards,