|
MountainBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - What Bike to Buy
|
|
What separates the Racer-X, Sugar, Adept from each other? (6 posts)
|  What separates the Racer-X, Sugar, Adept from each other? | bonker
Jan 13, 2002 7:38 PM | | They all have the basic design. My next build project is going to be one with the mentioned designs. I'm not 100% sure yet but I am leaning towards the RX with it's numerous good reviews. I've ridden the Sugar and Adept. No experience on the RX. I'm gonna keep my mind open on the suggestions. (A can of worms is opening).. Why should I buy the RX over the Sugar/Adept??
Thanks. I also apologize if I start a flame war. |
| re: What separates the Racer-X, Sugar, Adept from each other? | Fuel4U
Jan 14, 2002 5:27 AM | | ...a whole lotta $$$ !!!!!! Sugar/Adept/Fuel's are fine rides....go for thr RX if ya got the cashish :) |
| re: What separates the Racer-X, Sugar, Adept from each other? | Puzman
Jan 14, 2002 7:30 AM | | RX has a pivot at the dropouts, Sugar and Adept don't. RX has over 3.5" travel, Adept is 2.75", Sugar (not sugar +) is 2.5". Adept has internal cable routing, pretty paint, may be prone to denting. Sugar has loooong geometry. RX geometry on the quick side. RX is handbuilt by one of the best small builders, can spec as you like it. Sugar and Adept are off-the-shelf (unless you buy the frame only and build it up, in which case you're paying as much as the RX). If you want to save $, get a lower level Sugar or Adept and upgrade over time. If you want the best, get the Titus. |
| What about the Scapel? | JoeBob
Jan 14, 2002 10:56 AM | | Same design as the Sugar. I'm leaning towards this design for my FS bike as well. I'm partial to Cannondales. |
| The same as the Sugar? | someguy1
Jan 14, 2002 1:35 PM | | The Scalpel and Sugar are two entirely different designs from what I've seen and experienced. While riding the Scalpel I noticed A LOT of suspension movement for such a short travel bike. IMHO, the bikes needs to be locked out on climbs. The Sugar I rode felt much more harsher, more like a hardtail with the usable travel I felt.
In terms of design, it appears as though the bikes share very little. Pivot placement (or lack thereof) varies, as well as shock placement. Also, don't forget that the Scalpel is a flexy design, the Sugar should be stiffer (if only just a little bit).
Hopefully someone else will chime in with a more thorough explanation of the differences. The Scalpel should be a good bike with a couple years and more suspension tweaks under its belt. |
| X is quite different | derby
Jan 14, 2002 11:18 AM | | The Sugar and Adept have very similar supension geometry. The Sugar has more travel particularly the Sugar +4 but is not as light or as stiff as the Adept.
The RacerX has nearly the same usable travel as the Sugar +4 in the 4 inch travel setting. But due to the FSR suspension it will ride and pedal a little smoother over bumps for better traction and stability than the Trek bikes with about the same amount of suspension bob (very little).
- ray |
| |
|
|
