# New Scott 899 frame for 2011!



## krystian xtc (Jun 17, 2005)

Exclusive video of scott 899 frame for 2011.
Scott anounced sub900 gram frame with bb30/92. integrated seatclamp, carbon post mount and integrated housings.
more photos: http://www.lightbike-magazine.es/in...148:scott-899-2011-fotos-exclusivas&Itemid=25


----------



## sergio_pt (Jan 29, 2007)

that's very nice. Thanks for posting
I like the integrated seatpost clamp idea. It's another trend for the competition to follow. 
I wonder were they've removed the weight?


----------



## nikoli8 (Mar 23, 2008)

Brake mount looks interesting...


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

It looks great, but if I got that frame, I would have to replace my fork, headset, front derailleur, crankset, rear brake housing and seatpost. It would be easier to sell my bike and buy this one complete.

It would definitely look better with a black fork.


----------



## Atmos (Oct 20, 2006)

Is this going to be top or bottom pull?


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

Bottom pull.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

WOW !

It was really time came up with something new. The Scale now was 5 years in the making without any mayor changes. This new 899 seems to combine just about everything you can possibly build into a frameset.Really cool.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

very tasty

...design looks alot like a 2010 focus raven extreme - but further improved


----------



## Dex11 (May 4, 2005)

Awesome.....I really like that brake-mount !


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Dex11 said:


> Awesome.....I really like that brake-mount !


Actually - for me that's one of the details i'm thinking about if it's good or bad: with such a mount you might be unable to use 140 rotors. So while they save the weight of the usually needed adapter (ca. 20g) they limit you in rotor size. Hmm - i just had to go down to a 140 on my Formula R1 for very dry hardpack soil as the rear was too grabby.The 140 rotor was the perfect choice for me lately.

On a second glance i see more features that need to be looked at in detail:

-integrated cables.....well - we will see how those perform. What i also note is that they run the cables "wrong": the cable from the right enters the frame on the right and left on the left side...makes for awful narrow bends in the housings which then make for drag. I prefer to run the cables in a wider bend: left side goes around the steerer to the right side and right side goes around the steerer to the left. I then have the cables crossing each other under the downtube...that's how cables get the least bends in them and work the smoothest.Just looking at the cramped shifter cables doesn't look good to me. And i hope you still have free choice in choosing whichever cablesystem you like and also which side is for front and rear derailleur...

-tapered steerer.....looks like they have an oversize lower headset bearing. If so no way to put a lighter headset than the stock one.

-BB30/92......very limited crankset choice. At least Lightning cranks will fit so that's good. Guys using Claviculas or similar cranks will have to look elsewhere

-The seatpost size still looks pretty fat. Maybe no more 34,9 like in the past but it looks like 31,6 to me. The trend these days is going back to slimmer diameters like 27,2 though which dampen the ride quite a bit (and are lighter as well).

-invisible letters next to the red 899 saying "must have"....very expensive


----------



## mmmaaaiiikkk (Aug 10, 2009)

nino said:


> Actually - for me that's one of the details i'm thinking about if it's good or bad: with such a mount you might be unable to use 140 rotors. So while they save the adapter they limit you in rotor size. Hmm - i just had to go down to a 140 on my Formula R1 for very dry hardpack soil as the rear was too grabby.The 140 rotor was the perfect choice for me lately.
> 
> On a second glance i see more feauters that need to be looked at in detail:
> integrated cables.....well - we will see how those perform.
> ...


Frame looks great. If you follow the link in the first post, you can watch the promo video and see a few more details.
I have a '09 Scale LTD frame and this seems to make a couple of improvements. Bottom pull is a real bonus and eliminates the need for adapters to run road FDs, although the seat tube still appears to be 38mm. The internal cable routing probably saves weight over the standard full housings. If the rear brake posts can only accept 160mm, this would be a rear failing, but I can't really tell the size of the rotor from the pics (but it looks like a 160mm). As Nino says, the head tube looks a little unusual, and I hope it does not require a special Scott only headset. There also seems no longer to be a brace between the seat stays. But Scott claims it is stiffer than the Scale. 80gm lighter than claimed Scale weight is good - 35gm lost from the bottom bracket area (but stiffer - says so in the video) wonder where the rest is? But if you can't use a 140mm rear disc then that is 20gm extra weight already.
What I really don't like though is the name '899'. It annoys me when manufactures name their products after the supposed weight (I have a Selle Italia saddle that says '125g' in silver letters. Why? It doesn't weigh 125g!). Maybe they are trying to outdo Merida with their '0.9'.
Anyway ... like the look of it; hate the name.


----------



## Batas (Jan 16, 2004)

Even if you can't use a 140mm rotor, you probably get the same weight. The adapter is 12g +-...


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Batas said:


> Even if you can't use a 140mm rotor, you probably get the same weight. The adapter is 12g +-...


Correct-that's what i already wrote above BUT i still don't like it when a certain design limits you in choosing whatever component you would like. In my case the 140 rotor wasn't chosen because of the lighter weight but because it would be less powerful and can be better controlled entering corners on hardpack.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Nice. I knew they would have to step up to compete with the Flash. I wonder if Cannondale will make any changes to the Flash for 2010. Anyway, that's another thread. Nice light bike from a reputable company and it's not green!


----------



## dougal.s (Mar 13, 2006)

Cannondale to release new frame for 2011, the Flash 898.


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

sergio_pt said:


> that's very nice. Thanks for posting
> I like the integrated seatpost clamp idea. It's another trend for the competition to follow.
> I wonder were they've removed the weight?


integrated seat clamps have been around since the 80s when bosses were welded onto the the seat tube.


----------



## krystian xtc (Jun 17, 2005)

yes, and Trek the 897. This is the war of weight! i like it.


----------



## fernandoj (Mar 19, 2008)

Integrated seatpost clamp is a bad idea. Clamping force is not equally distributed, overtighten problems will come. You only have to see how evolve the clamping matter in the steel era.

PD. My Sunn Maxe '95 initially came with welded nuts but a few years later Sunn made their frames without them, with sexy results


----------



## Dex11 (May 4, 2005)

Nino...I agree with you that the brake mount maybe is not that functional, but I like the look of it and the way the cable-routing goes.


----------



## eliflap (Dec 13, 2007)

video on my FB page . cancelled on you tube


----------



## yellowbook (Aug 21, 2005)

nino said:


> -integrated cables.....well - we will see how those perform. What i also note is that they run the cables "wrong": the cable from the right enters the frame on the right and left on the left side...makes for awful narrow bends in the housings which then make for drag. I prefer to run the cables in a wider bend: left side goes around the steerer to the right side and right side goes around the steerer to the left. I then have the cables crossing each other under the downtube...that's how cables get the least bends in them and work the smoothest.Just looking at the cramped shifter cables doesn't look good to me. And i hope you still have free choice in choosing whichever cablesystem you like and also which side is for front and rear derailleur...


it depends where the cables come out, otherwise you can just cross them like on a Klein.

















These are the only two good pictures I could find, you see they come out under the downtube before the bottom bracket, I always crossed them down there.


----------



## Bender (Jan 12, 2004)

Yellowbook that is one pink bike I would actually ride :thumbsup: 

I wonder when these updates will make it to the Scott FS frames. I bet sub 3 pound FS frames are possible with this kind of engineering.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Probably next year. I bet their entire line up is getting an update.


----------



## jzbig (Apr 25, 2009)

Anyone know when Scott use too release their next year line up?? which mont??

Looking forward for some more info on the new frame


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

jzbig said:


> Anyone know when Scott use too release their next year line up?? which mont??
> 
> Looking forward for some more info on the new frame


From the rumors i heard the whole lineup is going to set new standards: HT, FS and also Roadbike.
Usually Scott presents their new bikes at Eurobike in late summer and first bikes show up after christmas / early spring


----------



## mutejeky (May 31, 2010)

the video it's on megaupload:

http://tinyurl.com/2b7hrk4


----------



## Atmos (Oct 20, 2006)

Whats the difference between BB30/92 and current BB30?


----------



## Baltazar (Jan 30, 2004)

yes, is it bb92 or bb30?


----------



## eliflap (Dec 13, 2007)

bb92


----------



## bikemaniack (Feb 6, 2010)

They should show some pic on scale to confirm that weight


----------



## jordanrosenbach3 (Jan 6, 2007)

if they did, it still doesn't mean that it will weigh sub 900g once it hits production..


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

I just have the latest edition of german BIKE magazine in hand where the 899 is presented.

The top tube is longer,stems shorter,BB is lower and makes for a smaller q-factor, 30% more comfort/shockabsorption, designed for 100-110mm forks. The frame weight in size M is announced to be 900g including seatclamp and cableguide! That's almost 200g lighter than the Scale is now....wow!

What Scott also offers is the same techonlogy for *29ers!*

There will be a 950g 29" frameset.The complete 29"- bike weighs 9,75 Kilos, the 26" bike is 9,05 Kilos in the tested version. Weights for size M.


----------



## G-Live (Jan 14, 2004)

That 950 gram 29er might get me back to riding a HT...

G


----------



## eliflap (Dec 13, 2007)

950 g for the Scale 29er will be 200 g less than Flash 29er i have and same weight of my 26" Flash


----------



## snowdrifter (Aug 2, 2006)

nino said:


> 30% more comfort/shockabsorption


sure!


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

the beauty of words, 30% simply sounds a lot. Now whats the "travel" of a HT frame? 20mm? If at all. So 30% more would be something like 27mm. The ring of 7 mm more comfort is not that impressive anymore.

Still like the new frame, I guess there a certain things you simply have to say in present bike marketing.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

snowdrifter said:


> sure!


well-you will have to agree that carbon offers better dampening qualities than alloy frames. Now we know that carbon has a lot of potential and depending on how the frame got designed it can be quite stiff yet still comfortable.MUCH more comfortable than other frames. The Scale was leader in this category for many years but C'dale, Specialized and others stepped up and now it's Scotts turn to add even more shock absorbing qualities. I personally don't give a whole lot for such numbers as well as long as the ride is good. It was already great on the Scale though so i'm really curious to what they can get out of a similar looking HT frame....


----------



## Atmos (Oct 20, 2006)

So which crankset available in the market now is BB30/92 other than Lightning?


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/scott-2011-launch-superlight-new-scale-and-genius-lt-185-26475


----------



## Hansiiii (Mar 26, 2010)

Some nice pictures on Nino Schurter of the Scale 899

http://www.nsracing.ch/index.php?section=gallery&cid=12


----------



## ginsu2k (Jul 28, 2006)

*30% more comfort = 30% more ride time*



quax said:


> the beauty of words, 30% simply sounds a lot. Now whats the "travel" of a HT frame? 20mm? If at all. So 30% more would be something like 27mm. The ring of 7 mm more comfort is not that impressive anymore.
> 
> Still like the new frame, I guess there a certain things you simply have to say in present bike marketing.


You're looking at the the glass half-empty. If 30% comfort were translated into 30% ride time with the same level of fatigue - then most of us would be on the bike another hour for our rides. Personally, I believe that to be a very significant advantage, because the main reason I get off my bike on the trail occasionally is to relieve numbness or soreness from the High Freq. Vibrations you get on the trail (especially gravel). If this frame offers 30% more comfort that would be a seriously huge advantage - especially for 24 hr. endurance races.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

ginsu2k said:


> If 30% comfort were translated into 30% ride time with the same level of fatigue


but comfort in that context simply means the travel of the frame. period. How do you know that 30% more travel of the frame translates to 30% more ride time? So why don't we race with 180mm forks then? 80% more ride time?


----------



## ginsu2k (Jul 28, 2006)

*Yes, TRAVEL = COMFORT*



quax said:


> but comfort in that context simply means the travel of the frame. period. How do you know that 30% more travel of the frame translates to 30% more ride time? So why don't we race with 180mm forks then? 80% more ride time?


The keyword is "IF", I am inferring that more travel almost always means more comfort. You're comment about the front fork makes sense to me, but the numbers don't. Obviously, there is a point where more travel ends up costing you in other areas like Overall Weight, Weight Distribution, and Mechanical Trail (which effects climbing/steering ability immensely). But a 180mm fork - adjustable to 80mm is definitely a good idea if your bike was designed to accommodate such a fork.

I wouldn't trust my spurious numbers either, but the whole point was that the bike will be more comfortable. Can you really argue that? I have no idea how much more comfortable it will be - but it will certainly be more comfortable.

No doubt, longer travel forks do make it easier to bike for longer periods of time, especially on downhills. I know there is a trail in my hometown that is a super fast 15min of constant downhill through the trees, roots and switchbacks, and I really needed a longer travel fork / disc brakes to make it through there comfortably. I first tried it with 80mm / V-Brakes and that was probably one of the worst experiences I've ever had biking because of brake fade and fatigue from the vibrations.

And yes, I've done some crazy downhills in the late '90s with no suspension - but I was a lot younger then, although I still remember how awful it was rolling off rocks with no suspension. Faceplants were far more common then.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

How does one tighten this bolt? There's no way in hell a torque wrench would fit there.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

why should this be a problem? Just use an extension piece (or however you call this) for your wrench


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

sfer1 said:


> How does one tighten this bolt? There's no way in hell a torque wrench would fit there.


Why thighten? The brakes get installed before the frame is finished. Scott calles this fully integrated brake design (FIBD). Makes life easier as you will never have to touch those bolts later on.
They are also discussing of bonding the seatpost directly into the seattube with a fixed lenght.Shorter riders will get growing vitamins and larger riders get a free hacksaw to get their legs to the desired lenghts.


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

sfer1: the bolt here seems to be side of seatstay rather directly under that and extension pieces are not recommended on torque wrenches anyway.


----------



## Batas (Jan 16, 2004)

Who needs a torque wrench anyway...


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

sfer1 said:


> How does one tighten this bolt? There's no way in hell a torque wrench would fit there.


If you look at the rear dropout from a different angle the disc brake caliper mounts are offset inboard from the rear triangle. There's going to be more space available than it first appears. You can definitely get an allen key in there and probably a torque wrench too if you're careful.

Pictured below: Scott 899 disc brake caliper mounts rear view.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Although not the 899 (It's from the new 2011 Scott Genius LT) i think it should be clear to everyone that there is no problem to have access to those bolts (too bad, i was looking for those vitamins)


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*Pics of LTD...*

This seems to be a picture of the Limited version.
It looks as they also saved the laquer on the frame and fork...a agressive stealth/military look.Except the tires which make for light weight only i like it.


----------



## Batas (Jan 16, 2004)

Nice! Still not the same impact as when your ltd came out... That year's ltd was something.


----------



## Epic-o (Feb 24, 2007)

7.3kg?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Batas said:


> Nice! Still not the same impact as when your ltd came out... That year's ltd was something.


Correct-it took the competition 4 years to get on the same level...But it seems they stepped it up another notch. The steps sure get smaller but fom what i can tell there's not too much left for improvement. But i'm almost sure the pricing will be stratospheric as well


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Looks awesome!


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

I have a new dream bike.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Hopefully they offer the 899 frame with different component groups. They'll probably have the clear coat with crazy expensive parts and then a painted frame with more reasonable specs. I don't want a 2000 dollar carbon wheelset but I would like the high end frame.


----------



## Epic-o (Feb 24, 2007)

Has the DT Swiss fork a tapered steerer too? It looks like a 1.125 steerer in the photo...

Not a good way of showing us the advantages of the system...


----------



## MaLoL1 (Jan 16, 2004)

certainly, you need the vitamins nino...

I still don´t like the cables going down the diagonal tube, it´s too primitive. Also the front deraulieur should be clamped, but i guess that can be customized latter. The head tube is very dump, very stupid, they should not copy specialized, it makes no sense to copy specialized.

The cables can be changed, like somebody said, making an internal X.
I like the integrated seatpost clamp, if they make it right it should work properly.
Geometry looks good, not too sharp angles.

I like this frame, but it would be so expensive it will be stupid to buy one.


----------



## MaLoL1 (Jan 16, 2004)

by the way, seems like nino is going to start selling his own taiwanese crap frames, he is starting to rip off even the swiss scott...


----------

