compact geometry hell

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Callistus Valerius

unread,
Feb 29, 2004, 6:52:02 PM2/29/04
to
Do people really like these ugly compact geometry bikes? When you stop
at the stoplight, how do you rest your leg on the top bar? We have some
really long red lights around here. It's too bad, now I wouldn't even
consider buying a LeMond bike.

The only thing in favor of it, is that you give the bike to a relative
or as a hand me down, because all you do is raise or lower the seat to fit
them.


Cipher

unread,
Feb 29, 2004, 7:50:46 PM2/29/04
to

Whiner...

--


Mike S.

unread,
Feb 29, 2004, 10:35:26 PM2/29/04
to

"Callistus Valerius" <jazz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CWu0c.15545$aT1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Uhh, for those of us built like a gorilla (long arms/torso, short legs),
compact frames are a godsend. Now I can actually straddle the TT AND have
the right length at the same time.

I haven't wanted a Lemond since the Lemond/Mitsubishi Rayon frame/fork I saw
in Adams Ave. bikes. Think Calfee and you have the right idea.

Oh, and straddling the TT still works, you just have to bend the other leg a
bit more.

Mike
Who loves my pair of compact frames...


Evan Evans

unread,
Feb 29, 2004, 11:13:51 PM2/29/04
to
Please! when you ride always look straight ahead. the whistling is driving us crazy!

Qui si parla Campagnolo

unread,
Mar 1, 2004, 8:54:28 AM3/1/04
to
jazzy-<< Do people really like these ugly compact geometry bikes? >><BR><BR>

Those that believe the marketing hype or are really small riders do.

Compact, like a lot of things 'bike' is being foisted onto the consumer. Most
of these things do nothing to put people on bikes and keep them there. Mostly
it is about the bike biz saving money cuz, like it or believe it or not, the
bike biz has been in trouble for years.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

Bruce Gilbert

unread,
Mar 1, 2004, 10:30:59 AM3/1/04
to
Peter, how can you say such a thing???? I saw you drive home in that
Ferrari.

Seriously though, the compact geometry frames represent a great savings to
the dealer and manufacturer. It means you have to stock a smaller range of
sizes for each bike model. Has your new fit-'em kit arrived yet? We saw it
at Interbike. It was developed by an orthopedic surgeon and an insurance
adjuster team. It has the ability to stretch or contract bone lengths to
accommodate almost anyone to any frame. This is going to be a great boon to
the bike biz. Why we can even sell it to the shoe stores too....

One thing we really should work on is a prop from Sleeper, you know the
Woody Allen film. They had a closet that was called the Orgasmatron. This
thing needs to be built into the new pro team issue seats. We'll get those
demographic numbers up there where they need to be in a year. You watch!
Between Berman & Berman, FashionTV and MTV, this thing is going to fly....

Bruce

"Qui si parla Campagnolo " <vecc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040301085428...@mb-m28.aol.com...

BaCardi

unread,
Mar 1, 2004, 12:50:45 PM3/1/04
to


Some frames aren't as compact as others. Seems like the Litespeeds,
Merlins, & other US brands have a tendency to have really extreme
sloping top tubes. And the Merckx, Pinarellos, and other Euro brands
seems to have less slope to the top tubes.

Maybe there should be a new category called "semi-compact"?

--


Dion Dock

unread,
Mar 1, 2004, 3:47:30 PM3/1/04
to
There is a reason they're in trouble.

How many brands of $200 shorts could you buy in 2000? Asssos.
How many brands of $200 shorts can you buy in 2004? Assos, Pearl Izumi,
Castelli, ...

How many brands of $350+ cranksets could you buy in 2000? Sweet Wings
How many brands of $350+ cranksets can you buy in 2004? Shimano, Campy,
Colnago, FSA, ...

They have given up on finding new customers and decided to milk the existing
ones.

-Dion

"Qui si parla Campagnolo " <vecc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040301085428...@mb-m28.aol.com...

...

Chris Zacho The Wheelman

unread,
Mar 1, 2004, 9:56:02 PM3/1/04
to
I can see a distinct advantage for mountain bikes, unless you think your
voice is too low...

"May you have the wind at your back.
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

Peter Cole

unread,
Mar 2, 2004, 7:53:28 AM3/2/04
to
"Dion Dock" <inv...@bounce.com> wrote in message
news:4043a164$1...@solnews.wv.mentorg.com...

> There is a reason they're in trouble.
>
> How many brands of $200 shorts could you buy in 2000? Asssos.
> How many brands of $200 shorts can you buy in 2004? Assos, Pearl Izumi,
> Castelli, ...
>
> How many brands of $350+ cranksets could you buy in 2000? Sweet Wings
> How many brands of $350+ cranksets can you buy in 2004? Shimano, Campy,
> Colnago, FSA, ...
>
> They have given up on finding new customers and decided to milk the existing
> ones.

Good point. Overheard a sales clerk mutter as he walked by to fetch a chi-chi
gee-gaw for a well heeled, clueless customer: "People have way too much f@$#%^
money".


Qui si parla Campagnolo

unread,
Mar 2, 2004, 10:00:47 AM3/2/04
to
Dion-<< How many brands of $200 shorts could you buy in 2000? Asssos.

How many brands of $200 shorts can you buy in 2004? Assos, Pearl Izumi,
Castelli, ... >><BR><BR>

But there are still well made and inexpensive shorts and bibs out there, like
Giordana and Descente.

Dion<< How many brands of $350+ cranksets could you buy in 2000? Sweet Wings


How many brands of $350+ cranksets can you buy in 2004? Shimano, Campy,
Colnago, FSA, ...

>><BR><BR>

But there are still well made and inexpensive cranksets out there from FSA,
Campagnolo, shimano.


Dion<< They have given up on finding new customers and decided to milk the
existing ones>><BR><BR>

Agree. The bike biz needs to put NEW people on bikes and keep them there.
Relaible, well made and ASSEMBLED bicycles that do what are promised.

Along with well maintained BIKE LANES, not multi-use paths, to make cycling
safer and more enjoyable. A $2 per gallon gas tax wouldn't hurt.

BUT NOT threadless and stoopid things like disc brakes on road bikes or
oversized hbars or crappy wheels outta boxes or carbon butt ends..etc..

Rick Onanian

unread,
Mar 2, 2004, 11:47:16 AM3/2/04
to
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:52:02 GMT, "Callistus Valerius"
<jazz...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Do people really like these ugly compact geometry bikes? When you stop

I have one and don't particularly like or dislike the compact
geometry. The bike fits.

>at the stoplight, how do you rest your leg on the top bar? We have some

I don't. How do you? I have one foot clicked into the pedal, and the
other on the ground, regardless of whether I'm riding my compact or
a standard frame.

> The only thing in favor of it, is that you give the bike to a relative
>or as a hand me down, because all you do is raise or lower the seat to fit
>them.

You also need to adjust the handlebar for reach and height. Both are
pretty easy to do with threadless stems, and height is reasonably
easy with threaded. Of course, that bit qualifies this as both a
response to a troll and troll in and of itself...
--
Rick Onanian

Richard Chan

unread,
Mar 2, 2004, 7:09:20 PM3/2/04
to
Rick Onanian <spam...@cox.net> wrote in message news:<1ce940p4gc7pmde09...@4ax.com>...

> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:52:02 GMT, "Callistus Valerius"

> .. Do people really like these ugly compact geometry bikes? When you stop...>

I think the compact geometry works for some people but here is a very
bad (or ugly) fit example: take a look at the current
T-Mobile/Telekom's Giants. Ullrich bike has ~2" headset spacers. Zabel
I think expressed (in one interview)that the off the shelve frame
doesn't fit him ... I hope T-Mobile doesn't have a bad season riding
those. DA10 seems to be doing well in functionality.

Ted Bennett

unread,
Mar 2, 2004, 8:43:01 PM3/2/04
to


Way to go Peter! That's all great stuff. Almost makes me forgive you
for the no-grease-on-crank spindle tapers-thing.

Just kidding; I know it's not much more than a religious disagreement.
But there is a battle raging at this moment on the fixed-gear list.

--
Ted Bennett
Portland OR

Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 2, 2004, 8:50:00 PM3/2/04
to
"Dion Dock" <inv...@bounce.com> wrote in message news:<4043a164$1...@solnews.wv.mentorg.com>...
> There is a reason they're in trouble.
>
> How many brands of $200 shorts could you buy in 2000? Asssos.
> How many brands of $200 shorts can you buy in 2004? Assos, Pearl Izumi,
> Castelli, ...
>
> How many brands of $350+ cranksets could you buy in 2000? Sweet Wings
> How many brands of $350+ cranksets can you buy in 2004? Shimano, Campy,
> Colnago, FSA, ...
>
> They have given up on finding new customers and decided to milk the existing
> ones.
>
> -Dion

Dear Dion,

Actually, given the law of supply and demand, don't rising
prices suggest that the manfacturers are not in trouble?

The flourishing market for $200 riding shorts and $350 cranks
suggests that so many people are willing to pay that much for
such wonderful items that more manufacturers are providing
exactly what the teeming masses are demanding.

Besides, it works both ways. WalMart's 18-speed mountain bike
is dipping dangerously close to the under-$50 price at which
I've sworn to buy one and ride it for at least a week.

Take heart,

Carl Fogel

Peter Storey

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 5:56:26 AM3/3/04
to
Ted Bennett <tedbe...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<tedbennett-F8F68...@news2.west.earthlink.net>...

> Way to go Peter! That's all great stuff. Almost makes me forgive you
> for the no-grease-on-crank spindle tapers-thing.
>
> Just kidding; I know it's not much more than a religious disagreement.
> But there is a battle raging at this moment on the fixed-gear list.

Well of course. If those bikes only had more parts, the list could
move on to more important matters like front derailleur
compatibilities.

Peter Storey

dvt

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 12:46:29 PM3/3/04
to
Carl Fogel wrote:
> WalMart's 18-speed mountain bike
> is dipping dangerously close to the under-$50 price at which
> I've sworn to buy one and ride it for at least a week.

According to Wal-Mart (http://tinyurl.com/kiro), the bike is 15-speed
(not 18). It has a 5-speed 14-28 freewheel with a triple crank (no
indication of chainring sizes). I didn't know freewheel bikes were still
available!

I'll send you the extra $3.73 + tax if you buy it and ride it for 1000
miles. At the average speeds you've claimed before, that means less than
50 hours on that bike. Of course this bike will be slightly slower.

1000 miles is certainly not a good test of durability, since a bike
should last *much* longer than that. But I'd dare to bet that you'd be
pretty sick of that bike by the end of that time. And I wouldn't be
surprised if a few durability issues came up during that period.

Full URL for the tinyurl haters:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2073249&cat=4183&type=5&dept=4125&path=0%3A4125%3A4178%3A4180%3A4183

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

Dion Dock

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 2:07:58 PM3/3/04
to
Is there really demand for such things? Sure, there is supply (or at least
ads) but does that mean there is demand?

I get the feeling one manufacturer sells an expensive product and the other
companies all figure there must be a big demand for it. They also feel
compelled to sell such a product for their image: how good can X be if they
don't have an expensive product like Y.

I forgot Look's $600 no-chainring crankset as shown in the latest
Bicycling....

Now where did I put my $699 Easton aero bars?

-Dion


"Carl Fogel" <carl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8bbde8fc.04030...@posting.google.com...

carlfogel

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 3:50:51 PM3/3/04
to
Dion Dock wrote:
> Is there really demand for such things? Sure, there is supply (or at
> least ads) but does that mean there is demand?
> I get the feeling one manufacturer sells an expensive product and the
> other companies all figure there must be a big demand for it. They also
> feel compelled to sell such a product for their image: how good can X be
> if they don't have an expensive product like Y.
> I forgot Look's $600 no-chainring crankset as shown in the latest
> Bicycling....
> Now where did I put my $699 Easton aero bars?
> -Dion
> "Carl Fogel" <carl...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:8bbde8fc.040-
> 3021750....@posting.google.comnews:8bbde8fc.0403021750.5aaa1d32@po-

> sting.google.com...
> > "Dion Dock" <inv...@bounce.com> wrote in message
> news:<4043a164$1...@solnews.wv.mentorg.com>...
> > > There is a reason they're in trouble.
> > >
> > > How many brands of $200 shorts could you buy in 2000? Asssos. How
> > > many brands of $200 shorts can you buy in 2004? Assos, Pearl Izumi,
> > > Castelli, ...
> > >
> > > How many brands of $350+ cranksets could you buy in 2000? Sweet
> > > Wings How many brands of $350+ cranksets can you buy in 2004?
> > > Shimano, Campy, Colnago, FSA, ...
> > >
> > > They have given up on finding new customers and decided to milk the
> existing
> > > ones.
> > >
> > > -Dion
> >
> > Dear Dion,
> >
> > Actually, given the law of supply and demand, don't rising prices
> > suggest that the manfacturers are not in trouble?
> >
> > The flourishing market for $200 riding shorts and $350 cranks suggests
> > that so many people are willing to pay that much for such wonderful
> > items that more manufacturers are providing exactly what the teeming
> > masses are demanding.
> >
> > Besides, it works both ways. WalMart's 18-speed mountain bike is
> > dipping dangerously close to the under-$50 price at which I've sworn
> > to buy one and ride it for at least a week.

Dear Dion,

Actually, supply can't even keep up with demand for overpriced parts!
They can't keep them in stock! (Or so they claim. Surely mail order
firms wouldn't practice upon my innocent creduilty.)

I tend to side with P.T. Barnum's theory of population increase. It fits
the facts better than Malthus.

That $400 titanium chain that's causing eyes to bug out in the current
"Do people really buy these?" thread has been out of stock at
Performance for two weeks.

Oh, whatever shall I do until they can ship me one?

Carl Fogel

--


Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 5:52:28 PM3/3/04
to
dvt <dvt_...@psu.edu> wrote in message news:<c255ll$1k10$1...@f04n12.cac.psu.edu>...

Dear Dave,

The things I'll do for $3.73!

I suppose that I can't complain if it's only 15 speeds.
My touring bike only has 14.

Carl Fogel

Tom Sherman

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 7:40:20 PM3/3/04
to
Carl Fogel wrote:

> ...


> I suppose that I can't complain if it's only 15 speeds.
> My touring bike only has 14.

Dear Carl,

Does your touring bike have a single chainring and Rohloff hub?

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Tom Sherman

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 7:42:41 PM3/3/04
to
dvt wrote:

I have always wanted a bike with a "high-tensity steel frame and fork". ;)

If the frame is handcrafted, I want to know the name of the person who
did the handcrafting (as I do for my trike and lowracer).

(Pete Cresswell)

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 8:45:14 PM3/3/04
to
RE/

>Good point. Overheard a sales clerk mutter as he walked by to fetch a chi-chi
>gee-gaw for a well heeled, clueless customer: "People have way too much f@$#%^
>money".

My neighbor's comment after seeing people down the shore impulse-buying $250
sunglasses on the boardwalk: "Just goes to show that taxes are too low in this
country."
--
PeteCresswell

carlfogel

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 8:50:49 PM3/3/04
to

Dear Tom,

Which touring bike do you mean?

I am now [modest cough] the owner and operator of two bicycles.

My faithful old 53/39 Schwinn LeTour with seven rear sprockets?

Or my brand-new triple-front-ring, five-rear-cogs Fury Roadmaster from
MalWart, $53.73 plus $3.98 tax, complete with kickstand--yes, a
kickstand is included!--and tires now inflated to 55 sizzling psi?

Ostentatiously,

Carl Fogel Fury Roadmaster owner since 03-03-2004 4:36pm MST

--


Kevin Cullen

unread,
Mar 3, 2004, 9:29:56 PM3/3/04
to
carlfogel wrote:
>
> I am now [modest cough] the owner and operator of two bicycles.
>
> My faithful old 53/39 Schwinn LeTour with seven rear sprockets?
>
> Or my brand-new triple-front-ring, five-rear-cogs Fury Roadmaster from
> MalWart, $53.73 plus $3.98 tax, complete with kickstand--yes, a
> kickstand is included!--and tires now inflated to 55 sizzling psi?
>
> Ostentatiously,
>
> Carl Fogel Fury Roadmaster owner since 03-03-2004 4:36pm MST

I'm terribly impressed. Please provide us with stories of how you
"overcome any obstacles in your way and make it to the top".

--Kevin

Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 2:43:22 AM3/4/04
to
Kevin Cullen <mokga...@nospamdot-yahoo-dot.com> wrote in message news:<4046...@news.ColoState.EDU>...

Dear Kevin,

I have a working title: "It's Not About the Bike."
(The editor has expressed vague reservations.)

However, despite my scorn for technology, I have already
removed both spoke-reflectors, having been advised that
the extra rotating mass might cost me precious seconds
during acceleration.

The spoke-reflectors almost escaped my notice, lurking
down there under the mammoth mountain-bike tire-knobs.

Why, I wonder, does my new contraption have such huge,
fierce treads sticking out on the side? Are these
triceratops-like projections a mating signal to female
mountain-bikes and a challenge to male mountain-bikes,
like the antlers on moose or the ears on basset hounds?

Carl Fogel

Appkiller

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 8:27:24 AM3/4/04
to
Mr Chisholm intoned:


> Compact, like a lot of things 'bike' is being foisted onto the consumer.


So, you're implying that there is something WRONG with compact bikes -
other than aesthetics. Specifically, what is it?

Do the frames fall apart? Are they physically less comfortable than
standard geometry bikes? Is the exposed length of seatpost a failure
danger?

I understand the sizing issues - but when almost all bikes are already
only manufactured in essentially symmetrical sizing (e.g., 56 TT, 56
ST) this kinda goes away as issue that sets standard geometry apart
from compact. ALL non-custom frames will present fit issues for one
segment of the market or another.

I have had discussions with many riders of compact frames and have
examined bike setup on their bikes. My totally unscientific findings
are that the compact frame actually allows for a wider variety of
position, especially in light of one of the other favorite gripes of
the retro grouch, the dreaded threadless headset, which limits bar
position.

I know that many think compact frames are "ugly", especially fans of
classic steel, but if they represent value to the customer, and minor
salvation for the bike industry, what's wrong with that?

App

Qui si parla Campagnolo

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 9:03:41 AM3/4/04
to
pete-<< So, you're implying that there is something WRONG with compact bikes -
other than aesthetics. Specifically, what is it? >><BR><BR>

Nothing 'wrong' but no probelm is being solved, no question being answered by
compact for the middle of the bell curve rider, size wise. BUT when reading
their marketing drivel, they are lighter, stiffer, faster, more complient, etc
type of drivel.

Remember who and why compact was first made, by Giant and 4 sizes. Like
threadless it was to save money, but painted as a performance enhancing
feature.

PETE-<< Are they physically less comfortable than
standard geometry bikes? >><BR><BR>

Some with only a few sizes do not fit tall riders well. I saw a extra large
frameset for a guy 6 ft tall that needed a 400mm seatpost and 140mm stem.

Pete<< Is the exposed length of seatpost a failure
danger? >><BR><BR>

For light seatposts, absolutely and for some framesets, a split seattube.

Pete<< ALL non-custom frames will present fit issues for one
segment of the market or another. >><BR><BR>


Far fewer problems when the sizes are 46cm to 64cm with 1 cm increments with
varying top tube lengths and seat tube angles.

pete-<< I have had discussions with many riders of compact frames and have


examined bike setup on their bikes. My totally unscientific findings
are that the compact frame actually allows for a wider variety of

position, >><BR><BR>

this makes no sense. This is like saying shoes in whole sizes only fit more
people, than whole and half sizes...just add a little tissue papaer in the toe.

See my post about WHY these things were made(to save money) and HOW they were
portaryed, is my point. If ya want to believe threadless, compact, carbon ass
ends, oversized handlebars, 1 1/8 inch integrated road HS', wheels outta boxes
and disc brakes make ya faster, go ahead...I don't.

Pete-<< I know that many think compact frames are "ugly", especially fans of


classic steel, but if they represent value to the customer, and minor

salvation for the bike industry, what's wrong with that? >><BR><BR>

The $ savings are not passed onto the rider. If you want to reward a poorly
performing industry, go ahead but I prefer to reward an industry that does it
right, with the customer, not the board members, in mind.

Would you buy a car with the same motivations in mind? Or a washing machine or
a watch or anything else?

David Damerell

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 10:46:52 AM3/4/04
to
Appkiller <pete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>So, you're implying that there is something WRONG with compact bikes -
>other than aesthetics. Specifically, what is it?

You can't mount as large a frame pump, which makes pumping up tyres more
prolonged a process.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl?

David Damerell

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 10:45:39 AM3/4/04
to
Tom Sherman <tshe...@qconline.com> wrote:

>Carl Fogel wrote:
>>I suppose that I can't complain if it's only 15 speeds.
>>My touring bike only has 14.
>Does your touring bike have a single chainring and Rohloff hub?

I dunno about him, but mine has 14 speeds as a 52/34 x 13/34; which I
suspect is still more useful than the 15 speeds on a gaspipe job... :-)

dvt

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 12:27:57 PM3/4/04
to
carlfogel wrote:
> Fury Roadmaster owner since 03-03-2004 4:36pm MST

Kudos! Is it faster than greased frog snot? Does it stop on a dime? Does
it clear giant obstacles in a single effortless bound? Is it stiff yet
compliant?

Do you plan to use it for some short-distance errands, like the 2-mile
commuter that made you start thinking of this? Or will this be your
do-it-all bike?

I'm eagerly awaiting the initial report and (hopefully) long-term reports.

Per Löwdin

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 2:47:42 PM3/4/04
to
> When you stop

> at the stoplight, how do you rest your leg on the top bar?

I practice my trackstand.
Per
http://lowdin.nu


Appkiller

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 3:54:36 PM3/4/04
to
vecc...@aol.com (Qui si parla Campagnolo ) wrote in message news:<20040304090341...@mb-m06.aol.com>...

> pete-<< So, you're implying that there is something WRONG with compact bikes -
> other than aesthetics. Specifically, what is it? >><BR><BR>
>
> Nothing 'wrong' but no probelm is being solved, no question being answered by
> compact for the middle of the bell curve rider, size wise. BUT when reading
> their marketing drivel, they are lighter, stiffer, faster, more complient, etc
> type of drivel.

Okey, yah marketing = lies. We all knew that.

>
> Remember who and why compact was first made, by Giant and 4 sizes. Like
> threadless it was to save money, but painted as a performance enhancing
> feature.

Yah, marketing again.

>
> PETE-<< Are they physically less comfortable than
> standard geometry bikes? >><BR><BR>
>
> Some with only a few sizes do not fit tall riders well. I saw a extra large
> frameset for a guy 6 ft tall that needed a 400mm seatpost and 140mm stem.

Yah, you make my point. Not custom = not good for everyone, compact
or not. And you are right, this is a particularly egregious example.
Kinda like a 56 cc ST Klein Stage with a 59 cc TT (I had it and dumped
it). Just wrong for those who would expect to be able to ride it.

>
> Pete<< Is the exposed length of seatpost a failure
> danger? >><BR><BR>
>
> For light seatposts, absolutely and for some framesets, a split seattube.
>
> Pete<< ALL non-custom frames will present fit issues for one
> segment of the market or another. >><BR><BR>
>
>
> Far fewer problems when the sizes are 46cm to 64cm with 1 cm increments with
> varying top tube lengths and seat tube angles.

How many mfr's make them in these increments at compact frame prices?
Most compact frames are mid to consumer grade alu. The only mfr's
making that many sizes are high end. Usually 2 cm increments, up to
59 or 60, with a min of 50 or 49.

>
> pete-<< I have had discussions with many riders of compact frames and have
> examined bike setup on their bikes. My totally unscientific findings
> are that the compact frame actually allows for a wider variety of
> position, >><BR><BR>
>
> this makes no sense. This is like saying shoes in whole sizes only fit more
> people, than whole and half sizes...just add a little tissue papaer in the >toe.

If just adding "a little tissue paper" resulted in a perfectly
comfortable shoe, then why not?

>
> See my post about WHY these things were made(to save money) and HOW they were
> portaryed, is my point. If ya want to believe threadless, compact, carbon ass
> ends, oversized handlebars, 1 1/8 inch integrated road HS', wheels outta boxes
> and disc brakes make ya faster, go ahead...I don't.
>


> Pete-<< I know that many think compact frames are "ugly", especially fans of
> classic steel, but if they represent value to the customer, and minor
> salvation for the bike industry, what's wrong with that? >><BR><BR>
>
> The $ savings are not passed onto the rider. If you want to reward a poorly
> performing industry, go ahead but I prefer to reward an industry that does it
> right, with the customer, not the board members, in mind.
>

Examples of high quality cheap compact frames: Gunnar, Schwinn (prior
to buyout), Specialized,etc... Which manufacturers of high end normal
geometry bikes are producing affordable high quality frames? Which
mfr's are thinking about the customer, not revenue?



> Would you buy a car with the same motivations in mind? Or a washing machine or
> a watch or anything else?
>

We are forced into it - $1500 dollar non-repairable car bumpers,
Shimano non-repairable components, etc... Everything we buy has been
engineered for maximized profit (whether the engineering was
successful is another story).

>
> Peter Chisholm
> Vecchio's Bicicletteria
> 1833 Pearl St.
> Boulder, CO, 80302
> (303)440-3535
> http://www.vecchios.com
> "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"


App

Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 4:13:01 PM3/4/04
to
Tom Sherman <tshe...@qconline.com> wrote in message news:<c25tg4$1pk23d$1...@ID-81487.news.uni-berlin.de>...

Dear Tom,

My newsgroup indexing gods broke the following replies
off into another thread, so I reproduce them below, lest
you miss vital technical details, and then reveal the
results of the first ride.

Carl Fogel

[First, my reply to your wide-eyed innocence.]

Dear Tom,

Which touring bike do you mean?

I am now [modest cough] the owner and operator of two bicycles.

My faithful old 53/39 Schwinn LeTour with seven rear sprockets?

Or my brand-new triple-front-ring, five-rear-cogs Fury Roadmaster from
MalWart, $53.73 plus $3.98 tax, complete with kickstand--yes, a
kickstand is included!--and tires now inflated to 55 sizzling psi?

Ostentatiously,

Carl Fogel, Fury Roadmaster owner since 03-03-2004 4:36pm MST


[Next, Kevin Cullen confessed to helpless admiration,
but stopped short of requesting a signed photograph.]

> I'm terribly impressed. Please provide us with stories of how you
> "overcome any obstacles in your way and make it to the top".
>
> --Kevin

Dear Kevin,

I have a working title: "It's Not About the Bike."
(The editor has expressed vague reservations.)

However, despite my scorn for technology, I have already
removed both spoke-reflectors, having been advised that
the extra rotating mass might cost me precious seconds
during acceleration.

The spoke-reflectors almost escaped my notice, lurking
down there under the mammoth mountain-bike tire-knobs.

Why, I wonder, does my new contraption have such huge,
fierce treads sticking out on the side? Are these
triceratops-like projections a mating signal to female
mountain-bikes and a challenge to male mountain-bikes,
like the antlers on moose or the ears on basset hounds?

Carl Fogel

[Now for the results of the first test ride.]

Since none of my neighbors complained about a 48-year-old
man riding back and forth on the street at midnight while
getting a spare speedometer to work and raising the seat
post and handlebar stem, I sallied forth after lunch,
feeling much like Sancho Panza.

The gearshifts are clicky friction doo-dads mounted on
either handlebar and confuse me easily, but I'm used to
down-tube shifters (which also confuse me some days, but
that's another story).

The cranks are shorter than usual. Peter Chisholm would
wince at the riding position, but I'll probably get used
to it. The silly thing is sold for gentlemen aged 10-17
who are still pursuing their education, not for someone
just over six feet tall, around 195 pounds, and consumed
by insatiable curiosity.

The fork legs are as thick as my touring bike's main tubes,
so mounting the speedometer involved larger-than-normal
zip ties and a section of thorn-resistant inner tube to
pad the sensor out to within hailing distance of the
spoke magnet. Sears best measuring tape indicated a front
tire unashamed of an 81.5-inch circumference, so I set the
$13 speedometer that I had lying around to 2070mm.

Sitting bolt upright in the approved MTB fashion, I
was surprised to find the speedometer creeping up to
almost respectable levels. For my trial run, I pedalled
over to the city park and did two slightly different
laps, hoping for about four miles. While a bowling ball
might not roll around this route, I doubt that there's
ten feet of elevation change, including going up and
down over the four six-inch-high speed humps.

I assume that soulless rec.bicycles.tech readers care
nothing for scenic description, so here's the raw data:
13:42 elapsed time, 4.06 miles, 17.8 mph average speed,
and 22.2 mph maximum speed (which startled me, but I
think a brief tailwind on the backstretch past the zoo
was responsible). The original thread that started all
this involved a college student who wanted to buy something
to pedal two miles to school and two miles back, so four
miles seems reasonable.

Afterward, I counted teeth and found a 48-tooth front
sprocket with elegant shifting ramps powering a 14-tooth
rear cog. (I neglected to pick the bike with the owner's
manual at MalWart. The fully-equipped bike had a funny bump
when its front tire rolled, so I rejected it while gazing
longingly at the $64 model that, alas, was out of my price
range.)

Only 996 more miles and Dave Van Tol's check for $7.71
is mine! This must be how Lance feels as he rolls off
the starting line in France, already thinking about
spending his prize money on Sheryl Crowe CD's.

Carl Fogel

Qui si parla Campagnolo

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 4:26:53 PM3/4/04
to
pete-<< Yah, you make my point. Not custom = not good for everyone, compact
or not. >><BR><BR>

Nope, you miss my point. He had the largest frameset offered, didn't fit him.
The largest frameset offered by most other manufacturers was 7-8cm LARGER than
he needed.

Pete<< How many mfr's make them in these increments at compact frame prices?
>><BR><BR>

'Compact frameset prices? You imply they are somehow cheaper as compact, they
are not and in some instances, like Litespeed, are lost more.

pete<< If just adding "a little tissue paper" resulted in a perfectly
comfortable shoe, then why not? >><BR><BR>


C'mon, a little reality please. Yes a size 10 shoe will fit 9.5 to 10.5
but.....

pete<< Which manufacturers of high end normal


geometry bikes are producing affordable high quality frames? Which

mfr's are thinking about the customer, not revenue? >><BR><BR>


Any manufacturer that sees compact for what it is, a fad, and not following
alomg like a lemming...

Calfee, Waterford, Torelli to name a few, BTW-

pete-<< We are forced into it - $1500 dollar non-repairable car bumpers,
Shimano non-repairable components, etc. >><BR><BR>

But you are not forced into it with bicycles and equipment-

Jesse Thompson

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 9:10:26 PM3/4/04
to
Qui si parla Campagnolo <vecc...@aol.com> wrote:

> pete-<< So, you're implying that there is something WRONG with compact bikes -
> other than aesthetics. Specifically, what is it? >><BR><BR>
>
> Nothing 'wrong' but no probelm is being solved, no question being answered by
> compact for the middle of the bell curve rider, size wise. BUT when reading
> their marketing drivel, they are lighter, stiffer, faster, more complient, etc
> type of drivel.

That "middle of the bell curve" line was a total cop-out Peter.

There IS a problem being solved with a compact frame. As Mike S has
said, and you have dodged over and over again, people with short legs
and long torsos (like me!) can fit a standard compact frame but not a
"classic" square frame.

I can go buy an affordable, off the shelf, compact frame that will fit
both me and the average guy. Without compact, I would have to go
custom, and that's silly.


> Remember who and why compact was first made, by Giant and 4 sizes. Like
> threadless it was to save money, but painted as a performance enhancing
> feature.


This is a dodge. Giant got all the attention for their compact road
frame in only 4 sizes, but we all know that was stupid, and plenty of
manufacturers make compact frames in 2cm increments. Specialized,
Cervelo, and many others. These frames fit MORE of the population than
a standard square frame.


> PETE-<< Are they physically less comfortable than
> standard geometry bikes? >><BR><BR>
>
> Some with only a few sizes do not fit tall riders well. I saw a extra large
> frameset for a guy 6 ft tall that needed a 400mm seatpost and 140mm stem.

Well, of course. A bad fitting frame is a bad fitting frame, no matter
the geometry. You see the same kind of thing with standard frames too,
all the time. Admit it...

And on and on.

If you would just admit up front you really just think compact frames
are ugly, we would understand why you keep stretching to find other
reasons not to like them.

Some people like me have decided that having more money in our wallet to
pay the mortgage looks better than the style of frame we are riding...


jesse

Tom Sherman

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 10:02:29 PM3/4/04
to
carlfogel wrote:

> Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Carl Fogel wrote:
> > > ... I suppose that I can't complain if it's only 15 speeds. My touring
> > > bike only has 14.
> > Dear Carl,
> > Does your touring bike have a single chainring and Rohloff hub?
> > Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)
>
> Dear Tom,
>
> Which touring bike do you mean?
>
> I am now [modest cough] the owner and operator of two bicycles.
>
> My faithful old 53/39 Schwinn LeTour with seven rear sprockets?
>
> Or my brand-new triple-front-ring, five-rear-cogs Fury Roadmaster from
> MalWart, $53.73 plus $3.98 tax, complete with kickstand--yes, a

> kickstand is included!--and tires now inflated to 55 sizzling psi?...

Dear Carl,

I believe that the "MalWart" bicycle shaped object would be improved
with the addition of a Schlumpf two-speed BB and a Rohloff hub for a
28-speed drivetrain. ;)

Tom Sherman

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 10:13:27 PM3/4/04
to
Jesse Thompson wrote:

> ...


> If you would just admit up front you really just think compact frames
> are ugly, we would understand why you keep stretching to find other
> reasons not to like them.
>
> Some people like me have decided that having more money in our wallet to
> pay the mortgage looks better than the style of frame we are riding...

A quality, "classic" design steel frame will easily last for 20+ years,
so the annual cost is very low. Of course, this requires that one forgo
the constant need to upgrade mentality.

And yes, compact frames are unconscionably ugly. Even recumbent riders
think so. :)

Rick Onanian

unread,
Mar 4, 2004, 10:14:49 PM3/4/04
to
Fogellization:

>> Or my brand-new triple-front-ring, five-rear-cogs Fury Roadmaster from
>> MalWart, $53.73 plus $3.98 tax, complete with kickstand--yes, a
>> kickstand is included!--and tires now inflated to 55 sizzling psi?...
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 21:02:29 -0600, Tom Sherman
<tshe...@qconline.com> wrote:
>I believe that the "MalWart" bicycle shaped object would be improved
>with the addition of a Schlumpf two-speed BB and a Rohloff hub for a
>28-speed drivetrain. ;)

Adding those items would result in a 420 speed drivetrain. Replacing
the existing drivetrain with them would result in the 28-speed.

Of course, nobody should ever use a hub that's worth more than 10x
the price of the bike.
--
Rick Onanian

Derk

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 1:21:28 AM3/5/04
to
Jesse Thompson wrote:

> said, and you have dodged over and over again, people with short legs
> and long torsos (like me!) can fit a standard compact frame but not a
> "classic" square frame.

I have noticed this too: especially italian frames, but also Look frames are
very short. a 58 c-c frame typically has 57.5cm top tube, which forces me
to mount a 13cm stem. This makes a bike "nervous".

I saw that a L compact has a 58cm top tube. Still .5cm less than my custom
built frames, but it fits me better.

Greets, Derk

Peter Serjeant

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 1:57:00 AM3/5/04
to
"Per Löwdin" <Perl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<yJL1c.51206$mU6.2...@newsb.telia.net>...

OT Fabulous Website!

Peter Serjeant

Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 2:25:45 AM3/5/04
to
dvt <dvt_...@psu.edu> wrote in message news:<c27out$13j0$1...@f04n12.cac.psu.edu>...

Dear Dave,

For reasons known only to my news server's indexing gods,
everything has moved over to the "there's-a-reason-why"
thread.

Errands, as Leona might say, are for little people. I propose
to continue my far-from-rigorous and utterly pointless daily
ride on my long-standing Rocinante, while adding a daily
four-mile level stint on my version of Sancho Panza's ass.

Apart from glory (and your money), I expect to attract even
greater numbers of admiring glances from the opposite sex
by two brisk laps through the city park.

("Look at that bearded weirdo in the silly costume, Sally.
Do you think he stole that bicycle from some poor child?")

Carl Fogel

BaCardi

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 2:30:58 AM3/5/04
to
I don't consider myself a purist although I like traditional frames more
than compact frames. However, I do think that there are some
traditionalists on this thread that merely want to dismiss compact
frames under the assumption that its all a smoke & mirrors marketing
thing. Usually, that's the last line of defense for an old fart to claim
that new technology is all marketing.

--


Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 4:01:12 AM3/5/04
to
Tom Sherman <tshe...@qconline.com> wrote in message news:<c28q6n$1qanfu$1...@ID-81487.news.uni-berlin.de>...

Dear Tom,

My MawlRat bicycle needs no over-elaborate Teutonic
machinery, with onomatopoeic names:

"Schlumpf! goes the front transmission, collapsing
and causing the rear hub to perform a disastrous
rohl-off."

You might as well be a famous bicyclist immodestly
named for the wrong part of the body and enamoured
of a singer named after a croaking bird.

Schlumpf? Humph!

Carl Fogel

SMMB

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 5:04:03 AM3/5/04
to
"Carl Fogel" <carl...@comcast.net> a écrit dans le message de :
news:8bbde8fc.04030...@posting.google.com...


> Dear Tom,
>
> My MawlRat bicycle needs no over-elaborate Teutonic
> machinery, with onomatopoeic names:
>
> "Schlumpf! goes the front transmission, collapsing
> and causing the rear hub to perform a disastrous
> rohl-off."
>

I'd be curious to know how badly or how well the initial preparation was.
What did you have to adjust, etc., to feel secure before really taking it
out.
--
Bonne route,

Sandy
Paris FR


Jesse Thompson

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 8:02:20 AM3/5/04
to
Derk <I_hat...@invalid.org> wrote:

No need to limit yourself to brands that size in letters.

Here is a Cervelo with a 59.2 / 73deg top tube:

http://www.cervelo.com/bikes/SLTeam.html#Geometry

Specialized makes a "62" with a 60.cm/72.5deg:

http://www.specialized.com/SBCGeometryPopup.jsp?sizechart=04sworks2&bike
model=04%20S-Works%20E5%20Road%20Frameset

K2 makes a 60cm/72deg frame:

http://www.k2bike.com/04products/road/mod5.asp


There are some really long bikes out there these days, things are much
better for people like us now...

Jesse

Qui si parla Campagnolo

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 9:03:12 AM3/5/04
to
bcdi-<< However, I do think that there are some

traditionalists on this thread that merely want to dismiss compact
frames under the assumption that its all a smoke & mirrors marketing
thing. Usually, that's the last line of defense for an old fart to claim
that new technology is all marketing. >><BR><BR>

clue-less.............

Qui si parla Campagnolo

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 9:13:30 AM3/5/04
to
jesseth-<< There IS a problem being solved with a compact frame. As Mike S has

said, and you have dodged over and over again, people with short legs
and long torsos (like me!) can fit a standard compact frame but not a
"classic" square frame. >><BR><BR>

The framesets we sell are not 'square'..many have steep seattubes and longish
top tubes. many framesets, like Lemond do too. Compact may solve the fit issue
for you but many 'standard' framesets do too. To paint compact as some sort of
cycling phenomenum is not true.

jesse<< I can go buy an affordable, off the shelf, compact frame that will fit


both me and the average guy. Without compact, I would have to go

custom, and that's silly. >><BR><BR>

If the manufacturers would make more sizes, you could do the same. You just
would have to find a manufacturer that did that, with frameset dimensions that
fit you. NOTHING about sizing is standard. To imply that frame makers ALL
follow some sort of guidelines or standardss as to frameset dimansions is
folly.

DeRosa/Merckx and Colnago are at opposite ends of the dimension spectrum, for
say a '56cm', both say their dimensions are proper.

We fit people everyday and sell a lot of bikes and have only twice needed a
'compact' frameset.


<jesse< This is a dodge. Giant got all the attention for their compact road


frame in only 4 sizes, but we all know that was stupid, and plenty of
manufacturers make compact frames in 2cm increments. Specialized,

Cervelo, and many others. >><BR><BR>

If lots of sizes, then why compact? They are not steep/long, in their
dimensions. They are just a standard frameset, with the top tube dropped, the
stays shorter. 'Stiffer, faster, more comfy'???

jesse<< These frames fit MORE of the population than
a standard square frame. >><BR><BR>

See above. The sizing isn't revolutionary. Look at the 'effective' top tube
length and seat tube angle and you will see they are the same as a standard
frameset.


jesse<< If you would just admit up front you really just think compact frames


are ugly, we would understand why you keep stretching to find other

reasons not to like them. >><BR><BR>

I have said numerous times I think they look stoopid but once again, you ignore
my point. They were and continue to be marketing driven, predominently. They
were and are made by some to save money, not to help the fit process. If they
work for you, groovy. Many standard framesets out there that do not cost a
fortune...many.

David Damerell

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 9:39:27 AM3/5/04
to
Jesse Thompson <jesseth@removethis_gwi.net> wrote:
>There IS a problem being solved with a compact frame. As Mike S has
>said, and you have dodged over and over again, people with short legs
>and long torsos (like me!) can fit a standard compact frame but not a
>"classic" square frame.

That certainly comes as news to me; I just use a stem with plenty of
forward extension.
--
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!

Jay Beattie

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 2:05:46 PM3/5/04
to

"David Damerell" <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in
message news:JVg*hr...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...

> Jesse Thompson <jesseth@removethis_gwi.net> wrote:
> >There IS a problem being solved with a compact frame. As Mike
S has
> >said, and you have dodged over and over again, people with
short legs
> >and long torsos (like me!) can fit a standard compact frame
but not a
> >"classic" square frame.
>
> That certainly comes as news to me; I just use a stem with
plenty of
> forward extension.

The compact frame is more of a problem for tall riders who get
stuck with a short frame, a long seat post and a long threadless
steerer and a long stem. The whole bike turns into a creaking
extension ladder. And depending on the effective length of the
TT, a tall rider ends up with his weight too far over the front
wheel, which gives the bike poor handling, IMO. -- Jay Beattie.


Carl Fogel

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 2:18:07 PM3/5/04
to
"SMMB" <please.do...@free.fr> wrote in message news:<c29jaj$m1h$1...@news.tiscali.fr>...

Dear Sandy,

My initial preparation began with calling WatMarl and
asking the lady who answered for the bicycle department,
which flummoxed her. She was relieved when I suggested
trying the sporting goods department, whose stalwart
clerk assured me that there were $50 15-speed bicycles
for sale and seemed puzzled when I asked how long it
would take to put one together--ya just roll 'em up
to the checkout stand, they're already assembled.

At the store, I found three fine examples of China's
answer to the Trek OCLV posing shyly on the upper
rack. Only one had a manual attached, so I heaved
it down, rolled it around, and found that the front
tire went bump, possibly because the soggy chunk of
thick rubber had been resting and deforming against
the rack for too long.

Rejecting it like a beauty queen with a pimple on
the end of her nose, I stuck a pitchfork into the
next bike and hoisted it down from the upper reaches
of the barn. This one's seat was noticeably dusty,
indicating an even longer sojourn on the display rack,
but its tires so rolled smoothly that I forgave it for
still having one of those round plastic shipping tabs
on one side of its rear axle (I'm not sure whether
"Consumer Reports" would call this a sample defect.)

At home, I introduced the gigantic Schrrader valve tires
to Mr. Air Compressor and settled for 55 harsh psi, favoring
ease of pedalling over the comfort offered by 40 psi.
While stuffing air into the tires, I gave the axle bolts
a tug and found them nicely snugged down.

Then I got on it and rode off. The silly thing surprised
me by how easily it pedalled, but it felt much smaller than
my touring bike, despite its impressive weight.

A sensible fellow would have promptly turned around,
returned to the garage, and continued with pre-ride
preparations, but instead I rode two blocks over to
where a narrow road descends a short, steep s-bend
gully to the Arkansas river and rolled down it to the
river, hitting what felt like 30 mph, a bit slower
than the usual 35 mph on my touring bike.

I figured out how to work handle-bar mounted shifters,
put it in low gear, trudged back up the hill, and
went back to pre-race preparation.

The chief problem was that the bike is really meant
for boys about the size that I was at fourteen (the
range is 10-17 years of age). An allen key loosened
the handlebar stem and let me raise it a few inches.
An adjustable wrench let me slide the seat further
back on its rails. The seat post is the old-fashioned
necked-down kind, so I pulled it out and compared it
to ancient seat posts in a box of odds and ends. One
of my old posts was the same size (from God knows what),
but several inches longer, so I popped it into the bike
after slathering grease on it, raised it to the limit
mark, and put the seat back on it.

Then I played on it for half an hour under the streetlight.
It's much easier to balance standing still than my touring
bike, but not as easy as my fondly remembered 5-speed
Schwinn from 1968, partly because I'm old and out of
practice and partly because of the narrow little
handlebars.

While balancing, I noticed that the raised stem seemed
to flex a bit when I strained on it. I expect that Chalo
Colina notices structural flex like this if he presses
the buttons on his speedometer carelessly.

Adding the speedometer was the biggest chore. I used a
spare that I keep ready to replace the speedometer on
my touring bike (they cost about $13 and die every few
years). The elephantine front forks (think of a pair
of tusks) required the biggest zip ties that I had
handy, crude padding, and mounting the sensor magnet
on the inside of the spoke-crossing, next to the hub.

Propping it upside down on a pair of 2x4's, I admired
its wheels. The rims are much narrower than the tires.
Using a KMart spoke wrench, I pretended to true the
rims, soothing them with half-remembered passages from
"The Bicycle Wheel." There was perhaps an eighth of an
inch of side wobble before I started, and arguably
less when I finished. The trick is to concentrate on
the rim and to ignore the fearsome rubber treads,
which project sideways and may well be staggered,
much like the teeth on a well-set saw.

While there's no actual data supporting the spoke
squeezing stress-relief theory, I gave all the
spokes a friendly grope. None of them broke or
seemed to resent the familiarity.

Given my size, I feel that the seat-post substitution
is within UCI rules. The effect of my wheel-truing is
notoriously open to question. By evil coincidence, I'd
broken my second drive-side spoke of the year on my
touring bike that afternoon, something that I didn't
mention to my new bicycle. (Doctors aren't required
to mention that the previous patient died, so I feel
reasonably ethical.)

The first real ride went fine yesterday. Unfortunately,
it began to rain last night, turned to snow, and is now
a few inches deep, so I may not go riding today. On the
other hand, I rode to school as a boy on days like this,
so I may sneak off, since the roads are just wet.

Carl Fogel

Dan Brussee

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 7:21:40 PM3/5/04
to
Proved the point there, didnt he? hehehe

On 05 Mar 2004 14:03:12 GMT, vecc...@aol.com (Qui si parla

Brad Behm

unread,
Mar 5, 2004, 9:11:08 PM3/5/04
to
Is compact geometry good for a riders with long legs and a short upper body?

"Callistus Valerius" <jazz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CWu0c.15545$aT1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Do people really like these ugly compact geometry bikes? When you stop
> at the stoplight, how do you rest your leg on the top bar? We have some
> really long red lights around here. It's too bad, now I wouldn't even
> consider buying a LeMond bike.
>
> The only thing in favor of it, is that you give the bike to a relative
> or as a hand me down, because all you do is raise or lower the seat to fit
> them.
>
>


Jeff Starr

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 9:37:59 AM3/6/04
to
"Brad Behm" <bradbehmdelet...@localnet.com> wrote in message news:<104icq3...@corp.supernews.com>...

> Is compact geometry good for a riders with long legs and a short upper body?
>

Hi, what is good for the above mentioned "long legs and a short upper
body" is the WSD frames offered by some manufacturers. Both Trek and
LeMond offer WSD frames and I would think that there are others.
Life is Good!
Jeff

Ryan Cousineau

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 11:55:16 AM3/6/04
to
In article <10c5841f.04030...@posting.google.com>,
jst...@peoplepc.com (Jeff Starr) wrote:

Yeah, but you have to ride a girl's bike. You don't ride a girl's bike,
do you?

The Pinarello was previously owned by a girl (she put a kickstand on it),
--
Ryan Cousineau, rcou...@sfu.ca http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

David Reuteler

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 12:17:14 PM3/6/04
to
Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> The Pinarello was previously owned by a girl (she put a kickstand on it),

hey, you've done much worse than put a kickstand on it. say, why isn't the
kickstand still on it?
--
david reuteler
reut...@visi.com

Mike Latondresse

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 2:12:01 PM3/6/04
to
David Reuteler <reut...@visi.com> wrote in
news:404a0799$0$184$a186...@newsreader.visi.com:

> Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
>> The Pinarello was previously owned by a girl (she put a kickstand
>> on it),
>
> hey, you've done much worse than put a kickstand on it. say, why
> isn't the kickstand still on it?

You think it is not? He is the only guy in the Tues nite crits with a
kick-stand.

David Reuteler

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 2:58:38 PM3/6/04
to
Mike Latondresse <mikelat@no_spamshaw.ca> wrote:
> You think it is not? He is the only guy in the Tues nite crits with a
> kick-stand.

ack .. my bad. naturally i just assumed ...

hey, there's really no way he can hold the presidency of fab's fan club and
ride crits with a kickstand is there? purple forks, orange seats ok .. but
this is beyond bad aesthetics. this weighs down the bike and costs time.

it's time to stringly consider impeaching ryan.
--
david reuteler
reut...@visi.com

Mike Latondresse

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 4:55:04 PM3/6/04
to
David Reuteler <reut...@visi.com> wrote in
news:404a2d6e$0$41287$a186...@newsreader.visi.com:

No, no, no, he is Fabs alter ego.

Ryan Cousineau

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 8:18:23 PM3/6/04
to
In article <Xns94A471F361B...@24.69.255.211>,
Mike Latondresse <mikelat@no_spamshaw.ca> wrote:

Lies, all lies! None of my bikes have kick-stands.

Though the Pinarello does have a bell.

Which I used in last weekend's race,

David Reuteler

unread,
Mar 6, 2004, 10:25:08 PM3/6/04
to
Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> Lies, all lies! None of my bikes have kick-stands.

ok.



> Though the Pinarello does have a bell.
>
> Which I used in last weekend's race,

ok, that's funny. i can guess the context. was it well received?
--
david reuteler
reut...@visi.com

Ryan Cousineau

unread,
Mar 7, 2004, 2:50:10 AM3/7/04
to
In article <404a9614$0$41288$a186...@newsreader.visi.com>,
David Reuteler <reut...@visi.com> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> > Lies, all lies! None of my bikes have kick-stands.
>
> ok.
>
> > Though the Pinarello does have a bell.
> >
> > Which I used in last weekend's race,
>
> ok, that's funny. i can guess the context. was it well received?

In that particular race, I used it twice: once when we were overtaking a
pair of dropped B-group riders (so everyone else is yelling "riders up!"
as we pass, and I ring my bell. Everyone laughs).

The other time was when I passed by my parents, who were out watching me
race.

-RjC.

Brian S

unread,
Mar 7, 2004, 10:04:51 AM3/7/04