Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

Better eye candy: traditional frame bike or compact geometry frame bike?

  • traditional

    Votes: 88 60.7%
  • compact

    Votes: 47 32.4%
  • other

    Votes: 10 6.9%
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,302 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I decided to start this bc I think traditional framed bikes look better (more frame, less components and I prefer the beauty of a frame over components), but I get the impression that a lot of people find the compacts more aesthetically pleasing. So let's see what the consensus is amont RBR'ers. I'm sure there will be a lot of loyalty to what the person rides.

edit: I started riding in 86, am old school (friction shifters), and have only ever owned traditional frames.
 

·
Incredibly slow
Joined
·
545 Posts
Since you are only asking aesthetics, for me the traditional geometry looks best (especially with chrome lugs and a quill stem, and yes I am an old fart). I don't mind a slightly rising top tube either, but I don't like the really compact designs. They look to me more like the manufacturer saved money by using a hardtail mountain bike frame design.

Functionally, Rocco has the right answer.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,767 Posts
Geez. Who cares? Another poll that pigeon holes people and that doesn't offer real choices.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,302 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
that's why I included "other", like the other choices it gives people the option to explain themselves (like Terry B did). What other choices should I have included other than "other"? I think this simple survey accomplishes what I was trying to accomplish best.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,767 Posts
Friction_Shifter said:
that's why I included "other", like the other choices it gives people the option to explain themselves (like Terry B did). What other choices should I have included other than "other"? I think this simple survey accomplishes what I was trying to accomplish best.

Well, then here: maybe A; maybe B; maybe C; maybe none of the above.
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
well as frames get bigger

compact gets uglier. can handle a very slight slope
 

·
Self-Banned
Joined
·
16,905 Posts
terry b said:
Don't prefer traditional and don't like compact. I like a slight slope. So I voted "other."

Actually, I must admit I like a traditional frame or one with a slight slope. My Time has a slight slope. I'm not very fond of true compact frames but on the other hand it's not a big deal either way. I want what fits me the best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
695 Posts
I like traditional best. Probably because I first got into cycling in the '80s. I agree with the above post regarding the larger frames. When the head tube starts to rival the seat tube in size, it makes the frame look strange.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
is funny... my mates reckon I look silly on a compact frame because of my height rather than the bike looking silly with a tall seat post - go figure:p

From an engineering perspective I reckon if the seat post gets too tall you are losing structural rigidity - with rigidity improving as you approach the shape of an equilateral triangle. Then again I don't build bikes - only buildings.
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
funny, blame the rider

Aussie Carl said:
is funny... my mates reckon I look silly on a compact frame because of my height rather than the bike looking silly with a tall seat post - go figure:p

From an engineering perspective I reckon if the seat post gets too tall you are losing structural rigidity - with rigidity improving as you approach the shape of an equilateral triangle. Then again I don't build bikes - only buildings.
"your bike doesn't look funny, you are too tall!" LMAO

yup, the more support you have closer to the mass (you) the more rigid it will be.
man I remember the day when you measured part of the fit by 'a handful of seatpost'.
 

·
Steaming piles of opinion
Joined
·
10,503 Posts
atpjunkie said:
"your bike doesn't look funny, you are too tall!" LMAO

yup, the more support you have closer to the mass (you) the more rigid it will be.
man I remember the day when you measured part of the fit by 'a handful of seatpost'.
Yep, and we had a name for the style of bike you could easily stand in front of the saddle on.

They were called "Ladies' bikes," and they were made that way so you could get on wearing a skirt.

Always saddens me to see folks fall for the "safe standover height" marketing against proper top tubes. They'd be safer still if they just learned how to mount and ride a bike properly. I don't know whether to blame the lawyers, the marketers, or an ignorant buying public for this vast conspiracy against my personal happiness.

Same with the "smaller triangles are stiffer and lighter" silliness. The size of the only triangle that matters - the distance between your butt, feet, and hands - doesn't change. Compacts only move the bracing away from the force points, which almost never yields a good result in a stiffness vs weight calculation. If this makes sense, why not make only one BMX -size frame, with 250mm stems and 500mm seatposts?

Still, "compacts" do have their place. Not all of them are hideous, and I can respect those who feel differently than I do. Especially if they wear skirts when they ride. :D
 

·
trying to HTFU...
Joined
·
1,875 Posts
my kestrel has a sloping top tube, only it slopes forward towards the
head tube. i really like the way it looks, otherwise i'm for a traditionally
shaped and proportioned frame. except for tt bikes like the scott plasma,
hed tt04.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
432 Posts
Just a little counterpoint. There are beater bikes that have springs under their seats. A long seatpost in a compact frame is designed to take the flex of the weight of the rider, and doesn't it possibly just a tad, make the ride a little bit less jarring as a result? Not so much a bad thing.

Now, don't get me wrong. I have a full custom bike and the top tube has a very tiny downslope, but you really can't see it from looking at the bike because it's so slight. I like it.
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
but that shock absorbtion as you put it

of having a longer seatpost is in actuality how should I say 'flex'. while it may make a smoother ride it also is robbing you of power and making you less stable. just imagine a chair on a single leg, the longer the leg gets the more sway (fore aft and side to side) is available.

I'd prefer to get a smoother ride out of better materials or better design than having a part that is supposed to be stable flex.

this is just another marketing ploy turning a lemon into lemonade. what compacts do is save the mfr money by reducing SKUs. everything else is marketing hype to make the decision look like the consumer was in mind. (I'm in marketing but not bicycle industry)

now a compact triangle on a BMX bike,Dirt Jumper, DH MTB makes sense and ytes it does produce a stiffer triangle. These bikes though spend 90% of their lives with the rider standing. You don't land a 7' elevator drop seated. these bikes have saddle positions that would fall under the 'too low to be functionally pedaled while seated' category.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,767 Posts
atpjunkie said:
of having a longer seatpost is in actuality how should I say 'flex'. while it may make a smoother ride it also is robbing you of power and making you less stable. just imagine a chair on a single leg, the longer the leg gets the more sway (fore aft and side to side) is available.

I'd prefer to get a smoother ride out of better materials or better design than having a part that is supposed to be stable flex.

this is just another marketing ploy turning a lemon into lemonade. what compacts do is save the mfr money by reducing SKUs. everything else is marketing hype to make the decision look like the consumer was in mind. (I'm in marketing but not bicycle industry)

now a compact triangle on a BMX bike,Dirt Jumper, DH MTB makes sense and ytes it does produce a stiffer triangle. These bikes though spend 90% of their lives with the rider standing. You don't land a 7' elevator drop seated. these bikes have saddle positions that would fall under the 'too low to be functionally pedaled while seated' category.
And the whine about seatpost flex on compacts or semi-compacts is just that: a whine. It's like the carping of the "steel is real" crowd or the lugged luddites: it completely ignores details of the design in favor of making some stupid blanket statement.
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
11,979 Posts
alienator said:
And the whine about seatpost flex on compacts or semi-compacts is just that: a whine. It's like the carping of the "steel is real" crowd or the lugged luddites: it completely ignores details of the design in favor of making some stupid blanket statement.
Blankets?? I didn't hear nothin' about no blankets!
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top