# anyone rides a Scott Gambler (FR20)?



## Loll (May 2, 2006)

Thinking about buying one. But I am too light a rider to handle the 45-49 pounds that mountain bike magazine claims this bike to be.

Do any of you guys have the weight of your awesome DH/FR Gambler? This will be the deal breaker, so any insight is appreciated. :thumbsup:


----------



## blooregard (Nov 1, 2009)

my buddy has one got it set up with a boxxer fork and he says it handles like a dream and he is like maybe 5 1 so he isnt the most substantial rider when it comes to weight also you might want to check out the voltage FR 10 might be more bang 4 buck it has adjustable shock mounts and is sold as a frame on scotts website


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

tons of bikes better then what you want and lighter too


----------



## captain spaulding (May 7, 2006)

http://scottusa.com/us_en/product/8286/44776/gambler_20 it's 41.6lbs according to Scott's website..


----------



## rocketmatt17 (Sep 10, 2007)

After alot of window shopping I decided to get a gambler FR20. I have upgraded the brakes, fork and the shock is next. The bike is bulletproof and the adjustability is great. Ride what you want, everyone has their own opinion and they will all recommend the bike they own anyway.....just like I did


----------



## Internal14 (Jan 21, 2004)

SHIVER ME TIMBERS said:


> tons of bikes better then what you want and lighter too


wow...that's helpful. How about some examples and why they're better. Price? Design? no wonder your post count is so high....:madman:


----------



## MaxBS (Mar 30, 2008)

Im sorry SMT but is there anyone who genuinely values your bike opinion, 90% of the stuff you post is just unjustified because in biking you have a bout 4 opiniones/views. Its a bit harsh but true. Have you ever ridden a Gambler....?

I have a Gambler but its my own build so its a few pounds lighter than the stock fr20. However, one thing everyone says is that the bike rides a lot lighter than you think it would. It is quite easy to throw around. The 3 travel options and HA settings may sound overkill but if you do mixxed freeride or downhill then you will appreciate it.

Yes the bike isnt a VPP (SMT), doesnt mean the suspension is bad. I rode the bike a week in the alps and didnt have any trouble with brake jack and didnt feel a single time when riding gnarly stuff that I wanted a VPP, which I have ridden.

Thing which I dont like about the FR20 are the spec and the looks. Looks wise it is a shame, because it is actually a very nice frame, but I think Scott ruin it with poor paint jobs (except a few colors). Whilst the spec performs, it is very basic. That said, the frame is upgrade worthy. 

Back to your question. I wouldnt say weight is a key issue when buying the bike. Yes Id rather ride a 40lbs bike than a 45lbs bike but you wont be riding either uphill and descending it doesnt make much of a difference either.


----------



## Uruk-hai (Apr 22, 2004)

I think the Gambler looks great. I also think single pivots rule.


But that's me.


----------



## 02sedona (May 23, 2006)

I like mine alot. I now have a 2010 fox 40 on it. By far the burliest bike I have ridden or demoed. We all know smt spends more time here typing than riding. I prefer to spend it digging rather than trying to be cool on a internet forum.


----------



## MTB-AHOLIC (Oct 8, 2005)

SHIVER ME TIMBERS said:


> tons of bikes better then what you want and lighter too


I feel the same way. I have no basis other than a dislike for the frame. Just seems bulky and awkward to me.


----------



## Karve (Mar 31, 2006)

Yea its definitely an opinion splitter.. when i first saw it i thought it was the sickest looking bike Id ever seen. Some of my mates really dont care for it some think its bad ass. Who cares.. I still love the way it looks.

I was very concerned pre buying about the standard single pivot traits but they really don't seem to exist on the Gambler. I spent 2 weeks in the alps this year and it was more supple than my horst link Nicolai. Both a re fitted with CCDBs so its fair to make an assessment of the 2.

Its had some top 10 world cup finnishes this year and the FR cru like Hopkins go really really big on theirs http://nsmb.com/3340-life-cycles-keeps-it-hip-in-fernie/

All good.


----------



## buckoW (Feb 7, 2007)

I like the Gambler .

It is the one of the only frames that makes it through multiple bike park seasons here in the Portes du Soleil. My brother and my wife are thinking about doing a third season on their frames and they could easily get a new one for cheap if they wanted. Nick Beer and Fabien Pedemanaud both got a 6th this year on the WC DH circuit. The bike isn't holding anyone back and the rear end is one of the stiffest going if that is important to you.

The lightest I got mine but still able to ride it everyday in the Alps was 17.8 kilos. I could have gone much lighter but then I would be getting flats and have too much maintenance at night when I should be drinking beers after a good day of riding.

I am totally biased so take it for what it is worth.


----------



## MaxBS (Mar 30, 2008)

I agree with Ben (BuckoW).
And the other thing the overall weight of the bikes isnt even that heavy. Ive not got a single lightweight part on my bike, everything is solid. Cranks, Wheels, Bar/Stem, Forks etc. and the bike is about 41-42 lbs. Sure that spec on a Session 88 would weight in at about 39lbs, but if could never take the abuse the Gambler does. 

Ive got my suspensions quite fast and everyone whos ridden it is suprised how "poppy" the thing is.

Criticism from me are some of the painjobs. The polished frame is still the best looking for me and the white one is also quite nice. But some of the paintjobs I think turned out quite poor. 

And cause its so pretty, here it is again and notice all the solid parts.


----------



## mercjoe (Dec 2, 2009)

This is my first post and its to tell you your gambler looks great.
Im also looking to get a gambler. Great bike and great looks.



MaxBS said:


> I agree with Ben (BuckoW).
> And the other thing the overall weight of the bikes isnt even that heavy. Ive not got a single lightweight part on my bike, everything is solid. Cranks, Wheels, Bar/Stem, Forks etc. and the bike is about 41-42 lbs. Sure that spec on a Session 88 would weight in at about 39lbs, but if could never take the abuse the Gambler does.
> 
> Ive got my suspensions quite fast and everyone whos ridden it is suprised how "poppy" the thing is.
> ...


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

It has a lot of adjustments but it looks like a heavy frame. Anyone know the frame weight? If you're weight conscious like the OP there are better options (Trek Session 88, V10, Sunday, ect).


----------



## MaxBS (Mar 30, 2008)

Frame is about 12.5 lbs with shock.


----------



## ruralrider528 (Nov 8, 2008)

My whole opinion on DH bikes would be that I would want something to last quite a few seasons. As for the weight issue, personally I like having some weight on my bike. My reasons are that you actually feel like you are riding something when you throw it around in the air, trails etc. not having to worry about if the trail or drop etc is too much for the bike you're on is a big bonus since your only focus is on the trail or obstacle.

How many of you have seen some of the older "tank" DH bikes of yesteryear still shredding it on the mountain vs some of the somewhat light downhill bikes of that era.

Get a bike that lasts a few seasons rather than breaking in 2 or 3. The scotts look strong so I can see the bikes lasting quite some time.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

I'm coming up on my 3rd season on my 3rd gen V10. Did 3 seasons on the 2nd gen and it looked like new. 12.5lbs is 2lbs more than my frame. There are plenty frames that weigh under 11lbs, will last several years, but don't have the geo adjustments of the Gambler. In my opinion these adjustments are the main selling point of this frame with their downside being extra weight. Happy with the non-adjustable geo of a lighter frame? Then buy that one.


----------



## kennyoss (Oct 4, 2009)

*help*

hi,

Merry X'mas to rider 

i'm 1.73cm and weighting at 90kg .what size should i get for gambler FR ? short or long ?


----------



## JCL (Oct 17, 2006)

It's a solid bike with good geometry.

Sure it's a little heavy but it won't dent like many. 

In saying that I'd have to say a Demo has it beat though.


----------



## buckoW (Feb 7, 2007)

kennyoss said:


> hi,
> 
> Merry X'mas to rider
> 
> i'm 1.73cm and weighting at 90kg .what size should i get for gambler FR ? short or long ?


You could go either way. Short for freeride or long for dh.


----------



## CA_Descender (Aug 20, 2004)

I do not post much but I'll jump in on the band wagon. It's going on two years now that I have had the Gambler and the bike is pretty solid. Granted it does not have the MOST modern suspension but what it does use has been proven to work and get the job done nicely. For the price, especially if you buy last years model, it is a tough deal to beat. In this pic mine weighed in at just under 42lbs. with the Kendas on it. With the tires I use now it is back up to 44lbs. Hopefully my new hoops and hub will arrive soon which should drop just a hair more weight. I also heard that there may be some new bling under the tree from Mrs Santa.


----------



## Iceman2058 (Mar 1, 2007)

Well,

just to add some useless info to this thread: the first time I saw a Gambler in the flesh, it was the green FR....man that thing looked SICK! I'm not much of a single-crown guy, but that custom green Totem (with all the other green stuff like grips, bashguard etc) was just off the charts. I almost bought one on the spot.

Like I said, useless contribution to the thread.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

What fork is that? Care to tell us about it, how you like it?


----------



## CA_Descender (Aug 20, 2004)

Lelandjt said:


> What fork is that? Care to tell us about it, how you like it?


 It's the old X-Fusion Delta8 (re-branded Bionicon "Special Agent") Works great now that I changed the oil in the cartridge. Smooth through the full range of travel, very stiff, goes where you point it and the adjustable stem (F.I.T. system) just adds a few more adjustments to get the bike dialed. Plus it can be adjusted on the fly like all Bionicons, this one can be run anywhere from 100 to 200mm with the push of a button. If you want to check one out find yer self a Bionicon dealer, the fork is stock on the Ironwood and there is a little more info on Bionicon's web site.


----------



## Djponee (Dec 20, 2006)

I don't know bout you guys, but i love the way my gambler rides. It's smooth as hell in the rough and ramps up well for jumps. Mine is lighter than 44 for sure and i have some heavy stuff on it. The reason i know that is my old bike was 44lb and this one feels a bit lighter.


----------



## MaxBS (Mar 30, 2008)

kennyoss said:


> hi,
> 
> Merry X'mas to rider
> 
> i'm 1.73cm and weighting at 90kg .what size should i get for gambler FR ? short or long ?


Merry Christmas to you too.
At that size you could go short or long.

In this pic youve got my dad who is 173 and my brother who is 185 (same height as me). The frame is a large, so you can see the size of the bike in relation to your size..


----------

