I'm assuming so?
For all road, cyclo-cross and track events there is a minimum weight requirement of 6.8 kg (14.99 lb). Ultra light road bikes and many track bikes may weigh less than the minimum weight. These are not allowed without adding additional weight to the bicycle to achieve the minimum weight. Water bottles, tool bags, pumps and such items that can simply be removed from the bike are not counted in the minimum required weight.
It says road, CX and track. So that's not MTB then... Plus that bike's about as light as MTBs get and it's still over 15lbs.
No, its the lightest production mtb.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/articles.php?category=htbikes
Shows that there is a UCI limit, and shows that you can build a mtb under it. I think the limit is also 15lbs?
You might as well compare a Model T with a Veyron and say it's basically the same since it has a wheel in each corner.
OK I'm talking more about road bikes here. If a Model T chassis was the same design as a Veyron chassis, you would have a point.
All I'm pointing out is that it's the same large triangle with 2 smaller triangles on the back that is has always been, with all the fixing points in roughly the same place. Refined, optimized, evolved but not really new.
We also take a lot of care at our place to look hi-tech, as it impresses people and they are prepared to spend more. Seems to work for the bike companies too.
Refined, optimized, evolved but not really new
I disagree. A modern CF bike IS new, it just LOOKS like an old bike because the design constraints are the same. Likewise cars almost all have 4 wheels cos of design constraints.
It's like saying planes haven't changed since they have wings, a fuselage and a tail.
before I get told off for being a london banker riding around a park
😆
Given that was my phrase, I suppose I should mention that I own 4 bikes which cost more than £2k, none of which I can possibly justify, 3 of them carbon 8)
The thing is, in absolute terms, ridiculously expensive bikes are still cheap. Joe Bloggs with an average job living in suburbia regularly splurges more on a boring repmobile than even the most exotic bike we're talking about here - if you're happy to drive around in an old banger, then you can afford such a bike on a perfectly normal salary. So mentioning the cost of my stable isn't even willie waving, just that I have different priorities to Joe Bloggs.
Late to the party...
The thing with the Scale 899 is that it's not that exceptional any more, make of that what you will!
Yes £8k is a lot, but S-Works Epic/Stumpjumpers are up to £6200 for 2011, the 29er will be £6600, I'm sure it has got carbon rims, but the WCS Clincher ones, not the Topo T's with Ritchey decals.
Merida were charging £7500 for the 96 Team in 2008, which was double an S-Works, Top Fuel 9.9 etc etc, that was shocking! It's also a far more usable bike than any of the 'Limited' models they've put out for the past few years, which by and large and designed to be hung on scales!
Would`nt last 5 minuites where i live 😉
But i do love carbon on a road bike....
[img] 
[/img]
see 😉
You post that more often than I post my Trek!
Odd choice of wheels IMO, and please tell me you're not running clinchers?
btw scmiken....your wrong they're not reynolds topo t's ...
It would appear they actually are [url= http://www.ritcheylogic.com/dyn_prodfamily.php?k=299432 ]Ritchey Superlogic Carbon[/url] as the decals suggest. Didn't know they did tubs too. Obviously not quite available yet!
Edit: ouch, the clinchers are over £2000, and at a whisker under 1300g are heavier than the DTs, not to mention the ZTR Podium's you could buy 3 sets of!
they are actually using the road rims...in 650cc size clever idea..