Patchelicious Posted February 1, 2017 Share Let you google that for me? Let me understand this, you want information, but you want other people to get it for you? Rudi Pollard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUMEYA Posted February 1, 2017 Share Giant was manufacturing mountain bikes with carbon seat and chain stays before spez. Does anyone know why Giant canned carbon seat and chain stays for aluminium ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banna Posted February 1, 2017 Share Yes There top model is a 27.5, still has a Alu rear triangle and that's $8750.So you're saying it's a worse bike because it has a lower price and a different wheelsize?........ (sorry just pulling your chain ) Spoke101 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted February 1, 2017 Share Giant was manufacturing mountain bikes with carbon seat and chain stays before spez. Does anyone know why Giant canned carbon seat and chain stays for aluminium ones?In their opinion the marginal stiffness / weight advantages just weren't worth the additional cost. Plus you can build a PLENTY stiff rear tri out of alu with it being pretty darn light. YUMEYA 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirkitech Posted February 1, 2017 Share I knew this was coming. Unfortunately, I didn't have a chance to get the bike near a scale. Would saying that it felt light suffice? my 2008 sworks epic has been called very light, but i suspect the 2017 version would be significantly lighter still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pellieg Posted February 1, 2017 Share Yes There top model is a 27.5, still has a Alu rear triangle and that's $8750. luckily the anthem has vertical Shock , other wise no one would buy it . Spoke101 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoke101 Posted February 1, 2017 Share So you're saying it's a worse bike because it has a lower price and a different wheelsize?........ (sorry just pulling your chain ) Spaz is $9000 So I know which one I would choose for only $250 more. Plus the Anthem spec is off (Pike up front and Giant hubs are not for me on a Pro level XC race bike). Rudi Pollard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUMEYA Posted February 1, 2017 Share No bottle cages!! Complete ripoff!60k for a new Sworks frame and no fork. That is a rip off. Bike addiction is not cheap. We are doomed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Headshot Posted February 1, 2017 Share Nice review, good and bad mentioned. Silly money for a bike. The special shocks and servicing costs on top of the astronomical asking price (the same goes for the other bikes mentioned in comments) make it too expensive for 90% of the cycling population. How about reviews of the cheapest Epic (no doubt still around 50-60k), Anthem, Scalpel and Scott? My guess is that aside form a weight penalty there isn't much difference. SeanvR and Nick 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stefmeister Posted February 1, 2017 Share Spaz is $9000 So I know which one I would choose for only $250 more. Plus the Anthem spec is off (Pike up front and Giant hubs are not for me on a Pro level XC race bike).I had to look up the spec on the new Anthem now. 120mm for xc? Interesting development. HT @68deg is sweet. But I would take a Pike over a SID any day.I've no idea what quality the giant hubs are, but the Rovals aren't anything to get excited about, and it will certainly not be the selling point of the bike.For me, the Scott Spark RC still looks like the best bike overall for xc.I had an Epic, it's a great bike and perfect for all day riding on all our trails...except on Upper Canaries @Jonkers. It was too twitchy for my own comfort. Spoke101 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonky Posted February 1, 2017 Share too early? Pipsqueak, Danilo and Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoke101 Posted February 1, 2017 Share I had to look up the spec on the new Anthem now. 120mm for xc? Interesting development. HT @68deg is sweet. But I would take a Pike over a SID any day.I've no idea what quality the giant hubs are, but the Rovals aren't anything to get excited about, and it will certainly not be the selling point of the bike.For me, the Scott Spark RC still looks like the best bike overall for xc.I had an Epic, it's a great bike and perfect for all day riding on all our trails...except on Upper Canaries @Jonkers. It was too twitchy for my own comfort. For top level XC a Pike is just too heavy, DT Swiss internals are way better than Giants offering.I used to be a huge Scott fan but they have lost me over the last few years. It started for the DT Swiss suspension then too many of there frames & wheels breaking and finally there pricing and support. 2 years ago the top S-Works Venge with a Quorq PM standard was R165k the top Foil was R170k without a PM and Scott SA didn't even bother bringing in the top 2 bikes there where special order.Scott use the same OEM Hubs as Spaz and the RC SL is $10000 or $6000 for the Frame & Fork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Dale Posted February 1, 2017 Share Awesome review, NickDetailed. Mooi prentjies too. Nick, SeanvR and Lexx 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanvR Posted February 2, 2017 Share I still think that it makes no sense to still have a brain... Haha . On a serious note, from a mechanical point of view, there are simpler linkage designs to improve efficiency which is lighter overall. Scotts bold move to move from a single-pivot suspension with the shock mounted horizontally to the top tube to a rocker design made complete sense and the benifits are tangible. My theory is that spez will not suggest (or most if any spez riders) that any other rear suspension is more efficient. Spez wont change their suspension design. Having the brain clearly defines a unique technology (Regardless of its performance) that splits itself from the rest which is why people will buy it (we all want a perceived cutting edge advantage). Secondly, the servicing of the brain is also good revenue. If I were the CEO of spez, I would not change a thing purely from a sales prospective. Beyond this, Spez do make a hell of a good finished product. The carbon work is like no other. I love the new Scott but the finishing touches are not quite spez if you have a good eye. Pricing seems high but your mates with the fat bonuses will still give into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted February 2, 2017 Share I still think that it makes no sense to still have a brain... Haha . On a serious note, from a mechanical point of view, there are simpler linkage designs to improve efficiency which is lighter overall. Scotts bold move to move from a single-pivot suspension with the shock mounted horizontally to the top tube to a rocker design made complete sense and the benifits are tangible. My theory is that spez will not suggest (or most if any spez riders) that any other rear suspension is more efficient. Spez wont change their suspension design. Having the brain clearly defines a unique technology (Regardless of its performance) that splits itself from the rest which is why people will buy it (we all want a perceived cutting edge advantage). Secondly, the servicing of the brain is also good revenue. If I were the CEO of spez, I would not change a thing purely from a sales prospective. Beyond this, Spez do make a hell of a good finished product. The carbon work is like no other. I love the new Scott but the finishing touches are not quite spez if you have a good eye. Pricing seems high but your mates with the fat bonuses will still give into it. Oh no you didn't.... Captain Fastbastard Mayhem and Danilo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanvR Posted February 2, 2017 Share Oh no you didn't....I knew that would come...Scott claims there are multiple benefits to the new design, including a higher initial leverage ratio improves small-bump sensitivity and offers better support while pedaling (less bobbing) in the middle of the shock stroke; a lighter top tube, since it no longer needs shock mount reinforcement; and more drivetrain stiffness, thanks to the upside-down shock orientation. The rocker-link design also freed Scott up to redesign and dramatically lighten the rear triangle. The old version had four distinct pieces with a rear axle pivot and a ton of hardware bolting it all together. The new, pivotless version has two swingarm pieces (in either carbon or aluminum) and dramatically less hardware (some of it moves to the rocker link, but there’s generally less of it, and it’s not as heavy). (http://www.bicycling.co.za/bikes-gear/bike-reviews/2017-scott-spark/) ....Throwing in a lower COG, reinforcing BB area (Hitting 2 birds with one stone here) and capacity for an extra bottle makes sense to me. It just looks a bit funny (The upside down shock) and probably a Bi@#ch to clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now