![]() |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 10432130)
There's a thousand posts on this road to nowhere. I can sense it.
|
Originally Posted by ls01
(Post 10431707)
More like jr high.
|
Originally Posted by nivekdodge
(Post 10432436)
If we're going back to high school I'm gonna need more hair.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y11...igheadcopy.jpg |
Hey Slothy, my LBS insists the BMC top of the line race frame is STIFFER than the Addict.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it kid. |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 10432590)
Hey Slothy, my LBS insists the BMC top of the line race frame is STIFFER than the Addict.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it kid. |
Originally Posted by WhyFi
(Post 10432615)
Your LBS must not be reading the same reviews.
Of course one man's 'horribly stiff' is another man's 'great climber/sprinter' and one man's 'comfy ride' is another man's 'mushy bike'. There are few absolutes in this department. Which slothy would get if he wasn't so imbecilic. |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 10432619)
I take reviews with a grain of salt, because for all the raving Slothy does about how stiff the bike is (and it's very stiff, he's right), all the reviews I've seen don't complain about that.
|
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 10432619)
I take reviews with a grain of salt, because for all the raving Slothy does about how stiff the bike is (and it's very stiff, he's right), all the reviews I've seen don't complain about that.
Of course one man's 'horribly stiff' is another man's 'great climber/sprinter' and one man's 'comfy ride' is another man's 'mushy bike'. There are few absolutes in this department. Which slothy would get if he wasn't so imbecilic. http://www.roadcyclinguk.com/bike-re...test/3332.html |
Originally Posted by WhyFi
(Post 10432615)
Your LBS must not be reading the same reviews.
|
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 10432550)
I have other problems, but that's not one of them.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y11...igheadcopy.jpg |
Originally Posted by slothlike
(Post 10432655)
But it's not for everybody. I really do hate mushy bikes more, I've sold a couple of those after short stints on them. I think the Addict will be a keeper. So slothy, we need to see pics of your bikes, or we'll have to conclude you're a total Internet Tough Guy. Don't hold out on us kid. |
Originally Posted by jdon
(Post 10432662)
Sock puppet rule #1. Don't answer questions directed at your alias.
|
Originally Posted by coasting
(Post 10432156)
That is what BF has above the other sites. self delusion is less prominent.
|
Here's what Bicycling Mag had to say about the Addict a couple of years ago. Completely contradicts that UK review slothy posted:
It's tempting to get so caught up in the siren call of ever-lighter bikes that we forget everything else. Sub-1,000-gram frames! 900 grams! 850!?!! But how a bike rides is a different issue from how little it moves the needle on a scale--and a more important one. With its new Addict line of bikes, Scott has the right priorities. The Addict replaces the CR1 line as Scott's top offering, and though there are cosmetic similarities, the Addict is really a new bike. The about-900-gram CR1 is constructed of butted carbon tubes joined with what Scott calls "carbon welding." But with the new Addict, although the stays are made with CR1, the main triangle is formed in what Scott calls its Integrated Molding Process, which lets designers shave material--about 11 percent less at the junction of the top, head and down tubes, for instance. IMP also lets Scott shave material from the bottom bracket, and get supertrick by building the dropouts, cable stops and even the front derailleur hanger (!) from carbon. The result is a claimed 790g frame (54cm). But the real wonder is how the bike rides. Most of our testers thought the CR1 felt as if it squared off even tiny bumps, a ride quality only the most rabid racers tolerated. The Addict is stiffer and lighter, yet rides better. It absorbs or disperses ongoing road chatter handily enough to legitimately be used as an all-day or century bike in addition to its natural spot as a racer. Compared with a CR1, the head tube is slightly shorter and the top tube slightly longer, and the fork has been lightened and reshaped; yet the ride quality of the Addict is so fundamentally smooth that the carbon construction itself must be the key. All testers called the Addict "snappy." Punch the pedals and the bike leaps; press down on the inside drop and it lasers through a corner; jut your hip sideways and it scampers to a new line. Or, as one tester did, mash the front brake to show off by doing a nose wheelie and the snappy bike throws you over the bar. The rest of us--we were thrown by just how light, fast, stiff yet smooth the Addict is. BUY IT IF: You're a weight freak and a ride-quality connoisseur |
|
|
It goes on and on.
So tell us Slothy, besides that one negative review and your obvious anti-Scott bias, what do you bring to this discussion besides the axe you have been grinding on my head for the past 700+ posts? |
I felt like pcad today, on my addict, crushing the souls of all the weekend-warrior freds.
|
Originally Posted by WhyFi
(Post 10432727)
Comprehend sarcasm much? If you did, you'd see that I was actually poking fun at Slothlike, not supporting his position. Oh, and for the record, there wasn't a question in Pcad's post. Nice try, though.
|
Originally Posted by jdon
(Post 10432944)
Yeah, sarcasm doesn't jump off the page in bold or italics. Try emoticons. Also, take sensitivity training. You will cry a lot less...
|
^^^^^^ bi+C4!ng and whining howevr cant be helped
|
Originally Posted by jdon
(Post 10432944)
Yeah, sarcasm doesn't jump off the page in bold or italics. Try emoticons. Also, take sensitivity training. You will cry a lot less...
Thank you! Come again! |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 10432795)
|
Originally Posted by slothlike
(Post 10432164)
It is getting a little too MACHO in here for me. At the end of the day...................................
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d1...mall_penis.jpg |
Originally Posted by slothlike
(Post 10433093)
Yeah, this coming from the guy who says reviews are bull$#$$. It is well known that Scott's are on harsh side of ride quality. I actually owned an aluminum Scott in the past which isn't a point of comparison, but even their aluminum was on harsh side compared to others I owned.
Well DONE. Moronic contradictory comments like this are the fuel rods of the BF Nuclear Stupidity Reactor. http://www.heatingoil.com/wp-content...9/12/homer.jpg |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:35 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.