how do you adjust the seat height.


very impressive weight aswell, bet it's got some 12stone max rider weight rule :)

I expect you will have to be 'custom' fitted for the bike and pray to god you cut the tube correctly :-/

Seems an insane way of solving a problem that doesnt exist.

"And yes, you get a replaceable derailleur hanger." :)

Scott do have a gift for finding solutions to problems only they know exist. What's wrong with being able to adjust the saddle height for different conditions?

It seems they've given up trying to get around the FSR patent and used a simple single pivot like the Storck Adrenalin which is its most obvious rival. Not a bad thing given that the racers that buy will probably run it locked out on the ups and enjoy single pivot suppleness on the downs.

More than I'd be prepared to pay even if I liked it.

its built for XC so the seatpost won't need to go up+down.
There was no problem to be solved, and this isn't a solution.

Only the very top end one has the integrated seatpost. There's a version with a normal seat tube too. But no pro XC racer adjusts his or her saddle height for the conditions ;-)

bet it's got some 12stone max rider weight rule

Nope :-)

And FFS, the integrated seat tube isn't attempting to "solve a problem". It's a no-compromise race bike, it's a weight-shaving measure. AND THERE'S A VERSION WITHOUT IT.

Sheesh.

Given that Scott Pro Racers will be using them, then the weight saving doesn't sound as insane as you might think. I presume the frame on the Limited has a longish carbon bit that is trimmed to suit the rider. before the saddle assembly is clamped on.

Will obviously be an issue if you want to sell the bike on, but TBH anyone dropping £4.5K on an MTB is unlikely to be affected by that.

I know they were pushing the limits of weight and that this was probably pushing the design but I though that particular suspension layout rode badly and squatted under power? I'm sure the clever shock can calm some of the issues but I've always thought that smart shocks were a sticking plaster for bad design. Given that this is going to be used as a race bike, i.e. powerful riders pushing it hard, I'd have thought a suspension design that tends to squat would be a bad idea.

But then, what the f*@$ do I know.

EDIT: There were 2 posts when I started typing this!

I though that particular suspension layout rode badly and squatted under power?

Not necessarily. The main pivot is actually quite high up. Squat isn't a fundamental characteristic of seat stay pivots...

Racers will run so much pro pedal, it'll ride like a HT 95% of the time I'd bet anyway.

I assumed the top of the seat tube had some adjustment scope, for different footwear maybe.

Always hack saw it off and drop a standard seat post into it if needs be :)



No weight limit, hmmm

It's not your fault I don't like the bike Mike. You write the stuff, we read it and look at the pics and some things please and some things don't. I didn't like the untriangulated and supposedly flexy arms sticking out of the back of Scott's late 90s offering either, or the pull shock on the Genius. Some people did and bought them though.

Scott produce innovative designs which often seem wrong to my conservative brain cells.

"Scott produce innovative designs which often seem wrong to my conservative brain cells."

I know what you mean John. I see innovation as "something else to go wrong when I'm in the middle of a moor and it's pissing down."

From the pics I've seen Mike the main pivot looked pretty low, but it could just have been perspective. Having seen it in the flesh, I'll bow to your wisdom - just this once :-)

The left-hand chainstay goes from dropout to pivot in a straight line, so the pivot is where it hits the seat tube - it's sort of between middle and big-ring height. Obviously playing with the rate curves makes a lot of difference too, and there's the multi-mode shock gubbinses to help.

I was thinking that generally it's a pretty conservative design as Scotts go. The innovation is in the construction rather than the shape ;-)

Why ya saying FFS Mike :-( Seems a bit over the top.

Anyhow, i appreciate that its aimed at top level riders who wont give a monkies about resale value etc. I just didnt see a real 'need' for this considering how light adjustable seatposts are now and i would imagine that although this will be light, the carbon in that area must be very well strengthened so maybe reduces the benefit even more.

Anyhow, sorry you got upset grumpy pants!!

Why ya saying FFS Mike :-( Seems a bit over the top.

It's only three letters ;-)

Anyhow, i appreciate that its aimed at top level riders who wont give a monkies about resale value etc. I just didnt see a real 'need' for this..

Well, there isn't a "real need" for disc brakes or gears or suspension or any of the other things we take for granted. It just seems a bit odd to me to object so strongly to a feature that three-quarters of the bikes in the range don't have :-)

Anyhow, sorry you got upset grumpy pants!!

Is it the weekend yet? I need a weekend.

True!

I really hadnt thought about how exclusive the frame is gonna be. Anyone who buys one is pretty much goona be wanting it to 'custom' fit anyhow.

If your a real weight wennie ( nick evans ) then the seat post makes sense, sure wouldn't want to cut to much off and have to get a new frame though :)

It does look like the clamp to fit the saddle to the top of the seat tube is likely to be as heavy as what they claim to have saved using a continuous seat tube though... And it's not like that's the lightest FS bike in the world either - this probably isn't either, but it's 2.5kg lighter than the Scott.

Though it may be the lightest frame of that travel to ever make production (And considering it includes a seatpost that figure is more impressive). Whether it's any good or not remains to be seen once people get a chance to ride it - It's unlikely to be appearing in my garage any time soon anyway...

I'm glad these companies keep pushing with designs for XC race oriented bikes, even if they don't appeal to normal riders any more. We need to be careful though, remember the days when we all had bikes and components that had filtered down from race programs, and then only lasted us a "season" worth of weekends. I hope we don't enter a time warp and bikes once again become compromised by companies chasing the "lightest ever blah" award.

that's the lightest FS bike in the world either

Lightest frame. That Litespeed thing had all sorts of ludicrous lightweight nonsense on it that you really wouldn't want to actually use ;-)

The impressive thing about that Scott is that there's really nothing super-exotic on it. Yes, it's got CrossMax SLRs and full XTR, but nothing hand-whittled from alien metals in a shed in Germany.