Specialized Stumpjumper HT M5 or Scott Scale 40 frames?

Chris McG

I posted a few days ago and have narrowed down to this:
For XC racing and general trail use, which is best?

Specialized Stumpjumper M5 Frame, £550, 1750g
(I feel this handles better than the other and will probs be stronger as it is not completely race-oriented)

or

Scott Scale 40 Frame, £450, 1500g
(Lighter, BUT I will have to get a new seatpost, which means another £50 at least.)

getonyourbike

last time you asked this the general consensus was an On One Whippet...

Chris McG

But I have decided against having carbon now for longevity/ damage issues as I tend to crash a fair bit

The Northern Monkey

Buy a steel inbred then.

I'd learn to not crash before spunking money on a nice frame.

You'll have the same problems when crashing a lightweight alu frame... infact I reckon a carbon frame would come off better.

And the whippet is still cheaper anyway.

ollie51

On-One Whippet.

xtc_special

[quote="The Northern Monkey"

I'd learn to not crash before spunking money on a nice frame.

Good point, i used to ride motorbikes years ago and came across the people that thought you were not a real biker untill you had crashed. :shock:

My thought was you can't ride a bike if you keep crashing. simples.

Chris McG

My question was which of the above, so please stop bringing in other options...
:roll:

Anyway my current alloy frame (a full sus) has survived a fair few crashes no problem. They aren't massive crashes, but I feel they could be too much for a carbon frame

toasty

Where are the weights from? I doubt the Stumpy weighs that much more to be honest.

Both would be very solid, I'd have the Stumpy frame as I know it fits me very well, they're not too race focused either.

DCR00

have you ridden either ? i would do that first if you cant decide

toasty

Yeah, I own a 2003 Stumpjumper HT, geared up with 2008+ bits, it's lasted fantastically. I've demo'd the newer ones over the years but the difference has never been huge. Always seem to get on with Specialized bikes, even now I've got the Stumpy HT, a 2010 Tricross Comp and 2010 Pitch Pro.

I've missed a few chances to try out Scales, did try the biggest Genius LT Scott do and found the top tube a bit short, where as the Pitch is looong. It's all down to personal preference really. If I were to get a Scott it'd have to be a carbon Scale though, they seem to focus so much of their resources to doing fantastic value carbon race frames.

guity

I have the old M5 S-works version of the stumpy. I used it for XC racing, marathon champs, 24 hour races, a mega avalanch enduro and the trans wales. I crashed it more times than I care to remember and it is still in perfect condition. I would take that frame over just about any other aluminium frame for comfort, stiffness and unbreakableness (i know thats not a real word). I think the current m5 stumpy is almost identical to my s-works.

On the other hand, I had the precursor to the scott before and the toptube is much shorter than the spec. Im not sure how the scale measures up against either but trying both of them and making sure they fit you should be the first concideration.

Hope that helps....

ride_whenever

It'd be the scott for me, love how they handle.

Chris McG

I do have a specialized (XCfsr) already, and this has pretty much the same geometry...

I think that the weight might be with seatpost, as it is sold with one...

Thanks for your opinions guys!

supersonic

While I am no going to comment on other frames you could try, I will however comment on your views on carbon. Carbon composites, weight for weight can be a hell of a lot tougher than aluminium, especially when thin frame tubes are used.

Take a look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lsDXEEUlRE

Cannondale Taurine vs it's heavier alloy equivalent. I know whick one I'd trust if I hit a rock.

Fodder666

I've got a 2006 S-works M5 frame and it's pretty much in as good a condition as the day I got it out of the box. I've used it for XC, trail, commuting and the odd downhill track and after 6 years can't bring myself to part with it as an equivalent bike these days would cost a fortune.

toasty

supersonic wrote:

While I am no going to comment on other frames you could try, I will however comment on your views on carbon. Carbon composites, weight for weight can be a hell of a lot tougher than aluminium, especially when thin frame tubes are used.

Take a look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lsDXEEUlRE

Cannondale Taurine vs it's heavier alloy equivalent. I know whick one I'd trust if I hit a rock.

It depends on the impact type though, that video shows exactly what carbon is good at shrugging off. You'd have to go it some to break an aluminium frame through clamping something on too tight for example.

It's good stuff, but you have to bear in mind it might only contribute a couple of hundred grams at the end of the day, depending on the frame manufacturer. After owning a couple of carbon frames I think I'm sticking to aluminium, especially on full sussers where you often get all the awkward joints glued together.

The Spiderman

Seems a lot to spend on an alu frame when you can get an On One Scandal for £235......

Back to the original question,though,both nice frames,these so I`d say go with the one which gives the best fit.

As you already have a Specialized which I assume fits and that you are happy with,I`d probably go with that.

darren555

Of those two I would go for the Stumpy but as has been said it is a lot of money for an aluminium frame.
My money would probably go on a Kinesis Maxlight.