Scott Spark 940 vs Giant Anthem X1 29er

[Nicola13]

Ok i have now narrowed down my shopping to these two bikes.

 

I can get them both at exactly the same price.

 

The catch comes in: The Giant i can get with tubeless conversion already on it. The Scott with original tyres.

 

But in my opinion, the Scott is a better spec bike than the Giant. Also the Scott is 3x10 gear ratio wheras the Giant is only 2x10.

 

So which one do i go for and why???

 

Scott Spark 940 - http://www.scott-sports.com/global/en/products/227690/scott-spark-940-bike/;jsessionid=3390CE2328C50DE853FEF90161661246

 

Giant Anthem X1 - http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-za/bikes/model/anthem.x.29er/12778/59366/

[MrJacques]

The Scott isn't bad at all, but I'd take the Giant. The suspension system is better. With the Scott you have to fiddle with the twinlock levers, where you can basically just ride on the Giant. And you are getting tubeless for free, but that's maybe a short term bonus.

[Snoman]

I prefer the Twinloc system to the floating sensation of the Giant suspension setup. With the three different settings you get the best out of the dual sudpension and you can adjust it on the fly according to the conditions. With the Giant you have no option except for the initial pressure setup. I hate it when the back end gives way when climbing hard, so a remote lockout is a must in my opnion.

[Google]

IMO scott is much better as it should be lighter and have a better suspension system with the twinlock. it also seems to have some XT components over the Giants SLX this is also a nice benifit.

[madbradd]

I went for the giant. A little more trail than the Scott. So maybe look at what kind of riding you do to help make up your mind.

 

I did chose to upgrade the crank and shifters though. Chat to your lbs if you go for the giant, worked out quite cheap - same price as two new tubeless tyres actually.

[Johny Bravo]

Scott is nice and racy, climbs well. I am not fan of the giant. They are lovely bikes, but they feel to soft for me. There are other options out there, but if it is between those 2 bikes the Scott.

[Louis for real]

Giant-enough said

[Tankman]

Scott is nice and racy, climbs well. I am not fan of the giant. They are lovely bikes, but they feel to soft for me. There are other options out there, but if it is between those 2 bikes the Scott.

 

Oh yea!

How can we forget so quickly after your Cannondale Lefty thread, that you are the resident go-to expert for advice, opinions and reviews on forks and suspensions?

 

If we went with your (ill)logic argument, the OP should not even be looking at dual suspension bikes ... or 29ers ... because Nino won ... on a hardtail ... 650b!

 

Giant. They are lovely bikes, but they feel to soft for me.

 

That is a benchmark review on the Maestro Suspension System and Fox CTD rear shox, well done!

 

[TuinSlang]

Scott def

[Carmichael]

Giant, if you setup and shock pressures are correct there is now fiddling needed. Been riding my anthem for a year now, and never experienced bobbing on climbs... Maybe i must climb harder?

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

The Giant isn't considered one of the best XC full sussers for nothing.

 

Besides - that Maestro (DW in disguise) suspension design is very, very well deserving of the accolades it receives. The Giant is also slightly more versatile than the Scott, in that you would (probably) be more comfortable on it after an all-day slog in the saddle.

 

As for XT vs SLX - VERY little difference there, so I would not let that be a determining factor. In any event, I'd take SLX over XT due to the extra durability it offers over XT's predominant goal - weight saving missions.

 

In addition, the Giant's wheels SEEM to be holding up more to abuse than the Scott's wheels (purely through the presence of less "I folded my wheels" complaints on the Giant) and the lack of a "twinloc" lever means nothing when there is the Propedal switch on the CTD shock - as long as that is engaged, you shouldn't have a problem with bob.

 

Also - bob DOES help on the climbs when they get more technical, believe it or not. SO you don't want a completely rigid suspension system, otherwise you may as well just get a hardtail. Bob allows the bike to "squish" into the terrain, offering you more grip at low (and high) speeds when the terrain gets rocky & rooty.

 

The 3x 10 vs 2x 10 argument is moot, as there is so much overlap in the ratios that it really doesn't make a difference which one you go for.

 

In short - I'd definitely go for the giant. Even though it has the SLX components vs the Scott's mix of xt/slx - the combination of a superior suspension design on the Giant - especially with that DT Swiss NUDE rear can on the Scott. Even though they've said that it's been fixed, I'd still rather wait to see what the long term test results give, or swap it out for an RP23 / CTD shock as previous incarnations had VERY bad reports of random failures, blown seals and stuff that a high-end shock just shouldn't suffer from - the Giant wins the day for me.

 

You also have the added bonus of an off the shelf tubeless conversion, which will do a lot to your enjoyment of the riding experience.

 

The elixir 5's on the Giant are also very good - mine have lasted VERY well, and do a very good job of stopping all 102 kg of me on the steepest descents. They just need to be loved and bled more carefully than the Shimanos on the Scott, which, according to some reviews, suffer from dramatically reduced braking power after the first / second bleed.

 

For me - Giant.

 

Better suspension design (especially with Scott's Nude 2 shocker)

As good as parts kit

Tubeless conversion

Potentially better wheels (not as many reports of failures)

Better agents? This is a contentious one. Scott seem to have pockets of excellence yet stumble on some issues. I've heard of far less issues on the Giant side of things.