Scott elite 29 vs giant anthem x1 29

[mtbDobby]

I have the giant - awesome bike and awesome ride... It is quality but I cannot say one over the other, try them on a test ride... I did with the trek hifi and chose the giant just on preference

[heed0]

I have the giant - awesome bike and awesome ride... It is quality but I cannot say one over the other, try them on a test ride... I did with the trek hifi and chose the giant just on preference

 

is your bike standard? what does it weigh?

[BergForce]

But my bike goes to number 3

[BergForce]

I also like to ride with my front locked out and my rear shock open, I find this setup work best for when I go downhill backwards....at speed.

[mtbDobby]

is your bike standard? what does it weigh?

It's standard - I did change the wheelset but to be honest the standard wheelset is fine and won't let u down - it's around around 12.3kgs standard set up

[wapad]

How is the propedal function? when you stand and pedal, do you get any bobbing?

 

When you going uphill, do you have to stop first and lock both front and rear suspension?

 

This can all be done on the move these setups climb with little or no bob depending on your setting for the pro pedal

 

The giant comes with the rp23 as opposed to to the trek which is rp2 although I probably prefer rp2 less to fiddle with

 

The giant when setup is quite a racy position where I got the feeling on the trek that it was slightly more relaxed

 

The best as mentioned when in doubt is to test ride

 

Remember giant has great backup where trek been known to be lacking in that dept, not sure about Scott but it does look great but that spec doesn't do the comparison justice

[Balsie]

I ride the Giant Anthem and am extremeley happy with it but only after I put lighter wheels on. When I first got it found it a little sluggish with the standard wheels so put on some ZTR Crests which have made the world of difference. Suspension front and rear is really good. Have also put on a Gobi Saddle as it fit's my ass And put on carbon bar and stem which has given me a weight of 11.5 kg's Scott looks nice but Giant definitly has better componentry which DOES make a difference.

[zuludog]

i ride the giant and from my experience can recommend it.

[covie]

I was all set to go for the scott, it just looked nice .... then as i do when i spend money i start building spreadsheets, and look for at least 15 different bike magazines / reputable online sources for reviews. And heres what i came up with.

 

On paper the scott and giant looks very good (not getting into the whole shimano vs sram debate) you pay more for the giant X1 compared to the scott elite, buts thats due to it having better front and rear suspension that the scott.

 

The moral is that the rear shock on the scott the DT swiss m210 has not had a single good review, sure some of the reviews mention its better than the last model, but they also say its nowhere close to the monarch or Fox.

 

So i started reading reviews on the Anthem x 29 where i got loads of mixed reviews from the various scott readups, I am yet to find a bad review on the Anthem X (Note I judge a review by the reviewer's experiance history and the standings of the site / magazine)

 

So in the end ill fork out a couple of grand extra and get me the Anthem i suspect its much more versatile than the "pretty scott" and a hell of a lot more comfy with proper rear suspension for stage races and marathons. And according to the reviewers its much more trail capable and fun to ride. If the scott had an Rp23 at the back i would have loved to see what diff that makes.

[MrJacques]

Here is a nice review of the Giant.

[manbearpig]

Just make sure on that weight you state on the Scott. I weighed one in Cycletech last week and it was 13.1kg

[the SWEATY BASTARD]

Scott

[Andre Maree]

For me there is no contest the giant wins, much better suspension in the rear, then also I have spoken to people owning the scott and they complained about handling, the giant has got great handling and the geometry just feels perfect.

[splat]

From the Bikerumour site: 'The Sparks all use a 142x12 rear thru-axle which is nice, but oddly matched to the 9mm QR only on the forks'

 

I think Specialized does this on their Epic 29's as well.

 

Giant has QR rear, but QR15 front.

 

I was wondering which makes more sense from a ride and practicality point of view?

[covie]

From the Bikerumour site: 'The Sparks all use a 142x12 rear thru-axle which is nice, but oddly matched to the 9mm QR only on the forks'

 

I think Specialized does this on their Epic 29's as well.

 

Giant has QR rear, but QR15 front.

 

I was wondering which makes more sense from a ride and practicality point of view?

Most of the forces and rigid requirement is in the front, I have no idea why you would want it in the rear unless your frame design has inherent flex and you want to counter that flex.

Edited February 16, 2012 by covie

[splat]

I understand that the through axle helps with stiffness.

But I dont understand why you would have it at the back, and not the fork...