| Re: Compact Geometry Question
Scott wrote:
> Hi, I have been out of the road cycling scene for more than 10 years. I
> want to get back into it and I am looking for a new bike. I see a lot of
> bikes with "Compact" geometries. I have read that this is to make it
> easier to fit a bike to the customer because the manufacturer only needs
> to make a few frame sizes.
How does it work that fewer sizes will fit the same collection of
riders? A compact frame can possibly be jerry-rigged to be ridable by
more riders than a standard frame, in that you could get on/off a bike
that is way to big for you if the top tube doesn't bash up the boys, but
that is not the same as saying it fits.
On the other hand, if you are like me, a "perfect 56", then most
manufacturers will make a bike that fits you well, sloping or flat top
tube. But it does not offer any advantage, except in terms of being
able to make do with a bike that really doesn't fit. Why spend
thousands of dollars for that?
>
> Can anyone describe to me the pros and cons of these geometries vs more
> traditional ones?
I think they are ugly. But, then, most new bikes are.
--
David L. Johnson
It is a scientifically proven fact that a mid life crisis can only be
cured by something racy and Italian. Bianchis and Colnagos are a lot
cheaper than Maserattis and Ferraris. -- Glenn Davies
|