Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

Scott Addict R15, Scott CR1 Pro or Scott Addict R2

13K views 7 replies 6 participants last post by  mainecoon57 
#1 ·
#2 · (Edited)
I own an Addict R15, and have a friend with a CR1.

Between the bikes you mention, part of it comes down to which group you prefer: Ultegra or Red.... I personally love the Red, it has been very solid and reliable. Some who are used to Shimano however may not like the feel of SRAM. The R15 is a really well specced bike - no junk parts on it to cut cost corners, but I think that is also the case with the CR1 Pro, and the R2.

Between the Addict and the CR1 I think its a case of geometry and ride. . The Addicts are very stiff, but still soak up the bumps pretty well, they don't beat you up on long rides IMO. The Addicts have fairly long top tubes, and fairly laid back seat angles with low head tubes-full on race geometry. The CR1 has seat and chain stays designed to flex slightly to absorb even more road shock (they are actually really cool-they narrow out almost like a leaf spring in the flex zones), they have slightly steeper seat angles, slightly shorter top tubes, and slightly taller head tubes than the Addicts, what some manufacturers would call performance geometry. Choosing between them will depend on your riding, and fit preference.

Hope it helps!! If there is anything specific you want to know about either feel free to ask!
 
#4 ·
Sorry about not adding to much detail. Well I wish for it to be a race bike ut not having enough money means it will also have to be a training bike. It sounds though it is not to rough though at least? :) Also it says It is 6.9kgs and my current bike like 9.8kgs haha. Does It really feel that light? and is it a good sprinters bike or climbers or both? thanks
 
#6 ·
Climbing depends on your legs, same for sprinting. They're both fairly aggressive geometries, with the CR1 being a tad bit more relaxed. This can actually be faster for you, depending on your flexibility. A more upright position doesn't put as much strain on your leg and core muscles, but increases wind resistance. How much slower? Cadel Evans won the tour on a bike that has similar geometry to the CR1...
EDIT: The Addict is definitely the weight weenie's bike. It's super light, and a lot of people think it's the bike that'll make them faster instead of their legs. If you rode them back to back, you wouldn't tell the difference in weight.
 
#8 ·
Climbing depends on your legs, same for sprinting. They're both fairly aggressive geometries, with the CR1 being a tad bit more relaxed. This can actually be faster for you, depending on your flexibility. A more upright position doesn't put as much strain on your leg and core muscles, but increases wind resistance. How much slower? Cadel Evans won the tour on a bike that has similar geometry to the CR1...
EDIT: The Addict is definitely the weight weenie's bike. It's super light, and a lot of people think it's the bike that'll make them faster instead of their legs. If you rode them back to back, you wouldn't tell the difference in weight.
This is exactly my case.My upper body is quite stiff and I go much faster with a CR1 than with an Addict, a SuperSix and other similiar bikes (geometry-wise).And it's even more obvious during climbs.
About the weight: I've tried an EVO 2 (Sram Red) and although it was lighter than my CR1 Pro it felt heavier.
Magazine reviews, geometry charts, rumors and whatnot are guidelines to narrow down your choices but you may be surprised when you actually ride a bike that, theoretically, should have been a good fit for you.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top