Could someone please explain clearly, the concept of compact frames!

Regards,
Brendon

In a nutshell a traditional frame is one with the top tube parallel to the ground. A compact frame is one where the top tube slopes downward as it moves back towards the seat post.

There's been a ton of discussion on the pro's and con's of these two frame types. My current bike has a compact frame, my next bike won't.

Zack

Any particular reason why?

I have a full size 23inch frame at the moment. With the compacts, do they have a smaller frame size, but the seat tube is sloped backwards, and have a longer seat post? and a longish top tupe? I find the only problems i have is when I sprint up-hill, and my knees just scrape the stem where it meets the forks. I don't bash myself, I just scrape it.

Brendon

The Idea with a compact frame is that by using a, for instance, fifty six cm top tube length, which would usually go with a bike with fifty six cm center to top seat tube, you have a fifty cm center to top measurement. This compact design saves six cm of seat tube(one of the thicker tubes) making the frame lighter and also stiffer(because the triangle is smaller). I like the way my compact bike rides, but I prefer the look of a conventional geometry steel frame. So I have both, but if I could only have one I would have to take the performance advantage of the compact.

The primary reason is it was manufactured before compact frames came out . I just picked up a '99 Lemond Nevada City. To me there's really no difference between a compact and traditional frame once I sling a leg over the seat and start riding - I can ride either one equally slow

Zack

Rev
I would think that instead of a triangle you have a parallelagram with a verticle (almost) stick coming out (the seat post) and that combination would be less stable than the convential frame.

I would think that it might be that it is easier to get a good fit that way though. I definitely like the looks of the convential fram though.

Joe