Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 131

Thread: 2013 Scott 27.5

  1. #1
    www.EpicCyclist.com
    Reputation: team_wee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    218

    2013 Scott 27.5


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69erEverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    350
    Heeeelllllllooo nurse!

    oh and for the fan boys

    We need to have a long-term play on our own trails to confirm our initial impressions, but the Genius 700 could be ‘the one’, perfectly combining some of the better rolling of a 29er with the aggression of a 26er.
    99% of the problems and questions posted here would be answered if people actually walked into a bicycle shop and asked

  3. #3
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,008
    Fu'yeah !

    Was never a fan of Scott but they gone up a few notches on my consideration, kudos to Scott

    There are quite a few important said that i found pretty interesting,

    The first thing you’ll notice is how the new suspension layout on both the Genius 700 and 900 is very similar to that of the Spark. However, Scott are keen to point out that the bikes aren’t simply longer-travel Sparks – they’re Genius steeds with 150mm of travel front and rear on the 650b 700 and 130mm front and rear on the 900 29er.

    A number of issues arose during development when Scott tried to run the longer-travel setup for the bigger wheel size. The wheelbase grew too long, and large compromises on bar height and chainstay length had to happen to squeeze in the monster wheels. Therefore, the travel was pulled down to 130mm.
    Some things i don't fully understand,

    The new wheel size does require a new fork, and Scott worked closely to develop a specific fork for the bike – a shortened custom Fox 34 with a QR15 bolt-through axle and a full 150mm of travel, linked with the bar-mounted TwinLoc system. The Genius 900 uses a custom Fox 32 chassis with 130mm of travel.
    So the flexier wheel comes with the flexier fork ?

    And of course,

    Which bike is better, the Genius 700 or 900? Well, that’s down to the rider and trail to decide. The 27.5in-wheel 700 offers a slight edge over the 29er for ultra-aggressive riders on super-technical trails.
    One of the few articles i actually enjoyed reading.

  4. #4
    www.EpicCyclist.com
    Reputation: team_wee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    218
    Well I guess we need nails...
    As Scott-Swisspower team manager Thomas Frischknecht accidentally let slip in the product launch, 26ers are dead, at least for Scott, and with these new bikes we’re inclined to agree with him. The wheel size debate just went nuclear…

  5. #5
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,542
    Thank you Scott! I will now officially stop whining and complaining about what I had thought were your lack of plans for 27.5" in 2013, especially after the success of Nino Schurter.

    Read in another thread that Scott Sales Manager Adrian Montgomery has been reading this board . If the MTBR 650 b forum did have any influence on Scott (who knows, we are a fairly large bunch of informed and picky consumers) it is pretty clear why a 150mm Genius 27.5" was the bike to produce. There are plenty of XC racers on the board, who were looking for a Spark, but more trail and AM looking for a Genius. Since 26" is "dead" for Scott, a 27.5 Spark will probably come out 2014.

    There will be an awesome selection of trail and AM 27.5" bikes next year, Jamis, Turner, Intense, Norco, Ventana, Scott; all with great sounding specs. Wonder who will sell the most?
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    788
    So the new 650B Fox specific is an F34?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    23
    Wow, the Genius 700 is the exact bike I was hoping for someone to make. Sounds amazing!

  8. #8
    I should be out riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    888
    This just went on my short list for my next bike purchase. Still a bit much travel for me, really wanting 100 - 120mm and more XC orientation. Whoever builds it first will get the sale.

  9. #9
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,566
    Quote Originally Posted by GTR-33 View Post
    So the new 650B Fox specific is an F34?
    So far Fox has only tooled up to offer 34 series models in 650B. In the future they might extend it to the other platforms. As to the scott 900 using an F32, its probably because even in the numbers that Scott will buy, the F32 29er forks cost less than the F34 29er forks, and that lets them keep the price point for the 900 where they want it. The F34s are produced in smaller numbers than the F32s so their unit cost is higher.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  10. #10
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,542
    Quote Originally Posted by ACree View Post
    This just went on my short list for my next bike purchase. Still a bit much travel for me, really wanting 100 - 120mm and more XC orientation. Whoever builds it first will get the sale.
    Sounds like you're looking for a Spark 27.5. Assuming Scott is planning such a model, you won't see it till 2014.

    AFAIK, the closest to XC among the new bikes for 2013 is the Turner Burner. Trail bike travel @ 140mm, alloy frame at 5.5 lbs within 1/2 lb of the 700 carbon. But HA on the slack side for XC. If you aren't using the bike for actual XC racing, a trail bike is more fun to ride than XC, IME. More travel trumps weight weenie bike weight assuming you are not racing uphill. The descents are so much better
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Sounds like you're looking for a Spark 27.5. Assuming Scott is planning such a model, you won't see it till 2014.
    I would kill for a Spark 27.5 or an Anthem 27.5

    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    If you aren't using the bike for actual XC racing, a trail bike is more fun to ride than XC, IME. More travel trumps weight weenie bike weight assuming you are not racing uphill. The descents are so much better
    I think I'm not alone in preferring less travel for most riding, it's more fun, it's more technical. I used to have an Iron Horse Azure with 80mm travel which aside from not having room for tires > 2.1" was an absolute missile downhill. Look at 4x bikes, also not so much travel. Geometry and suspension design is much more important.

  12. #12
    I should be out riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    888
    Quote Originally Posted by elgatovolador View Post

    I think I'm not alone in preferring less travel for most riding, it's more fun, it's more technical.
    Exactly. I ride a rigid 29er SS, hardtail 650b (26" frame) with gears, and 100mm FS 26er right now. All are equally fun, just in different ways. 100mm gets me down the hills as fast as the 5" + others ride, and up the hills faster. If I want longer travel, i'll go ride my ktm with 12" of travel. For me, I just don't see the need for the travel that all these 'trail' bikes have. The problem is the xc bikes can be a bit steep and fragile, while the others are too heavy and slack.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,089
    A Scale must be in the mix somewhere.

    Fom the horses mouth.

    "As Scott-Swisspower team manager Thomas Frischknecht accidentally let slip in the product launch, 26ers are dead, at least for Scott, and with these new bikes we’re inclined to agree with him. The wheel size debate just went nuclear…"


    I like the look of the Genius but I'd have to see the suspension curves first. I suspect they have minimal anti squat and are relying on their tricky shock.
    A mini Genius at 130 to 140mm with 68 to 69 degreee head angle would be more for my kind of trail bike. 140mm plus is just too inaccurate, too much brake dive, too much flex for a trail bike.For a Trail bike , anything slacker than 68 degrees and you start to get more of the negatives of 29er with less positives. i.e. feels like a 29er without the traction benefits.
    Might as well be on a 120 to 130 mm 29er.
    Last edited by gvs_nz; 07-06-2012 at 12:44 PM.

  14. #14
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,542
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post

    I
    A mini Genius at 130 to 140mm with 68 to 69 degree head angle would be more for my kind of trail bike. 140mm plus is just too inaccurate, too much brake dive, too much flex for a trail bike.For a Trail bike , anything slacker than 68 degrees and you start to get more of the negatives of 29er with less positives. i.e. feels like a 29er without the traction benefits. Might as well be on a 120 to 130 mm 29er.
    Interesting comment. If what you say is true, then some of the new AM 650b's coming out in 2013 my not be ideal. AFAIK, Intense, Turner, and Ventana have 140mm+ sus. with slack HTA's


    Note that the Jamis 650 B2 has 69 deg HTA @ 130mm travel. Jamis has been in the game longer. so maybe they have hit on the optimum trail bike geometry for the wheel size. I love mine. I ]just worry about the frame durability, having read more than one post about chianstays breaking.
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,089
    I think 160mm AM FR DH will be fine.That's where 29ers can't compete.The gravity guys will see the benefit of more stabilty at speed . It's just the light AM sector where they use 67.5 ish degrees head angle plus 650B. The Genius 700 with No Ni tires is in that category. It's good they spec 70mm stem and 740mm wide bars. That's the minimum width bar and longest stem I'd use with a big 650B tire at 67.5 degrees. Anything less agressive and the steering is too sluggish, unless your at speed carving open trails. If your happy with that steering response you might as well be getting the extra rollover and cornering traction of a mid travel 29er with similar No Ni tires.
    I think they were alluding to that in this statement
    "For a lot of British riding, the magic mix of big wheels, big travel and low weight will make the Genius 29er a great option. 29ers would be the future for trail bikes as well as hardtails if it wasn’t for 650b bikes."

    At the other end of the spectrum, I can't understand why some want to put 900+ gm tires on a 29er. Do they reallly need that much traction and stabilty. Do they have hydraulic arms?

    I'm still riding all three wheel sizes. For a balance of trail to light AM riding, what feels neutral and well balanced to me is 66 to 70 deg in 26",68 to 69 in 650B and 69 to 70 in 29er land.
    Also scaling down in tire width from 2.4 in 26" to 2.25" in 29er land.
    Last edited by gvs_nz; 07-06-2012 at 10:31 PM.

  16. #16
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,542
    Quote Originally Posted by ACree View Post
    . For me, I just don't see the need for the travel that all these 'trail' bikes have. The problem is the xc bikes can be a bit steep and fragile, while the others are too heavy and slack.
    There are always compromises. I rode XC bikes exclusively until I broke my last two 26'er frames. When I got my Jamis B2, I not only moved moved up to bigger wheels, but an inch more travel. That combo has expanded the range of terrain I can ride comfortably and fast. The geometry is closer to XC than AM, but the weight is 5 lbs heavier than my XC. So long as I'm not being pushed, it climbs just fine. My comparison bikes now are HT 650b conversion and rigid 26'er SS. Definitely prefer the trail bike over all


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  17. #17
    The Bubble Wrap Hysteria
    Reputation: mtnbiker4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,128
    Quote Originally Posted by ACree View Post
    This just went on my short list for my next bike purchase. Still a bit much travel for me, really wanting 100 - 120mm and more XC orientation. Whoever builds it first will get the sale.
    I am certain Ventana will make you a custom short travel FS frame. Sherwood made me a semi custom 650B hard tail two years ago. Give them a call.

  18. #18
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    I think 160mm AM FR DH will be fine.That's where 29ers can't compete.The gravity guys will see the benefit of more stabilty at speed . It's just the light AM sector where they use 67.5 ish degrees head angle plus 650B. The Genius 700 with No Ni tires is in that category. It's good they spec 70mm stem and 740mm wide bars. That's the minimum width bar and longest stem I'd use with a big 650B tire at 67.5 degrees. Anything less agressive and the steering is too sluggish, unless your at speed carving open trails. If your happy with that steering response you might as well be getting the extra rollover and cornering traction of a mid travel 29er with similar No Ni tires.
    Hmm isn't the Genius 700 68º though ? At least that's what i've seen on some geometry graphs. Besides, this is all down to riding preferences.

    Exactly. I ride a rigid 29er SS, hardtail 650b (26" frame) with gears, and 100mm FS 26er right now. All are equally fun, just in different ways. 100mm gets me down the hills as fast as the 5" + others ride, and up the hills faster. If I want longer travel, i'll go ride my ktm with 12" of travel. For me, I just don't see the need for the travel that all these 'trail' bikes have. The problem is the xc bikes can be a bit steep and fragile, while the others are too heavy and slack.
    Just the other day i was seeing some Contour footage ( including speed/alt data ) from a well known Enduro race and as i watched i was thinking:

    "Why is he racing on a 150mm trail bike in this course ...?"

    The funny part was that on some parts there were 2 or 3 three distinguished lines to pick, mostly short and rocky or longer but mostly flat and althought they were all racing with 140+ travel bikes around 70% of the riders still chose the longer & flater lines.

    Why choose longer travel bikes if you're gonna choose the easy lines ? If you're choosing the easier lines you might as well get a shorter travel bike and reap the benefits of being lighter and faster on those trails.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbiker4life View Post
    I am certain Ventana will make you a custom short travel FS frame. Sherwood made me a semi custom 650B hard tail two years ago. Give them a call.
    There are a few of us that are looking for a 650b FS XC bike. However custom builders just aren't making what I am looking for. With XC bikes its all about weight and efficiency. Most custom builders are not using very efficient designs like VPP, DW, Maestro or Horst link with inertia valve. Most are just using Faux bar (or whatever you want to call it) and relying on platform damping to be efficient. They also are not making carbon frames. Most high end XC carbon frames now are sub 5 lbs. Most custom XC frames are well above 6lbs. If I could get what I wanted by going custom I would.
    2012 On One Whippet 650b
    2012 Santa Cruz TRc 650b
    2014 On One Dirty Disco
    2010 Soma Groove
    1987 Haro RS1

  20. #20
    The Bubble Wrap Hysteria
    Reputation: mtnbiker4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,128
    Quote Originally Posted by ljsmith View Post
    There are a few of us that are looking for a 650b FS XC bike. However custom builders just aren't making what I am looking for. With XC bikes its all about weight and efficiency. Most custom builders are not using very efficient designs like VPP, DW, Maestro or Horst link with inertia valve. Most are just using Faux bar (or whatever you want to call it) and relying on platform damping to be efficient. They also are not making carbon frames. Most high end XC carbon frames now are sub 5 lbs. Most custom XC frames are well above 6lbs. If I could get what I wanted by going custom I would.
    Then you will most likely be out of luck because the way I see it 100-120mm FS bikes are just not want everyone wants. It's a shame because I really want a 650B FS XC bike. How did 140, 150, or 160mm become the default standard for FS bikes?

    .

  21. #21
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,542
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post

    isn't the Genius 700 68º though ?
    .

    Couldn't find that anywhere. The Bike Radar Article says that the the frame has a flip chip, allowing the rider to raise BB and increase HTA, if preferred

    Why choose longer travel bikes if you're gonna choose the easy lines ? If you're choosing the easier lines you might as well get a shorter travel bike and reap the benefits of being lighter and faster on those trails.
    Absolutely. This is why a trail bike is as big as I can go. I can ride pretty much to the limit of that bike. But If I had 6" of travel, I wouldn't be able to do it justice, and would make myself open to a poseur accusation. Being over-biked is a waste of money for extra weight



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    Hmm isn't the Genius 700 68º though ? At least that's what i've seen on some geometry graphs. Besides, this is all down to riding preferences.
    You could be right. Maybe the slack setting on the chip is 67.5?

    They were spot on with the geometry on my Scale 29er. Hopefully they are on the mark with the Genius 700.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    .

    Couldn't find that anywhere. The Bike Radar Article says that the the frame has a flip chip, allowing the rider to raise BB and increase HTA, if preferred



    Absolutely. This is why a trail bike is as big as I can go. I can ride pretty much to the limit of that bike. But If I had 6" of travel, I wouldn't be able to do it justice, and would make myself open to a poseur accusation. Being over-biked is a waste of money for extra weight



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I need enough to safeguard the back. So just enough travel to bottom out when seated pedalling through a g out it what I look for. I'm finding latest generation 5" [127mm not 120mm] bikes that allow you to ride deep in to the travel[ early generation bikes ramped up to much] is spot on. That change in suspension design has much to do with the rebirth of the 5" slacker 26" trail bike. Tight, accurate light and fun. It's hard work trying to push a 150mm trail bike fast through the flat twisting trail.

    I suspect the Genius is targeted more at trips to the Alps. Long descents.

  24. #24
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,008
    There ya go,







    There are a few of us that are looking for a 650b FS XC bike. However custom builders just aren't making what I am looking for. With XC bikes its all about weight and efficiency. Most custom builders are not using very efficient designs like VPP, DW, Maestro or Horst link with inertia valve. Most are just using Faux bar (or whatever you want to call it) and relying on platform damping to be efficient. They also are not making carbon frames. Most high end XC carbon frames now are sub 5 lbs. Most custom XC frames are well above 6lbs. If I could get what I wanted by going custom I would.
    Well tbh i don't see many advantages on short travel bikes with those kind of suspension designs over the simple mono pivot. I've ridden many km's with a Cube ( which uses a Horst link ) and i saw no major improvements on a race compared to my mono-pivot. I actually prefer the mono pivot on a XC bike since it's usually more sensitive to the terrain and these days the platform shocks are more than good enough for these applications, most people who use FS XC bikes are those who do long marathons and i for one put confort over beeing a few % more efficient when i'm doing 90 or 120km's on the bike.

    When i want to be really eficient i just put the sub-22lbs HT to use.

    This of course is just my opinion and the way I like to race.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post

    When i want to be really eficient i just put the sub-22lbs HT to use.

    This of course is just my opinion and the way I like to race.
    Basically I am a hardtail rider at heart. I was a late adopter to FS, got my first in 2007. A hardtail is probably good for about 80% of the trails I ride. But the other 20% I really need a FS to safely ride, if my skills were better I could probably ride a hardtail on all the trails I ride. Being a hardtail fan I HATE bob, I do not like to feel pedal induced bob at all while seated, I can deal with a little while standing. I run my suspension on the stiffer side and find I don't need any more than 100mm for any place that I ride. So I see no reason to haul around all the extra weight of a 160mm monster machine. I do notice that the trend is for longer travel, but along with that I now see people walking their 160mm bikes uphill just so they can go down it. I have actually had people tell me that the only fun part of mountain biking is going down and that they have no desire to ride uphill.
    2012 On One Whippet 650b
    2012 Santa Cruz TRc 650b
    2014 On One Dirty Disco
    2010 Soma Groove
    1987 Haro RS1

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •