Raleigh RC6000 or Scott Speedster S20

[tyger]

hi,

uncertain what bike to get! can you help? both has 105 grp and shimano wheels. please assist

[Willehond]

tyger, both of these bikes are nicely specced with full Shimano 105 at a decent weight.  Scott sometimes putts cheap components on (like seat and stem) to save some money, but this one looks solid (is it the new one in white?).

 

In the end it comes down to personal preference and price.  The Scott has slightly more street cred, but the Raleigh is a great deal (I ride the RC6000 myself) and usually better priced.  You can't go wrong with either!

[fandacious]

I've also got an RC6000 and I havent had 1 ounce of trouble. Its rock solid and goes like a dream. I'm not dissing the other bike - i'm just saying the Raleigh is really great

[mrmed]

I've got an RC6000 too and I love my bike. I just wished I'd had the cash to buy the carbon one. Want to buy my Ally one and I'll upgrade?

[Willehond]

Well tyger, that's Raleigh=3, Scott=0! My Raleigh has not given me a bit of trouble in 2 years and got me a long way up the PPA alphabet plus gave me an easy sub-3 Argus, so it is not just an entry level bike.  It has kicked the butt of many a carbon bling bike, and that's a great feeling.

 

Plus, if Hubbers ride the Raleigh it MUST be better!!!

[Frame Breaker]

Seems like a lot of people have the RC 6000

So the question should be do you want to be different or just blend in?

[Hendrik Petoors]

Be different and ride gemors (A spaghetti frame with a parmesan groupsetmaybe????) or blend in and make sure you ride quality (Any Raleigh)....... is that what ya mean?????????

[The Saint]

I have the RC8000, awesome bike and would ride it anyday over a Scott.

[Wannabe]

RC6000, no argument. You'll have to go far to get a better specced bike at that price. Also very reliable (13000km and not a problem)

 

[fr0sT!e]

i rode an RC3000 for a while, same frame but different groupset, and it was not too bad. so i'll have to go with the majority and say the ralleigh

[Zaskar]

Ive got a Scott AFD Pro (2004 model) same as the S20, except has aluminum rear stays, and i have a 2006 Raleigh RC6000.

 

I bought the Raleigh really just to upgrade to the 105 10sp groupset (I got it for an excellent price brand new). I rode it for 2 months to decide if i liked it more than my Scott, but I just could not get used to the way it felt. Dont know if it was the the compact Raleigh geometry, but the position was not right for me.

 

After quite a few rides i decided it wasnt for me, and I swapped the 10sp 105 with the 9sp 105 that was on my Scott. And since then ive never looked back! Gave the RC6000 to my younger brother, but he never rides it. (I dont blame him either!)

 

I ride the Scott daily as a training bike, and i wouldnt trade it for any Raleigh ever. I love the way it rides, its much lighter than that Raleigh, and much more responsive on the road. Ill never buy another Raleigh unless its for parts again.

[CaptainDura]

Ditto on the previous post.

 

Also tried the raleigh and the scott and preferred the scott ride and handling.

[scotty]

Scott, i have one and have never nor dont need to ride a Raleigh road bike.

[Eugene]

Scott S20, it has a carbon seatstay (only the 2008 Raleigh will have one), it looks much nicer and most importantly, you will have a bit of individuality. Raleighs are like Toyotas, everybody has one. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with the Raleigh, there are just too many people riding them and I like something different.

[Solo]

My last bike was a Raleigh RC9000. Aluminium bike with the carbon rear stay and front fork. As I am a design engineer I have a pretty good under standing of structural strengths, dynamics of motion, etc. My take is that Raleigh is fine for entry level bicycles and your average cyclist. However if you are looking at a top of the range bike in order to race aggressively and allow your bike to last you many years like a properly designed bike should, then stay away from buying Raleigh's and other brands that are not well known or tested.

I am currently riding a Cervelo Soloist Carbon and if you compare the flex at the BB between the 2 bikes you will be amazed to see just how poor the stiffness of the RC9000 can be.

 

The new RC6000 carbon frames had major problems with the frame as they were all cracking in the same place, on the left hand chainstay. I have seen this myself in a friends bike. The problem with carbon is that it is very, very stiff and strong in one direction, but 90 degrees to this it is as pap as a piece of spagetti and only has the strenght of the resin which hold it together (not much at all). Therefore the only way, to correctly engineer a carbon bike in order to bring out the full potential of carbon and make it safe is to use FEA (Finite Element Analysis) computer software to analyse the stiffness, fatigue limit and strength of the frame under normal riding conditions. Unfortunately very few carbon bike manufacturers do this, I strongly doubt Raleigh did this and if they did, then they came up short in their calculations.

 

4 years ago there was a post advertised for a design engineer at the company that distribute, build and sell Raleighs in South Africa. At that stage I had 2 years experience in the design field. I have a B.Eng degree from Stellenbosch University, I was told I was over-qualified for the job. I later learned they hired someone with no formal engineering training to spec there bikes and do the designs they were responsible for. I did some more research into the way they performed there designs and let's just say that I was shocked. So I stick to what I say before, Raleigh's are finie for the masses, but high end bikes that you are going to race at 100km/h with balls to the wall aggression, rather spend a bit more money and get something that is correctly engineered and that you can find properly documented engineering data on (e.g. check out the engineering notes on the cervelo website - these guys know what they are doing).

 

At the end of the day, whatever bike you buy you need to ask yourself just one question:

 

When I am hurtling down a mountain pass at 90km/h and all that is between me and the bone-crushing tar is about 7kg of man-made-designed material, do I trust the people that designed it, built it, tested it, marketed it and sold it or did I blindly try and squeeze as much out of the budget I had in order to get something that could end my cycling career and life right here, right now?

[racman]

And that is why I ride a BMC ! (A bit pricy but definately over engineered for my purpose.)