Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi,
I'm thinking about ordering a 2006 Scale Limited Frameset with vbrake bosses quite soon (this frame will be available in january in France) and before I do I really need to make sure I can build the bike as I want.
So I have one question : with vbrakes on this frame, what's the biggest tire size I'll be able to use without having to remove pressure from the tire every time I introduce the rear wheel onto the bike ?

Since the seatstays look completely straight (the stays aren't bent right over the bosses to make room for the pads), I'm worried the pads might get in the way of the tire even with a quite small tire.

I like to use big tires on the rear wheel (Bontrager Tubeless Ready Jones and Revolt X 2.2 , Nbx Lite 2.2 and RR 2.25) so I want to know if I'll still be able to use "big" tires with this frame... --> I don't think the 34.9 seatpost will absorb vibrations as well as my Moots layback posts do on my actual bikes...

Thanks in advance for your help
Pierre
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,770 Posts
ca. 48-50mm

xc-rider said:
Any chance Nino or anybody else with a Scale - Vbrakes can answer my question ??? :(
between opened v-pads i get about 48-50mm (approx. 1,9" size)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Ouch!

nino said:
between opened v-pads i get about 48-50mm (approx. 1,9" size)
That seems like it would be a deal-breaker for some. I've put Conti 2.3s and even a WTB 2.4 on my Trek 9.8 (which is a touch porky, but I got it on warranty after cracking my first bike--a Klein) without any drama. Is this limit on your Scale really a function of the frame or is it determined largely by choice of V-brakes and pads? Why would Scott make it so tight, particularly when bigger tires can sometimes reduce rolling resistance?

Thanks.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,770 Posts
sorry - wrong info!!

Jesseg said:
That seems like it would be a deal-breaker for some. I've put Conti 2.3s and even a WTB 2.4 on my Trek 9.8 (which is a touch porky, but I got it on warranty after cracking my first bike--a Klein) without any drama. Is this limit on your Scale really a function of the frame or is it determined largely by choice of V-brakes and pads? Why would Scott make it so tight, particularly when bigger tires can sometimes reduce rolling resistance?

Thanks.
i just measured again and noticed i have to pull my right-side arm by hand to open it full. the Tune plastic cables i use hinder the arm to move freely all the way out... so there is actually ca. 56mm room between the pads. therefore no problems also with larger tires!
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
nino said:
i just measured again and noticed i have to pull my right-side arm by hand to open it full. the Tune plastic cables i use hinder the arm to move freely all the way out... so there is actually ca. 56mm room between the pads. therefore no problems also with larger tires!
Thanks a lot Nino
56mm is a good distance, I should be able to keep using my favorite tires :)

Since we are talking about the Scale... can you tell me how it rides compare to your Scott scandium ? Do you like the carbon one better ? What are the main differences that you felt when trying it ?

Again, thanks for this info that I really needed
Pyf
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top