I am interested in various opinions out there about compacts versus standards, what the consensus on which is preferred and why? What are both sides of the argument and the pros and cons of each?
Lots of discussion on this topic already. Many say that if you’re are less then 4 watts per kilo at threshold then you’re better off with a compact. Also you can set your gearing up to be tighter, and ride the middle of your cassette so you dont have the chain crossing.
The question is why would you not use a compact? It is lighter, the chain is shorter, the gearing is tighter, there are more gears, and it shifts smoother. What’s not to like?
There are no pros and cons that can be universally applied. It’s just a preference based on your power, how fast your ride, your preferred cadence and how often you like to shift between the big and little ring. If you find that most of your riding has you skewed to one side or the other of the rear cassette then you should consider adjusting your front chainring such that you spend most of your time in the center of the cassette.
The question is why would you not use a compact? It is lighter, the chain is shorter, the gearing is tighter, there are more gears, and it shifts smoother. What’s not to like?
here is dead-flat Chicago, it turns 20 gear choices into about 7 viable ones. I never got out of the big ring. I was even using an 11-21 cassette most of the time. I am back on a 53/39 crank with my new bike and it gives me more gear options.
Compacts are great options for many (most?) people, but they are not a universal solution.
The question is why would you not use a compact? It is lighter, the chain is shorter, the gearing is tighter, there are more gears, and it shifts smoother. What’s not to like? Because you aren’t a wimp, and want everyone to realize that you don’t NEED a compact. Also: you need a lot more metal chainring (more flexible than crankset) for a compact than for a standard which can reduce shifting quality. Compacts also have a bigger tooth jump which decreases shifting more. Long descents, in the area could be another valid reason or it could be pancake flat in which case you don’t need any gearing smaller than a 39/21. (For flat 40k TT’s I use an 11-23 cassette with a 54/44 chainring setup)
The question is why would you not use a compact? It is lighter, the chain is shorter, the gearing is tighter, there are more gears, and it shifts smoother. What’s not to like? Because you aren’t a wimp, and want everyone to realize that you don’t NEED a compact.Because if people see you with a standard they’ll naturally assume you have 6 W/kg power like the pros 
The question is why would you not use a compact? What’s not to like?
Nothing, other than your friends laughing at you behind your back… 
Brad
You should turn pro
.
I have 4 bikes that use a chain; my commuter is a standard 53-39 with a 13-26 cassette- this an ideal set up because there is 1 longhill coming home plus the bike has panniers usually full of stuff.
My touring bike has a compact crankset 50-36 with a 12-25 cassette, again mostly good for long slow rides through flats or hills.
My TT and training bikes have a std crank but 50-39 chainrings and 12-23 cassette, this works for me because the 50 tooth ring is perfect for an extended steady speed.
If I only had 1 bike and had to choose a set-up, I’d go compact crankset with a 12-23 cassette
Has anyone in decent shape ever needed easier gearing than a 44-21 on a dead flat TT course? At 90 rpms you would be going 15 mph in that gear.
The question is why would you not use a compact? It is lighter, the chain is shorter, the gearing is tighter, there are more gears, and it shifts smoother. What’s not to like? Because you aren’t a wimp, and want everyone to realize that you don’t NEED a compact.Because if people see you with a standard they’ll naturally assume you have 6 W/kg power like the pros
I suppose that might people why people run them, other than the shifting stuff I don’t have a huge problem with them other than your friends will laugh at you for running it. Me personally? I climb mountains with a 39-25, because I prefer to climb at 70 rpms and it forces me to not slow down. I suppose I could run a 34-23… but that would make me look like a pussy because most people don’t really understand how little of a difference 1 tooth on a chainring is.
My personal favorite thing people say about chainring sizes is “I spun out because I had a compact or 12t.” It was always fun when I was racing as a junior because I ran a 44t small chainring as my big chainring and I would simply point to it and ask them “How the hell do you think I beat you then?”
I think you’d be surprised how little people care about your gearing.
Edit: And people riding around in spandex with shaved legs aren’t worried about being called pussies!
Possibly, once again my primary reason for running a standard is shift quality. I could honestly care less what the guys I race with think about my equipment choices as long as I get results. I take lots of flak as it is for over analyzing equipment choices and not following traditional roadie ‘wisdom’.
Also: you need a lot more metal chainring (more flexible than crankset) for a compact than for a standard which can reduce shifting quality.–I do not find this true at all. I been riding the so-called racing bikes since the mid 1970’s and can’t tell a difference with my Cannondale Compact crank or the Campy/Shimano 130bcd cranks I rode for many years.
Compacts also have a bigger tooth jump which decreases shifting more.— Not true at all.
It is true, compacts are not for everyone.
Has anyone in decent shape ever needed easier gearing than a 44-21 on a dead flat TT course? At 90 rpms you would be going 15 mph in that gear.
True, but let’s be honest. Who here needs anything bigger than a 50x11, hell, a 50x12 on a dead flat TT course. 50x12 at 90 rpm is 29.5 mph, in the 11 it’s 32.2 mph.
Also: you need a lot more metal chainring (more flexible than crankset) for a compact than for a standard which can reduce shifting quality.–I do not find this true at all. I been riding the so-called racing bikes since the mid 1970’s and can’t tell a difference with my Cannondale Compact crank or the Campy/Shimano 130bcd cranks I rode for many years.
Compacts also have a bigger tooth jump which decreases shifting more.— Not true at all.
It is true, compacts are not for everyone.
Having worked as a mechanic I have found the shifting quality to be marginally worse with high qaulity chainrings, but with the cheap crap that comes on all SRAM cranks (except Red) and FSA cranks it is bad. These things hardly shift with a standard setup because they flex and the ramps and pins suck (unless they’ve improved as of late),with a compact they are suck*2. Yes having a larger tooth jump with decrease shifting performance, you can’t expect the chain to move more distance in the same amount of time when the same force is applied. Pulling the chain up farther takes more time and requires high quality ramps and pins that many chainrings don’t have.
Touche, you don’t but it looks awesome :P.
I think you are overemphasizing the degradation in shifting performance. I never once had any issue shifting to the big ring when I had compacts…and I only had FSA Gossamer cranks.
No doubt a 16T differential will negatively impact shifting performance vs. a 14T differential, but to say they suck is completely misleading.
No most of them don’t suck completely, but some of them do and I prefer not to take that chance (some of them really are crap, FSA’s QC must suck), and I’m picky!