|   No love for Cannondale | El-Gato
Jun 12, 2003 5:16 PM | | I've scoured the archives and have yet to see anything about the Scalpel. A LBS in my area is trying to sell me a new 2002 Scalpel 800 for $1,500. It seems like a good deal. I trail ride with a Royce Union..(please don't laugh) so anything feels incredible to me. Any thoughts? |
| is this the one? | older guy
Jun 12, 2003 6:14 PM | | click on this:
http://www.supergo.com/itemlist.asp?id=7559&subid=7599&company=Cannondale%2C+in%2Dstore+only
|
| YES IT IS! | EL-GATO
Jun 13, 2003 3:04 AM | | $200 less sounds good but where is there store? |
| YES IT IS! | damion
Jun 13, 2003 3:55 AM | | In the LA area. If you have to ask, there is probably not one near you. $1500 is still a steal, if you cant get to a supergo. |
| Is it a good value | el-gato
Jun 13, 2003 4:07 AM | | Is it a good bike? Or should I buy a Jamis xlt 1.0 for the same price? |
| re: No love for Cannondale | Tullebukk
Jun 13, 2003 4:20 AM | | The Scalpel is really more of an XC race bike. If I were looking for a trailbike I wouldn't even bother looking at the Scalpel (although I am sure some people would). IMHO there are many $1500 bikes that would make better trail bikes (and many bikes that would make better XC racers as well). The Jamis you mentioned is one of them. |
| Curious, What makes it unsuitable as a trail bike? | Fett
Jun 13, 2003 9:55 AM | | I am curious as to what attributes make the Scalpel unsuitable as a trail bike. It is a shorter travel bike (2.75"), but that alone does not exclude it. There are many good hardtail trail bikes out there. I am not being critical, but I have seen it said before about the Scalpel, but never any reason why. Suspensions can be set up as firm or plush as you like.
I bought an 03 Scalpel at the beginning of the year and can say that it is the XC bike that I have ever ridden. So much so that My Merlin Extra Fat and Giant NRS now gather dust. It handles better than any bike that I have ever owned. |
| Curious, What makes it unsuitable as a trail bike? | Tullebukk
Jun 14, 2003 3:02 AM | | Well, lot's of reasons really. For most people, 2.75" of travel is not enough for a "trailbike". For an XC racer perhaps, but not a trailbike. A wouldn't recommend less then 3.5" - 4" of travel for most people looking for a trailbike these days. There are exceptions of course. For those who ride relatively smooth trails, or do lots of extended climbing on smooth trails or fireroads might find 2.75" of travel to be sufficient. But, why limit yourself to so little travel when there are so many excellent bikes that have more. Even the Jeckyll would be a better trailbike IMHO.
The headshock on the Cannondale is also a big turnoff for me. There are at least a dozen forks I would rather have on the front of my bike. Also, when I buy a bike I try to find a bike with part that I can keep and use on a new frame later. The headshock doesn't really give you that option.
I have read several reviews, and none of them left me with the impression that the Scalpel would make a good trail bike. A decent XC racer yes, but not a good trailbike. Many of the reviews mentioned that there was a lot of suspension activity while pedaling, and some flex in the chainstays. One review even went so far as to say that you needed to leave the suspension locked out all of the time, except for rough decents. At 200+ lbs., the idea of the chainstays flexing is not all that appealing. I can fairly easily flex a fairly stiff frame as it is.
Here a couple of quotes from the online Mountain Bike Mag review that basically sum up what I have read in most of the other reviews:
"We were surprised to find that the Scalpel's back end actually moves considerably from drivetrain input. We figured that, with the short travel and air shock, it would be all but motionless for anything but a medium- to large-sized impact. The reality is that drivetrain input tends to compress the suspension a considerable amount, so even though you've got a short-travel XC bike, you go bobbing on down the trail."
"While the performance of the suspension (on both ends) surprised us, the ideal use for the bike doesn't-the Scalpel design is all about performance riding and XC racing. It will carry the most serious XC riders as fast as they want to go in pretty much any situation. We came to appreciate the Scalpel not so much as a full-time suspension bike, but more as a hardtail with the benefit of sensitive, short-travel suspension for occasional rough sections and downhills. It's a great choice for hardtail fans who want that little extra something to help them go faster in the rough stuff."
The rest of the review is here:
http://www.mountainbike.com/bikes/111901_scalpel.shtml
I haven't ridden the Scalpel, and I considered not answering the post for that reason. But, it really sounded like this guy wanted a trailbike, not an XC racer. It sounded like he found a cool looking bike for $100 of MSRP, rather than a good bike for his purposes. If it was my hard earned money, there are lots of bikes I would rather have. But, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be a good trailbike for some people. |
| Curious, What makes it unsuitable as a trail bike? | divve
Jun 16, 2003 6:32 PM | | I agree that the Scalpel isn't really a trail bike. In my opinion it's a true XC or marathon singletrack racer only bike. The article you quote is pure hogwash however. They set-up the bike wrong or simply don't understand the concept of an active suspension and inefficient pedal stroke. For more info I suggest you read the technical faq on the Titus site. They have an article there regarding suspension types which will give you a rudimentary idea of what's going on.
http://www.titusti.com/techtalk_frmset.html |
| |
