Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 58
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157

    2011 Scott Genius 30 vs. Giant Trance X1

    Perhaps it's not apples to apples (the Scott coming in at roughly 1000 bucks more, if my math is correct), but if it's THAT much more bike, I'd consider it.

    I thought it was going to be a slam-dunk for the X1, until I saw pics of the Genius 30 and had to fetch my bib.

    What are the comparisons between the Maestro system and the Genius system? I'm wondering if all those on-the-fly adjustments just mean more things to possibly go wrong (Scott).

    Any and all suggestions/opinions welcome. Pound for pound, dollar for dollar, which one would you choose and why?

    Thanks, and happy trails.

    Steve

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: midas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    80
    Indeed, the two bikes are not comparable, as the Genius is a long-travel marathon bike, and the Trance is a trail bike.
    In short: suspension-wise, the Maestro is years ahead of the Scott system, in every way (climbing, descending, out of the saddle efforts, small bump compliance). The same goes for the shock (damping&rebound consistency, weight, reliability, difficulty in setting it just right).

    In favour of the Genius, it has a very special feeling riding it, the Trance seems a bit dull in comparison, most probably because the genius is made from carbon?? Also the construction and finish of the Scott is actually light years ahead of the Giant. After just a few rides you could tell the wear on the Giant - the Scott looks as new even after a couple of bad crashes)

    My experience comes from riding a 2009 Genius 30 and a 2010 ReignX for about 60 rides each. I also did ride an older Trance model just for a short ride, but I understand that they share the same Maestro riding characteristics as my ReignX. I should also mention that I had two blown Equalizer shocks in that time, but with excellent service from the importer.

    I can't recommend to you one bike over the other, I know people that are happy with their Genius bike, it's all down to your needs and where you ride. Good luck with your choice

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Hey, Midas,

    Golden answer....thanks....but I had no idea I'd be opening a can of words (in my head). All very useful stuff, but now it has me thinking about what I really want/need.

    I'm 50 (he bragged), but I can still push myself hard. Having a bike that is well-constructed is huge. I hate creaks and rattles and loose-fitting stuff. Easily scratched would also be an irritant. I heard that the finish on the Giant is much improved, and the X1 is a metallic silver finish, making me think it wouldn't be an issue.

    On the other hand, you say that the Giant has a superior ride in terms of climbing, descending, and overall suspension. Wouldn't that tough to achieve if the bike were rather clumsily constructed, relative to the Scott?

    Not being able to test ride either here in Korea, it's a lot of analysis paralysis until I gather enough facts/opinions to be able to make the right choice before forking out (MTB humour, eh) my hard earned pay.

    What was it that was unique about the Scott, other than a certain "feel"? I wonder how they were able to nail down construction and fit without attending to the very real issue of suspension. It is, after all, an all-mountain bike.

    Thanks for your input, and happy trails.

    Steve

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: midas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    80
    Steve, it's not that the Giant is poorly constructed or suffers from any creaks, rather that it scratches and dents easily. Rocks that the front wheel picks up leave marks on the downtube - I've put protective tape since, but there's dents and an ugly hairline crack already there, probably nothing serious, but very annoying to see.
    The Scott on the other hand did land on a boulder and bounced 2 feet up in the air on an occasion, I thought that it was totalled, but there appeared to be only a minor scratch! On the toptube as well, which I doubt is as tough as the downtube.

    The Genius is NOT an all-mountain bike! It feels sketchy on the steeps! It places your weight too far on the front of the bike (for more efficient pedalling? I don't know) This is probably the most important thing to note when making your decision. It may feel like it has 'instant acceleration', or 'live handling' as you read in the mags, but to me it all translated to 'nervous handling'.
    I tried many things to rectify that behaviour, wider tires, wider/taller handlebars, shorter stem, more sag than recommended on the shock all to little effect, and then I test-rode a Reign (also with 150mm suspension travel)... my Genius was up for sale the same day!

    If the trails you ride are less demanding, or if your skills are up to it, then it (the Scott) could well be the better choice for you, just don't forget that it essentially is a long-travel marathon-racing bike.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    @ Midas:
    That's wild, I've never heard of little pebbles denting a Giant's downtube at all, let alone cracking it. I've been riding my Reign for months with zero dents or dings. A few little paint chips (the biggest one is the size of a dot with a sharpie pen), but if your frame has a crack, there was obviously some sort of flaw there that caused the failure. I'd send it back to Giant through your LBS immediately to get it replaced. Gotta love lifetime frame warranties.

    @ Steve, I would warn you to be careful with carbon, as it hides its damage well, until it decides to fail completely. Little to no warning at best. While little rocks don't leave visible dents as easily in carbon, rest assured that damage to the fibers is still being done on a micro scale. Those broken fibers no longer can support load directly as designed to do. It then relies completely on the epoxy binder for its strength, which is a cause of carbons often violent breakage. If metal is dented, it can still usually offer some if not most of its original strength.

    I am a complete carbon whore, I'll admit it. I've been making things with carbon cloth tows, etc using epoxy and cyanoacrylate binders since the age of about 6 (under the guidance of my dad). After high school, I worked in a shop making $80,000 yacht sails for the America's Cup boat race using kevlar, carbon and spectra strengthening tows. I adore it. Sexy, super light, and so strong for its mass. But it's not much of a choice for me when I want a long-lasting bike frame. Not to negate the use of carbon though. It has a place in biking for sure. I just don't think that place is in the AM category quite yet. Approaching, yes, but not fully there. To me, Santa Cruz is the only maker that does a truly great job on real all-mountain carbon frames (up to this point, anyway). I personally would take my chances with dented metal than weakened carbon fiber any day of the week. The Genius isn't really as you say, an all-mountain bike. A newly converted road biker may feel it is, but as Midas said, it will feel very sketchy in comparison to something like a TranceX if going downhill, because of the leaned-forward body position of bikes of that type. Definitely an XC geometry. I'd shy away from it if you're working on getting more comfortable in rougher or steeper terrain.

    If you are starting to lean toward carbon, I'd check out something like a Santa Cruz Blur LTc. Extremely good bike for general AM riding. That VPP suspension is every bit as good as the Maestro to me, as well. If you want something bigger that will handle everything from steep climbs to big DH drops and everything in between, I'd look at a carbon Nomad. Very new, very pricey, but very very sexy. If those options are just too pricey, stick with aluminum. Tried, true, light and strong.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  6. #6
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    i dont want to get into the whole validity for carbon an mountain bikes but they are covered in a very hard finish and i be very surprised if any kicked up pebles were actually breaking through to the carbon fiber.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Hey guys,

    Well, given the terrain here, and the relative degree of difficulty versus some of the trail descriptions of of the mtbr forum members, I'd say I shouldn't be too concerned about boulders. The odd ding I can live with, but cracks and anything that would compromise the integrity of the frame would have me looking elsewhere. I don't suspect I'm in that territory, though.

    I was curious about the terminology....pull versus compression. My guess is that the Trance would be more to my liking in that regard....a little more plush on nail-biting drops, and with the orientation further back, a bit more confidence inspiring. I'm starting to take more chances, but I still don't want to go to a forky downhill only bike.

    I'm actually not leaning toward carbon....no danger of becoming a whore (hey, how'd that pass the censors, huh?). I perhaps erroneously put the 30 on my wish list. I'd rather stay away from carbon for price reasons mainly. I know the premium (for me, at least) can't be justified. Weight savings, great. I might have meant to put up the 40.

    Moving from a hardtail, it might make sense to go with the geometry of the Scott, but, correct me if I'm wrong, but am I just moving to Anthem (to use a Trance vs Anthem analogy) territory by choosing the Scott? I don't see the need for the LT version, or its ilk, because I'm just telling myself to be a downhill-only rider. I just want the best all-round FS bike, that isn't racer-oriented (we just don't have miles and miles of contiguous trail here in Korea), but is still good for road, some tough climbs, descents with some drops (but no 2 or 3 foot drops), and single track.

    I know that it's tough to find a one-size-fits-all kind of solution, but there ya go....geez, it's 3 a.m. here....what the hell am I still doing up?

    Happy trailzzzzz

  8. #8
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    a pull shock is where the piston is pulled out of the shock body, dt swiss makes the equilizer for scott i think. a compression shock the piston gets pushed into the shock body. not sure which is more plush, any difference is probably due more to the linkage than the actual shock.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Thanks.

    The pull shock on the Scott looks a bit more cumbersome. A bit mean, but still bulky. Another poster had said that the Scott wins in terms of construction and fit, but the Trance in terms of suspension and overall ride. (If I'm summing his words up faithfully).

    My instincts are telling me that the Trance X1 is the one I'll go for. The Trance X2 fits the budget nicer, and I like the colour better, but wonder if I'll regret not getting the more responsive shifters, shock adjustability, and slightly lighter frame on the X1. The debate comes down to price alone.

    Happy trails.

  10. #10
    meow meow
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,622
    i be warry of the equilizer only because it is a proprietary part.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: midas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by charging_rhinos
    That's wild, I've never heard of little pebbles denting a Giant's downtube at all
    A little misunderstanding there, I never said little pebbles, where I ride there's baby-head size rocks everywhere, loose rocks over rocks, rockgardens probably not the best environment for a Genius anyway(silly me for buying into Scott's categorization of the Genius as AM )

    I don't think there's something wrong with the bike because it dented: I tried to roll over a boulder, had a nasty contact with it, and that was it - even the bashguard looks very worn after a few months of riding. There's clearly a problem with the paint though - probably not common to all Giant frames - it chips away too easily, like it wasn't allowed enough time to dry or something. Send it back to the Giant importer in Greece??? That's a laugh!!! It took them two months to sort the problem with the wrong headset that came with the frame and that was only after I threatend with a lawsuit- it would probably take them a year to warrant the frame

    Happy trails, everyone

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,560
    Quote Originally Posted by midas
    -snip-
    I don't think there's something wrong with the bike because it dented: I tried to roll over a boulder, had a nasty contact with it, and that was it - even the bashguard looks very worn after a few months of riding. There's clearly a problem with the paint though - probably not common to all Giant frames - it chips away too easily, like it wasn't allowed enough time to dry or something. Send it back to the Giant importer in Greece??? That's a laugh!!! It took them two months to sort the problem with the wrong headset that came with the frame and that was only after I threatend with a lawsuit- it would probably take them a year to warrant the frame

    Happy trails, everyone
    Yeah, I wondered if the swoopy downtube might get damaged where it can't be covered by a bashguard...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Hmmm....

    I find it curious that the Genius might NOT be considered all mountain, given its focus on flexibility of travel on both the front and rear suspension. I have a bit of trouble with the AM term anyway, as opposed to something considered more of a trail bike. Why not just call AM a downhill? Anyway, enough of semantics....

    The original reply was talking of the differences....bike geometry of the Genius being a bit sketchy on hills (both up and down). That made me ponder the efficacy of the suspension, more than tube angles. And of that, it seems very similar to the Trance. So what am I not getting? What would make the Scott the inferior bike over the Trance in them thar hills? Adjustability-on-the-fly aside, is their suspension system simply not as advanced and smooth as the Maestro's?

    Fit and finish, construction, dings and dents....my guess is there's pluses and minuses for aluminum and carbon....I would also think, as one of the posters opined, that today's carbon would be coated well enough that it would take a serious bang to break into the fibrous structure and cause frame integrity to be lost. Perhaps aluminum might hold up better in that regard.

    As I've said before, I want a capable all-round bike. I'm not going to the store for milk, and I'm not doing marathons, or serious ATV-like bombs over all kinds of terrain. I want the best bang for the buck most durable mtb for road, trails, go-up-and-go-down stuff, and increase my confidence in areas (specifically staggered series of drops, over roots, small rocks, etc.), since I'm using a HT with only 100 mm of travel. I would think that the Trance, with 125 mm would give me slightly more ability on the front, and the Maestro would help me sink down on the back end. The Genius just has that much more travel front and back, so why wouldn't it be superior? What am I missing?

    Thanks....and happy trails as always.

    Steve

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    Geometry:
    They are fairly similar, that's true. Especially with the new 2011 bikes. I actually went down to the local Scott dealer because of this thread just to check the genius out so I wouldn't be spraying false info. The head tube angle of the Genius is actually slightly more slack than that of the Trance, which seems due to the addition of the Talas fork on the front. But that seat tube angle, combined with the degree more slack head tube on the Scott seemed to make the Genius climb a bit strange. I think it felt better when the fork was brought down to a lower travel amount. Overall, it's construction is still seemingly more geared toward the light side of AM riding though. The ride felt more 'spindly', for a lack of a better word, than the trance. Maybe it had something to do with bottom bracket heights when riding, which i neglected to measure.

    Scott is trying hard to improve their image in the AM category, in which they have only had marginal success thus far. I totally respect that goal. The Genius is more AM than it used to be, for sure. I know others will disagree, but it still seemed like a road biker's AM bike more than a mountain biker's AM bike, if that makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve L. Knievel
    Adjustability-on-the-fly aside, is their suspension system simply not as advanced and smooth as the Maestro's?
    In a word, no. The Genius' suspension is not anywhere near as advanced as the Trance's. It is decent, and I don't want to bash it. But as far as pedaling efficiency and overall plushness is considered, well, there's no comparison. If you are worried that the Genius might be able to handle more varied terrain due to the larger amount of travel, don't be. A good suspension design will always trump one that has more travel (as you probably realize). I rode a custom DH bike once with 13" of rear travel, and it wasn't nearly as good as an 8" bike with a better suspension design.

    Regarding the bikes in question, on my test rides, I must again admit my Giant bias. I love 'em. But I did try to be as objective as possible, for what it's worth. I do love many things about Scott and their bikes, so I'm not a hater or anything. Ok, on to my impressions:

    Overall impressions: The Genius pleasantly surprised me. Nice and rigid frame (of course it was, it's got a great carbon lay-up). I did not, however like the rather jittery feel of the bike. The Giant was exactly as I suspected. Super solid performer up and down.

    Fast chop. The nemesis of many suspension systems. The Maestro tracked FAR better over choppy ground and felt much less like a rubber band than the Genius. Velvety smooth. Night and day difference. The Scott's back end felt a bit bouncey and harsh over hard chatter bumps and rocks while going fast.

    Small 2'-ish drops (one-hits on the suspension): Bigger one-hits were pretty smooth on the Scott. Nice damping. The Maestro felt similar on bigger hits.

    Climbing: The Giant did noticeably climb better than the Scott when I pedaled harder. The Scott started out climbing very well if I was pedaling lightly, but the harder I cranked, the bouncier it got. Adjusting the suspension couldn't get rid of it without adversely affecting the rest of the performance of the shock. The Trance's rear triangle progressively stiffened up more as I pedaled harder. Again, I admit my bias, but there was little comparison between the rear suspension of the two. Giant won that one.

    Lastly, I must say that suspension parts will eventually wear out. It'll be a LOT easier to replace something off the Trance than the Genius. Servicing that pull shock alone would seal the deal against it in my mind. There's a good reason most companies don't go with pull-style shocks any more.
    Last edited by charging_rhinos; 10-10-2010 at 05:37 PM.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Rhinos,

    Thanks for yet another brilliant post. You fill in blank spaces with each response. I guess I needed it spelled out a bit more.

    As much as I think the Scott is clearly the better looking bike, I have found myself leaning toward the Trance. Is it because you write so well? Perhaps. I appreciate your unique insights and detailed responses. I've received plenty of glowing reports about the Scott, and my dealer friend here personally rides one....a 2007, I think. But if skittish is in the mix, count me out. Carbon's longevity relative to metal fatigue notwithstanding, I need to count rubles, and think of the drain of maintenance as well.

    Unless something else blows me away at the upcoming bike show here in Seoul (I'll be sure to bring the aforementioned bib), chances are I'll be riding a Trance before too long.

    Happy trails.

    Steve

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    steve i currently own a 2010 genius 10 and used to ride a 2010 trance. overall (which is what you seem to be looking for) the genius is the better bike in IMHO. i have owned a number of giants prior to purchasing the scott thus no bias whatsoever here.

    i have had no problems with the pull shock which is after all made by DT-Swiss. my bike is under warranty so if there is a problem with the shock i am sure it will be replaced. if it is out of warranty the cost of a new pull shock as far as i know is no more than of a new fox or RS. of course very difficult to find a second hand one. i suggest you make an effort if possible to ride both bikes, because the genius is under rated and if you read more around mtbr suspension design is one of many factors in choosing a bike.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Damn....my post disappeared into the ether.

    Thanks for your input.

    For me, suspension is 90% of the reason for the upgrade. Having something that plants firmly, tracks true, and doesn't bob and weave like Ali is what's on the shopping list.

    Availability of parts is important too, and having a dealer network. Here in Korea, I think both bikes are well represented.

    As for test rides, nope. Read mtb forums, blogs, go to the store and squeeze the brakes, sit on the seat, bounce up and down, make purchase.

    The last thing I want is to get my dream bike, get it out on the trails, and go SH#T!

    Hopefully the bike show in 2 weeks will answer a lot of questions for me. Here's hoping the light goes on in my head and I find the right one for me.

    Happy trails.

    Steve

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Re: test rides.

    They simply are not offered or allowed here in Korea. Not when buying a new bike. And I don't know of places that really sell used, other than Craigslist and Korean sites, perhaps.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    what about in the parking lot of the shop at least to give you a feel for each bike. surely when spending so much money your LBS would allow you to ride the bike even if it is to size it up. all i am saying is that they are different bikes and it comes down to the individual. i don't think one is better than the other for all people. just my 2c worth.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    steve let me assure the genius carbon 'plants firmly, tracks true, and doesn't bob and weave like Ali'. hence, why i believe you need to test ride it because i am not sure what gave you that view. most good branded bikes (and the scott carbon genius is not cheap) that i have ridden no matter the suspension design plant firmly, track true, and don't bob and weave like Ali. i have many friends who can't even tell the difference in bob between single pivot, DW, maestro or VPP. and again 'planting firmly, tracking true, and no bob and weave like Ali' is not simply a factor of suspension.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Thanks, Rondet

    The Ali comment was my own....I was spinning off of a comment earlier about the Genius not having nearly the suspension of the Giant, nor tracking as well on climbs or being as capable on the downhills. Whether it's the reality for me or not I'll never find out. I won't buy both.

    Test rides, even in parking lots....being a foreigner here....or even if I were a local....I just don't know. If you've established a relationship with a LBS, perhaps you might be able to. Parking lots in Seoul are a rarity, unless under office towers. Sitting on the bike and getting a "feel" for it, is about all I can do. Return policies are non-existent. Customer service on the front end is exemplary here....absent after the purchase.

    Hence my posts. Doing as much "homework" as I possibly can. Thanks for your assitance.

    Happy trails

    Steve

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    in that case i feel for you as that is not a good environment to purchase an expensive bike, especially if you have a few in mind and never ridden either. research helps but it is no substitute. anyway, i would still insist on a short around the block test ride even if it is just to size up as that is a factor also. good luck and hope you make the right choice for you!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Thanks Rondet.

    I just got a reply from the Scott rep here in Korea. The 2011 Genius 30 won't arrive until Spring. The cost will be about a thousand more than is listed on the Scott USA site (3700 USD). That kinda sucks. I'm not sure if it puts it off the radar, but it just might. The bike looks so sweet. I just had one poster who was steering me away from the Scott (not trashing it, but singing the praises of the Trance).

    I'm sure both have their merits, and each to his own.....otherwise there'd be a one-size-fits all solution to all of our biking needs.

    I hope the Trance X1 is on the floor at the upcoming bike show....for side by side comparisons, I'm out of luck. I could compare the 2010 Scott with the '11 Trance. I'll either have to wait until March to see the new droolworthy 30, or just go with the Trance. Better than a kick in the nuts, either way.

    Happy trails

    Steve

  24. #24
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    I have the 2009 Scott Genius 50 which shares the same geometry with the 2011 Genius 30 (I have 150mm fork travel also). Looking at the spec below, why would the Trance be any better than Genius when climbing/descending? Everyone knows about the Equalizer shocks so let's put that on the side. Other than the rear shock, what else makes the Trance any better bike than Genius (handling wise... up/downhill).

    Thank you.
    **********************

    Spec: Scott (small)
    Head Angle 68.5
    Top Tube (horizontal) mm 555
    Seat Angle (degree) 73.5
    Wheelbase mm 1086
    Stem mm 80

    ****************

    Spec: 2011 Trance X1 (small)
    Head Angle 69.5
    Top Tube (horizontal) mm 559
    Seat Angle (degree) 73.5
    Wheelbase mm 1082
    Stem mm 70

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    Quote Originally Posted by Tjay
    I have the 2009 Scott Genius 50 which shares the same geometry with the 2011 Genius 30 (I have 150mm fork travel also). Looking at the spec below, why would the Trance be any better than Genius when climbing/descending? Everyone knows about the Equalizer shocks so let's put that on the side. Other than the rear shock, what else makes the Trance any better bike than Genius (handling wise... up/downhill).

    Thank you.
    **********************

    Spec: Scott (small)
    Head Angle 68.5
    Top Tube (horizontal) mm 555
    Seat Angle (degree) 73.5
    Wheelbase mm 1086
    Stem mm 80

    ****************

    Spec: 2011 Trance X1 (small)
    Head Angle 69.5
    Top Tube (horizontal) mm 559
    Seat Angle (degree) 73.5
    Wheelbase mm 1082
    Stem mm 70

    It's precisely the rear shock system that sets the new Scott apart from the TranceX, so you can't set that aside, really. The older Scotts were much more XC oriented bikes. The New ones are much more AM than they used to be for sure, and quite close in terms of frame measurements. But it's in the rear triangle where you'll find the performance gains of the Trance. The floating pivot linkage is simply superior in terms of absorption of rough terrain, and it climbs more efficiently than the Scott. You can tune the Scott to climb as well as the Giant, but you'll lose the bottomless feel that the Trance gets when descending. If you tune it for that side of the spectrum, you'll lose the climbing efficiency it can offer, and you'll either bob or rely completely on a platform valving system (the bike world's version of a band-aid fix). The Scott is a great bike. I just don't like it for the price.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Tjay, Rhinos...

    Thanks...I thought the thread was dead.

    Update: I did get a chance to test ride...quite surprised that it was on the table. There was a a bike show (not a really major one) in Seoul last weekend, and in the parking lot, I got to ride the Trance X2 (not ideal...I wanted the X1...all I could do was run my hands over it in Giant's booth....sit on it, squeeze the brakes, etc).
    Re X2, the problem was the tires were under-inflated, and the rear shock wasn't juiced up enough...as such, the ride was kind of mushy. So all opinions wouldn't be fair. I got a feel for frame size (I'm just a tad under 6 feet, and about 220 pounds, I guess....what's 100 kg?) and rode the Medium. Getting used to the different head and seat tube angle over my HT Trek was a bit of a learning curve....not that it's like a chopper, but you get my point...turning felt different. Anyway....on to your points.

    Rhinos, what exactly DO you like about the Scott? It seems like you lean heavily toward the Trance. I know earlier you mentioned build quality, but I'm wondering how that could reasonably be compared (broken frames on drops, rattles, loose fitting parts? or is it more due to the carbon whore comment?) I could see geometry being a factor, but there really isn't a whole lot different, as per Tjay's specs. It might favour the Trance, for top tube and wheelbase, relative to my physical makeup.

    Climbing? Descending? Handling? Acceleration? BIke weight? Components? Straight line comfort?

    Price independent, the Scott looks quite the stunner. I'd take it on the bling factor, but I'm not sure what the final MSRP will be here (I got an email from the Korean importer, letting me in on a Genius 20 for about 4300.00, but it was a S frame....I'm guessing the 2011/30 will be slightly higher...so I'd guess about 500 dollars more than the Trance. In the end, is it worth it for bling? More fork adjustability and travel?

    Happy trails.

    Steve

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    "Tjay, Rhinos...Thanks...I thought the thread was dead." so did i.

    however, i really do not understand the fuss about the genius shock. rhinos, what exactly do you not like about it? have you been on a 2010 or 2011 genius or know for a fact that the majority of genius owners have had problems with it? there were reports of some reliability issues, but i thought that was in past. i am sure the 2011 DT-swiss shock on the genius would be even more reliable. i have had no problems with it and it feels great!

    i will say again in comparison to the trance i don't believe there is that much more noticeable bob. that's coming from experience, not by way of a technical comparison of the two suspension designs. overall the genius feels like a much better bike anyway.

    steve have a look in the scott thread and most of the reviews are positive!

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    I know I might sound like I don't like the Scott at all, and I want to assure you that it's not the case. Might I ask of you why you like the Scott over the Giant? Just for curiosity's sake. I have ridden the new Scott Genius, as I described in an earlier post in this thread. I didn't get to take it for any extended period of time (as in a few days), but I think I got a pretty good feel for how it behaves. Here are my only two complaints with the Scott:

    1) Pull shocks. It works fine, and DT is a great company for sure. The part I hate is that of the hard-to-find parts. Rare parts are a pain in the ___ to deal with. Sure, all companies have their proprietary seal kits and everything, but how many shops actually carry DT pull-shock replacement seals and things like that in stock? They do wear out just as fast as any other models, and will need replacing. The shops can surely order them, but I love the fact that I can walk into 90% of bike shops in all the world, tell the clerk I want a seal kit for my DHX Air, and it's back together and I'm riding in half an hour or less. That's what I don't like about the DT rear shock.

    2) The rear suspension design of the Scott isn't, in my opinion, as good and well thought-out as the floating pivot Maestro/DW-Link/VPP systems. I don't know ho much you know about suspension, so bear with me if you already know all this. I'm a mechanical engineer and have been studying suspension designs for about 6 years now, and I'm currently designing my own DH suspension system, so I feel I can speak with a decent amount of authority on the topic. Scott uses a variation of the standard linkage-actuated single pivot, as do most other makers, like Kona, Trek, Specialized, etc. They work fine, it's true. But the more recent floating pivot seems to me to add a new level of plushness, while not sacrificing uphill performance. Single pivots rely entirely on the valving and damping characteristics of the shock to provide both the absorption/damping necessary for rough terrain, and to cancel out pedal bob. Basically, you're asking the shock to plat the part of a really stiff shock one minute, then asking it to be really soft and plush the next. That can lead to a tuning nightmare, and it often does. You tune it to handle downhill and rough terrain better, and it will usually bob more on climbs. Tune it to climb efficiently like a hardtail, and it often feels harsh and pogo-sticky on rough stuff. It can even lead to the feeling of an effective loss of travel if the shock needs to be stiffened too much for climbing. Shocks, unless you get into the world of multi-valved DH racing shocks, aren't all that great at striking the perfect balance between the two extremes, so they invented the platform valve. Basically choke the shock down on the climbs so it feels nice and stiff, then open the valve to gain the lost plushness and travel. Band-aid on the problem, rather than designing a system that will avoid the problem altogether. Most find settings in between those extremes that work well enough, and leave it at that, never knowing that they can have more of both characteristics, making their ride even better at both climbing and descending. Enter floating pivot links.

    The magic of the f.p.l. lies in the small, secondary link added between the frame and the chainstay/axle. The angles and location of that link dictate much of the climbing performance. When you pedal harder, chain tension draws the chainstay in. The link forces the chainstay to move downward, counteracting the vertical 'bob' force that pedaling can induce. I'll refrain from getting into it further unless you want me to, and I'll PM you more info.
    Very long story kinda short: when you turn around and descend on a f.p.l. frame, there's no lever to mess with (or forget and leave on), no harshness, etc. It's the bike's full amount of travel, and buttery smooth. That feeling, to me, builds a lot of confidence and control on the downhill and through the nasty stuff, because the bike feels like it's taking all the work out of it. Ergo, I progress more in my riding because I'm more confident and in control.

    Anyway, sorry about another long-winded post. I really don't hate Scotts at all. They're fine bikes, and Scott's use of high modulus carbon technology is some of the best out there. If I were to get a time trials road bike, It would definitely be the Scott Plasma. The Genius line are great bikes, but I just prefer what I feel is a better design: No odd-man-out parts, and a more advanced suspension linkage. I do admit that I have a bias toward Giant. That bias actually came out of initial dislike for the brand though. I always thought Giant was more akin to meh companies like Jamis than the more reputable makers. I have since removed my foot from my mouth, and I couldn't be happier with my decision. My Reign is the best do-it-all bike I have ever ridden.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  29. #29
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    I'm still a newbie so I'm not going to get all technical because I too am still learning however, I'd like to put my input here as an owner of a 2009 Scott Genius 50.

    I've owned the bike for maybe a little over a month and I have been riding it everyday, 7 days a week eversince I've owned it on both paved and dirt. Coming from HT background, I decided to get a FS just so I know how it feels like owning one (and yes, I got spoiled and will not go back to HT=)). That said, I thought (at the time of purchase), since I'm coming for HT for years, It should not matter what rear shock I get as long as it is tuneable/adjustable not walmart brand stuff. I did read about the Genius's rear shock not being able to absorb small bumps prior to buying the bike but for the price of the bike, $1500 new and SCOTT GENIUS?!! I couldn't let it go.

    When I receive the bike I was very happy on how it looked. It was work of art and it comes with remote rear lock out with zero bobbing? WOW!! I was riding this bike same pace going uphill as my carbon fiber XC bike which weighs in at 20 lbs. Keep in mind that the G50 weighs in at 28.8 lbs with the same tires as my XC. The climb using trac-control or LO was very useful. It turns my FS bike into a HT! Going downhill was great too incomparison with my XC bike. I think I gained about 12 mph faster descending just by having a rear suspension and the position/angle of the fork helps also. I didn't notice the rear not being able to absorb those small bumps (again, this is coming from a HT bike rider). Although I do feel that my rear brakes will slip once and a while when going fast descending. I though it was because I was going faster than normal.

    One day, I rode both of my friends specialized 2009 and 2010 SJ expert (both rider weighed in at an approximate 155-165 lbs so the bikes shocks were set up at that range. I'm 140-145lbs geared up) and instantly notice a HUGE difference in absorbing the small bumps. Their bikes were plush!! All this time I thought I had a bike that has all the cush that I need. I thought I dont need that cush since I already have rear susser but that's wrong... The brake "slip" feel that I get from my bike when descending, was coming from "brake-jack" (I think that's the corect term? Pls correct me if I'm wrong) to where the rear tire is loosing contact with the ground. It gets scary sometimes but when riding the push-type shocks, I never feel this brake-jacking.

    If you look at the spec between Sj & Trance, they very similar if not the same with Scott. As a matter of fact, I think scott has a better geometry when descending according to the spec but the the pull-type shocks is where this bike looses from the rest of the trail bikes available on the market. As a rookie rider wh dont often buy bikes, this Scott Genius bike is a waste of money especially those highend ones such as 30,20 and the G10. Why would you want to spend this much of money on a bike that's only good for 1 thing, climbing. When you can get a bike for a lesser if not the same, that can do both worlds with less to none headache.

    I've spent a lot of time posting, reading, emailing the scott CS support, carrying my shock pump daily, asking my coworker and my wife to measure the darn "sag-boy" etc... just to get this shock to it proper settings and even after all the time I spent chasing for setup, I ended up going back to stock spec. No matter what you do, it cannot do what a push-type shock can, period.

    Now, I'm stuck with a bike that I dont even want to ride but it's all good. I've learned a lot from this experience and when I come back from my 3 weeks vacay next month, I'm pickin up a Giant!

    Although after all the work I did just setting up the rear shock of this bike, I absolutely have to give props to Scott-Sports Customer Service. Their response were very quick and really helpful. I'm scared that I may not be able to get this with Giant bikes but we'll see.

    Hope this helps those that are going to buy this bike.
    Last edited by Tjay; 10-26-2010 at 03:37 PM.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    steve my main advice to you has been to try out both bikes before you buy, which i think if you look around here is standard. per se i have not said one bike is better than the other!

    tjay i feel for you and although i agree that the pull shock initially takes time to setup, once it is done i, nor anyone else i know, have had any issues. perhaps there is a problem with your pull shock, as the 09 pull shocks had reliability issues and i think it is a bold statement to say that the pull shock is not as good as push shock. you mention that you preferred the spech bikes in terms of plushness but many would say that the spech suspension is also a band aid. my genius is set up plush enough for my liking.

    rhinos i was aware of the technicalities of multi-pivot vs single pivot. i also own a DW and a VPP bike. all i have to say is that there are pros and cons in relation to each design, but technically it is difficult to describe why i prefer one over the other in different conditions. it is just a feeling and obviously subjective. that is why my message to the op has always been to try both bikes out if possible. however, it seems that you and tjay despite having some good things to say about the genius, are basically indicating that the giant is better (although tjay seems to suggest in his/her first post that the genius is better so i am little confused about that) and thus the op should buy the giant. when purchasing the many bikes that i own i pretty much try out all the bikes within that category from all the reputable brands available in my location, which is IMHO the way to go. otherwise the only way you will know anything about any bike is by reading this forum. there is no substitute to a demo and discussing other details (such as reliability) about the bike with a mechanic. anyway enough said, hopefully steve has a chance to try a few bikes within his budget (which he seems to have already started) and selects one which feels best.
    Last edited by rondet; 10-26-2010 at 04:38 PM.

  31. #31
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by rondet

    tjay i feel for you and although i agree that the pull shock initially takes time to setup, once it is done i, nor anyone else i know, have had any issues. perhaps there is a problem with your pull shock, as the 09 pull shocks had reliability issues.
    By "issues" you mean that my shock has problem/s? 2008 is when they had reliability issues and it was fixed in 2009. The shock is perfectly fine. It's just that, incomparison to push-type shocks as oppose to pull-type, the push-type shock kept the rear wheel planted on the ground at all times. Something I wasn't concerned and didn't even notice when I use the ride a hardtail. Now, it is very noticeable and if I set it up to where it's "plush" enough (still bounces though), the rear has significant sag even on LockOut mode.

    Check this out.

    Set the shock to spec per instruction/scott reps/forums. 180mm eye-to-eye with 25%=12.5mm sag in Full Travel mode.
    Result--> LockOut mode, locks it wtih zero sag (which is how its suppose to be). Trac & Full travel mode also are in spec with 12.5-13mm sag. Now ride it on the trail with this spec. The rear is very stiff as if you have too much air in there. Brake-jack galore...

    Set it to a rider that is 20, 15,10 or even 5 lbs lighter.
    Result--> sags even on LockOut mode! Now the climbing efficiency is not so efficient. I have to readjust my saddle forward so that I wont blow my knee but even with that, it still doesnt climb like zero lockout.

    Have you guys (scott owner) looked at your rear shocks (if you say that it is plush enough) when you have it on LockOut mode and then ride it for couple/few minutes and check the sag? Well, it should not have a sag there in lockout mode and the only way of not having this sag is if you have more air in the + chamber. But by doing so, you will make the rear stiff. A 15-18mm sag in Full Travel Mode will descend great! Not as good as Push-Type but it'll do however, I have to get off the bike and pump the rear shocks to spec so that I can bring the rear back up to lockout position when climbing. Now, who wants to do that? I can suck it up (which what I've been doing) and just deal with it or post what I have done to the bike here and help others on what to look for when trying/buying this bike.

    Anyway, definitely true. Demo as much bikes as you can if you can. If not, back to the forums.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by Tjay
    however, I have to get off the bike and pump the rear shocks to spec so that I can bring the rear back up to lockout position when climbing. Now, who wants to do that?
    i agree no one!!

    however, i have no such problems as you describe (well not as far as i can notice) in full travel mode. that is, it is plush enough for my liking (up or down) as i said. you should be able to get the full amount (or close to it) of rear travel in full travel mode. if the bike is stiff with the correct amount of sag in full travel mode something does not sound correct. how did scott CS explain the stiff shock in full travel mode to you as to me it does not sound normal, although 'normal' in itself is subjective.

    in terms of bob and brakejack there is no more and no less than with any other single pivot bike i have been on. also, i don't use the lockout all the time when i climb and again the bob is not an issue with me in that case anyway.

  33. #33
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    it is plush enough for my liking
    Plush for you but compare it with other type of shocks which in this case, trance. Push type keeps the tire intact with the ground.

    i don't use the lockout all the time when i climb and again the bob is not an issue with me in that case anyway
    You don't, but it is a feature that most of the buyer would like to have since it is already an option. No bobbing on Scott's shock for sure. I never mentioned that there is but it does sag if you want it lower psi (lower psi if you want it plush) than your weight spec, even in lockout mode it sags.

    rondet: I dont mean to come to you or to anyone unpolitely. I just want to share how I feel about the bike that I just recently purchased. Trust me, I dont care about the rear triangle's design. I'm just about the shock type. I hope the scott can house the push-type shocks... I swear I'll be all over it. The bike has a great geometry and I love the remote on-the-fly rear suspension and the climbing efficiency on this bike. It's just the rear shocks that I'm not liking.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by Tjay
    It's just the rear shocks that I'm not liking.
    i guess each to his own, but again for me the pull shock does as a good a job as the push shocks i have on my other bikes. i will not claim that it is the best rear shock i have used, but it is by far not the worst!

    the reason i don't use the lockout all the time when climbing is because i don't experience much bob, so why use lockout or for that matter even on a push shock bike and the rear of my genius always feels well planted to the ground. the only thing about the pull shock is it did take a while to set up and at the end of the day it was my LBS who did it because setting up any shock by the book seems to produce problems. believe you me i have had more issues with monarchs and rp23s on my other bikes than i have had with the genius pull shock. so who knows, and that is why my advice to the OP was and still is to demo as many bikes as possible because different people experience different things on the same bike.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Thanks guys...this is great stuff. Civilized, educational, a plethora of opinions and suggestions.
    I'm not very technical myself, so a bike that required a huge learning curve wouldn't be my cup of tea, nor one that had difficulty obtaining parts for upkeep (even though biking is extremely popular in Korea).
    The test rides, as I've said, are generally not available. I did demo the Trance X2 (I prefer the X1) at a recent show....but it was parking lot stuff, with under-inflated tires, and not enough air in the rear shock. Tough to gauge.
    I have, in the last couple of days, gone back to an old favourite drooler....the Ibis Mojo SL, in carbon matte finish. I had configured the spec sheet all wrong on it long ago, and when I saw the 6 grand plus price, I just mosied along. Checking it yesterday, I configured a setup and it came out just slightly more than the Trance, and probably in the same ballpark as the Genius 30.
    What say you to the Mojo as a contender? General, all-round do-everything bike....not a serious downill blazer at 50 years old....but desperate to push myself to the next limit...and able to run all day long...it looks pretty sweet. Suspension (Rhinos, I guess I'm directing this at you) in the same league as the Maestro?

    Happy Trails.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    steve i also have a mojo sl black (my DW bike). if it is between the mojo and trance i would say that most would agree that it is no contest. the mojo hands down and better than the alu genius 30. however, i would suggest the new mojo HD-140, which is not that much more expensive than the sl. the HD is my next bike, and probably one of the best long travel bikes around. even if you have to wait a bit for it, to save up more cash or simply because they are hard to get, it will be well worth it. there aren't many people who can and have said anything negative about that bike! mojo HD-140 all the way, or if you are impatient the sl which is probably also one of the best in its class!!!!

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    So Steve, your bike problems have now taken a turn for the worst/best. Worst, in that you are now adding a lot more options to your choice, which always leads to eventual option-overload. These options are a rather slippery slope, as far as price is concerned, too. It gets very easy to spend more money after passing the 3k price point. Your choices have also taken a turn for the best though, because you're entering the thoroughbred stables of bikes. You'll start to get a LOT more performance for your money if you choose well.

    Like everyone said, test riding is paramount, and should be done a lot if at all possible. But you mentioned that test rides are not all that possible in Korea. Still do your best to get in the saddle though, because all these things we've been debating are very much based on personal preference.

    ^^ agreed with you rondet, 100%. The Mojo HD is one sexy beast for sure. It's got my floating pivot rear triangle that I love so dearly, and the frame is extremely stiff and accurate feeling. The only negative I have to say about it isn't about the bike at all, actually. It's just the fact that a lot of the Ibis riders here in Utah are the more elitist gram-counter jerk types. But their bikes are super nice, and I just brush off their attitude if it comes out. It will climb as good if not better than the Trance, and it will positively destroy it on the downhills.

    The other analog to the Mojo that I'd add to the list is the Santa Cruz Nomad Carbon. Incredible bike. Most say that the Mojo HD tends to pedal a little better uphill, but the Nomad smooths out the rougher stuff a bit more when going back down. Both are phenomenal bikes, and would be quite close to each other in terms of overall performance and price. I'd personally lean toward the Nomad, but that's mainly due to the fact that it has a rising (progressively stiffening) rear shock rate. I love that for when I take the inevitable harder landing off a small drop or something. It doesn't bottom out unless I REALLY mash it into the ground hard. The Mojo has a regressive rate geometry, combined with a progressive air shock. This basically equals a more or less linear rate of compression. That will make it a bit more prone to bottoming on larger hits, but overall it has a great, cushy feel. Both are better choices than the Trance. They're a lot more AM than the Trance. They are more comparable to my beloved Reign 1 (which I would have passed on and went with a Nomad if I had an extra 1600 bucks stashed somewhere, but alas, i didn't)
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    steve, rhinos is correct the nomad is probably as nice as the HD, but it is a bike in a different category (to the trance) with 160-180mm travel. thinking about it even the genius is in a different category to the trance (the reign is probably more in that category). the reason i suggested the HD-140 which is a new ibis bike for this year is because it is 140mm and can be easily changed to a standard HD with 160-180mm. in other words in terms of travel the HD-140 is closer to the trance (although it has an AM geometry) than the genius and the nomad and can be turned into a full blown AM bike with 160-180mm as well (although the genius does have the adjustable travel on the fly). going with the nomad, which is a great bike, is a leap into a different type of riding. if you are prepared for that you can't go wrong with the HD or nomad. however, the mojo sl in terms of geometry and travel is probably the closest to the trance. thus, i think you really need to think about what type of bike you need and for what purpose. the best thing as everyone has indicated is to try them all which is the only way to know what you like!!!!
    Last edited by rondet; 10-27-2010 at 04:46 PM.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Whitedog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    422
    As I have a 2008 Trance X2 and a 2009 Genius 50, I have been watching this thread with interest.

    I found Rhinos' post #28 to be spot on in describing the rear suspension. Among my bikes are a '08 Trek EX9, '07Yeti 575, '08 Stumpjumper Pro, '08 Niner RIP9, and '05 Intense Spider VPP, Ironhorse MKIII (DW-link), '07 Fisher Fat Possum as various examples of the different designs out there. To me the 'short link' suspensions work the best. Although I'm not an engineer (but have been accused of having an 'engineer brain'), I've come to the same conclusion as articulated by Rhinos.

    I prefer the Trance X2 over the Genius 50 (and actually like all the other bikes listed above better than the Genius too).

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Whitedog...welcome back....Rhinos...Rondet...thanks for your input as always.

    Yes, Rhinos, I suppose I've muddied the mix somewhat. Analysis paralysis, I call it. But it's all good. I'm picky, and rightly so. When I finally decide, I want a bike I can engage in pillow talk with for years to come.

    I am probably moving the Scott down the list, based on lots that I've read. Also, the sag and bob issues, even if minor, won't do much to inspire my confidence. The tricky set up and somewhat steeper learning curve doesn't speak to my personality. I still use a coal fired blow dryer to style my hair. Talk about a throwback!

    You frequently speak in glowing terms about your Reign, Rhinos. I suppose in Utah you've got lots of opportunities to really air it out. I wonder how useful that would be for me here. As I've said, we do have trails aplenty, but serious downhills are few and far between. Some really nice riding, to be sure, but no canyons with serious dropouts. How much AM do I really need? I doubt I'd bottom out with a Trance. Having said that, will a Reign be as easy to maneuver day in and day out, even on lazy trails and road? Is it close to the ultimate do-everything bike? Or do I need to move next to a mountain and forget about the rest?

    Ok, on to the aforementioned Mojo and Nomad. Both are super-sexy, light, and a marvellous balance of technology and simplicity. Pricing here would likely be in the stratosphere. I wonder about the feasibility of shipping "under the radar" with a few smudges on the tires so as to appear used. Anyway, knowing my stats: 50 yrs, 100 kg, in good shape relative to those stats, and no Scott Lopes (although I've been known to lope), and the fact that I am gradually ramping up the fear factor, and taking greater plunges, do I go for carbon, longer travel, or stay within a more MOR format with the Trance? My hesitation seems more to be that it's the EXACT same colour as my current Trek HT....talk about nitpicky!

    But there you have it....

    Choices (price be damned): 1 and 2: Mojo (either SL carbon or HD 140) or Nomad carbon
    3: Reign 0
    4: Trance X1
    5: Scott Genius 30

    Happy trails....I'm off to ride....sunny Saturday morning here in Seoul....just a nice bite in the air.

    Steve

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    SO lucky! I can't ride tomorrow (saturday), and it's killing me. Enjoy the ride!!!

    As for the Reign, it is definitely more of a true all-mountain bike than the Trance. The Trance feels a bit XC when I ride one now, although it's still a capable bike for sure. Don't let the 6" of travel fool you into thinking it's a freeride or light DH beast, because it wouldn't stand up to that kind of torture-riding. But back the terrain demands off a bit, and it happily attacks everything I throw at it. I personally like it so much because I can pound fast, technical rock gardens easily on it, but it still pedals and climbs like a goat on steroids. It really does climb extremely well (at least 80% as good as my hardtail), and it weighs in at a mere 30 lbs. It does take some time to get used to the slightly slacker angles while climbing, but for me it inspired confidence immediately, and I started improving.

    Had I the money, I would have probably gotten a Nomad, as it's slightly more robust and can take a bit larger drops, but still climbs about as good as the Reign. It was just too expensive for me at the time of buying (over $1000 more for a lesser component spec). But no complaints here. My Reign 1 fits my needs so well, I don't care. There are so many great bikes out there, it's just a matter of choosing one of them.

    As for the Mojo vs Nomad, either will be super sweet, no doubt in my mind. If you did go Mojo, for sure go for the HD. It's just that much hotter But both are top tier bikes anyone would be proud to own. If you go for a Reign, the 0 is super hot. Very good components, and lighter than my ride by at least a lb or two.

    I realize it's all subjective and there will be many who prefer one ride over another. That's fine. In the end, I love my bike and it does whatever I want it to. I'm sure yours will too. You're doing it right by taking your time, and your efforts wont go unrewarded for it.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Rhinos...back from ride....went to LBS to see frames and gear.

    Winter pants....check
    Winter gloves....check
    Ibis frame.....to be checked

    I was down at my LBS....Santa Cruz and Ibis importer....struggled with my Korean, but it's all good....pricing seems reasonable compared to domestic (N.A.) pricing.....so it looks as though we'll be building from the ground up. I really prefer that, actually....it'll be a fun process. The Blur LC is on the radar, but not the Nomad. I'm leaning toward the HD, but I prefer the nude matte carbon, as they say on the site....would love to see it in the flesh....all the pics I've seen are nice, but hard to make out detail. The Ibis frame they had was carbon, black, but had a shiny coat....not my taste, really. I wonder if the HD is available in the black....I'll check it out.

    Gotta do some math and see if I've settled on the bike for the next 4 or 5 years and beyond....

    Happy Trails

    Steve

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    Steve you will not be disappointed with ibis. I suggest the HD-140, probably the best bike around given all reports and from a demo that I recently did. It does come in matte clear (black) or the best colour is white. The good thing is you can unleash it's full potential by changing the rear shock and forks! However, as I said before if you like something with more of an Xc geometry the Sl is also probably the best in that class.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Rondet,

    Do you think the HD-140 will be too AM for my tastes? The largest of the hills we ride here are about 100-200 metres at best....it's mostly trail....with some nice, but shortish downhill trails...no serious dropouts, although with a bit of sleuthing, I suppose they can be found.

    I'm sure, as you say, either bike will be best in class...or close enough. I'm sure grin factor will be high regardless, but it seems the original post title needs to be put in the dustbin. It's more about Mojo now....which one?

    More about the clear coat....I've been reading up about skins, and rubberized paint....issues abound....I am absolutely mesmerized by the nude carbon....wondering if it's going to be scratch-tastic. I'm hoping to be able to get the LBS to order it from Ibis....all they had was the very dated shiny carbon finish....and of course the SL in white. I love the white, but what originally caught my attention a couple of years back was seeing an Ibis Mojo in nude carbon (a 10,000 dollar version, no less!) at a bike show here. I kind of want to go with that feeling. To date, it still remains the most beautiful bike I've ever seen....hands down.

    But we'll see....waiting to hear back from LBS....apparently got a good rep with the ex-pats here, and speaks English well.
    Happy Trails...

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    Steve, in short the HD-140 is a bit heavier, but stiffer and has an am HA. Going down therefore the HD-140 feels great if not the best available and hence better than the sl. Going up both the sl and HD-140 are great and it is a matter of preference. Of course as I mentioned before the HD-140 can be turned into a full blown am bike by changing the rear shock and forks, which makes it more versatile. Sl certainly more xc. Therefore from your description of the local trails perhaps the sl will do, but I am sure the HD-140 will perform almost as well plus you have the option of more rear travel later on if you need it. Very hard choice and the only way is to ride both. It is that close! My sl is the clear carbon and I have had no issues with the paint. The only other thing is that you may have to wait months for the HD-140.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Rondet

    I'm just wondering if my own physique (if indeed I have one) would warrant an HD at this stage of the game. I'm about to turn 51 (yes, I know I've sounded that warning bell before), weigh a bit more than 200 pounds, and stand around 1.81 metres. I'm not looking for a sedate ride, but wonder if the HD would be overkill for me. I want a capable climber, and a lighter carbon frame with a slightly more forward geometry seems like it'd do wonders.

    As for downhill needs, I'm sure the HD would trump the SL, but again, I'm not doing gravity defying dropouts, and pounding over rock gardens and the like. I'm trying to think ahead...will I take the bike on the road to places that are more challenging? Perhaps....I'll mull it over....and appreciate your input.

    One more thing....frame size. I'm riding a Trek HT 6 series...2008....it's a 17.5 inch frame, and I think it's a bit small for me. I do benefit on the uphills, but feel too far forward (hence my previous issues with backing off the more serious declines) and think I might need a L frame. The LBS says M, and so does my Korean friend and riding buddy, who is a wrench, and also a mechanic teacher. I have my doubts, though....
    Happy Trails...

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    103
    steve you will not go wrong with an SL and you will not regret it and you should be able to get a frame quickly. in terms of sizing, a very hard question especially if you are on the border between medium and large. in this case i would have to say 100% that you must try both because it is a personal choice for a border case.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve L. Knievel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    157
    Midas, Rhinos, Rondet, TJay, et al...

    Time to put the thread to bed. I picked up a bike last night. It was the Scott Genius 30. However, I didn't get new....as it's not yet out (at least here in Korea).

    As much as I wanted the Mojo, or the Blur, I couldn't find one used, and the price to build a bike was too prohibitive for me at this time. I analyzed every which way to Sunday, but in the end, couldn't cough up 5 grand without wincing.

    For the price range I was able to get on the Trance X1, it made a lot of sense, but I wound up getting what I believe is a damn good deal. I paid the equivalent of 1350 USD for the 2008 Genius....in near-mint condition. All stock, and it feels like it's been well maintained. The rear shock middle setting wasn't up to snuff, and my mechanic buddy took care of that today. He's got a 2007 Genius 50, so he knows the set up well. Now it's time to put the Trek on Craigslist.

    The only thing that I need to do with the Scott is to change the rather cruel saddle. What is it with saddles, anyway? Seems the fine balance between performance and comfort is a constant challenge.

    I'll post anew, seeking your wisdom and guidance as I shop for a nice little bench for the old boys.

    Thanks everyone.
    Happy Trails...

  49. #49
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    $1350 for an '08 Genius 30 is a good deal. Steve, can you please do me a favor? Can you put your bike in LOCKOUT mode (rear/no rider), then hop on the bike and ride the bike for about 2 mins. While still on the bike (making sure that you don't lean on anything), can you check if there's a sag in the rear shock?

    Scott cs support told me I shouldn't have sag there in LO mode. Noone here really gave me a feedback about this test on their Genius bikes. I'm hoping you can help me. Meanwhile, I'm taking my bike to scott specialist for them to check on my rear shocks. I hope its messed up so that I can have it replaced.

    Real quick about the Genius. Everything else on this bike is great, the geometry, remote rear suspension, 150mm travel, weight, ascends great and descends good. The only thing that you wont get here is the small bump compliance like the "push-type" rear shocks. But if you're coming from a hardtail bike, like myself, this is definitely an upgrade. Just dont borrow your friends trance or stumpy.

  50. #50
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    When scott cs support and local shop (scott tech) told me that it should not SAG at LockOut mode, they're very confident with it. For some reason I dont believe them. I really think that there's nothing wrong with my rear shocks but to make sure, I had it replaced today with their new E2 shocks while mine is being shipped to scott for service. Before I left the shop, I wanted him to show me if it will not SAG anymore in lock-out mode so he did. He pushed/leaned on it and in less than 5 sec the thing started sagging. Even quicker than my OEM E2 but then again he was pushing a lot of pressure to it and he's taller and heavier than me (keep in mind that the shock spec is for my weight @145lbs geared up).

    When I tested it, about 2 full minutes (and I wasnt geared up. I weigh in at 132lbs this morning and with clothes on maybe 137-140lbs?), I looked down to see the SAG and yes, it is still there. Again, this is on the new E2 replacement I got for LBS. I called them and told them about it and they said they will get mine fixed and they'll put that back on and see if it fixes it. I really hope so because according to them, it should not SAG in LO mode.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •