# compact vs. traditional frame (Klein) (please explain)



## cook90 (Sep 29, 2004)

I'm considering the purchase of a used Klein bike. I'd like to know how the compact frame performs in comparison to a traditional straight frame. And why did Klein decide to develop a compact frame in the first place (cost?). I'd like to purchase a traditional frame but if there's no performance difference I think I can save money on a compact bike. I fit well on both bikes. If anyone knows the background on this please respond. Thanks.


----------



## blehargh (Mar 17, 2004)

cook90 said:


> I'm considering the purchase of a used Klein bike. I'd like to know how the compact frame performs in comparison to a traditional straight frame. And why did Klein decide to develop a compact frame in the first place (cost?). I'd like to purchase a traditional frame but if there's no performance difference I think I can save money on a compact bike. I fit well on both bikes. If anyone knows the background on this please respond. Thanks.


effective there's no real difference. it's mostly a style question. if you're asking why the aura is cheaper than a q-pro, then that's a different story that has nothign to do with whether it's a compact geometry or not. the aura uses straight tubing and a standard headset/fork combo. whereas the q-pro shapes the tubing which takes more work and uses klein's proprietary aeros carbon fork which is lighter. both of those make the q-pro more $$$ than the aura which is where the price difference comes from, not the sloping top tube.

-don


----------



## cook90 (Sep 29, 2004)

blehargh said:


> effective there's no real difference. it's mostly a style question. if you're asking why the aura is cheaper than a q-pro, then that's a different story that has nothign to do with whether it's a compact geometry or not. the aura uses straight tubing and a standard headset/fork combo. whereas the q-pro shapes the tubing which takes more work and uses klein's proprietary aeros carbon fork which is lighter. both of those make the q-pro more $$$ than the aura which is where the price difference comes from, not the sloping top tube.
> 
> -don


Thanks for the information. Several additional questions. In 2002, Klein only produced the traditional frame. Is this the same frame on all 2002 Klein bikes (Quantum Pro, Quantum Race, Quantum)? And is the 2002 straight frame the same one we see on the 2004/2005 Q-Pro series of bikes? In other words, if I buy a 2002 traditional frame am I getting today's top-of-the-line frame? Thanks.
dan.


----------



## blehargh (Mar 17, 2004)

cook90 said:


> Thanks for the information. Several additional questions. In 2002, Klein only produced the traditional frame. Is this the same frame on all 2002 Klein bikes (Quantum Pro, Quantum Race, Quantum)? And is the 2002 straight frame the same one we see on the 2004/2005 Q-Pro series of bikes? In other words, if I buy a 2002 traditional frame am I getting today's top-of-the-line frame? Thanks.
> dan.


the 2002 quantum and quantum race are the same frame - icon carbon fork and a standard 1 1/8 headset and AL stays. i believe the colors are plum crazy for the quantum and big sky blue for the q race.

the 2002 q-pro is basically the same as today's q-pro. carbon stays and the aeros fork. i think they have changed some of the shapes of the tubing from 02-05 tho. but in essense it's the same bike. silver cloud color.


----------



## Herschel (Nov 17, 2004)

I have a 2000 Quantum frame with conventional horizontal top-tube but, unlike today's frames, no carbon seatstays. Very stiff and thus superb for racing and climbing, but due to its tooth-rattling ride I don't spend more than three hours in a single day on the thing.

However, I don't know anyone who's ridden the sloping-tube models as well, so I wouldn't be able to compare them. If you can test-ride them both, that would be ideal.


----------

