Oneone Scandal &quo...
 

[Closed] Oneone Scandal "up to date ?"

Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

So is a Scandal 29er considered up to date in regards to where 29er geometry is at today ?


 
Posted : 31/07/2011 11:00 pm
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

stuck in mid-2009


 
Posted : 31/07/2011 11:06 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

whats new ?


 
Posted : 31/07/2011 11:12 pm
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

FS


 
Posted : 31/07/2011 11:14 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

FS

now were talking.


 
Posted : 31/07/2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

The trend these days is that people are going for steeper head angles and the forks are getting more offset as a result, not dissimilar to Gary Fisher's G2 geometry.

Evidenced by the following quoted head angles, comparing the venerable Scandal to the latest offering for 2011 from Santa Cruz:
Santa Cruz Highball - 70.5
On-One Scandal - 72.0

Having owned, ridden and raced a Scandal, an original G2 Scandal and now a Highball (yes, I am a very lucky boy indeed!), I would say the difference is marked and would recommend the Highball (or at least the Highball geometry) over the Scandal. That said, they are both damn good bikes, so you can't go that far wrong ๐Ÿ˜‰

Rob
[url= http://www.bigrobracing.co.uk ]bigrobracing.co.uk[/url]


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 7:15 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Thanks Rob.


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 8:56 am
 gee
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Rob - the stats you quoted are the opposite of what you said...? The O-O has a steeper head angle? Do you mean that head angles are getting less steep? Agreed on the forks though - my 2005 Rebas and 2009 Fox F29 are a totally different shape for 2 80mm suspension forks.


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 9:03 am
Posts: 4315
Free Member
 

people are going for steeper head angles

Surely it's the opposite โ“ - current trend is for slacker head angles - like the 70.5 quoted on the SC. Scotts are 69.5 etc. which is possible due to increased fork offset.

On-one's new bikes all stick with their same geo of steeper head angles which was designed to quicken the steering in a time when most forks had less offset.


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 9:06 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Oops, I appear to have typed that before drinking my morning coffe whilst having breakfast. At least t was clear what I meant even thought I typed the oppposite.

Yup, just like I was corrected, head angles are (and I'm playing safe here) [b]changing[/b] (slackening, but I am willing to be re-corrected) to accomodate forks that, correspondingly, have increasing fork offset, which negates the need for a steep head angle as a measure to quicken up steering.

But at least the numbers I quoted the first time around make sense!

Rob
[url= http://www.bigrobracing.co.uk ]bigrobracing.co.uk[/url]


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 1:18 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

So, there are limited forks available for these new bikes ? I guess most are OEM aswell ?


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 3:21 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Nope, RockShox & Fox forks all have increased offset too.

However, you can run old forks with new frames and vice versa. One of the Trek women runs a SID on her G2 Superfly as it's lighter, I ran a Reba on a Gary Fisher for a bit too. I've never ridden and "old" fork on a "new" frame but I'm sure it would be just fine.

On 26" bikes we never worry about head angles and fork offsets and difference with time and 99.9% of bikes work just fine!

Rob
[url= http://www.bigrobracing.co.uk ]bigrobracing.co.uk[/url]


 
Posted : 01/08/2011 7:47 pm