Pcad after today's "recovery" ride on the Scott.
http://m.gmgrd.co.uk/res/203.$plit/C...em_0_image.jpg

He hasn't posted, so there is reason for concern. He always posts! All the time!

the only reason he bought the scott is so that he can mount an iPad on it and still have a light bike.

My father saw this page while I was looking at your bike and he said, "Wow he has a really big cluster in the back." I replied with, "Nine speeds by the look of things. It because he's old." "Oh" He said. "It that what those are for?"

I think I could actually get to love this bike. A couple of position tweaks and it's better. Stiff as hell, but love the lively response and the great climbing mojo. And this Ultegra stuff is the bomb.

D.A. wheels arrive this week. Let's see how it rides with those.

The past few months haven't been the best for my feet for some reason; it seems like everytime it's some new weird pain. I'm going to set up an appointment with a podiatrist to see what the heck is going on. I've been riding frequently but no more than usual so not sure why.


It's a nice bike, I've test ridden the CR1 and the Addict two years ago and was impressed with them then, though the non replaceable hanger didn't fill me with confidence. I like the new ones as well which is adding options to my new bike considerations. Why didn't you go with the CR1 SL which has the taller headtube but still pretty light?

Why would anyone buy a bike named Scott?

lets not show your age now...

CR 1 has a more forgiving ride alright, but who needs that Fred geometry? I would have considered a CR-1 if they hadn't Fredded it down. The Addict at least now has a replaceable rear derailleur hanger. Mine does.

Before you buy an Addict, take it for a long test ride. By far the stiffest frame I've ridden, might be stiffer than that CAAD 3 I had. But it's CF, so it still has a better ride than the alu Cannondale did, and it's lighter, more lively, better climber.

So a Pcad Ipad- or well go ahead and make up all the combinations

True the CR1 is a kinder gentler bike than it used to be if I remember correctly because it had a more aggressive geometry than it has now. I asked because if you need a lot of spacers then you might benefit for a taller headtube and avoid the "Fredness" of spacer stacks; I'm not a road nazi, but you know how it goes. I'll take both out for a spin because my BMC is set up aggressively and I'm debating whether to get something just slightly more relaxed to mix it up, which is the role my Orbea fills now. I don't know if you've tried them or not, but BMCs are "lively" bikes.

Coming in a bit late. That Scott looks hot. I'll bet that, once you get it dialed in, you'll have a hard time choosing which of your bikes to take out on hammerfests. That's a fine dilemma to have to resolve.

pcad, did you get the bike fitted to you or are you doing the dialing in yourself?

Really? I hadn't noticed.

'Fitted?'

I've been doing this for 20+ years. I know what fits.

If I can't like the Addict, BMC will probably be the next option. But I think I am going to like this bike. It's always a transition with a radical new ride, although I did like the S2 out of the box more than this bike. But I did like it today. Tough on the chip and seal roads up here however.

This whole thing is always a process.

You should have a professional fit you just for s's and g's.

F that action.

My LBS does pro fits all the time. They saw how my last couple of bikes fit. They seemed happy.

The only thing is that the bike characteristics won't change, just your perception and acceptance of it has to . I think it would be easier to accept the Scott if you didn't have the Cervelo as a frame of reference.
You rail against the idea of choosing a bike the makes you feel "Fred" when in reality, it may be the better choice. Kind of adolescent don't you think?

Not for nothing, for someone who purports to be so experienced, to chose a bike based on a test ride in the parking lot of the LBS is a very rookie move. I won't be taking advice on cycling products from you anytime soon.
Just sayin.

Maybe they were just to happy to avoid the lengthy hand wringing torturefest you'd put them through?

I loved my BMC from the very first ride, it asks to be ridden fast and I'm more than happy to oblige. It's funny because I bought it to be my second bike but it's become my primary bike, and in this case the aluminum frame sees more action than the carbon one. In fairness it's not the material but the set up, kind of like having a speedster and a Cadillac.

Well, that sound like a real "professional" fit.............................

Spare me the 'pro' fit bullshlit.

Agreed. It really kills me to see someone on a bike with a tower of spacers under the stem when there are plenty of good bikes in the market that have taller head tubes to prevent this. I also don't think bikes with tall head tubes look "Fred" when it means you can eliminate spacers:

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m...y/IMG_1262.jpg

You do all realize that all your stupid opinions are completely irrelevant to me.

Carry on.