Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 131

Thread: 2013 Scott 27.5

  1. #1
    www.EpicCyclist.com
    Reputation: team_wee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    245

    2013 Scott 27.5


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69erEverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    675
    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
    948
    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
    245
    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
    4,169
    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
    983
    So the new 650B Fox specific is an F34?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    34
    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: ACree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,562
    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
    10,764
    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
    4,169
    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: ACree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,562
    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
    3,493
    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
    4,169
    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
    3,493
    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
    4,169
    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
    3,594
    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
    948
    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
    3,242
    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.
    2013 Santa Cruz TRc 650b
    2015 Lynskey Cooper CX
    2010 Soma Groove
    1987 Haro RS1

  20. #20
    The Bubble Wrap Hysteria
    Reputation: mtnbiker4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,594
    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
    4,169
    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
    3,493
    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
    3,493
    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
    948
    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
    3,242
    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.
    2013 Santa Cruz TRc 650b
    2015 Lynskey Cooper CX
    2010 Soma Groove
    1987 Haro RS1

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    There ya go,









    .
    Definately an Alps AM bike with the long wheelbase and chainstay and steep seat tube angle. Makes a Mojo look like a midget.

  27. #27
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    I don't know what the big deal is with Scott. Yes, they should be commended for doing 650B, but I personally don't like their FS designs. I don't like flipping switches to achieve efficiency. Heck, I went SS for simplicity. If ever I go back to gears, I'd do a 1x.

    That said, I'm one of the few looking for a short travel (100-120mm), lightweight (carbon maybe), efficient pedaling, slack full sus bikes. Something like the SC Blur TRc in 650B
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,038
    If your looking for a lightweight 650b XC bike, why not consider the Santa Cruz Blur XCcarbon? I know its not a "650b specific" frame, but at a little over 4 lbs for a large frame, fits most XC orientated 650b tires, I run 2.25 Schwalbe RR's with no clearence issues at all, its the perfect XC bike, I use mine for heavy trail riding also.
    I use a 120mm 26er Fox fork, again no clearence issues.
    Mine built up with SRAM XX, American Classic BXC650 wheels(convrted to tubeless) is a little under 23lbs.
    I cant wait for the 650b, 27.5 market to explode, it will bring a bunch of awesome wheels, tires and frames for all disiplines, but until then, and probably after, I'll be using the Blur.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493
    Wish I could afford one! Over here they want NZ$3700 just for the frame. My complete Anthem x 29er 1 cost that.

  30. #30
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by r1Gel View Post
    I don't know what the big deal is with Scott. Yes, they should be commended for doing 650B, but I personally don't like their FS designs. I don't like flipping switches to achieve efficiency. Heck, I went SS for simplicity. If ever I go back to gears, I'd do a 1x.

    That said, I'm one of the few looking for a short travel (100-120mm), lightweight (carbon maybe), efficient pedaling, slack full sus bikes. Something like the SC Blur TRc in 650B
    It's not a matter of being a superior design or frame, it's about "supporting" 650b and they were the first "big" brand to do it, it's about not spreading FUD and pissing on 650b just because you invested too much on 29r's *cough* Santa Cruz *cough*.

  31. #31
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    It's not a matter of being a superior design or frame, it's about "supporting" 650b and they were the first "big" brand to do it, it's about not spreading FUD and pissing on 650b just because you invested too much on 29r's *cough* Santa Cruz *cough*.
    +1.

    Not to mention *cough* Specialized, Trek and Giant *cough*.




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

  32. #32
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post


    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.
    Speaking of that, the Bike Mag test rides of the 700 and 900 were done

    "on the buff and fast singletrack of Sun Valley, Idaho. "

    Preview: Scott Bikes 650b Genius 700 and 29er Genius 900

    I've only ridden SV once and the trails I rode absolutely were baby butt buff. HT terrain all the way. The " fast" part implies you've got to climb to earn the descents. So HT 29" or 27.5" or 26" depending on which size you like better for climbing/ descending. But a total waste for trail and AM bikes. So what good at all is this "test?"

    Take them to Moab, Sedona, Fruita or whatever, then report on how they perform. Good grief.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by dwt; 07-08-2012 at 05:45 PM.
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Speaking of that, the Bike Mag test rides of the 700 and 900 were done

    "on the buff and fast singletrack of Sun Valley, Idaho. "

    Take them to Moab, Sedona, Fruita or whatever, then report on how they perform. Good grief.
    Scott's HQ is in Idaho, so I assume it was just simple logistics for a preview. Methow Valley would have been pretty good, but even there it is more scenic than technically challenging.

    The Southwest, Socal and the Alps are the real place for such a bike, and even most of Socal is total hardtail terrain. Same reason why Bionicon just won't do that well in the US- a bike that can capably climb 2000m vertical and then descend very technical terrain has no use here.

    That said, once I move to Europe, I will get a Scott, Liteville or Bionicon.

  34. #34
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    Hi H-Jeff. Would you know what your head angle came out to be with the 120-mm fork?
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  35. #35
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by elgatovolador View Post
    Scott's HQ is in Idaho, so I assume it was just simple logistics for a preview. Methow Valley would have been pretty good, but even there it is more scenic than technically challenging.

    That said, once I move to Europe, I will get a Scott, Liteville or Bionicon.
    Technically challenging terrain is necessary to test trail and AM bikes. Yes Scott's US headquarters is in SV Idaho in the Sawtooth Mtns. It's hard to believe that in the entire local trail system there is is no terrain suitable to test these bikes. I think we can all agree that buff singletrack is appropriate for testing HT's, and will tell you very little about trail or AM bikes, other than they are too heavy for that terrain.

    In live in NE USA and there is plenty of technical terrain here to test the Scott 700 and 900 both for climbing and handling difficult descents.

    No need to go to western US, BC, or Europe.

    As I recall the recent MBA shootout of suspension 27.5" and 29" bikes was also done on smooth terrain.

    Makes zero sense, that's my point.



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

  36. #36
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Dirt Rag report:

    http://www.dirtragmag.com/webrag/fir...-650b-and-29er



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

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    "As Scott-Swisspower team manager Thomas Frischknecht accidentally let slip in the product launch, 26ers are dead..."
    I really belive that in the mid to long term 650b is goning to replace 26ers. The industry needs new impluses and so, IMHO, it is just a logical consequence to convince the 26er enthusiats who will never switch to 29ers from the advantages of bigger wheels. And in my opinion 650b really seems to combine the advantages from both worlds.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    16
    Oh, and yes, this 650b Genius 700 is very cool

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,038
    I'm not totally sure, but guessing between 69/70 degrees.
    I disagree what some say about raking out the fork using 650b on a 26er fork, the wheelbase will not/ cannot change. I've heard discussions regarding that, I believe that it may slow the steering a tad, because of using a taller wheel in a fork designed for a shorter wheel, but I haven't noticed any ill effects

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    77
    It doesn't change the head angle or wheelbase, but bigger wheels increases "trail" the same as if you raked out the HA by some amount.

    Raising the BB also negatively affects handling. But if you're starting with a Blur XC it is still going to be in a normal range I guess.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Speaking of that, the Bike Mag test rides of the 700 and 900 were done

    "on the buff and fast singletrack of Sun Valley, Idaho. "

    Preview: Scott Bikes 650b Genius 700 and 29er Genius 900

    I've only ridden SV once and the trails I rode absolutely were baby butt buff. HT terrain all the way. The " fast" part implies you've got to climb to earn the descents. So HT 29" or 27.5" or 26" depending on which size you like better for climbing/ descending. But a total waste for trail and AM bikes. So what good at all is this "test?"

    Take them to Moab, Sedona, Fruita or whatever, then report on how they perform. Good grief.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Wait a minute there, we have plenty of rough & rubble in Sun Valley, you just need to get off the bloody highway and more than a 5 minute ride from town! We have some great backcountry trails where these bikes will excel, the testers just needed to travel a little (or at all). Convenience I suppose, or laziness.

    Common misconception with this part of Idaho. Since we have buff trails right in town (read: famous, beginner friendly), people have less incentive to venture past them to find the truly good stuff. No shortage of rides that abound with pucker factors well in excess of what you might find anywhere. If you stayed on the slickrock trail in Moab, you wouldn't get a good taste for what the enchilada was like either!

  42. #42
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,895
    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    It would be cool to see that 2013 Gambler with 650b wheels!

  43. #43
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by tigen View Post
    It doesn't change the head angle or wheelbase, but bigger wheels increases "trail" the same as if you raked out the HA by some amount.

    Raising the BB also negatively affects handling. But if you're starting with a Blur XC it is still going to be in a normal range I guess.
    Not a bad thing in some cases actually ... i know i benefited by the raise on the BB on both my bikes ( they had some pretty low BB's specially the FS, pedal strikes gallore ) !

    I could live without the increased trail and thus "slugishness" but nothing like some wider bars and some tweaks on the cockpit didn't fix though.

  44. #44
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by redbarn View Post
    Wait a minute there, we have plenty of rough & rubble in Sun Valley, you just need to get off the bloody highway and more than a 5 minute ride from town!
    I figured as much. You would have thought that Scott would have steered the testers to the appropriate terrain for these bikes.

    I had the same treatment when I was there fall 2010. Went to Sturtos to rent a bike and found a 26" Blur LT. Asked the guy at the shop to direct me to trails which would do the bike justice. He sent me to Lake Creek to Fox Creek to Prairie Creek to Chocolate Gulch. It was very pretty and there were one or two hike a bike sections, once I got high up, leading to a nice fast descent, but FS was entirely unnecessary. I would have been much better served with a HT of any wheel size.

    I ski there a lot & will return summer though and hope for a better trail referral for my 660b trail bike ( may be moving to Ketchum)

    [QUOTE ]n Moab, you wouldn't get a good taste for what the enchilada was like either![/QUOTE]

    Amen to that.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by dwt; 07-09-2012 at 05:55 PM.
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

  45. #45
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,977
    If you want the real variety of trails in the area, there is no other that the Teton Valleys. sun Valley, unfortunately, doesn't really have much variety or mileage in comparison. I know it hurts to hear, but it's pretty much exactly like the ski area...no longer top notch...;-)
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,038
    The Blur actually is better off with a slightly higher BB with the 650b wheels, imo, than with the 26" wheels. The trail issue, I can understand, but with no noticeable side effects.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,282
    I believe the journalists are taken on ego trails. Feel fast and flowy. The head of the area's chamber of commerce says a major misconception is all of SV and Ketchum's trail's are buffed. All my friends think the same. I've been up there twice this past few weeks and there are some nasty tight rocky off camber steep trails but you have to actually pedal up and around the mountain and beyond the giant dirt parking lot. The kind of stuff you don't want magazine writers crashing on and breaking shiny new bikes. Never the rider's fault, always the new wheel/suspension/theory/marketing.

  48. #48
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by westin View Post
    The kind of stuff you don't want magazine writers crashing on and breaking shiny new bikes. Never the rider's fault, always the new wheel/suspension/theory/marketing.
    Some folks in mtbr are missing their calling. They write well, know bikes inside and out, and presumably can ride them. Send resumes to the bike mags, get a gig, ride the crap out of the test bikes on appropriate terrain. Then report.


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

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493

  50. #50
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Wake me up when somebody actually rides the damn thing ... I really dislike these lengthy "preview" articles that sound more like brochures than anything else.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,226
    I'm waiting for is price and specifications. I will get to ride the bike at outerbike this year before I make a decision. I know this sounds crazy but the 29er can make a nice endurance race bike if you are in to that sort of riding with the 3 modes of travel and according to bike rumor only weighs ~24 lbs.

    Erik

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post







    Notice the stand over height is significantly better on the 900 29er over the 700 650b? Can this be correct?

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    908
    My understanding is that both bikes fit the same, but small differences in SO height are to be expected. That said, 1cm or less difference size-for-size is hardly what I would call significant.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493
    Quote Originally Posted by bedell99 View Post
    I'm waiting for is price and specifications. I will get to ride the bike at outerbike this year before I make a decision. I know this sounds crazy but the 29er can make a nice endurance race bike if you are in to that sort of riding with the 3 modes of travel and according to bike rumor only weighs ~24 lbs.

    Erik
    I think it's also lighter than the 650B 700 with it's heavier fork. They're both nice looking bits of kit though.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    If you want the real variety of trails in the area, there is no other that the Teton Valleys. sun Valley, unfortunately, doesn't really have much variety or mileage in comparison. I know it hurts to hear, but it's pretty much exactly like the ski area...no longer top notch...;-)
    ------------------------------------
    Ha! Wyoming speaks, good on you.

    Yup, Teton/Bridger/Wind Rivers et al are awesome rifts, but I'll put the White Clouds, Smokeys & Pioneers singletrack up against 'em any day!

    Basically the same chunk of the world, so really no argument. It's all about getting the trails built & maintained in either of our backwoods locals. If you build them faster, I will come over!

    I will say that Jackson is kicking Sun Valley's butt in developing the ski mountain though. Sun Valley Company is (very) old school, what are you gonna do...

  56. #56
    Life Is Short
    Reputation: fatcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,534
    That Scott looks like something that will be on the podium for a few Super D wins next year.
    Sweet bike.

  57. #57
    Let's Ride the WH Res
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    12
    Any speculation on pricing?

  58. #58
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Pinkbike also has some insight on them, First Look at Scott's 2013 Genius and Gambler - Pinkbike

  59. #59
    RTM
    RTM is offline
    #1 Latex Salesman
    Reputation: RTM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    Wish I could afford one! Over here they want NZ$3700 just for the frame. My complete Anthem x 29er 1 cost that.
    I'm in the same boat. this is exciting but ultimately I'll need to wait for the "Comp" model in aluminum to even have a shot.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    908
    my understanding is that price will be in-line or a bit less than the current models, at least in the US. So with the MSRP of the Genius 40 around $3300 for the current model, the MSRP of something like the 740 would be 3k+

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    33
    nice bike

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    908
    much bigger article posted locally. Nice to see the Al models as well. The 740 without the Nude shock seems like a poor choice though. I'd have gone for a lesser drivetrain to keep the 3 position platform.

    2013 Scott Genius 700 – 650b All Mountain Bike | Mountain Bike Review

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,116
    Quote Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Speaking of that, the Bike Mag test rides of the 700 and 900 were done

    "on the buff and fast singletrack of Sun Valley, Idaho. "

    Preview: Scott Bikes 650b Genius 700 and 29er Genius 900

    I've only ridden SV once and the trails I rode absolutely were baby butt buff. HT terrain all the way. The " fast" part implies you've got to climb to earn the descents. So HT 29" or 27.5" or 26" depending on which size you like better for climbing/ descending. But a total waste for trail and AM bikes. So what good at all is this "test?"

    Take them to Moab, Sedona, Fruita or whatever, then report on how they perform. Good grief.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm looking at the 700 as a Pisgah killer.
    "Bikes aren't fast--people are fast. Bikes are overpriced. It's an important distinction."---BikeSnob NYC

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493
    Quote Originally Posted by zombinate View Post
    much bigger article posted locally. Nice to see the Al models as well. The 740 without the Nude shock seems like a poor choice though. I'd have gone for a lesser drivetrain to keep the 3 position platform.

    2013 Scott Genius 700 – 650b All Mountain Bike | Mountain Bike Review
    The pivot posn looks like it's high enough to not even need the 3 posn shock anyway? If your running a double or single ring may need platform on the climbs?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2013 Scott 27.5-genius-bb.jpg  

    Last edited by gvs_nz; 07-14-2012 at 06:35 PM.

  65. #65
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    has anyone read the vital review? very interesting, sounds like they didnt like the 700 much but were pretty happy with the 900 (26 die hards too so the result is especially interesting).

  66. #66
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    has anyone read the vital review? very interesting, sounds like they didnt like the 700 much but were pretty happy with the 900 (26 die hards too so the result is especially interesting).
    Is that really that strange ? Different people like different things. I've had friends switching from 26r's to 29er's and had 29er's switch to 650b.

    As long they run a legit review, it's all good.

  67. #67
    RTM
    RTM is offline
    #1 Latex Salesman
    Reputation: RTM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by zombinate View Post
    my understanding is that price will be in-line or a bit less than the current models, at least in the US. So with the MSRP of the Genius 40 around $3300 for the current model, the MSRP of something like the 740 would be 3k+
    Its a carbon bike right? I just assumed that meant $6k+. Sub 4k i could sneak past the wife! Now you're talking.

  68. #68
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    Is that really that strange ? Different people like different things. I've had friends switching from 26r's to 29er's and had 29er's switch to 650b.

    As long they run a legit review, it's all good.
    yeah since 650bs claim to fame is having the benefits of a 29er without the drawbacks, yet in this case they said the 650b wheel offered little benefit over the 26'' and really wasnt a great ride all alround. obviously different people like different things but for a group of freeride 26'' guys to go with the bigger wheel is strange.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,242
    Quote Originally Posted by RTM View Post
    Its a carbon bike right? I just assumed that meant $6k+. Sub 4k i could sneak past the wife! Now you're talking.
    The lower end ones are aluminum. I doubt you can get a carbon one for under 4k, unless its on clearance or something.
    2013 Santa Cruz TRc 650b
    2015 Lynskey Cooper CX
    2010 Soma Groove
    1987 Haro RS1

  70. #70
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    yeah since 650bs claim to fame is having the benefits of a 29er without the drawbacks, yet in this case they said the 650b wheel offered little benefit over the 26'' and really wasnt a great ride all alround. obviously different people like different things but for a group of freeride 26'' guys to go with the bigger wheel is strange.
    After reading the entire article, them preferring the 29er's is actually pretty understandable. If you're a "die hard" 26'' affectionado do you really want to say that you biggest "threat", 650b, is better ?

    If 650b wheels are to take off, many bike models would cease to exist or would at least be relegated to the low entry models, like what we are seeing here with Scott.

    Specially when the article has quite a few contradictions and where they preferred one wheel size because of a certain attribute but then the same attribute is all of a sudden bad/good ? Not that good of an article imho ...

    It does make sense though and their opinion has some logic, if i was a 26er "fan" and i wanted to try out big wheels, the logic step would be a 29er instead of a 650b as that would give the biggest change, no "sense" of going to a 650b where it's still similar in behaviour to a 26er.

    But i never was a fan of reading online "reviews" as i believe they need a TON so salt when reading them so .... meh.

  71. #71
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    yeah since 650bs claim to fame is having the benefits of a 29er without the drawbacks, yet in this case they said the 650b wheel offered little benefit over the 26'' and really wasnt a great ride all alround. obviously different people like different things .
    No reason to exaggerate the 650b claim to fame. It does not have the benefits, namely roll, of a 29'er. It is not as nimble as a 26'er. It is in the middle . As such it rolls better than a 26' but not as well as a 29'er, and is more nimble than a 29'er but not as nimble as a 26'er.

    What intrigues me about the Vital (and other mag) reviews is which indeed is the better Genius trail bike: longer travel 650b or shorter travel 29'er?

    Dang I would love the luxury of being able to test both back to back in the right terrain and conditions.


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

  72. #72
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    26'' affectionado do you really want to say that you biggest "threat", 650b, is better ?
    i very much doubt any wheel size is going away.

  73. #73
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane Jeff View Post
    I'm not totally sure, but guessing between 69/70 degrees.
    thanks
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: carverboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    has anyone read the vital review? very interesting, sounds like they didnt like the 700 much but were pretty happy with the 900 (26 die hards too so the result is especially interesting).
    Vital seems to have pulled the review? All I can pull up is a pic of the 700 and 4out of 5 stars
    There is no write up at all,what gives? I clicked on some other articles and they were there so thinking something is going on

  75. #75
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    i very much doubt any wheel size is going away.
    Well I never said that they would disappear but rather that some popular models would cease to exist in 26'' format and that manufacturing/development focus would shift towards big wheels. Would you rather buy some bike/frame built specifically for 26" or something that was made with big wheels on mind and then scaled down to 26" ?

  76. #76
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Quote Originally Posted by carverboy View Post
    Vital seems to have pulled the review? All I can pull up is a pic of the 700 and 4out of 5 stars
    There is no write up at all,what gives? I clicked on some other articles and they were there so thinking something is going on
    http://www.vitalmtb.com/product/guid...ct-reviews/671


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

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LukeSPOOK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by carverboy View Post
    Vital seems to have pulled the review? All I can pull up is a pic of the 700 and 4out of 5 stars
    There is no write up at all,what gives? I clicked on some other articles and they were there so thinking something is going on
    Same for me, can't seem to access the review.

  78. #78
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    Well I never said that they would disappear but rather that some popular models would cease to exist in 26'' format and that manufacturing/development focus would shift towards big wheels. Would you rather buy some bike/frame built specifically for 26" or something that was made with big wheels on mind and then scaled down to 26" ?
    we will probably see some tinkering in bike companies lines to include a 650b and redundant models will be dropped but 26'' wont go away. there will always be purpose built 26'' bikes. scott is probably the only company that will take such a radical approach.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    82

  80. #80
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    we will probably see some tinkering in bike companies lines to include a 650b and redundant models will be dropped but 26'' wont go away. there will always be purpose built 26'' bikes. scott is probably the only company that will take such a radical approach.

    No wheel size will ever go away, there will always be someone who will make parts regardless. But with this economy and lower sales i bet there will be more companies doing what Scott is doing, at least with some models.

  81. #81
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    No wheel size will ever go away, there will always be someone who will make parts regardless. But with this economy and lower sales i bet there will be more companies doing what Scott is doing, at least with some models.
    every company has added, not replaced so far. turner, intense, jamis, khs. scott is the exception here. if what you are claiming is actually true why are there both 26'' and 29'' bike created for the exact same purpose?

  82. #82
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Like i said, i *bet* there will be more not that i *know* there will be. Look at Cannondale for example, for what is known so far there won't be carbon versions of the 26er Flash in the States, just 29er's. The new Scalpels ? The 29er's are new, the 26er's are last years model with a 2013 Lefty and somewhat new spec.

  83. #83
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    Quote Originally Posted by danielsilva View Post
    Like i said, i *bet* there will be more not that i *know* there will be. Look at Cannondale for example, for what is known so far there won't be carbon versions of the 26er Flash in the States, just 29er's. The new Scalpels ? The 29er's are new, the 26er's are last years model with a 2013 Lefty and somewhat new spec.
    as a whole cannondale seems to be kind of pulling back and doing some weird stuff lineup wise so they are not really a good bench mark. look at spec, trek, giant, sc, intense, turner; they all offer both 26 and 29 fs bikes in xc and trail/am.

  84. #84
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Well SC already chopped a few models and there are a couple rumors that they will chop some 26er models too ( like the Superlight or Highball ) sooo .... Apart from Intense or Turner ( which isn't in the same level as GT, Cannondale, Scott, etc in sales ) the only BIG name brand i see doing a 650b any time soon is Giant.

    And to be honest, if Trek releases a 650b bike anytime soon i will be REALLY surprised.

  85. #85
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    im talking 26 vs 29 redundancies, not 650b. it illustrates my point that companies add bikes and dont subsequently drop competing models of a different wheel size.

    btw the highball is a 29'' bike.

  86. #86
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    im talking 26 vs 29 redundancies, not 650b. it illustrates my point that companies add bikes and dont subsequently drop competing models of a different wheel size.

    btw the highball is a 29'' bike.
    Yes i know, i was just giving examples of models that would be 29er' only on the SC line-up ( although the Superlight was 26er ).

    My point is that there are companies who are dropping wheel sizes from certain models, maybe not all models and not all the brands will be doing it but it is being done nevertheless, and i bet there will be more models being phased out in favor of X size wheel in the future.

    I do know a couple more Euro brands, most boutique shops, who don't produce 26er's ( at least on certain models ) and focused on 650b and 29ers. If it doesn't sell in sufficient numbers to be considered worth making new molds, it makes sense to cut them off.

  87. #87
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    you are missing the point, brands havent phased one model out in favor of another with a different wheel size. maybe that will change but if you judge by whats available on the market today you would see the problem with what you have said.

  88. #88
    derp
    Reputation: danielsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    948
    Well i was talking about companies not offering a certain wheel size with their models not completely phasing out models altogether, at least i don't know any company who even did that ?

    But there are companies who are not offering the 26'' wheel as an option on certain models when in the past they were, and that is my point.

  89. #89
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    name a big or even semi big company that offers a 29'' bike with no 26'' competitor.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493
    26" will be here for a long time yet.

    Just read a UK DIRT mag and there was a were scathing article on 650B.
    There take was that 650b was for those who sat on the fence, poking 29ers, then deciding they were missing something when it caught on, but still can't bring themselves to buy a 29er.

    Sadly it's true in many cases.

  91. #91
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,895
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    name a big or even semi big company that offers a 29'' bike with no 26'' competitor.
    Niner?

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    908
    Quote Originally Posted by b-kul View Post
    name a big or even semi big company that offers a 29'' bike with no 26'' competitor.
    Salsa?

  93. #93
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    Quote Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    Niner?
    cheater

    Quote Originally Posted by zombinate View Post
    Salsa?
    i would call them a pretty small company. i was thinking more of a sc level at the minimum.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,169
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    26" will be here for a long time yet.

    Just read a UK DIRT mag and there was a were scathing article on 650B.
    There take was that 650b was for those who sat on the fence, poking 29ers, then deciding they were missing something when it caught on, but still can't bring themselves to buy a 29er.

    Sadly it's true in many cases.
    Scathing huh, well that's to bad. Consumer wins in the end with more choices. Sad, absolutely not. Nothing wrong with wanting something that looks/feels 26'r ish and may improve some ride characteristics without going 29'r. While I'm sure plenty of people will own all 3 sizes to play on for the majority it's a 1 quiver stable. Nothing wrong with not wanting a 29'r.

    Have a link to the article?
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    Consumer wins in the end with more choices.
    Usually, but not always. Look at the mess with bottom brackets and head tube standards. The 90s were nice because it was relatively simple, and we all had a lot of fun riding despite the equipment not being that great. If you wanted fancy equipment, you had Spin wheels, maguras + purple anodized bling. Everything else was having good technique + a big engine.

    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    While I'm sure plenty of people will own all 3 sizes to play on for the majority it's a 1 quiver stable.
    I personally do not want to own 3 sizes as it means 3 different sets of tires (and possibly tubes) and wheels. Forget having one set of nice race wheels.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,493
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post
    S

    Have a link to the article?
    No sorry. Hard copy. But I don't think you'll want to read it.

    I'll quote you the last line.The columist is Seb Kemp, no stranger to controversy on his opinion about industry changes.And yes he does have a 29er.

    "I'm thinking perhaps sit back and watch all these plonkers fly on their own hot air and hyperbole.DICK HEADS."

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,169
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    No sorry. Hard copy. But I don't think you'll want to read it.

    I'll quote you the last line.The columist is Seb Kemp, no stranger to controversy on his opinion about industry changes.And yes he does have a 29er.

    "I'm thinking perhaps sit back and watch all these plonkers fly on their own hot air and hyperbole.DICK HEADS."
    LOL, sounds like he's a bitter opionated dick head himself.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,169
    Quote Originally Posted by elgatovolador View Post
    Usually, but not always. Look at the mess with bottom brackets and head tube standards. The 90s were nice because it was relatively simple, and we all had a lot of fun riding despite the equipment not being that great. If you wanted fancy equipment, you had Spin wheels, maguras + purple anodized bling. Everything else was having good technique + a big engine.



    I personally do not want to own 3 sizes as it means 3 different sets of tires (and possibly tubes) and wheels. Forget having one set of nice race wheels.
    Totally agree on the BB and head set standards that can drive you nuts. I'm dealing with that right now on a replacement warranty Trek EX9 frame I got to replace a broken Fisher Hi Fi frame. I've spent hours trying to figure it all out so I order the right parts.

    It seems allot of guys on this forum own multiple bikes but still for many they have to get by with just 1 so the choice becomes more difficult. Personally I own 2 mtn. bikes, 1 road bike and 2 dirt bikes. Not to mention my 3 kids and a girlfriends mtn. bikes I get to maintain. Still, I would like a 29'r to play on as well but I don't see that in the cards anytime soon.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  99. #99
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    582
    Yolo

  100. #100
    dwt
    dwt is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dwt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,169
    Writing a scathing article about something as trivial as a wheel size to me indicates a mental problem. Or perhaps compensation for a small package, or crap bike handling skills and constantly getting dropped by your friends. Anyway a loser.

    If you wanted to be a dick on the other extreme you could point out that Brian Lopes in his book on Mt Bike skills says he never had a problem rolling through stuff on his 26'er, so why would he want heavier, less nimble and slower accelerating bike for better roll he doesn't need? Originally he was talking about 29'ers, but I suppose the Argument would apply to 650b

    Therefore, you could argue that the best riders, like Lopes, ride 26" AM because they can, and 26" is always the lightest and best handling bike. Those of us who can't ride bigger wheels for the roll. The bigger you need, then the worse bike handler you are, eh?

    Of course the argument doesn't apply to XC where bigger
    is faster. And maybe bigger will prove faster in other disciplines. Meanwhile Lopes will smoke everyone's ass on his 26'er Mojo HD, no matter how big everyone else's wheels are












    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by dwt; 07-17-2012 at 08:55 AM.
    Old enough to know better. And old enough not to care. Best age to be.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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