Scott CR1

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
mrowkoob
Posts: 1487
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:35 pm
Location: Middle of nowhere, EU

by mrowkoob

sharkman wrote:The paint indeed chips off easy but reapairing is so easy. Teammate got some deep scratches on his frame. I sandpapered it and spraYed a new layer of clear coate on the chainstay and it from new.


Hey me being a dummy on recoating what kind of clearcoat spray was that?

by Weenie


Maui Mike
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 1:06 pm

by Maui Mike

Want to purchase a Scott CR1 frameset. Who has the best deal? I live in florida. Is purchasing overseas and getting shipped to US cheaper?
Help!!!
Maui Mike

User avatar
spytech
Posts: 1693
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:34 pm
Location: New York City
Contact:

by spytech

just saw the scott cr1 team issue frame for the first time. my lbs has it in display in med. i must say i am impressed with the frame. only thing i am debating is which size to get.

any thoughts on size and fit? right now i am using a giant med. 55.5 top tube w/130 stem, the cr1 large is a 56 i would use a 120 stem or an XL which is 57.5, and a 105 syntace stem. any opinions?

what is the head tubes height, on the scott cr1 l and xl frames?

User avatar
asphaltdude
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 8:39 pm
Location: Holland
Contact:

by asphaltdude

I think you'd better take size L
Whow! That's a pretty damn nice garage door!

User avatar
divve
Posts: 4123
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:36 pm
Contact:

by divve

I also suggest you find out what the seat tube angle of the Scott is as well. If it's steeper than your Giant it will effectively increase the top tube length. As a result your saddle will have to be set farther back. Conversely a slacker seat tube compared to your current set-up will require a more forward saddle position in order to maintain the same pedal to knee/leg relation and shorten the effective top tube length.

User avatar
spytech
Posts: 1693
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:34 pm
Location: New York City
Contact:

by spytech

asphaltdude wrote:I think you'd better take size L
why the large over the XL

the seat angles are 73.5 (large) 73.3 (XL) on the scott. and 73.5 in my giant frame.

i am still unsure. the Xl scott frame has a 57.5 cm top tube, it would be the same length with a 105mm stem as a 56 cm top tube frame with a 120mm stem. i could use a shorter seatpost, but i still dont know the height of the head tube, i would like to know this; because it might make my bars too high in a Xlarge frame size.

now are their advantages from using a smaller frame and longer stem?

User avatar
Bruiser
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 1:59 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

by Bruiser

There would be weight advantages, but I'd guess the handling woul be more important than a few grams. Pends what you want in a frame.

User avatar
cadence90
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:52 am

by cadence90

"Gimondi è un eroe umano, che viene sconfitto ma che continua la sua corsa fino a tornare a vincere." - Enrico Ruggeri

Tim the Pineapple
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:30 pm

by Tim the Pineapple



Wa ?

Honestly i like guys over at pez but the reviews are just.... turd.

User avatar
cadence90
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:52 am

by cadence90

Tim the Pineapple wrote:


Wa ?

Honestly i like guys over at pez but the reviews are just.... turd.

Wawa. :)
Yes, their "reviews" are badly written and all they do is gush, but it has different photos than the standard full side view, that's all. And so many folks on this forum seem in love with the bike....
"Gimondi è un eroe umano, che viene sconfitto ma che continua la sua corsa fino a tornare a vincere." - Enrico Ruggeri

Tim the Pineapple
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:30 pm

by Tim the Pineapple

cadence90 wrote:
Tim the Pineapple wrote:


Wa ?

Honestly i like guys over at pez but the reviews are just.... turd.

Wawa. :)
Yes, their "reviews" are badly written and all they do is gush, but it has different photos than the standard full side view, that's all. And so many folks on this forum seem in love with the bike....


Just had a chicken sandwhich and coffee from Wawa :)

Im wondering if there are any other (no crappy) reviews for the cr1; everyone here seem to like it but i don't buy it.

bobalou
Posts: 1013
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 6:05 am

by bobalou



The procycling report quotes the Scott stock fork weight at 290.

If you look earlier in this thread, velocity posted a pick of the fork weighing in at 446g!! That's a significant difference!

I've rarely seen anything negative about a scott but this weight difference would tick me off if I'd bought the frame. I wonder if the 290g is what Scott quotes or if procycling just plain got it wrong?

User avatar
Superlite
Posts: 2492
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 9:01 pm

by Superlite

I've rarely seen anything negative about a scott but this weight difference would tick me off if I'd bought the frame. I wonder if the 290g is what Scott quotes or if procycling just plain got it wrong?


You forget, Scott offers two different forks with the frameset. The standard is the aero fork, that's what weighs 440g. The Other fork is the Superlite model, made for 150lbs or under, and it weighs 290g.

User avatar
divve
Posts: 4123
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:36 pm
Contact:

by divve

They show and describe the aero fork and state it's 290g.

by Weenie


User avatar
Superlite
Posts: 2492
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 9:01 pm

by Superlite

They show and describe the aero fork and state it's 290g.


Obviously they messed up.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post