Quote Originally Posted by mimitabby View Post
I may not be right here, but I believe we're talking about leverage. The bigger the lever, the less work to get it to move.
If you get a compact crank, you're not going to have to turn it as far to move the same distance, but you're going to have to work harder.


to illustrate to yourself the difference between what you have and a compact
just put your bike in a higher gear next time you're going up a hill. you won't have to pedal as much, but IT WILL BE HARDER.

tell me if i'm wrong guys, but i just checked Sheldon Brown's website and from what it said, I believe I understand the concept.

I agree, get a triple if you want to have more options going up a hill.
I looked up the term, too, but I got a different description --

http://www.chainreaction.com/triples.htm

(search "compact")

"Just when you thought you had it all figured out, along comes the "Compact" crank. A new way (actually it's been around for some time, but forgotten) to get lower gears without a triple. Instead of the classic 53/39 front chainrings, you have a 50/36 (sometimes 50/34) combination that gets you quite a bit lower gears, while giving up a very small amount from the high end... all using standard double-compatible shifters & derailleurs. A high-quality compact setup is actually lighter weight than a standard double! The downside? You don't get as low a gear as a triple will offer, and you lose just a bit off your high end (the gears you'd be drafting trucks downhill in, but nothing you'd ever miss in day-to-day riding)."