Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    34

    Zaskar 26" carbon geo vs. the classic? WHY!!!!

    I raced and own the classic 96' Zaskar, 2000 Team Zaskar, and Zaskar LE all made in america size MEDIUM.

    I just purchased the 2011 Carbon fiber frame to much excitement. When I took it out of the box and lined it up next to my team frame, and the others boy was I dissappointed!

    This new "medium" of 2011 is significantly longer than any of the classic frames. The rear is the same but not the front. Also I have learned that it takes a 100mm fork. I have 80 sids on my others.

    Anyone here race the new carbon frame? I'm very upset, however I havn't ridden it yet but I was hoping for just a stiffer lighter verion of the best hard tail ever.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    951
    I haven't ridden one but I hear the new frames were slightly different to acomodate the 100mm travel up in front. They are still very stiff and very light. I have a Carbon Marathon Team and it is a very stiff ride for being a full suspension. The carbon lay up is not much different from your bike to mine so I would say you should be fine. I still think you should go to a 100 though but why not try an 80 since you already have one. My Marathon weighs under 24 lbs without pedals, your Zaskar should be pretty darn light.
    2009 GT Marathon Team,GT Force 2.0, GT Jelly Belly TT (nude carbon), and a very special Todd Wells Zaskar.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrhead View Post
    This new "medium" of 2011 is significantly longer than any of the classic frames. The rear is the same but not the front. Also I have learned that it takes a 100mm fork. I have 80 sids on my others.
    Cross country sport discipline evolves, so the bike frames too.
    Longer front end and longer fork means more stability, especially on descents

  4. #4
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,146
    ^yep to this... these days 100mm is the norm for xc. Things move on, like its now made out of carbon not aluminium and has a 100mm fork. If you went back to 91 you'd find the geo slightly different to a 96 or 00 frame... Still a nice bike.
    2003 Yeti ARC
    2008 GT Zaskar Reissue
    1996 GT Xizang
    2012 Cervelo R3

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dropmachine.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    514
    Its called progression. The newer bikes are that way for a reason. Try riding them first, before panicking over nostalgia and numbers.
    Stuff.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Root Beer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    41
    ...
    Last edited by Root Beer; 11-16-2012 at 09:37 AM.

Posting Permissions

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