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
  #11  
Old April 27th 12, 08:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,900
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 04/27/2012 03:17 PM, SMS wrote:
On 4/27/2012 12:04 PM, Duane wrote:
On 04/27/2012 01:08 PM, SMS wrote:
On 4/27/2012 9:48 AM, Arthur Shapiro wrote:
In ,
wrote:

I told him to go with a Habanero titanium with Shimano 105.

Habanero is the obvious choice, and one can still purchase them
without the
arguably-silly threadless headsets.

That's true, but since the threaded forks and headsets have become
almost a boutique item, it now costs more for threaded. A threaded
headset and fork are preferable of course, but I don't think he'd pay
two hundred dollars more for it. You can correct the biggest problem
with threadless headsets with some after-market devices, i.e. see
http://www.octagoncycles.com/ and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oQYbZeQW0M.

For his riding, the Surly Pacer would be ideal, and still about $600
less than the Habanero even once he had the crankset changed to a
triple.


I believe that the Bianchi CRO-Moly bikes are still non-compact frames.
http://www.bianchiusa.com/bikes/road/


They've wrecked those too. Not quite compact, but "modified."


Even the steel ones toward the bottom? Looking at the Volpe, the frame
looks very similar to my Volpe from 1994.


Ads
  #12  
Old April 27th 12, 09:19 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom $herman (-_-)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 970
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/27/2012 11:39 AM, SMS wrote:
[...]
I told him to go with a Habanero titanium with Shimano 105. They sell
complete bicycles as well as just frames. Maybe he'll do it, since it's
much better than what he can get at bikesdirect, and he's pretty much
resigned to the fact that he can't buy what he wants at an LBS anymore
anyway, so whatever he gets it will have to be ordered from somewhere.
[...]


Do not Habanero bicycles pull strongly to the right?

(Old-timers on RBT will understand.)

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
Post Free or Die!
  #13  
Old April 27th 12, 09:45 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Michael Kaiser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On Apr 27, 10:31*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).


Has he looked at Bob Jackson Cycles? He'd have to build it up
himself, but the frame prices are very reasonable. I bought their
World Tour frame about 8 months ago and built up my commuter bike and
have been very happy with it. They also make lighter frames. See
he
http://www.bobjacksoncycles.co.uk/de...afkc6meo 1gh3
  #14  
Old April 27th 12, 09:47 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,724
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On Apr 27, 1:08*pm, SMS wrote:
On 4/27/2012 9:48 AM, Arthur Shapiro wrote:

In , *wrote:


I told him to go with a Habanero titanium with Shimano 105.


Habanero is the obvious choice, and one can still purchase them without the
arguably-silly threadless headsets.


That's true, but since the threaded forks and headsets have become
almost a boutique item, it now costs more for threaded. A threaded
headset and fork are preferable of course, but I don't think he'd pay
two hundred dollars more for it. You can correct the biggest problem
with threadless headsets with some after-market devices, i.e. see
http://www.octagoncycles.com/ and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oQYbZeQW0M.

For his riding, the Surly Pacer would be ideal, and still about $600
less than the Habanero even once he had the crankset changed to a triple.


I wonder if any of those stems will break where the holes are? This is
also not a good place to have any problems with a quick release coming
loose. I hope they used a close cam quick release.

Cheers
  #15  
Old April 28th 12, 01:54 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,323
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

On 4/27/2012 1:47 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Apr 27, 1:08 pm, wrote:
On 4/27/2012 9:48 AM, Arthur Shapiro wrote:

In , wrote:


I told him to go with a Habanero titanium with Shimano 105.


Habanero is the obvious choice, and one can still purchase them without the
arguably-silly threadless headsets.


That's true, but since the threaded forks and headsets have become
almost a boutique item, it now costs more for threaded. A threaded
headset and fork are preferable of course, but I don't think he'd pay
two hundred dollars more for it. You can correct the biggest problem
with threadless headsets with some after-market devices, i.e. see
http://www.octagoncycles.com/ and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oQYbZeQW0M.

For his riding, the Surly Pacer would be ideal, and still about $600
less than the Habanero even once he had the crankset changed to a triple.


I wonder if any of those stems will break where the holes are? This is
also not a good place to have any problems with a quick release coming
loose. I hope they used a close cam quick release.


Various versions of those have been around for many probably ten years
and I've never heard of any problems with them. Of course there probably
were not millions sold.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001V5GLHY
http://www.speedlifter.com




  #16  
Old April 28th 12, 10:03 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Lou Holtman[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 628
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

Op 27-4-2012 21:57, Duane schreef:
On 04/27/2012 03:17 PM, SMS wrote:
On 4/27/2012 12:04 PM, Duane wrote:
On 04/27/2012 01:08 PM, SMS wrote:
On 4/27/2012 9:48 AM, Arthur Shapiro wrote:
In ,
wrote:

I told him to go with a Habanero titanium with Shimano 105.

Habanero is the obvious choice, and one can still purchase them
without the
arguably-silly threadless headsets.

That's true, but since the threaded forks and headsets have become
almost a boutique item, it now costs more for threaded. A threaded
headset and fork are preferable of course, but I don't think he'd pay
two hundred dollars more for it. You can correct the biggest problem
with threadless headsets with some after-market devices, i.e. see
http://www.octagoncycles.com/ and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oQYbZeQW0M.

For his riding, the Surly Pacer would be ideal, and still about $600
less than the Habanero even once he had the crankset changed to a
triple.

I believe that the Bianchi CRO-Moly bikes are still non-compact frames.
http://www.bianchiusa.com/bikes/road/


They've wrecked those too. Not quite compact, but "modified."


Even the steel ones toward the bottom? Looking at the Volpe, the frame
looks very similar to my Volpe from 1994.



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

Lou
  #17  
Old April 28th 12, 10:18 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Lou Holtman[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 628
Default Who still makes non-compact frame road bikes?

Op 27-4-2012 18:39, SMS schreef:
The negatives
of the compact frame geometry are too great for him personally, but lets
not turn this thread into a debate over the relative merits of each
geometry.


Sure, but I'm really curious what those negatives are that he is willing
to limit his choice enormously. I'm not talking about the extreme
sloping geometry like what GIANT was offering years ago but slightly
sloping toptubes.

Lou
  #18  
Old April 28th 12, 10:54 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 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."
  #19  
Old April 28th 12, 11:19 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 2:18 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op 27-4-2012 18:39, SMS schreef:
The negatives
of the compact frame geometry are too great for him personally, but lets
not turn this thread into a debate over the relative merits of each
geometry.


Sure, but I'm really curious what those negatives are that he is willing
to limit his choice enormously. I'm not talking about the extreme
sloping geometry like what GIANT was offering years ago but slightly
sloping toptubes.


The problem here appears to be that you're focusing on the slope of the
top tube.

  #20  
Old April 28th 12, 01:53 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 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
 




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 01:51 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.