Difference between a regular frame and a compact frame

I'm pretty sure that they are talking about the bike having a "compact" crank. Which is to say it has a bit *easier* (relatively...dumbing it down a bit) gearing in the front. (less teeth on the big rings)

It won't effect the frame itself, just a preference.

No, it's a compact frame not crank that he's asking about. Compact frames have a downward sloping top tube as their main characteristic; shorter seat stays as well IIRC. From what I've read the main advantage of compact geometries is to the manufacturer as it allows them to make fewer sizes, each of which fits a wider range of people. Not sure that the ride characteristics are any different.

This was my first road bike, in a compact frame:

Compact geometry is what he's probably talking about--as in a bike with a sloping top tube versus one with a flat top tube. The main advantage to a compact is that they tend to have overlap between the sizes, so can fit a larger number of riders a bit mroe easily. One can also get in to discussing the weight advantages, as well as the stiffness...but really the sizing is the biggest thing.

Some folks say they are stiffer, and/or lighter. My husband swears by his (Giant TCR comp 0). I prefer my straight top tube Trek...but his isn't bad.

woops, didn't even see any compact frames on bikesdirect

my bust, what they said ^^^

There's a commercial benefit of a compact frame (which means a frame with a sloping top tube), and that is that the manufacturer can fit a wider range of people on the same frame, hence needing fewer sizes.

The technical benefits are a bit more debated... one actual benefit is that you get more clearance when standing over a bike. Some argue that the frame does get to be stiffer in the horizontal plane and a bike with a traditional geometry (parallell top tube).

Quite a few manufacturers are now using the extra stand over clearance that a sloped top tube gives you and progressively reduce the slope, or completely elmininated on the larger sizes; ex. Look is doing this.

There's no real benefit to either a compact geometry or a traditional geometry... just get the bike that fits you.

Like the others have mentioned.  The compact frame has a sloping top tube, and the standard frame has a horizontal top tube (more or less).

As for sizing, if you generaly fit a 54" standard, you will still fit a 54" compact.  It's just the way the frame is configured and has little to do with actual sizing...

However, just get fit by the LBS you buy the bike from and you will be cool.

As for me, sort of like the looks of the compact frame, and it seems a lot of pros have swithed to them, but I recently bought a standard frame...

I do wonder if there could be a slight weight savings with the compact frame.  Less seat tube and ever so slightly shorter top tube - BUT that may be offset by maybe needing a little longer seat post.

A 54" bike is huge. Mine is only 54cm, roughly one-third that size.

I AM a big guy... 

The Dawes with the 105 components is a really great deal. You can find it a little cheaper on e-bay. The resale value is low but it is a good starter bike

I was looking at that Dawes as well as the 1500. I like that it is somewhat road bike like rather than a full tri bike. I was also looking at the Moto Grand REcord. Only thing that bike does not have is the clip on aero bars

Anyone have experience with the Motobecane or Dawes bikes

A friend of mine that I race with has a BD Motobecane. He likes it.

Not a real scientific review. Sorry.