A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 28th 12, 04:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,323
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/28/2012 5:53 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

As you said the slope of the TT is immaterial so IMO there is no (fit)
reasons to exclude these frames in your friends choice.


If you accept the old Midas Muffler logic, that's true. The other shop
welds a bunch of pipes onto the muffler they have in stock and assure
the customer, "Fit? We'll _make_ it fit."

You can take a few sizes of compact frames and use various seat posts,
cut the threadless steer tube to length, and use different angle and
reach stems, and "make it fit." But it isn't optimal. It's less
comfortable, you have excessive seat post flex, you can't mount enough
usable bottle cages, etc..

Unfortunately you'd drank the Kool Aid.


Ads
  #22  
Old April 28th 12, 05:36 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Lou Holtman[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 628
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

Op 28-4-2012 17:44, SMS schreef:
On 4/28/2012 5:53 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

As you said the slope of the TT is immaterial so IMO there is no (fit)
reasons to exclude these frames in your friends choice.


If you accept the old Midas Muffler logic, that's true. The other shop
welds a bunch of pipes onto the muffler they have in stock and assure
the customer, "Fit? We'll _make_ it fit."

You can take a few sizes of compact frames and use various seat posts,
cut the threadless steer tube to length, and use different angle and
reach stems, and "make it fit." But it isn't optimal. It's less
comfortable, you have excessive seat post flex, you can't mount enough
usable bottle cages, etc..

Unfortunately you'd drank the Kool Aid.



I drank nothing. You keep saying something that isn't true. I tried to
show you.
You see an excessive extended seatpost? Frame has two waterbottle mounts
which can be used normally, bike rides as comfortable as the bike with
the hortizontal TT, normal 110 mm stem etc. I know because I have both
and ride both. Do you? You just parroting someone else, who was wrong in
the first place. If you like the look of a horizontal TT better that is
OK with me, but if your advise to your friend is that this is the only
way he can be fitted properly on a bike, you are wrong.

Lou
  #23  
Old April 28th 12, 07:38 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Peter Cole[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,572
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/28/2012 8:53 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op 28-4-2012 11:54, SMS schreef:
On 4/28/2012 2:03 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

The toptube is also slightly sloped. Some people qualify that as
'wrecked' and limiting their choice enormously.

Lou


I'm sure that you are aware that the slope of the top tube is
immaterial, it's the geometry and dimensions. You can look at what
Bianchi has done by looking at how the frame has shrunk over time.

Cannondale summarized it well:

"there's a disturbing trend among some bike companies to re-tool their
road frames by shortening the seat tube and slanting the top tube down
from the head tube. This new design "breakthrough," they argue, saves
frame weight. And if you take their claim literally, they're right - a
shorter seat tube does make a bare frame a little lighter. What they
don't tell you is that their complete bicycle actually weighs more than
a bike with a conventional geometry. Why? You have to use longer (and
therefore heavier) seatposts and stems on smaller frames to fit the
rider properly, and their added weight more than off-sets the few grams
saved by their sloping top tube frames."

The manufacturer saves money of course. Not only does the cost of
materials go down slightly, but most manufacturers reduces the number of
size SKUs and use longer seat posts and different stems and fork
lengths. Instead of 8-10 frame sizes you can now make 5-6.

Unless the rider is very short, a the geometry of the the compact frame
does not place the rider in the optimum position for handling and
comfort.

Throw in some clever marketing catch phrases about how a compact frame
is lighter and stiffer, to justify the change, and once there are few
alternatives you leave the bike shops no choice other than to parrot the
manufacturer's marketing. Sadly, most customers do little research and
don't understand why their new bicycle is more uncomfortable, and rides
poorer than their old one.

It's especially instructive and amusing to see how the after-market
parts and accessory industry responded to compact frames.

Look at something as mundane as bottle cages. On some smaller size
frames, the manufacturer dropped one set of braze-ons because there
simply was no longer room for a second bottle. But some left the second
set of braze-ons even though there really wasn't room for the second
bottle. Cage manufacturers responded with products like
http://www.mellowveloblog.com/?p=535 " it’s perfect for those of us
who find that the small frames we ride are not well suited for carrying
two bottles. The bottoms bump into each other and the low or sloping top
bar leaves little room to remove and replace the bottles."

Seatposts are another issue. Since the seatposts are longer a lot of
riders found that with a lighter carbon seatpost there was far too much
flex so they switched to a heavier aluminum seat post. You used to
almost never hear of a broken seat post because a properly sized
standard frame has a pretty short seat post. Now you often see broken
seat posts, and there have been a slew of recalls, and not just on
carbon seat posts.

There are major disadvantages to the rider of the smaller frame, but
major advantages to the manufacturer. Sheldon Brown stated it
succinctly: "Manufacturers like compact frames because they are more
versatile in terms of fit. Usually 3 or 4 sizes are enough to fit 98% of
customers. This saves a lot of money for a manufacturer who doesn't need
to deal with so many different sizes."



As you said the slope of the TT is immaterial so IMO there is no (fit)
reasons to exclude these frames in your friends choice. The extreme
compact geometry is from the past for roadframes. 90% have slightly
sloped toptubes even Cannondale so what are they talking about:

http://www.cannondale.com/nld/2012/b...ite-road/caad8

Headtube angle 73 degree-sh, seattube angle 73 degree-ish, wheeldistance
1000 mm-ish, so it comes down to (effective) toptube length; that's it.
I have a roadbike with a horizontal TT and a roadbike with a sloping
toptube. There is no difference whatsoever between those frames fit
wise. The frame with the sloping TT comes in 7 sizes and it was easy to
find one that fits me. The only difference is headtube length. The frame
with the horizontal TT needs a more upright stem and/or more spacers.
Personally I don't really like the look of it, but it doesn't bother me
either.

https://picasaweb.google.com/101076538433373858645/SlopingVersusHorizontalTT?authkey=Gv1sRgCI2Qr-ChrNW4xwE#


Lou


Very interesting, thanks for taking the time.
  #24  
Old April 29th 12, 01:00 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
john B.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,603
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 08:44:03 -0700, SMS
wrote:

On 4/28/2012 5:53 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

As you said the slope of the TT is immaterial so IMO there is no (fit)
reasons to exclude these frames in your friends choice.


If you accept the old Midas Muffler logic, that's true. The other shop
welds a bunch of pipes onto the muffler they have in stock and assure
the customer, "Fit? We'll _make_ it fit."

You can take a few sizes of compact frames and use various seat posts,
cut the threadless steer tube to length, and use different angle and
reach stems, and "make it fit." But it isn't optimal. It's less
comfortable, you have excessive seat post flex, you can't mount enough
usable bottle cages, etc..

Unfortunately you'd drank the Kool Aid.


And unfortunately you are wrong. The sloping top tube simply allows a
shorter seat tube - to fit those with short legs - it has no effect on
the geometry of the bike, assuming that by geometry you are referring
to the bike's relationship with the ground and not simply its
appearance to a casual passer-by.

One can built a bike with no top tube, sloping top tube or horizontal
top tube with no geometry effecting changes whatsoever. The height of
the seat tube simply changes.
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #25  
Old April 29th 12, 06:24 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On Apr 27, 8:31 am, SMS wrote:
Does any major manufacturer still makes non-compact frame road bikes for
sale in the U.S.?

Friend is looking for a new road bike and is about to give up on shops
and go to bikesdirect.com. He's willing to spend about $2K, which rules
out all the custom frames which are still normal size. He needs a 56cm
frame.

There are still a couple of touring bikes made in non-compact frame
designs, but he wants something lighter (the touring bikes are all steel
frames and the wheels are heavier as well).


My Miyata was 56 cm. Light, steel, sweet, cheap. *Beautiful* classic
design. I got it via ebay, but there are other venues.
  #26  
Old April 29th 12, 06:45 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,323
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/28/2012 10:24 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Apr 27, 8:31 am, wrote:
Does any major manufacturer still makes non-compact frame road bikes for
sale in the U.S.?

Friend is looking for a new road bike and is about to give up on shops
and go to bikesdirect.com. He's willing to spend about $2K, which rules
out all the custom frames which are still normal size. He needs a 56cm
frame.

There are still a couple of touring bikes made in non-compact frame
designs, but he wants something lighter (the touring bikes are all steel
frames and the wheels are heavier as well).


My Miyata was 56 cm. Light, steel, sweet, cheap. *Beautiful* classic
design. I got it via ebay, but there are other venues.


I think he'll go with a new Surly. The thing is that he's not interested
in making this a big project, he just wants to buy a bicycle. It
shouldn't be so hard, but it is.

It's very amusing to see people insisting that the only difference
between a compact frame and a traditional frame is that one has a
sloping top tube! If you look at the geometry specifications provided by
each manufactures, it's very clear that this is not the case.

Good quote by Grant Peterson at
http://www.renaissancebicycles.com/rivendell/

The problem is that the bicycle dealers had no choice but to adopt the
same rationalizations as the manufacturers when it came to compact frames.
  #27  
Old April 29th 12, 11:01 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Lou Holtman[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 628
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

Op 29-4-2012 7:45, SMS schreef:
On 4/28/2012 10:24 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Apr 27, 8:31 am, wrote:
Does any major manufacturer still makes non-compact frame road bikes for
sale in the U.S.?

Friend is looking for a new road bike and is about to give up on shops
and go to bikesdirect.com. He's willing to spend about $2K, which rules
out all the custom frames which are still normal size. He needs a 56cm
frame.

There are still a couple of touring bikes made in non-compact frame
designs, but he wants something lighter (the touring bikes are all steel
frames and the wheels are heavier as well).


My Miyata was 56 cm. Light, steel, sweet, cheap. *Beautiful* classic
design. I got it via ebay, but there are other venues.


I think he'll go with a new Surly. The thing is that he's not interested
in making this a big project, he just wants to buy a bicycle. It
shouldn't be so hard, but it is.

It's very amusing to see people insisting that the only difference
between a compact frame and a traditional frame is that one has a
sloping top tube! If you look at the geometry specifications provided by
each manufactures, it's very clear that this is not the case.


Can you give an example of this so we know what we are talking about? If
a look at the geometry of the Surly you mentioned this is exactly the
same for a 56 cm framesize as my sloping frame.

Good quote by Grant Peterson at
http://www.renaissancebicycles.com/rivendell/


According to that definition almost all frames with a sloping TT are
expanded frames which is good according to Grant. So the choice is
enormous for your friend. Maybe you should have give an definition of a
compactframe from the beginning.

The problem is that the bicycle dealers had no choice but to adopt the
same rationalizations as the manufacturers when it came to compact frames.


Yeah, yeah it is a conspiracy.
However, make sure your friend get a bike fully equipped with Ultegra 10
speed for less than 2K USD. For 1300 USD he should get a bike fully
equipped with Shimano 105.

Lou

  #28  
Old April 29th 12, 08:01 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane Hebert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 628
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/28/2012 5:03 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

snip

The toptube is also slightly sloped. Some people qualify that as
'wrecked' and limiting their choice enormously.


Well I have a Specialized Tarmac that fits me like a glove and it has a
fairly bent top tube. I don't consider it wrecked.

For the Bianchi Volpe in question, I would miss the lugged frame most of
all if I traded in my old one for that one. Just because I like the look.
  #29  
Old April 29th 12, 08:22 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,323
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/29/2012 12:01 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 4/28/2012 5:03 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

snip

The toptube is also slightly sloped. Some people qualify that as
'wrecked' and limiting their choice enormously.


Well I have a Specialized Tarmac that fits me like a glove and it has a
fairly bent top tube. I don't consider it wrecked.

For the Bianchi Volpe in question, I would miss the lugged frame most of
all if I traded in my old one for that one. Just because I like the look.


Actually Bianchi's geometry has remained pretty good, at least for some
of the steel models. I went back and compared the specs between 2012 and
2006 on their steel models and they are similar, though it's hard to
compare because the Bianchi USA web site is so poorly done.

One big decontenting at Bianchi took place from in 2006 for the Brava,
and 2003 for the Volpe. When did they drop the lugged frame?

The Brava's problem is the CF fork. The Volpe has a steel fork which is
well worth the extra $200 (besides having other upgrades).

I think it'll come down to the Surly Pacer (with a crankset plus front
and rear derailleur change will be about $300), the Bianchi Volpe, or
something from Habanero.

  #30  
Old April 30th 12, 02:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,900
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 04/29/2012 03:22 PM, SMS wrote:
On 4/29/2012 12:01 PM, Duane Hebert wrote:
On 4/28/2012 5:03 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

snip

The toptube is also slightly sloped. Some people qualify that as
'wrecked' and limiting their choice enormously.


Well I have a Specialized Tarmac that fits me like a glove and it has a
fairly bent top tube. I don't consider it wrecked.

For the Bianchi Volpe in question, I would miss the lugged frame most of
all if I traded in my old one for that one. Just because I like the look.


Actually Bianchi's geometry has remained pretty good, at least for some
of the steel models. I went back and compared the specs between 2012 and
2006 on their steel models and they are similar, though it's hard to
compare because the Bianchi USA web site is so poorly done.

One big decontenting at Bianchi took place from in 2006 for the Brava,
and 2003 for the Volpe. When did they drop the lugged frame?

The Brava's problem is the CF fork. The Volpe has a steel fork which is
well worth the extra $200 (besides having other upgrades).

I think it'll come down to the Surly Pacer (with a crankset plus front
and rear derailleur change will be about $300), the Bianchi Volpe, or
something from Habanero.


Not sure when Bianchi dropped the lugged frame. I bought mine in 1994
but it was a 93 model.

Looking at the geometry for the 2012 Volpe, they have 9 "sizes" so I
don't see any big difference from mine. I think that when I bought it,
for a size 52 there were 2 choices of TT length. The size then as the
seat tube lenght IIRC. Now there seems to be only one TT length per AS
but given that you can change stems I don't see a big problem. They
still have more selection than the Specialized Tarmac that has 6 basic
sizes.

I would have bought one of their road bikes when I was shopping for one
but Bianchi is not readily available in Montreal for some reason and I
prefer to have a bike that I can get parts for easily from the LBS. I
would not have any problem recommending a Bianchi. I still ride mine
and it's nearly 20 years old.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Opinions on two different makes of bikes [email protected] General 28 September 25th 07 03:10 AM
Compact road crankset on a MTB frame...Bonus external bearing content Barnard Frederick Techniques 8 May 20th 06 01:28 PM
FA: Giant TCR Compact Road frame Wade Summers Marketplace 0 February 18th 05 09:04 PM
Compact Chainsets & Road Bikes [Not Responding] UK 23 December 17th 04 10:41 AM
Compact frame vs Traditional Frame geometry Dennis Vaughn Techniques 39 September 4th 03 02:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.