Scott CR1: Smart Light or Stupid Light

Booker C. Bense
. stanford.edu wrote in
:

Ksyrium wheels. This combo is clearly marketed to appeal to
middle-aged Freds with disposable incomes, not racing teams. And so
if Scott markets to recreational masters riders, I would expect enough
frame durability to handle the stresses of recreational riding and the
extra 10, 15, 20 pounds of Master Fattie paunch that goes with it.

_ Why? The frame only has a one year limited warranty. How does
putting less expensive components on the bike make the frame more
durable? You might expect those things, but I don't see how they
can be compatible with one of the lightest frames available.

_ Booker C. Bense

I think you missed my point there, Booker. I asked if people thought the
CR1 was 'strong and light' or 'light, but not durable.' Some posters shared
anecdotes that suggested the CR1 was light but not durable. Then I said
that if Scott markets a pure racing bike, it's OK if the frame is fragile,
racing customers expect that trade-off in a frame. However, if the CR1 is
indeed a fragile frame, I believe Scott should not hang cheaper components
on it and market it as a club ride and century bike. Freds like me expect
durability.