Forum

Hi guys,
I am looking for a mtb to get back into riding that also gives me some margin to improve and develop some techniques. Also, I would like something that climbs well and it is manageable on single tracks, but no plans on getting into racing or abrupt descends/jumps.
After four agonic weeks reading and test riding I managed to narrow my selection to three bikes. What do you think? (I got scared as some people told me that the scale is too 'racy')

1) Cannondale Trail SL 1 2013 Mountain Bike (£1100 - between sizes M and L):

http://www.cannondale.com/gbr/2013/bike ... sl-1-28484

2) Scott Scale 50 2012 (£1000 - more likely in size L - the M felt a tad small buy very manoeuvrable):

http://www.scott-sports.com/global/en/p ... 50/#.UWw4_ b8ymxo

3) Trek 6300 D 2012 (£650 - also between 18.5 and 19.5, the latter with a shorter stem of 90mm):

http://www.trekbikes.com/au/en/bikes/2012/archive/6300

PS. I have also seen the Scott Scale 30 at £1299, which is carbon frame and better components. Is it worth the difference in money?

In that case, I tried that one and cannot decide between sizes (medium/large)... but it might be that I don't know very well what to look for and expect during a 30 mins test ride.

All three bikes 'look' to have very similar geometry and all three look like nice bikes to rack up miles of fire road but not sure of anything more 'challenging' you really need to think about 2 things, 1) where you'll ride most. 2)where are you happy to compromise. (E.G i'd rather compromise racing across a farmers field for being able to hit some jumps going down a hill ?) but i'll ride where ever my bike takes me.

Of the three you posted i would put the decision down to pure gut feeling and personal preference as i don't feel there is much difference anywhere else ?

Thanks for the ideas, that is quite helpful!

I think that, at least for now, I am planning to do longer rides and get to follow some routes until I get back to shape again. Also, budget wise I cannot afford a full-suspension at the moment.

Actually, after a test ride yesterday (I spent an hour on the Scott Scale Medium and 30 mins on the Large) I feel some pain on my neck/upper back. Could it be because of the more aggressive geometry on the Scale or wrong sizing?

I am thinking that, if I finally go for any of the Scales, I could fit a slightly raised handlebar to see whether that helps with the handling and reducing a bit the virtual top tube length. Would that make sense?

My other option would be the Trek on 18.5 and, as you said, safe some money for further investment (though that carbon fibre frame is very tempting).

Back pain is most definitely poor positioning on the bike, could be a number of things though ! seat too far / not far enough back, brakes and gears too low causing you to rotate your wrists too much, stem length too long, incorrect crank length, all sorts

Jon speaketh the truth, but of the selected ones i would go with comfort of the carbon Scale. Less Buzz etc.
But also the aching could just be down to you not used to being on a bike for a while.

Having ridden all of these in previous incarnations they all feel pretty similar to ride and some basic handlebar/stem changes will make it fit better for you.

Even though I'm a big Cannondale fan, I would go for the Scott as the wheels are far better than the others and require less upgrades overall.

I too would go for the Scott..i have a 2004 hard tail and its done me proud, although its not very comfy..but that trek does look nice..decisions decisions..

I do like Trek but then I do like Scott , but which is best.? There's only one way to find out......................FIGHT!!!!

On a serious side I'd go for the Trek for £650. If you want to upgrade £350 buys you a lot on ebay.

Have a look at this on ebay it's new. Item number 111053308607. Don't pay the £500, make an offer.
This bikes been best bike in its class 6 years!
I've just bought a canyon and drove to Nottingham to collect, absolutely fantastic bikes.


https://www.canyon.com/_en/mountainbike ... tml?b=3002



J.A.T.

Scott scale,this decision is based purely on reading good things about it elsewhere and id like one. although theres a lot of difference in price between the this and the Trek!

Hi guys!
I finally went for the Scott Scale 50 for £700. It was only £50 more than the Trek. I was also considering the Whyte 901 that felt great and is a more Trail oriented bike but is was £1200 more. But for the price difference I could get a new fork at some point or even safe for a new bike in the future.
I am going to start fiddling around with the Scott, starting with shortening the stem a bit (currently: 100mm).
I went for a ride yesterday and it felt really nice to be back on the tracks!
Thanks for all your help!