Pretty sexy, even to an Orbea 'addict'

I may go for it.

Is the Addict replacing the CR1?

Looks remarkably similar to the CR1. Slimmed down seat and chain stays by the looks of things, and perhaps slimmed down the fork although remains the same shape.

It appears to be a one-piece seat tube/seat post.... that would be a major change and makes me think the CR1 isn't going anywhere.

The CR-1s will stay, the Addict will go beyond with seatmast and wait till you see the bottom bracket it will be like no other.

The CR-1s will stay, the Addict will go beyond with seatmast and wait till you see the bottom bracket it will be like no other. I will upgrade from CR-1 to an Addict this Jan. 2007

Cool. Sounds like they will get rid of the outward bearings and just go with a bigger wider bb sheel? If so the BB stiffness will definitely improve. I am surprised it took the industry so long to do that.

Now due to the slimmed down tubes will the stiffness suffer elsewhere on the bike? Also how about the geometries? Any websites/ links with more info?

The CR-1s will stay, the Addict will go beyond with seatmast and wait till you see the bottom bracket it will be like no other. I will upgrade from CR-1 to an Addict this Jan. 2007

Pretty cool, but it looks like they stole the post from Giant, the seat stays from Cervelo and the paint mask from Orbea. I was hoping for a little more originality in their 07 line. As for the BB thing, I don't get it from these pics because this bike has a standard 07 Record Crankset that uses outboard BB cups.

More pics...

the fist paint job is sooo nice

I will be selling my 06 Scott CR1 Team Issue Size small complete with full dura ace 06. If you guys know anyone that is interested please let me know. thanks guys.

Frame= 790 grams (WOW!)
Fork= 330 grams
Total= 6 kilograms (As reported with normal build with Campy Record, Campy Hyperon Ultras, Ritchey stem/bar, Conti GP4000, SI SLR)
Pro Race Limit= 6.8 kilograms

Will Scott sponsored pro teams find a way to race this frame or do you think they'll stick with the CR1?

Scott is sticking with Saunier Duval - Prodir for 07. They will be using the addict, however I'm not sure if they will use the SRAM or Campy group.

I've been waiting for Scott to get rid of that yellow team color paint job. I will buy a Scott Addict in Jan, 07. I suppose we can buy the frame and fork sperately??? Anyone know?

It didn't take the industry that long -- you just arrived to the party. Specialized did it on last year's Tarmac SL, C-dale has been doing it for several years (though their AL #$&%$ is outdated), and Pinarello has done it for several years as well.

Cheers

Cool. Sounds like they will get rid of the outward bearings and just go with a bigger wider bb sheel? If so the BB stiffness will definitely improve. I am surprised it took the industry so long to do that.

Now due to the slimmed down tubes will the stiffness suffer elsewhere on the bike? Also how about the geometries? Any websites/ links with more info?

to bad the Addicts start at $5500 and work up to $10,750 for the top one. Getting a CR1 seems like a deal compared to the Addicts. Unfortanatly becuase of price our shop wont be able to stock an Addict

whoa! 12 grand msrp man!

I wanna get a new frame and was considering an Addict. What's the diff btw all the Addicts? As in, Addict Limited, R1, R2 and R3. Componentry?

Anyone has an addict? How's it's ride quality? I currently ride a Trek Madone SSL 5.9 and am looking for a new road frame.

Criteria: As stiff and light as it gets. Responsive. comfort wouldn't hurt but yeah. Agressive racing bike basically. Looking at the Addict as one of my considerations.

Would wanna get it to the UCI limit of course ( I just don't like using it below the limits. Personal preference.)

Thanks ahead.

I wanna get a new frame and was considering an Addict. What's the diff btw all the Addicts? As in, Addict Limited, R1, R2 and R3. Componentry?The difference is strictly components - frame is the same across the line.

Anyone has an addict? How's it's ride quality? I currently ride a Trek Madone SSL 5.9 and am looking for a new road frame. Count on it to ride rather poorly; rather like aluminum. just like the CR1s.

Criteria: As stiff and light as it gets. Responsive. comfort wouldn't hurt but yeah. Agressive racing bike basically. Looking at the Addict as one of my considerations.If you want light, stiff, responsive & something that rides very nicely, your only choice is the S-works Tarmac. If you skip the great ride quality, try the Cervelo R3.

Would wanna get it to the UCI limit of course ( I just don't like using it below the limits. Personal preference.)We build stock S-works Tarmacs all the time that weigh 14.5lbs without super light wheels. Add a set of Speedplays and they weigh right at the UCI limit. Add carbon tubs and light-weight components and 13lb bikes are easy, but not raceable because of the weight

Thanks ahead.BTW, everyone be careful with the seat mast thing -- if you want to ship your bike, it likely will not fit in a standad case and will cost you waaaay more for shipping!

Wow thanks for the reply.

You a Specialized dealer or sth? anyway, Scott Addicts don't ride nicely?

Light stiff and responsive, my Madone does that too actually.

Nonetheless, I'd like to get a superb racing bike that's as light and stiff as it gets of which stiffness takes precedence. Responsiveness is something I guess would come with such bikes.

Yes I am considering a Tarmac as a matter of fact. Does specialized offer custom paintjobs? I'd really love a white basaed bike.

So, the Tarmac, with say full Dura Ace and some Zipp/lightweight wheels won't be raceable then? Unless I use heavier bars etc.

Rides like an aluminium - very very stiff?

Wow thanks for the reply.


You a Specialized dealer or sth? anyway, Scott Addicts don't ride nicely?Will the Addict ride nicely - I am referring to compliance here, and not really. In the next post you asked stiff like aluminum, yes as is not vertically compliant. And, AL bikes, C-dale included are not very stiff in either the BB or torsionally -- and there are #s to back that up, it is not just my opinion. In fact, the stiffest bike C-dale makes is the Synapse.

Light stiff and responsive, my Madone does that too actually.Sorry, Madones are not in the same league for weight or stiffness. A Madone 5.9 SL is 500 grams heavier than a Tarmac SL -- that includes frame, fork & crankset. It has 1/3 less torsional & BB stiffness than a Tarmac SL.

The stiffest bike in these parameters is the Cervelo R3, but it suffers in vertical compliance. This is also where the Scott's fall down, but then they are not stiffer than the Tarmac SL either.

Nonetheless, I'd like to get a superb racing bike that's as light and stiff as it gets of which stiffness takes precedence. Responsiveness is something I guess would come with such bikes.


Yes I am considering a Tarmac as a matter of fact. Does specialized offer custom paintjobs? I'd really love a white basaed bike. Sorry no custom paint.

So, the Tarmac, with say full Dura Ace and some Zipp/lightweight wheels won't be raceable then? Unless I use heavier bars etc.We have a 56cm 2007 Tarmac with DA & Kysrium ES wheels and it weighs 14.56lbs (14lb 9oz). A pair of Speedplay X2 (not ti) pedals weigh .44lbs, that's 15.00lbs before you subtract for Zipps - the bottle cages need to be heavy. Remember, the Specialized crank that comes with all but the frame option in the SL weighs 150grams (6+ oz) less than a DA crank and is 15% stiffer.

Yes, I am a Specialized dealer, but I used to sell Scott as well -- their infringement of the Specialized FSR patents ended that. But frankly, other than their carbon road bikes, in my market area (meaning mtb is not like CO or NoCal), their stuff was marginal. The CR1s are light and stiff, but it is nice not to have to sacrifice in the ride quality department, and you do not have to with the SL. BTW, the weight of the CR1 including frame, fork and crank is 233 grams (just over .5lbs) heavier than the SL. The Addict isn't getting there either, though it could be very close. Lastly, a full DA (except crank) SL with ES wheels can be bought for $5000 - way less than the cheapset Addict.

Can you give us the price points on the various Tarmac's and what they include (component group, wheeelset, etc.)? Anyone able to ride the Tarmac's and CR1's back to back? Opinions?

Thanks!

Can you give us the price points on the various Tarmac's and what they include (component group, wheeelset, etc.)? Anyone able to ride the Tarmac's and CR1's back to back? Opinions?

Thanks!

SRAM Force, Roval Rapide Star Carbon wheels: $6000
DA, Mavic Ksyrium ES wheels: $5000

The SRAM bike also comes with an adjustable one-piece bar/stem -- light and incredibly stiff. The DA bike has a carbon stem & bar, but they are separate pieces. Colors are red/carbon & silver/carbon in the SRAM bike, and red/carbon & blue/carbon (gerolsteiner) in the DA bike.

There is also a frameset (frame, fork & seatpost): $2500, and
a "module" (frame, fork, seatpost, crank & adjustable bar/stem combo): $3500. The latter two come in silver/carbon or red/carbon, and blue/carbon (gerolsteiner), respectively.

Please note: the prices are our prices, other shops will likely charge differently.

I really would like a Tarmac honestly. Now all I've gotta do is test em out just to ensure everything fits perfect. However, I would just be getting a frameset probably as I would like to build the bike up myself as far as possible. I would be getting some componentry together but would be using my extra bar/stem in the meantime and all that. I might get Lightweight wheels as well.

Just a correction, my Madone is an SSL 5.9 not the SL. :)

Tarmac SL? On specialized's website, all I see is the S Works Tarmac/Sworks Roubaix.

Which is a better ride? I know both are great and the Roubaix is more comfortable in a way. But, what I would like to know is how the bikes feel etc.

Based on what I'm looking for: light and stiff and responsive, I assume the S Works Tarmac suits me better?

Thanks.

P.S. Pity there's no custom paint. I would ABSOLUTELY love a white Specialized bike without doubt. Can't I request for it and pay for the paintjob?

I really would like a Tarmac honestly. Now all I've gotta do is test em out just to ensure everything fits perfect. However, I would just be getting a frameset probably as I would like to build the bike up myself as far as possible. I would be getting some componentry together but would be using my extra bar/stem in the meantime and all that. I might get Lightweight wheels as well.

Just a correction, my Madone is an SSL 5.9 not the SL. :)

Tarmac SL? On specialized's website, all I see is the S Works Tarmac/Sworks Roubaix.
When you select bikes and road, you must go to S-Works; that is where you will find the Tarmac SL. Oh, you will also find the Roubaix SL under this heading.
Which is a better ride? I know both are great and the Roubaix is more comfortable in a way. But, what I would like to know is how the bikes feel etc.
The Roubaix will have the more compliant ride, but the SL is a more straight forward race bike. Guys like Boonen will ride the Roubaix at places like Paris-Roubaix next year, but you will likely see them ride the Tarmac SL at places like the Tour.
Based on what I'm looking for: light and stiff and responsive, I assume the S Works Tarmac suits me better?
It sounds like you would want the Tarmac.
Thanks.

P.S. Pity there's no custom paint. I would ABSOLUTELY love a white Specialized bike without doubt. Can't I request for it and pay for the paintjob?
Sorry way to order custom paint.

Can't get custom? Darn... Why can't more companies have something like a Project One thing like Trek? :)

I could always paint it myself though I guess...

Thanks for the info.

WrigleyRoadie, where did you get the picture of the first Addict? Absolutely love the look of it! Sorta Pearlescent colored... SWEEEET.... I don't see it at Scott's website...

Can't get custom? Darn... Why can't more companies have something like a Project One thing like Trek? :)
Why, first it is a lot easier (and cheaper) to produce tube & lug bikes. Second, they are made in Trek's factory and they control production - hey John, the next set of tubes and lugs hit with some white paint. Third, refer to 1 & 2.
I could always paint it myself though I guess...
If you want a beautiful race oriented bike try the Kuota Kredo - http://www.kuota.it/english.html. Go to Products then Road then Kredo. And, yes, if anyone is curious, we sell Kuota, but they are great bikes and very different from the masses. Oh, their KOM is the newest and lightest (910gr in L), and we can get those custom painted for you -- $450 extra. A frame would run about $3000 (no custom paint), and a full bike with SRAM Force and Zero Gravity brakes about $5500 (less $300 with Force brakes), but I thought you might like the light ones.
Thanks for the info.

WrigleyRoadie, where did you get the picture of the first Addict? Absolutely love the look of it! Sorta Pearlescent colored... SWEEEET.... I don't see it at Scott's website...

015176

I'm totally clueless on Kuota but I'll check em out. Vs. a Specialized, how does it ride? Stiffness/responsiveness/weight and comfort..

$5.5k's not too bad considering some other brands cost a lot more.. Thanks. I'll check these out in the next few weeks, along with maybe the Cervelo and all and go on test rides etc. I'm hoping to get a new frame before 07 and have it built hopefully latest by January.

BTW, the weight of the CR1 including frame, fork and crank is 233 grams (just over .5lbs) heavier than the SL. The Addict isn't getting there either, though it could be very close. Lastly, a full DA (except crank) SL with ES wheels can be bought for $5000 - way less than the cheapset Addict.



I think you mean 233 grams heavier. My nieghbours is exactly half a pound heavier with identical componentry minus the seatpost and saddle and his tarmac is a 54 and my scott a 56. This being said we both use the DA crank.

I think you mean 233 grams heavier. My nieghbours is exactly half a pound heavier with identical componentry minus the seatpost and saddle and his tarmac is a 54 and my scott a 56. This being said we both use the DA crank.

No, the weights being compared are the frame, fork, crankset & BB. The weight for a S-works Tarmac SL and CR1 are 1915 & 2148 grams, respectively. The crank used for the CR1 was a FSA K-force, and the SL is the Specialized S-works carbon crank. The FSA is about the same weight as a DA crank, but is stiffer.

I will be selling my 06 Scott CR1 Team Issue Size small complete with full dura ace 06. If you guys know anyone that is interested please let me know. thanks guys.



How many do you want selling your CR1?

No, the weights being compared are the frame, fork, crankset & BB. The weight for a S-works Tarmac SL and CR1 are 1915 & 2148 grams, respectively. The crank used for the CR1 was a FSA K-force, and the SL is the Specialized S-works carbon crank. The FSA is about the same weight as a DA crank, but is stiffer.

I think we should get the facts straight here from someone who isn't a Specialized dealer.

First of all the weights you give are claimed weights so they are rubbish. Secondly forget about the crankset weight - it is completely irrelevant when you can pick and choose what crankset you want and there are many other cranksets around the same weight or lighter than the S-works. THM, Stronglight, Time, Zipp to name a few. The K-Force crank is not particularly light by any means.

Now for the frame/headset/fork combo:

Tarmac SL - 1540g
CR1 - 1407g

Figures are from a TOUR test, with equivalent frame sizes.

"If you want light, stiff, responsive & something that rides very nicely, your only choice is the S-works Tarmac. If you skip the great ride quality, try the Cervelo R3. "

Wow you are really shameless in promoting Specialized aren't you. So basically you are saying that the only good all round bike available on the market is Specialized. Righto.

I think we should get the facts straight here from someone who isn't a Specialized dealer.
Really, at least it was clear that I was a Spec dealer!
First of all the weights you give are claimed weights so they are rubbish. Secondly forget about the crankset weight - it is completely irrelevant when you can pick and choose what crankset you want and there are many other cranksets around the same weight or lighter than the S-works. THM, Stronglight, Time, Zipp to name a few. The K-Force crank is not particularly light by any means.
No, the weights were not claimed, they were actual. There are very few cranks lighter than the Spec pieces and maybe nothing stiffer. It does mean something if you have to add weight to get stiff cranks.
Now for the frame/headset/fork combo:

Tarmac SL - 1540g
CR1 - 1407g
I'll take your word, though my scale tells a different story for the Spec weight.
Figures are from a TOUR test, with equivalent frame sizes.

"If you want light, stiff, responsive & something that rides very nicely, your only choice is the S-works Tarmac. If you skip the great ride quality, try the Cervelo R3. "

Wow you are really shameless in promoting Specialized aren't you. So basically you are saying that the only good all round bike available on the market is Specialized. Righto.
No, I'm not saying they are the only good all round bike on the market. However, when in factor in weight, performance, ride quality, price, etc, they are very hard to look past. And, the ride quality of the Scott stuff does suck. Oh, as Tom B. put it (without Spec folks in attendance): "... they are simply better".
Sorry you had an aneurism 3 months after the fact.

Cheers

No, I'm not saying they are the only good all round bike on the market. However, when in factor in weight, performance, ride quality, price, etc, they are very hard to look past. And, the ride quality of the Scott stuff does suck. Oh, as Tom B. put it (without Spec folks in attendance): "... they are simply better".
Sorry you had an aneurism 3 months after the fact.

Cheers

And did Boonen say that about the Specialized S-Works crankset which the whole Quickstep team stopped using due to the chain dropping off whenever they put any power down? Of course he is going to say "they simply are better" when he is sponsored by them :rolleyes:

Maybe I was taking you a little too literally when you said "your only choice is the S-works Tarmac" but I hope I am the only person taking you literally otherwise there will be some disappointed new Tarmac SL owners who believed that they truly were buying 'the lightest frame, fork and crankset' on the market.

I am not trying to say that it is a bad bike but it isn't the greatest in the world, despite what you would like to have people believe. One of the hardest things for a consumer to do is to distinguish sales banter from hard facts and you aren't helping.

And did Boonen say that about the Specialized S-Works crankset which the whole Quickstep team stopped using due to the chain dropping off whenever they put any power down? Of course he is going to say "they simply are better" when he is sponsored by them
Chains dropping when they put any power down -- that's sheer BS, and you know it. I believe the Campy folks had something to say about it. In addition, it was an interview by a Belguim paper and he was not even asked about the bikes. I guess maybe he's just that good a marketer?
Maybe I was taking you a little too literally when you said "your only choice is the S-works Tarmac" but I hope I am the only person taking you literally otherwise there will be some disappointed new Tarmac SL owners who believed that they truly were buying 'the lightest frame, fork and crankset' on the market.
I don't recall saying it was THE lightest on the market, and i doubt they would be disappointed they only have one of the very best bikes on the market but it's a few grams heavier than something else.
I am not trying to say that it is a bad bike but it isn't the greatest in the world, despite what you would like to have people believe. One of the hardest things for a consumer to do is to distinguish sales banter from hard facts and you aren't helping.
I gave hard facts based on actual weights for actual bikes.
Can you go hog wild and make this lighter than that, sure, but no matter what you do to the Scott, it will not ride as nicely as the Spec -- my ^&*_*_ opinion, along with some real test data.

If you choose Scott Addict.I should beat your best price. PM only if you are ready to purchase. Chris

"Will the Addict ride nicely - I am referring to compliance here, and not really. In the next post you asked stiff like aluminum, yes as is not vertically compliant. And, AL bikes, C-dale included are not very stiff in either the BB or torsionally -- and there are #s to back that up, it is not just my opinion. In fact, the stiffest bike C-dale makes is the Synapse."

I would suggest consulting the independent data from the recent VeloNews or Tour testing. VeloNews says: "As you might have guessed, the Cannondale CAAD 9 was very stiff" In fact, it was the stiffest frame torsionally and third stiffest laterally."

The independent data would also suggest the Cervelo R3 and the CR1 to exhibit more measured stiffness than the Tarmac.

Having pointed this out, I am not sure how meaningful to choose a bike based upon some narrow lab measurements on a single frame sample.

"If you want light, stiff, responsive & something that rides very nicely, your only choice is the S-works Tarmac."

There is no ONLY choice, and it is absurd to suggest a CR1 rides poorly or an R3 lacks ride quality. Test ride the bikes youself and form an opinion. These are personal preferences and many of the differences are subtle.

Proper fit makes more of difference than any stiffness test or some anonymous and potentially biased rant. The geometry of these bikes are not identical, and it is hard to talk about ride quality if you find yourself struggling with between standard frame sizes.

"Oh, as Tom B. put it (without Spec folks in attendance): ... they are simply better".

Tom B. is paid to ride Specialized. Cannondale came close to being the sponsor this year and he would have said the same about the System 6.

No, I'm not saying they are the only good all round bike on the market. However, when in factor in weight, performance, ride quality, price, etc, they are very hard to look past. And, the ride quality of the Scott stuff does suck. Oh, as Tom B. put it (without Spec folks in attendance): "... they are simply better".
Sorry you had an aneurism 3 months after the fact.

Cheers

Yep, your pretty much an idiot.

"Will the Addict ride nicely - I am referring to compliance here, and not really. In the next post you asked stiff like aluminum, yes as is not vertically compliant. And, AL bikes, C-dale included are not very stiff in either the BB or torsionally -- and there are #s to back that up, it is not just my opinion. In fact, the stiffest bike C-dale makes is the Synapse."

I would suggest consulting the independent data from the recent VeloNews or Tour testing. VeloNews says: "As you might have guessed, the Cannondale CAAD 9 was very stiff" In fact, it was the stiffest frame torsionally and third stiffest laterally."

The independent data would also suggest the Cervelo R3 and the CR1 to exhibit more measured stiffness than the Tarmac.

Having pointed this out, I am not sure how meaningful to choose a bike based upon some narrow lab measurements on a single frame sample.
I would suggest that you look at data other than Velo News -- they widely criticized for the test methods they used. Try the german lab EFBE, as they do this testing all the time, for many companies in the industry.
"If you want light, stiff, responsive & something that rides very nicely, your only choice is the S-works Tarmac."

There is no ONLY choice, and it is absurd to suggest a CR1 rides poorly or an R3 lacks ride quality. Test ride the bikes youself and form an opinion. These are personal preferences and many of the differences are subtle.

Proper fit makes more of difference than any stiffness test or some anonymous and potentially biased rant. The geometry of these bikes are not identical, and it is hard to talk about ride quality if you find yourself struggling with between standard frame sizes.
It certainly is not absurd to say that the vertical compliance of the Scott is poor -- compared to other full carbon bikes. It rides just fine if you compare it to big tubed aluminum bikes, but that isn't saying much.

How did proper fit come into this equation? I am not talking about whether the bike fits (one should assume the bike fits), and of course there are handling nuiances based on very minor geometry differences, but which one beats you up more? Hands down the Scott!! If you want to talk about different geometries, you might want to first consult the geometry tables -- you will see there are only very small differences between the two.
"Oh, as Tom B. put it (without Spec folks in attendance): ... they are simply better".

Tom B. is paid to ride Specialized. Cannondale came close to being the sponsor this year and he would have said the same about the System 6.
Tom is paid to ride a bike; he will ride whatever they put him on. He may have said the same thing about the 6, but maybe not.

I would suggest that you look at data other than Velo News -- they widely criticized for the test methods they used. Try the german lab EFBE, as they do this testing all the time, for many companies in the industry.


- Even if it were "widely criticized," The Velo News data coorelates with all other independent testing data.

- Based upon the EFBE website, the Scott CR1 has performed very well.

- The Testing performed by Tour Magazine has been done with EFBE equipment and methods. The February 2006 data suggest that the Tarmac SL has nearly identical characteristics as a CR1 (aside from being heavier)

- Should we be purchasing Cannondale based upon this test data: http://www.daa.co.il/news/System6_competitive_testing.pdf

And the real point is that aside from extremes, there is no way to translate some single frame test numbers to ride quality. You need to ride the bike for that evaluation. "Ride quality" to one person is "dead and lifeless" to another.

- Even if it were "widely criticized," The Velo News data coorelates with all other independent testing data.
It correlates somewhat poorly to other test data methods and that was part of the problem. Some of the figures they gave were also misleading, at best, wrong more likely.

- Based upon the EFBE website, the Scott CR1 has performed very well.

- The Testing performed by Tour Magazine has been done with EFBE equipment and methods. The February 2006 data suggest that the Tarmac SL has nearly identical characteristics as a CR1 (aside from being heavier)

Yes, the test data for the CR1 and Tarmac are quite close and I never disputed that point. It was the "crappy" ride (mine and others' subjective opinion) that I questioned. It is test data that points to the harshness (or lack of vertical compliance) that I spoke of.

- Should we be purchasing Cannondale based upon this test data: http://www.daa.co.il/news/System6_competitive_testing.pdf

And the real point is that aside from extremes, there is no way to translate some single frame test numbers to ride quality. You need to ride the bike for that evaluation. "Ride quality" to one person is "dead and lifeless" to another.
I have spent time aboard the Scott and it rides like fat-tubed aluminum. And, I am keenly aware of what fat-tubed al rides like -- I spent 9 years on Kleins and Cannondales.

I have spent time aboard the Scott and it rides like fat-tubed aluminum. And, I am keenly aware of what fat-tubed al rides like -- I spent 9 years on Kleins and Cannondales.


You previously said "Aluminum is not Stiff", so I am not sure how to calibrate your 9 years of experience.

In the end, the Tarmac is not the "Only Choice." Your opinion is a single data point.

A bike rides differently when you weigh 125 pounds or 225 pounds. Fit matters more than the differences between a Tarmac and whatever competitive offering is not worthy. Since you so quickly dismiss bike fit, you might want to learn more about it and the impact on ride quality. Competitive offerings may may be similar, but they do not have identical geometry and I believe there are only 5 sizes offered in the Tarmac. Some individuals may find a better fit on another brand of bike.

I have ridden both the Tarmac SL and the CR1 extensively and the differences are subtle (and neither rode like fat tubed aluminum.)

There is a very intelligent and less ignorant discourse about testing data and ride quality at the weight weenies forum.

If you choose Scott Addict.I should beat your best price. PM only if you are ready to purchase. Chris
Not available to me at this time. All are spoken for. :cryin:

WrigleyRoadie, where did you get the picture of the first Addict? Absolutely love the look of it! Sorta Pearlescent colored... SWEEEET.... I don't see it at Scott's website...

Uzzie
That "sorta peralescent" color is just the reflection of surrounding lights and colors reflecting off of the gloss/clearcoat of the head-tube. It comes in raw carbon and red or raw carbon and yellow.

Also, keep in mind that the custom white paint you desire is going to result in a heavier bike.
I assume you have seen Simoni's white Addict that he is riding in this year's Giro.

Uzzie
That "sorta peralescent" color is just the reflection of surrounding lights and colors reflecting off of the gloss/clearcoat of the head-tube. It comes in raw carbon and red or raw carbon and yellow.

Also, keep in mind that the custom white paint you desire is going to result in a heavier bike.
I assume you have seen Simoni's white Addict that he is riding in this year's Giro. About 100g for paint