Page 1 of 2

Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:00 pm
by DaVinci
I’m buying a new bike and it’s between the stock 2017 Scott Foil 20 or Addict 20 (s/52cm). I’m leaning towards the Foil, BUT I’m torn as I will encounter many hill climbs within the area I ride. From a climbing perspective, I fully understand the Foil is an aero bike and that the Addict is generally deemed the climber because it is lighter. However, the geometry and weight of both bikes is nearly exact. Does anyone have any hill climbing experience on these two bikes? Any other comments and suggestions about the two bikes are also welcomed.

It is worth mentioning that I’m an average rider who participates in 3-4 non-competitive events each year; I ride for enjoyment but like race bikes. My current ride is a 2006 Scott CR1 SL and really enjoy it. Thanks!

Scott Foil 20: https://www.scott-sports.com/ca/en/prod ... il-20-Bike

Scott Addict 20: https://www.scott-sports.com/ca/en/prod ... ct-20-Bike

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:13 pm
by gsindela
For me, the Foil is far sexier. What is the price on both?

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:13 pm
by Weenie

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:30 pm
by Delorre
I'm an Addict user (see my sig), and all I can say is, wow! Truely are really great bike : very stiff, very responsive and very light to flick around. I did a lot climbing the past 2 seasons, and I can not fault this bike on anything, with the exception of being a little harsh. Other than that, it exceeds my Canyon Ultimate in all the aspects. I do not race, but I can in all honesty / modesty say that our small granfondo / century group is levels above the average cyclists at those events in the Belgian Ardennes (our avg is 31 till 33 km/h on + 150km and more routes with 2000 to 3000 m of elevation, 300w ftp for 70 kg). I say that to give you some perspective. Even at those performance levels, the bike is awesome, BUT, I have to warn you : when you run a little out of juice at the end of a ride, don't execpt any help / forgiveness of the frame!! At a more modest fitness level, it will remain at very good bike, but it will not really come to live. Some other bikes may be suit you more (the Ultimate f.ex...) I had an 2005 CR1 SL before, and both bikes (addict and cr1) are somewhat in the same league : stiff, stable, a little harsh, the addict being more reactive. The geo of the Addict is a lot racier than the CR1!!

I can't tell you anything about the new foil, other than the reviews you find on the net. Some people here have complained about rear brake rub on hard efforts. Maybe they will shime in, but can also do a search for the topics about the new Foil over here.you

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:09 pm
by topflightpro
Must you stay with a Scott?

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:43 pm
by russianbear
The glaring nuisance of the foil is the under mounted rear brake. Also you have to think about if the included aero stem if the size you need. Although I'm pretty sure you can use whichever one you want.

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:18 am
by DaVinci
russianbear wrote:The glaring nuisance of the foil is the under mounted rear brake. Also you have to think about if the included aero stem if the size you need. Although I'm pretty sure you can use whichever one you want.


Although it presents a tighter area for maintenance, what other nuisances does the BB mounted rear brake present?

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:23 am
by DaVinci
topflightpro wrote:Must you stay with a Scott?

I was also considering the Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0
https://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-ca/bi ... 88/100717/

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:04 am
by Johnny Rad
That Giant looks so pro! I've always had a soft spot for it in my heart, but I'm a Scott homer through and through so it may never grace my underside.

I've ridden an Addict w/HFX carbon tubes for the past ~7 seasons. The harshness or stiffness hasn't bothered me one bit beyond the first couple of rides. I previously rode a Trek Madone for ~4 seasons and the first couple of rides on my Addict felt like its tires were inflated to 1,000psi! I got used to it and it never bothered me again. Sorry, I can't compare an Addict to a Foil.

Good luck with your decision. You probably can't make a poor one!

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 8:43 am
by addictR1
I have an AddictR1 and although not the latest or the greatest, but she's in hell of a climber! She's my dedicated climbing bike and so comfy to ride.

On the other hand, I have a BMC TMR02 that I love to climb with as well. On the same climb... My BMC climbs faster. Not sure if it's because of aero factor or newer technology in CF design. Both uses Kinlin alloy wheelsets and the BMC is close to 2lbs heavier than my Addict.

OP, you can't go wrong with either one.. Pick the one that is the sexiest for you... One that will make you get all hard up thinking to jump on her to ride daily while you are stuck at work, school or where ever. I know both of my rides gives me that urge daily...

Good luck


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:46 am
by GothicCastle
The idea that one needs a special "climbing" bike is kind of silly.

I don't see fork rake/trail information for the Foil on the site, but it's shorter wheelbase and chainstays suggest it might handle a little differently than the addict. Other than that, you might favor the Addict if you prefer more standard parts.

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:47 am
by gewichtweenie
i think addict looks the best, but the giant is also a fine choice. the foil looks too much like an SUV.

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:04 am
by ryanw
My Addict was immense, such a good all round bike! I would go for it and just add some deep sections for looks lol...

Very aero bike too.

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:37 pm
by topflightpro
Since it doesn't have to be a Scott, what about a Cervelo S5?

I don't own one, nor have I ever owned a Cervelo, but the S5 seems like a pretty good mix of aero and light weight.

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:46 pm
by ryanw
topflightpro wrote:Since it doesn't have to be a Scott, what about a Cervelo S5?

I don't own one, nor have I ever owned a Cervelo, but the S5 seems like a pretty good mix of aero and light weight.


I've have an S5 now and it won't be going anywhere until the new S5 comes out next year... Best bike I've ever owned.

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:46 pm
by Weenie

Re: Scott Foil vs. Addict

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 6:02 pm
by Lelandjt
DaVinci wrote:
russianbear wrote:The glaring nuisance of the foil is the under mounted rear brake. Also you have to think about if the included aero stem if the size you need. Although I'm pretty sure you can use whichever one you want.


Although it presents a tighter area for maintenance, what other nuisances does the BB mounted rear brake present?

The ugly quick release that's supposed to be on the handlebar-to-frame section of brake line. Move it to the frame-to-brake section for better aero and aesthetics.

Isn't the Foil the lightest aero frame? It's rated as pretty comfortable for aero too. I don't think it gives up much in either of those catagories to the Addict in exchange for an equally small improvement in speed above 20mph (and looks?). I'd take that trade.