Hardtail Carbons... Scott scale > Specialized S-works Hardtail?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559

    Hardtail Carbons... Scott scale > Specialized S-works Hardtail?

    Is the Scott Scale carbon frame > Specialized S-works carbon Hardtail?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    934
    I'm not sure what you're asking but the Scott Scale (limited anyway) frame is not heavier than the S-works. Size L Scale Limited is around 1000 grams IIRC.

    Edit:

    However, the Scale comes with an unusually wide seatpost at 34.9 mm which is hard to find unless you stick with the stock Ritchey post, buy a uber expensive Schmolk or AX-lightness or use a shim with a very very light New Ultimate, however this is said to void the warranty.

    I've had chain alignment issues with the very wide BB and isis on the Scale (not sure what the S uses).

    Scale uses continuous housing which adds weight effectively negating some of the light weight party piece claims.

    The Scale rides nice, is compliant in the right directions while stiff in others. As one person mentioned the geometry is such that foot strikes tend to occur. I can confirm this and it forces you to be very careful.

    If you do a thorough search you will find some helpful comments and cool ways to tune the bike. The Scale frame now comes with a replaceable hanger and shops have "fix" for old bent hangers.

    I'm probably forgetting something. The S-works might be a better way to go - I just don't know very much about it - it's so expensive no one seems to have the hard tail. If I were you I would also consider the Giant XTC, Orbea has a carbon frame, Trek now has a lighter carbon frame and for mega bling Ibis I think has a comparable light frame.

    EDIT AGAIN - IBIS DOES NOT HAVE A HARD TAIL

    Cheers!
    Last edited by Slobberdoggy; 08-05-2006 at 07:27 PM.

  3. #3
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    I guess I should have been more specific in my question.

    My questions really was meant to say, "Is the Scott Scale limited frame better than the Specialized S-works Carbon Hardtail?" Better in terms of geometry, ride quality, stiffness, and/or durability.

    The scott scale MSRP is $2,299.99 USD (scott usa website)
    The s-works MSRP is $2200 USD (specialized usa website).

    weight weenie shows a weighed mass of 1041.6 g for the scott
    weight weenie does not have a listing for the specialized hardtail though. "At well under 1300 grams" is what the specialized website says.

    Edit:

    The specialized factory setup for the bike uses a Shimano M-960 XTR crankset. It uses a 30.9mm seat post diameter.
    Last edited by Cheers!; 08-05-2006 at 05:59 PM.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    125
    I love my SWorks HT


    the geometry is the same as my previous Specialized HT (M5) = fast nimble and perfect (for me)
    The build in the photo comes in at 19lbs
    I can't say anything about the Scale since I've never seen a Scott in my area (New England)

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    934
    It's hard for me to tell because you use disks, but are there cable stops for the derailure housing?

    In terms of BB - I would be interested to know what size it is - the Scott Scale uses a 73/113.

    The Scale uses an E-type front der (a plate fits around the bb and goes up to the der and is then secured also with a small bolt). This arrangement is heavy. Nino has a really cool fix for this and is what I meant by "tuning" above. Does the S-Works use an E-type or just a regular clamp around the seat tube?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Slobberdoggy
    It's hard for me to tell because you use disks, but are there cable stops for the derailure housing?

    In terms of BB - I would be interested to know what size it is - the Scott Scale uses a 73/113.

    The Scale uses an E-type front der (a plate fits around the bb and goes up to the der and is then secured also with a small bolt). This arrangement is heavy. Nino has a really cool fix for this and is what I meant by "tuning" above. Does the S-Works use an E-type or just a regular clamp around the seat tube?

    Yes there are cable stops. the RD/FD do not use full housing
    The FD uses a regular seat tube clamp

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    934
    Excellent. Sounds (and looks) like a sweet bike.

  8. #8
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559


    gforcephoto - Do you know the weight of hte frame?

    Slobberdoggy - The frame is the same size / Geometry as all the hardtail stumpjumpers whether they be the M5 aluminum version (s-works alloy) or the M4 aluminum (which I currently have). Part of the reason why i'm interested in this frame as I know how it rides already in terms of fit. Although I must admit I have not ridden many different frames for hardtail or mountain bikes for that matter.

    If you are looking for the the BB size I can't answer that as I don't even know what my normal stumpjumper takes. Perhaps someone else on this forum with a fairly new hardtail stumpjumper can chime in?

  9. #9
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    S-Works Carbon = 1386g....

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheers!
    I guess I should have been more specific in my question.

    My questions really was meant to say, "Is the Scott Scale limited frame better than the Specialized S-works Carbon Hardtail?" Better in terms of geometry, ride quality, stiffness, and/or durability.

    The scott scale MSRP is $2,299.99 USD (scott usa website)
    The s-works MSRP is $2200 USD (specialized usa website).

    weight weenie shows a weighed mass of 1041.6 g for the scott
    weight weenie does not have a listing for the specialized hardtail though. "At well under 1300 grams" is what the specialized website says.

    Edit:

    The specialized factory setup for the bike uses a Shimano M-960 XTR crankset. It uses a 30.9mm seat post diameter.
    german magazines did a comparison test on 3 different high-end carbon bikes. in size L the Scale weighs 1040g , the S-works 1380g. regarding the seatpost size the S-works also has this odd 30.9 size. adding a shim is real easy on both bikes though. the Scott is the master in singletrails and acts like your own flech and blood when riding. it's nimble and flickable like no other bike i've ridden so far. the S-works has a more calm and "slow" ride when compared directly. better suited for higher speeds or more relaxed riding. if you want it really light the Scott is the way to go. you'll find detailed info here:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?...56&postcount=5
    Last edited by nino; 08-05-2006 at 10:55 PM.

  10. #10
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    I wonder how much a 17" frame would weigh.

    According to Nino's post of the German magazine review the Sworks frame weighs 1386g (not sure what it includes), but it is a 19" frame.

    My 17" M4 alloy stumpjumper hardtail is 1469.6 lbs (bare frame + seat binder, no headset, no other bolts).

    The carbon s-works frame would be a very expensive way to save around 200 g or so.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    934
    Yeah it's hard to say. 200 grams may not seem like a lot but in the end when you're doing everything you can to save weight (money and tuning) 20 grams starts to seem like a lot. On the other hand not buying an expensive frame opens up your budget for super light exotic parts - an ultra light wheelset.

    If I were you I would seriously consider the Orbea Alma if you would like to go disk (I think they are all disk?). If I'm not mistaken it's a little lighter (liter?) then the S-works and possibly cheaper.

    If you really want the ultimate light bike I would go with the scott but then do Nino's tuning method. That would be the ultimate light bike BUT if you don't get rid of the continuous housing (nino's tuning) you may as well go with the carbon S-works.

    Frame size and weight:

    I know with the Scott you don't save much weight going to a smaller frame. Whatever you decide to do keep us informed and good luck.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheers!
    I wonder how much a 17" frame would weigh.

    According to Nino's post of the German magazine review the Sworks frame weighs 1386g (not sure what it includes), but it is a 19" frame.

    My 17" M4 alloy stumpjumper hardtail is 1469.6 lbs (bare frame + seat binder, no headset, no other bolts).

    The carbon s-works frame would be a very expensive way to save around 200 g or so.
    Hi,

    my S-Works Carbon 19" weights incl. headset, seatbinder and all bolts 1.410gr
    Withaout that parts 1.280gr.

    Bye
    Marcus.

  13. #13

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,273

    17 inch M4 alloy Stumpjumper vs Scott Scale size M

    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    german magazines did a comparison test on 3 different high-end carbon bikes. in size L the Scale weighs 1040g , the S-works 1380g. regarding the seatpost size the S-works also has this odd 30.9 size. adding a shim is real easy on both bikes though. the Scott is the master in singletrails and acts like your own flech and blood when riding. it's nimble and flickable like no other bike i've ridden so far. the S-works has a more calm and "slow" ride when compared directly. better suited for higher speeds or more relaxed riding. if you want it really light the Scott is the way to go. you'll find detailed info here:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?...56&postcount=5
    Cheers says "My 17" M4 alloy stumpjumper hardtail is 1469.6 lbs (bare frame + seat binder, no headset, no other bolts)."

    I have that same frame. You say a size L Scale weighs 1040g. So if a size M Scale were to weigh about 1019, then the difference between it and a M4 alloy stumpjumper HT would be about 450g or just about 1.0 pounds.
    Is 1019g a good estimate for a size M Scale frame?

    Is that a fair analysis, all other parts-factors being equal? A starting handicap of about 450 grams. Thats a large difference, but if one already owns a nice frame, the money spent on other parts might be a better way to drop weight instead of spending
    Scott scale MSRP is $2,299.99 USD.

    BTW, do you know if Nokian really stopped making the 2.0 NBX Light?
    Someone said that in a prior post.

  14. #14
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Chester
    Cheers says "My 17" M4 alloy stumpjumper hardtail is 1469.6 lbs (bare frame + seat binder, no headset, no other bolts)."

    I have that same frame. You say a size L Scale weighs 1040g. So if a size M Scale were to weigh about 1019, then the difference between it and a M4 alloy stumpjumper HT would be about 450g or just about 1.0 pounds.
    Is 1019g a good estimate for a size M Scale frame?

    Is that a fair analysis, all other parts-factors being equal? A starting handicap of about 450 grams. Thats a large difference, but if one already owns a nice frame, the money spent on other parts might be a better way to drop weight instead of spending
    Scott scale MSRP is $2,299.99 USD.

    BTW, do you know if Nokian really stopped making the 2.0 NBX Light?
    Someone said that in a prior post.
    my 05 Scale Limited in size M weighs 1002g (bare frame incl. cantistuds)

    and you can get the Scale quite a bit cheaper...

  15. #15
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Chester
    Cheers says "My 17" M4 alloy stumpjumper hardtail is 1469.6 lbs (bare frame + seat binder, no headset, no other bolts)."

    I have that same frame. You say a size L Scale weighs 1040g. So if a size M Scale were to weigh about 1019, then the difference between it and a M4 alloy stumpjumper HT would be about 450g or just about 1.0 pounds.
    Is 1019g a good estimate for a size M Scale frame?

    Is that a fair analysis, all other parts-factors being equal? A starting handicap of about 450 grams. Thats a large difference, but if one already owns a nice frame, the money spent on other parts might be a better way to drop weight instead of spending
    Scott scale MSRP is $2,299.99 USD.

    BTW, do you know if Nokian really stopped making the 2.0 NBX Light?
    Someone said that in a prior post.
    Actually I quite bad at not getting my point across very well usually. I type too fast and don't proof read...

    I was actually comparing my M4 Alloy stumpjumper 17" frame to a carbon S-works Stumpjumper in terms of weight. The reason is that the geometry and size is the same, and I like how my alloy stumpjumper fits me. Would the Scott fit me better, or ride better I don't know... I have only seen one Scott Scale ever... Most stores don't have such high end bikes or frames in stock, they are all special order it seems. So I'm kinda risking 2000+ dollars on something I may not like the fit of... Hence my desire to go with Specialized S-works carbon. But, spending 2200 USD to save 200 g on a frame is kinda a moot point. That 200 g can be achieved else where for a lot cheaper than 2200.
    Last edited by Cheers!; 08-07-2006 at 09:31 PM.

  16. #16
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    S-works vs. Scott

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheers!
    So I'm kinda risking 2000+ dollars on something I may not like the fit of...
    you are right for sure. you definitely should have the possibility to ride such a bike first. on the other hand you are also lucky: if you would have the chance to throw a leg over a Scale....you would need 2200$ immediately

    i was a hardcore S-works rider before. i had s-works bikes from '97 until '02. i always thought my s-works HT's were the best bikes on earth and couldn't be happier....well - that was until i rode the Scott. the Scott was that much more agile, accelerating faster, transferring my power to the ground , twice as flickable, it was sooo much more fun in singletrails...the Scott is more of a racer. it demands your attention because it is really sharp turning. on the other hand at speed it can get a handful especially with my light setup and wheels. but it's really a fun machine to ride. the Specialized is for sure an awesome bike but as testers pointed out it has a more calmed ride. the agility of the Scott gets on you instead. it makes you want go faster all the time.

    well - nowadays ALL bikes feel lame when i ride them as my bike is so light it's an unfair advantage

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Scary
    I hate Specialized (and Scott for that matter as well), but I've got to admit that is a very sharp bike!
    seconded, gorgeous

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
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.