Scott Spark RC 650B

Who are you (no off-topic talk please)

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
User avatar
tehan
in the industry
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by tehan

only 2-3g difference between non xx1 and xx1 profiles. So it's absolutely great weight - still the lightest on the market!

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

Interesting - and you say it works with a normal rear derailleur? that would be a light setup :-P

by Weenie


User avatar
tehan
in the industry
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by tehan

yes it will work with your normal rear mech.
This may only not be true in proper DH usage, but looking at your bike you will not push it that far.

User avatar
andreszucs
in the industry
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:15 am

by andreszucs

Mads Kock wrote:Seattube clearance fully compressed - no problem!
Image

Talked with the carbon/fork guy today - he suggested to try it. He would ride it!


1-NICE BIKE!
2-Trying to understand the difference from your set-up to this one: http://goo.gl/YfJ3Vz
It looks like this guy had some extra work to fit the back tire RRalphs 27.5x2.25 including a shim inside the rear shock . Ok...your tire is the RRon 2.1, but how come you have so much more clearance? could it be the frame size? maybe his frame is small?
3-did you noticed any discomfort to hop on the bike after the change? I've noticed that on my spark running 26', the distance from ground to BB is so much higher then my cannondale Flash, also running 26'. So I wonder if after upgrading to 27.5 would compromise positioning? How about reducing the travel on front and back susp? perhaps from 110 to 90mm on rear and (in my case) from 120 to 100mm on the front making the whole frame to drop down?

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

Don't know if Scott changed something about the geometry (mine is a 2009) or it changes depending on the size of the frame or it's just because it's a larger tire. Probably the last with the bigger tire could mean alot - I don't think I could use bigger tires than the 2.1" Rocket Rons.

The bike feels a little bit higher but my frame is maybe a little small for me (I'm probably in between a size small and medium) so the extra height doesn't effect the ride for me. The bike doesn't feel nervous or actually feel any "different" than before other than it feels like being more stable over roots and stuff like that :-)

User avatar
andreszucs
in the industry
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:15 am

by andreszucs

So your frame is a small! don't know if the rear triangle changes on S/M/L. Mine is a Large...so I should be ok with the change to 27.5...hope so! I have a 2011 spark 10.

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

I'm sure that you will be okay with 2.1" tires - I know a guy with the same frame and size as yours that has done the conversion. Most interesting is that he also fitted a 650B wheel in a Rock Shox SID 26" fork.

User avatar
andreszucs
in the industry
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:15 am

by andreszucs

Thanks. When I start the conversion I'll also add some Fun to the task and try shortening both suspension. Something from 110R/120F to 90R/100F. If you know how to do it on the Scott nude shock let me know...if not...Wish me luck!!! I'll also need to do some research on the lefty fork and figure it out how to put it apart. Goal will be to drop some mm on the bike height.

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

How much sag do you run on your rear shock?

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

Anyone tried a 650B front wheel/2.1" tire with a Rock Shox SID WC 26" fork?

youngwalsh
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:12 pm

by youngwalsh

tehan wrote:Hey, guys.
It's Marcin from AbsoluteBlack.

Spiderless version indeed does not have narrow/wide tooth, so it requires short/medium clutch cage in order to work properly in light riding. But even then for some it may not be enough in very demanding terrain.

My 104bcd chainrings do have narrow/wide profiles and it is impossible to drop a chain almost. What DanW wrote here is the issue with KMC chain. My chainrings does not work with KMC chains and thus problems with mud. Every other chain works, just not KMC as they are out of spec and have to tight links (wrong dimension). KMC got back to me as they found out on my website i don't recommend them so i guess they will soon make a running chain to fix the issue.

I will have in 5-6 weeks also Spiderless version with narrow/wide profile. So if someone is really unhappy with the current performance of regular spiderless chainring please get back to me via email (contac@absoluteblack.cc). But please notice that i wrote very precisely on my website that when riding in demanding conditions you WILL need to use chain catcher of some sort on the top.
Most customers of the spiderless solution are singlespeeders and Enduro/DH guys. first ones does use anything and second ones always use a full chain catcher anyway "just in case" as for them is scary to ride without anything. So for these people i have build non narrow/wide chainrings as they don't need it.

New chainrings are coming soon so stay tuned.
Marcin

Only aware now that KMC chains are not suitable for the spiderless chain ring. I have only just rebuilt my Scott Spark up in preperation for this coming seasons racing and have only done 2 training rides so far. I put on a KMC X10EL chain with a Sram X0 type 2 short cage and its flawless. First ride was mucky & bumpy with no problems at all. :D

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

After changing to the Sram XX1 chain from KMC X11SL it got much better but still not impossible for me to drop the chain - not on everyt ride and there doesn't seems to be a certain kind of pattern. Sometimes it happens at speed - sometimes just rolling along. I'm thinking about trying the Wolftooth DM chainring instead - should work with normal rear derailleur too.

After riding trails since 1993 - I have now decided to make my Scott Spark a amphibious bike. Works pretty fine so far :-P

Image

DanW
Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

Have you removed all of the padding on the Speedneedle Mads? Is it just as comfortable? I only ask as the nose padding is already starting to fall of my Speedneedle after one ride!

With regards to dropping the chain it might be worth checking the chainline. XX1 cassette is obviously wider than a 9 or 10 speed cassette so can be a challenge for a frame's chainline. Does the chain always fall off towards the frame and when in the easier gears for example?

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

Hi Dan

Yes, I have removed the cover - got worned. Works fine without padding - just put some tape or something like that around the sharp edges on the front and on the back.

Regarding the 1x10s setup - this is no pattern to how I loose the chain. Sometimes it's towards the frame and something outside - both high and low gear on the rear. Can't really understand it - but probably like tehan said. The DM chainring is not for use without chainguide - just wished that I have read more carefully and got a working DM chainring.

User avatar
Mads Kock
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

by Mads Kock

tehan wrote:Regardless please get back to me in few weeks and i will have for you narrow/wide version of same chainring.


Anyone knows if the narrow/wide version been released? can't find it anywhere.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post