Diamondback Mission vs Scapegoat - Difference?
I'm torn between the Mission & Scapegoat. I like to do big XC rides but session freeride features when I get to good spots. I do skinnies, drops, etc but still love to pedal all day. Weight is not a huge concern to me. I've found some great deals on both the Mission & Scapegoat.
They both have 6" of travel and 68 degree headtubes. Is the Scapegoat only a burlier frame? I'm not sure it's worth the extra weight if it will behave the same as a Mission anyway.
I already have a designated FR/DH bike (Giant Glory) so I'm not looking for something that needs to handle DH/FR duties. I do need the Diamondback to hold up to the freeride opportunities I have when I ride XC here in New Mexico, and freeride features are all over the trails here.
I already have a 160mm fork I'll be using on whichever model I get. The Mission is cheaper, & lighter, so that's what I'm leaning towards. Is there something I'm missing here? What advantage does the Scapegoat have over the mission except for burliness?
Wy would you buy a Scapegoat over a Mission? Thanks in advance for any input.
Last edited by delnorte; 12-14-2010 at 06:05 PM.
id get the mission. it like a longer legged trail/ am bike. the scapegoat is like its fr brother.
It's not longer legged. They both have 160mm rear travel. They both also have the same 68 degree head angle. I'd run my 160mm fork on either one that I would buy.
Originally Posted by b-kul
I'm trying to find out what differences a rider should expect besides that the Scapegoat is built up heavier and stronger than the Mission.
The Diamonback website shows a 66 degree HTA on the scapegoat and it has 180mm in the front. I would go for the Mission
Edit: The 2011 is 66 and the 2009/2010 is 68. I would still go for the Mission though.
not what i mean. im saying the mission is like a burly long travel trail bike and the scapegoat is a shorter travel fr bike. just look at the builds to get an idea of the difference, that should make it pretty obvious.
Originally Posted by delnorte
I'm no expert I have to admit so a detailed reply from the most knowledgeable wiseguy is not what you will get from me. (David over on the DiamondBack forum seems to be the resident guru), but I do have a Mission2 (2010). It's a rather capable AM bike, I believe the ScapeGoat is categorized as Aggressive AM/Freeride model. I believe that the frames have very small differences and builds are somewhat tailored to the roles. Fox Float RL 150mm travel Forks and Fox RP23 rear shock,for Mission, Fox 36 RC2 180mm Float fork and Fox DHX Air 5.0 rear shock foir Scapegoat.
It looks like there is a balance that is applied to the Mission to still keep it pedal/epic ride friendly. It's no race bike but it is solid, comfortable, rides well, pedaling is in line with a bike with more weight than your XC bike thus is a tad more effort and for me I feel the added energy expenditure compared to my XC/Trail bike (the tire choice also is a major contributer also tho) but it truly does great going down. It really is a great bike, for me quite honestly the weak link is me. I could use some work on my endurance/stammina.
I've never ridden the scapegoat but I would think it would be more to pedal about but glorious in the big hits and any other scenario where gravity is working in your favor (down).
The Mission is a burly bike but the components (e.g: forks, shock, wheels, brakes,) on the Scapegoat are aimed at the bigger hits, bigger drops, etc. .
My gut is telling me that you suit the Mission more than the Scapegoat with your need to pedal a lot. It is no substitute for a XC bike mind you so far as pedaling goes. But AM is not XC so race bike speed and weight is not what you are after presumably.
Check out DiamondBacks own marketing vid:
Diamondback 2011 Scapegoat, Mission & Sortie from Kevin Philbin on Vimeo.
Last edited by Moozh; 12-14-2010 at 11:22 PM.
Yeah Im looking the 2008 Mission & 2010 Scapegoat - that's where the 68 head angles come in. The 2010 Scapegoat was stock w/ a 160mm fork, also.
Originally Posted by mullen119
Thanks for all of the answers guys.
Unicorn Disabilities Act
I am pretty sure the frames are the same, just different shocks/forks/build kits. The head angle differences are due to different fork lengths.
I have several friends rocking them, great bikes. I helped a friend build one up and was really impressed with the ride. 160mm fox fork felt just right, geometry wise.
Originally Posted by Courage the comic insult dog
I don't know if it's still the case, but one of the distinctions of the Scapegoat when it was first released was the straight-gauge tubing on the down tube.
Originally Posted by MoustacheCashStash
I have an original 09 Scapegoat 15.5" frame built with AM kit to keep the weight down:
Originally Posted by colin1
150mm Revelation dual air forks (20mm Maxle Lite)
M3R Shock (both shocks are controlled with dual pushlock compression remote)
Avid Elixir Carbon brakes (203F, 180R)
Richey WCS wheels, High Roller 2.35 tyres
Sram X0 mechs, X9 Shifters
750mm Kore Torsion Bars & 70mm Stem
Truvativ Stylo Cranks (22-34-44)
and it weighs approx 33lb. The differences to a mission are 1.5" Headtube, Straight guage downtube & ISCG mount. I would say that this is overkill unless you are into slopestyle but it is the most balanced & capable downhill bike & with the pushlock engaged it climbs brilliantly for it's weight. I would go for the Mission though as it should feel just as good but lighter.
Hope this helps
I've ridden both quite extensively (2011 Goat and Mission). For what you are describing you will be more than happy with the Mission. Make sure it has the 160 fork and you are set. VERY versatile bikes and ride great,
FYI, this thread is 9 months old.
Originally Posted by Largextracheese