Patman1776

There's been much discussion about "Compact Geometry" v.s. "Traditional" Geometry road bikes in this forum. In watching OLN's TDF coverage daily, I've noticed that Compact Geometry frames appear to outnumber the Traditional Geometry frames by a substantial margin. Are my eyes decieving me?......Is this just a fad, or are the pros on to something?.......I switched from a traditional frame ( 58cm '93 Trek 2300 CF/AL) to a compact (58cm '05 Pilot 5.2) and found the fit to be much better (could be just me). Looks aside, there's got to be something to this trend, eh?

johnny99

There are fit differences between standard geometry and compact geometry, especially in the smaller sizes. Compact geometry can, in theory, give a shorter rider more top tube length options without worrying about standover clearance. Most Tour de France racers are on the shorter side. Unfortunately, some manufacturers (e.g. Giant) negate the sizing feature by making fewer sizes than most other brands. To them, compact geometry means fewer sizes, and thus reduced manufacturing costs.

sydney

Only cave dwellers would not have noticed.

nitropowered

I compared my bike (56 Cannondale) and the bike shop mechanics bike (TCR Composite, Medium) and his bike is small. I would ride a medium as well. He's got about a foot of seatpost and a 140 stem on it. He says its quick and responsive but to squirrelly when the roads get bad.

I might consider a compact on my next bike because I hate it when my knees rub/hit the top tube when I sprint or climb hard.

Patman1776

I'm 6'1" with a shorter than average torso. The "virtual" top-tube length on the compact frames I've tried (Roubaix, OCR, Pilot) give me a better fit. The Pilot's was the best fit of the three. Again, it's a personal thing, but compact seems to work best for me..........I would like to add an Madone 5.9 SL to my stable, though

tribe3

The smaller triangle on a compact has to be stiffer than its traditional counterpart

johnny99

Why? Are you talking about only the triangle or the whole frame?

cydewaze

I have one compact (well, compact-ish) and one traditional. What I don't like about the compact is that there's less room to fit a large water bottle in the seat tube location (it hits the top tube). Of course, that could be due to the fact that my cheapo Supergo frame has the cage bolts mounted too high.

Al1943

And how many compact geometry frames have won the TdF?

Al

Al1943

Several, several, and several.

No compacts, maybe next year.

Al1943

Doesn't count, he was on EPO.

sydney

thewalrus

The compact geometry bikes I notice most in video coverage from the TDF are the S-Works Tarmac... very distinctive top tube:

Wurm

What the hell is "semi-compact"?? Either it's a sloping TT frame or it ain't.

Good old 73/73 'traditional' Eye-tai-yun geom fits and works for me just fine. Call me a retro-grouch or Luddite, that's OK - but if it works well, don't eff widdit.

Smoothie104

Manufactures are pushing compacts because its cheaper and easier to only make 4 frame sizes. The Pro's are riding them, becuase the manufacture pays them too. Guys sees compacts in the the TdF, guys buy them.

Marketing always wins.

bradb044

Spoken like someone in marketing. BTW, I agree 100%. First the manufacturer designs a bike to cut manufacturing costs (fewer frame sizes), the pros get paid to ride them, the great unwashed masses belive that the have to be the "squirrels nuts", the manufacturers get their wish that they get to sell more bikes that are cheaper to manufacture. I LOVE CAPITALISM !!!!!

Wurm

Yeah smoothie, I know all about the marketing thing - I work in a bike shop and get to wade through it every day. In fact, the only things close to trad geom we have on the shop floor right now are C'dale R2000, R900, R700 and a Trek 2300. Any trad geom's for Specialized seems to have gone the way of the do-do bird.

HOWEVAH, when you get past all of the "new & improved" hype, "oh, the back end is stiffer now", etc., I've yet to ride a compact geom that shows me a noticeable increase in stiffness or better handling as compared to a similar frame that's trad geom.

Just think: next year, we're supposed to be seeing 12v Campy clusters too. I hope I can get that grouppo before the rest of you slackers...

NOT!!

berny

It's wrong to call it compact 'goemetry' because the same geometry definitions can be achieved with either compact or tradition concepts.

I may also be too 'old school' but I just can't get amped about compact frame design.

jemoryl

Not strictly true. I ride a Basso Reef with compact geometry (size XL), but Basso makes the same frame in traditional geometry as well. Maybe what you say is true of Giant or some other huge manufacturer, but there are several other smallish builders who do the same thing as Basso.

classic1

Spot on berny. It should more correctly be called girls or unisex geometry.

RiDE

There you are. I was wondering what took you so long to come out from under your bridge. You're usually the first one to post something constructive every time there's a thread about compact geometry.

classic1

Iron Chef normally has a dig as well!

I could argue the point about limited sizing, etc, but this is more fun

RiDE

Yeah he usually says something about China and girls just like you do... but you're more consistent.

He says he likes the Roubaix because Ned Overend rides one so that makes it cool even though it has compact geometry.

Well, carry on with your pointless crusade.

classic1

If I can get one person to refer to 'unisex' geometry I will have succeded in my pointless quest!

berny

Yes, when I started riding, sloping top tubes were used on girls frames. We seemed to have different and some rather strange priorities back then