Re: Compact Geometry Question - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

02-06-2007, 04:33 AM

On Feb 5, 6:32 pm, "David L. Johnson" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:
> 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.

Reality, what a concept.
>
> 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.

Reality, what a conceptx2
>
> --
>
> 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