- Scott Ransom – any good for XC? Could it be light?
Current issue of ST has a review of the Genius which scored very highly with the testers saying it was as good at descending as the Ransom and better at climbing, maybe worth considering that instead?Posted 8 years ago
But yes, the Ransom is also ace, I’ve seen one ridden up Jacobs Ladder in one go: no dabs, no stops. The guy was no slouch descending it again afterwards…open up the TracLock suspension thingy, drop the saddle and he was out of sight very quickly! It was light enough, <30lb.
twohats what a load of s**t, i’ve had mine nearly a year now and i’ve had no problems at all, only ones that i’ve created by having offs (mech hanger ripped off). The shock has been floorless, just sent it away to get serviced before we do the mountain mayhem and then france in july. Awesome having the three adjustments.
I’ve ridden twice a week on it for 10 months without issue.
But someone made a point about fox float 100’s up front, thats not enough travel, the frame is designed to run with at least 140mm and really should be 150mm, i’ve got lyrics on the front of mine. As for the weight issue you won’t ever get it really light. I’ve got the LTD model with xtr/saint and its 30.5 lbs, but i don’t suffer because of it? And its awesome DH.
But if DH isn’t so much your thing then i’d go for the genius? Bit more of an all rounder? Hope this helps?Posted 8 years agonjee20Subscriber
I think a dealer is more likely to know the score than one person who’s had one for less than a year!
That seems like a really stupid idea to me, fit a 100mm fork and it’ll be super steep with a nice low bottom bracket to smash your pedals the whole time.
Even the Sparks (save for the RC and LTD) come with 120mm forks now! Don’t do it!Posted 8 years ago
Its a popular bike thats sold world wide in numbers, every bike has its faults, every bike, I’m simply saying that they’re not a poor bike and you can’t dismiss every one for either a few problamatic production models or poor riders, the shock technology is the same throughout the scott range and is tried and tested on other models.Posted 8 years agotrail_ratMember
a mate hired one out for the day .. i rode it round glentress(after setting the shock and forks up for me) …. what a bag of spanners …
Headangle too steep to be a quick descender, seat angle too slack to be a good climber. bit like your local dodgy builder , jack of all trades and good at none.
quite a scary bike to ride actually. Nice idea poorly executed !Posted 8 years agoolieMember
Ransoms are ace in my experience!
I had one as a demo bike from work, I rode it lots as did my collegues and many customers. I even used it to race xc on once just to prove a point (I was second!).
It would be unfair to say the model didn’t have the odd problem but our demo ran flawlessly for 12 months being used by a variety of people who where all giving it grief. Also sold plenty and didn’t experience any crazy comebacks.
I don’t work for a Scott dealer any more so I have nothing to gain by recommending them but if I could I’d another.
OliePosted 8 years agoRHSno2Member
I have had one for almost 3 years.
Its a great bike for big riding. Its just a bit steep for full on DH but great for trail stuff. You can get it reasonably light and it does take a lot of abuse. I have ridden it a lot (2 years guiding in Verbier) and it became my friend.
However, that f****** rear shock. Pretty good when it works but its ability to lose Negative air is impressive.
Oh and the Aluminium chain stay. Twice snapped next to disc. Not big drop or anything just standard riding. Only 1.2 mm thick. Seems like a design flaw when the rest of the frame is pretty overbuilt.
I still think its a good bike. Know some hard riders who use it but in comparison to the likes of an Orange there was a lot of downtime/bad performance.
100mm forks? WTF? Designed for 150-160mm. Get a different bikePosted 8 years agoPeterPoddyMember
Yes, the head angle will be too steep as well. I’d also imagine that you’d reduce the ground clearence way too much as well….. The pedals would be a lot closer to the floor!Posted 8 years ago
Why not stick a 29er front wheel on whilst you’re at it? You might as well screw the bike up TOTALLY….!catnashMember
One of our guys has a 07 Ransom 20, he’s 56 rides it up down no problems. I have only ever sat on it and pedal’d for a couple of hundred yards. I dind any bike strange after being on mine. Although he preferred his Scott Octane by a long way and he still has the Octane as a second bike.Posted 8 years ago
“Why not stick a 29er front wheel on whilst you’re at it? You might as well screw the bike up TOTALLY….! “
That would probably work much better actually ..
Assuming the same size tyre
Given that a Lyric or Fox 36 have arch-to-crown height of 545mm
a F100 is 471mm arch – crown
60mm travel difference and 74mm arch – crown difference
A Reba 29 100mm is 510mm arch-to-crown
+ 1.5″ of extra wheel height ~ 38mm
= arch-crown+29er wheel of 548mm
So only 3mm taller? Could drop that with a slightly smaller front tyrePosted 8 years ago
I think its a goer!
much more than an F100 26″er anyway ..davel75Member
I’ve got to agree with the “snaptastic” quote… was really happy with mine for 2 1/2 years but it’s just too fragile as a package. The shock is superb when it works (which is about 95% of the time) but the -ve air does seem to leak at any opportunity.
A 100mm fork would make it plain scary.
I’d say a spark or a genius would be more appropriate.Posted 8 years ago
sorry, getting my words mixed up. I did mean axle-to-crown height
Even taking sag into account, an F29 or Reba 29er would be a better bet than an F100?
Could always run an 80/90mm version
Realistically it needs a 150/160mm fork, perhaps with adjustable travel or some form of lockdown/eta for steeper climbsPosted 8 years ago
The topic ‘Scott Ransom – any good for XC? Could it be light?’ is closed to new replies.