Scott Spark 920 vs Cannondale Scapel SI 4 vs Spez Camber Carbon vs Pyga 110

[GrahamS2]

What's your budget? 

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

at what stage does the HA move from being a marathon bike to a trail bike ?

no definitive number, and they're all moving down 'cos they realise that it's the way to go. But if you had to force a number - I'd not consider anything with more than 69 deg a trail bike. 

[EtiennevdMerwe]

My mate has the camber, I have the PYGA Stage, we are both buffalo's.

Don't think you can go wrong with either.

 

Personally the PYGA just works so much better, cannot fault the geometry.

[Baracuda]

I had a similar decision to make 2 years ago and went with a Pyga 110. Compared to the Camber of the time, it was tons more fun, more rigid, etc etc. The cambers and scotts have evolved more to the Pyga geometry over time - longer, slacker etc.

In terms of costs, I took a little time and kept an eye on this website and Gumtree and picked up a pearler 110 with 130mm shocks, X0 cranks, XT brakes, 1X11, and dropper post for 28k. A mate of mine is looking at a Camber at the moment and the prices are insane.

 

I am also a buffel at 97kgs and have hammered this 110 down drops, into massive rocks etc etc and it is tough and strong. I am not sure a carbon spec or scott would take the smashing so well.

 

But the main thing is the fun factor, you can ride it damn hard and I never get to the bottom without a massive smile on my face. The harder and faster you ride it, the better

[splat]

2015 Camber has 110mm Fork and 70deg head angle

2017 has 120mm fork and 68.5 deg HA

 

So yes, there should be minor updates as the models progress. As to how they differences come into account on a ride I'm not entirely sure. Someone with a better understanding of geometry and suspension will be able to tell 

They made the change to the Cambers in 2016

[Heel Drop]

Morning all,

 

So I'm pondering about getting a new bike. I currently have a 2013 Scott Spark 940 & I have narrowed it down to the above 4 2017 models which from my current knowledge are in a similar price bracket & the start of the carbon ranges.

 

I've seen a few reviews but some are outdated & I will still search for more.

 

I'm no race snake but enjoy my riding once or twice a week. I do the Trailseeker (current C batch) & USN (current B batch) series & want to do more stage races (possibly Joburg2C or Sani2C). I have done the 2 day Berg & Bush & I'm doing the Great Trek this year. I therefore need & want to step up my riding & go from 40km Trailseekers to 70 & from 30km USNs to 50. I'm therefore looking for a marathan/ XCO (not 100% sure of the difference) bike, not enduro etc.

 

I am a Buffalo category (+-98kg) & 187cm tall if that helps with a view.

 

I want the upgrade to be worth it & to be honest I want a good looking bike as well at that price, which I think they are. That is why I haven't added the Momsen Vipa 2 to the list as the yellow doesn't do it for me.

 

I'm not a techie but detailed feedback will help. If not, then a ranking of 1 to 4 will also help.

 

Advantage of the Scott is that I can trade in my current Scott at Cycle Lab who have already given me a value. I don't recall seeing the other brands there. Yes the value will be less than a private sale but it is instant, convenient in many ways & less chance of being scammed in the current world we live in. Other shops may do trade ins, I don't know, but this shouldn't be a deciding factor.

 

Thanks!

I would.go for the Scott

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Dicky DQ]

And there is no speed difference over a 70km course for the avg Joe. The little you lose on the hills ( which is little) you make up on the downs and tech or single track.

Are you sure? it is on the downs and the tech or single track that I have seen most average Joes loose most time. 

[#Pete#]

No-one on here has mentioned what I think may be the most NB difference between these bikes: geometry. 

 

The Scott for e.g. has far lower stack height than the Camber. Depending on your leg length you could go L or XL size - with huge differences in how you need to size to have the same feel as say on the Camber (or your current bike, where the bars are much higher. Do you like long or short stems, do you like your bars low or high, does it matter to you if you need a riser bar, etc.

 

Take careful measures of your current position and go compare; go sit on the XL of all and only then decide; the rest less NB and will come down to little personal choices. Geometry always most NB.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Are you sure? it is on the downs and the tech or single track that I have seen most average Joes loose most time. 

and.... a longer travel bike with slacker HA will enable the average joe to go a lot faster down the hills when compared against an XC race bike, with very little if any disadvantage on the ups. That's the whole point.

[Christofison]

I would take the Camber if you were buying a frame only and building it up. I think the Comp Carbon has a stupid mix match of components.

The Spark has a Fox 34 which a Buffalo would really appreciate.

 

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

[niterider]

Good comparative review here between the Camber and Spark - http://flowmountainbike.com/tests/shootout-specialized-camber-expert-carbon-29-vs-scott-spark-900/

[RossW]

I'm also toying with the idea of a trail bike for fun on the trails rather than beating myself to death on the HT. Spez Camber is in my top 5.

• Spez Camber
• Trek Fuel Ex
• Giant Trance
• YT Jeffsy
• Canyon Neuron

Too many awesome bikes out there. I do limit the travel at 140 mm however. Don't need more but I want at least 110 mm else I'm better sticking to my HT as I don't want to create a situation of 100 mm FS and HT because I know I will never ride the HT if that scenario arises.

[lerouc]

Doesn't the camber have A 27.2 seat tube ?

 

If yes that will swing my vote to the scott , dropper posts are importanr

 

Doesnt the camber come with a dropper?

[splat]

Doesn't the camber have A 27.2 seat tube ?

 

If yes that will swing my vote to the scott , dropper posts are importanr

Nope, its a 30.9 diameter seat tube with internal routing.

Epic is 27.2 (and the new Giant Anthem 29).

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

I'm also toying with the idea of a trail bike for fun on the trails rather than beating myself to death on the HT. Spez Camber is in my top 5.

• Spez Camber
• Trek Fuel Ex
• Giant Trance
• YT Jeffsy
• Canyon Neuron

Too many awesome bikes out there. I do limit the travel at 140 mm however. Don't need more but I want at least 110 mm else I'm better sticking to my HT as I don't want to create a situation of 100 mm FS and HT because I know I will never ride the HT if that scenario arises.

Be sure to include the Banshee Spitfire in the mix. Honestly, if I were to get a new bike now, that would be it. 

[JeffD]

Hmmm, I'm still thinking about this.

 

I've gone to the shops, had a few chats & read a few reviews.

 

I don't really see any pros of the Spez over the Scott except for aesthetics, like the paint job & storage space in the frame. The specs are pretty much the same as a Spark 930 with my half trained eye.

 

Pros of the Spark:

- I already have a Spark bias.

- I like the lock out system which will be missed if it wasn't there. Even Schurter says he uses it hundreds of times a race.

- The 910 has better specs for a slightly higher price (on sale when I last checked) than the Spez.

- Niterider's shared review http://flowmountainbike.com/tests/shootout-specialized-camber-expert-carbon-29-vs-scott-spark-900/ also favours the Scott even after noting some "weaknesses". I acknowledge these are the high end versions of the Spark vs the Camber.

 

New problem:

I started looking at the 940 again (as I have the 2013 version) just to compare with the 3 carbon versions (930, 920 & 910 (900 not an option)) & there is definitely an upgrade from 2013 & in terms of matching components the 910 is the closest match at R20k more. So I now have to work out is going carbon worth it. I'm sure I can find out a lot on this topic if I search these forums. Weight wise there is 0.8kg (6%) difference.

 

The components I look at: Fork, rear shock, rear & front (if applicable) derailleur, shifters, brakes, chains, cassettes  & now dropper posts. The rest is still all foreign to me but I'm sure plays a part in the pricing.

 

Like I've told fellow cyclists & people looking to get into the sport, buying a bike is harder than buying a car for me.