Forum home Commuter cycling forum Commuting chat

Scott Sportster P6 2010 or Scott Sub 30 2009

toybhoytoybhoy Posts: 112
edited March 2010 in Commuting chat
Can;t decide between the two. Anyone have any expierence of them? Can;t find much info on the Sportster ... b0s18p1554 ... b0s18p1028

Both similarly priced, The Sportster comes with £65 worth of free accessories though.

I was looking for a fast hybrid to replace my slow and heavy Specialized. Mostly cyclepath and roads for the 6 mile commute. Was going to go for a road bike but at £300, wasn;t going to get much so decided to pump for a hybrid as I would like to go on the occassional towpaths and trips on some light trails.



  • roger_merrimanroger_merriman Posts: 6,148
    looking at them the sportster has a more laid back frame, not a lot else really.
  • fnegronifnegroni Posts: 794
    I would go for the SUB 30, but would opt for 26" wheels and put some large and comfy tyres.

    Would still be a lot easier to push then your current bike.
  • toybhoytoybhoy Posts: 112

    Out of interest, why 26inch wheels rather than 700?

    I was actually thinking about changing the tyres to 700x28 for more speed rather than getting heavier 26inch ones.
  • fnegronifnegroni Posts: 794
    IMHO, speed on cycle paths is irrelevant, and the versatility of 26" wheel fitment means greater tyre choice, especially for trail use.
    Of course if you shop around you can get decent 700c options, so it is by no means exclusive.
    My experience is that on average, 26" gives more options at lower prices.
    The only exception being rigid forks: with 26", there are very few options that are not suspension equipped, but most come with a lock-out option anyway.
    I too was looking for a replacement commuter bike, and 700c equipped hybrids look very sexy IMHO, especially the ones with disc brakes.
    But when I look at what I want to use it for, I just realise my current bike's frame is a better match for my needs.
    It is just an opinion though: if you want 700c, get 700c: there is nothing worse than riding regret!
  • toybhoytoybhoy Posts: 112
    Thanks fregroni!

    As always, opinions are much appreciated and will give me food for thought! :D
  • 0scar0scar Posts: 219
    I used to have a 2008 SUB 30 with slick 26 wheels, it means quicker acceleration than 700c but you run out of gears sooner. If you have a stop-start commute they make sense but they can be frustrating if you're going for high speeds on empty roads because you spin out.
    Commuter: Taped-up black Trek 2200 (FCN 5)
    Shiny bike: Pinarello FP2 (FCN 3)
  • AvoneerAvoneer Posts: 525
    I ran an original Scott Sub30 for many years on 26" wheels.

    It was one of the best commuting bikes I had.

    Only down side was the forks were really stiff and a bit harsh.

    Going on from the fork, 26" wheels would be more comfy, although if you only commute on good roads, 700cc wheels will make it a lot faster.

    If I was to buy another commuter (currently using a road bike), I would probably buy a Scott Sub40 with 700's.

    "Campagnolo has soul, Shimano has ruthless efficiency and SRAM has yet to acquire mystique. Differentiating between them is a matter of taste"
  • toybhoytoybhoy Posts: 112
    Thanks guys! Have decided to go for the Scott Sub 30 :D

    One last question, are you able to add your own mudguards and rack to it without using the Scott "urban kit" own fenders and rack?

    I'd like to use my existing Chomoplastics and Tortec Expedition rack.
  • AvoneerAvoneer Posts: 525
    If it's the one in your link - it's last years so any generic guards and rack will bolt straight on.

    Good choice.

    I'm kind of regretting selling mine.

    "Campagnolo has soul, Shimano has ruthless efficiency and SRAM has yet to acquire mystique. Differentiating between them is a matter of taste"
  • I have a sportster (can't remember the number) and a sub 10. In my experience, the sub is much faster (even though it has 26" wheels), lighter and a whole lot stiffer. The sportster would be more comfy for tow paths, but I do nearly all of my riding on roads.

    Big disclaimer to this though - my sportster was circa £200 in 2006, and the sub circa £700 in 2009, so not really a fair comparison.

    The sub is absolutely brilliant, and with ergon grips fitted, the stiff forks are less of an issue.
  • toybhoytoybhoy Posts: 112
    Apologies for so many questions.

    So I have decided on the Sub 30 2009 but having an absolute nightmare trying to find sizes. Anyone suggest either the medium or large for a 5ft 10 guy with 32inch legs?

    Called up Dales and Evans and they dont have it in stock on the floor to test so looks like its gonna be a stab in the dark. Also the 2010 Subs has a different geometry so I cant even test them :-(

    thanks again in advance :D
  • AvoneerAvoneer Posts: 525
    I'd say a large.

    I'm 5'6" and had a small and the seat post was up this much.


    "Campagnolo has soul, Shimano has ruthless efficiency and SRAM has yet to acquire mystique. Differentiating between them is a matter of taste"
  • I'm the same height and leg length as you and I have a large Scott sub 10 2009. Seat is at a sensible-looking height. Also handle bar height is very easily adjustable on the Scott, if that helps.
  • toybhoytoybhoy Posts: 112
    Helps a lot guys :-)

    Large it is for me then! Thanks again!!
Sign In or Register to comment.