# CR1 wobbly geometry at speed?



## kneejerk

Update: sorry to resurrect an old thread but,... I think I have found some of my struggles with the bike.... after setting this bike aside to my "B" bike... I built it up with some Tiagra 4600 shifters on the handlebar without under the bar tape cable routing for the shifters.... and guess what!!... it has changed that characteristic wobble to some degree I was concerned about! Previously it was built up with shift cables running under the handlebar tape and I'm convinced it had (has) an effect on the steering and stability character. Being that the cables exit near the steering axis they have a greater effect on the turning (or lack there of) of the bike. Just thought I'd resurrect this! Hope I didn't scare anyone! Cheers! 

... original posting follows below...
Hey forum: I had the chance to try a CR1 over the weekend for around 20 miles. The bike rode nice and smooth at lower speeds, once I got it above 30mph I noticed some really nervous steering manners, a little unnerving, reminded me of my old Trek Madone (you can see my other threads), I come from a motorcycle roadracing background so I like to light it up a bit coming down hills.... and my recent purchase of a Raleigh roadbike has showed me that not all geometries are the same when it comes to stability at speed, pinpointing the differences is difficult and even geometry charts can be wrong..... so, just posing a question here and observation to see if others feel the same character. I've tried quite a few road machines now..... and I'm loving the one's that allow me stability at high speeds down hills...


----------



## rice rocket

I haven't tried the updated CR1 with the taller geometry, but I had an 08 CR1 Team.

I agree with what you say, I wasn't totally confident descending on it. Once speeds got over 40 mph, it made me think twice whether this was a good idea or not. My new bike is a Litespeed C2, and it inspires much more confidence descending. I'm not sure if it's the larger lower headset bearing (1.5" instead of 1 1/8" on the CR1), or if its a stiffer headtube, or if it's geometry related. End of the day, I point, it goes.


----------



## paulfeng

I rode my 2011 CR1 over 1000 miles this year and did not observe any issue with wobbliness at speed. Granted, I do not live in a place where I have extended descents, but on what few descents we have, I tried to maximize my speed - regularly exceeding 30mph, and briefly exceeding 40mph on thirty or so rides. No issues. Style of descents ranged from sprinting out of the saddle with hands in the drops, to tucked-in with hands next to stem, body crouched over hands, knees and elbows in tight. I specifically thought to myself - I have complete confidence in, and comfort on, this bike when bombing down hills.

Ironically, I am replacing my 2011 CR1 with a Motobecane Le Champion Ti, of which there has been some concern about its stability at speed. (See my post history; I have not observed there to be a problem with that bike either.) The reason I am replacing the CR1 has nothing to do with any shortcoming of the Scott; I just fell in love with the titanium.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

Try a Colnago C-50. Traditional. There you will experience what it is stability at speed and confidence descending. Better with low handlebars, no spacers :thumbsup:


----------



## paulfeng

I will add that I keep my CR1's handlebars low too. I would not want the headtube any longer than it is on the new CR1 frame style.


----------



## kneejerk

I was riding with "low" handlebars to offset the tall headtube. I've ridden a lot of road bikes. Sure the wobbliness is liveable, it could be so much better as you will find with other bikes. Recent bikes I've ridden that were stable for me are the BH Ultralight, a Specialized Tarmac SL (I think 3) and my Raleigh, my Nashbar (cheapo frame) isn't that far off either. I think these manufacturers get carried away with making them responsive on climbs and crits. that the side effect is the wobble. If I had to put a finger on it, I'd put it down to either a steep head angle, lack of rake or both. Then throw in the possibility of poor alignment (but likely less of a factor).


----------



## paulfeng

To be clear, I certainly don't doubt what you report. I'm just sharing my experience, which means that either there is not a generic problem, or I've been lucky. Or I haven't pushed the envelope hard enough to see the instability.


----------



## kneejerk

paulfeng said:


> To be clear, I certainly don't doubt what you report. I'm just sharing my experience, which means that either there is not a generic problem, or I've been lucky. Or I haven't pushed the envelope hard enough to see the instability.


Or I have just ridden a freak of CR1 nature...... I guess this is a bit of a personal crusade, the pursuit of stable high speed descending roadbikes!


----------



## Harryquinn

No such problems observed with my 56cm 2011 CR1Pro. We have some pretty steep hills where I live in South Australia and I've never noticed the Scott attempt the wobbles even at speeds over 75kph (46.5mph).


----------



## Terex

My old CR1 Sl was rock solid up to the top speed I rode it - 55 mph. Most confidence inspiring bike descending I've ever ridden.


----------



## wolfboy0000

*What about the wheels*

Could it have been the wheels, I followed a gentleman in our riding group and his trek made a very strange noise when he changed lanes quickly. Like the spokes were crackling, he didn't hear it on the bike, I know the rim was flexing, but he didn't seem to notice.


----------



## marcalans

*Unstable Scott CR1*

I test rode a Scott CR1, but didn't feel comfortable with it due to what I perceived to be a taller frame than what I am used to, so I didn't pursue the purchase. The taller head tube, itself, didn't bother me. I've ridden Cannondale, Felt, and Specialized bikes with taller head tubes and they were all very stable at high speed and their geometries seemed more balanced than that of the CR1.

This is what BikeRadar.com reported about the CR1 in a Jan. 2011 review:
_
"While chassis weight is outstandingly low, the tall frame and long stem gave a top-heavy feel to the bike when we were flicking in and out of corners. It’s something you adjust to rapidly, but the steep angles and short chainstays and wheelbase made the Scott a bit of an attention-seeker in terms of handling."_

Also helping me with my decision not to purchase was a report out of Australia that some CR1 owners were planning a lawsuit against Scott because they claimed the CR1 carbon frames were defective and cracked easily. Here is a link to previously posted photos of the bike of a CR1 owner who would, no doubt, agree with this claim. He apparently shattered his CR1 Team frame after hitting a pebble at an awkward angle, which forced him into a small pothole.Pictures by Steebler - Photobucket


----------



## wolfboy0000

*What Now*

I purchased a CR1 Elite last week, I didn't find many bad reviews before the purchase, I was looking for a FOIL, but they weren't in yet, gave the CR1 a spin and like the relaxed ride, I had a bianchi 1885 and sold it, it was a much faster bike than the CR1 but not as comfortable on long rides, very low position and stretched out. I'll give the CR1 a ride for a while, then when the FOIL comes in I may try one of those, but so far I'm liking the comfort of the bike. I hope it doesn't crack up under me, that's one thing I worried about with carbon, thanks for the heads up, I'll check the frame for cracks before rides, thanks again.


----------



## kneejerk

wolfboy0000 said:


> Could it have been the wheels, I followed a gentleman in our riding group and his trek made a very strange noise when he changed lanes quickly. Like the spokes were crackling, he didn't hear it on the bike, I know the rim was flexing, but he didn't seem to notice.


I actually used the wheels from my bike when I rode it. and the skewers were tight.... it's a geometry thing (I felt),


----------



## kneejerk

marcalans said:


> Also helping me with my decision not to purchase was a report out of Australia that some CR1 owners were planning a lawsuit against Scott because they claimed the CR1 carbon frames were defective and cracked easily. Here is a link to previously posted photos of the bike of a CR1 owner who would, no doubt, agree with this claim. He apparently shattered his CR1 Team frame after hitting a pebble at an awkward angle, which forced him into a small pothole.Pictures by Steebler - Photobucket


that looks like the previous version of the CR1.... very dramatic damage.... something that I would associate with an impact of some sort (hopefully)....


----------



## paulfeng

*I'll see your Jan 2011 CR1 review...*



marcalans said:


> I test rode a Scott CR1, but didn't feel comfortable with it due to what I perceived to be a taller frame than what I am used to, so I didn't pursue the purchase. The taller head tube, itself, didn't bother me. I've ridden Cannondale, Felt, and Specialized bikes with taller head tubes and they were all very stable at high speed and their geometries seemed more balanced than that of the CR1.
> 
> This is what BikeRadar.com reported about the CR1 in a Jan. 2011 review:
> _
> "While chassis weight is outstandingly low, the tall frame and long stem gave a top-heavy feel to the bike when we were flicking in and out of corners. It’s something you adjust to rapidly, but the steep angles and short chainstays and wheelbase made the Scott a bit of an attention-seeker in terms of handling."_


I'll see your Jan 2011 BikeRadar CR1 Team review and raise you one July 2011 BikeRadar CR1 Comp review:

"With Scott keeping the head-tube height reasonable, the front end is compact enough to keep the handling sharp. Through the tight, twisty sections on our test route the CR1 inspired us to push that little bit harder, lean in further and really get the adrenaline flowing."

Note that BikeRadar (which I like) consolidates material from multiple sources; the January review is from "Triathlon Plus," while the July review is from "Cycling Plus." One reason I like BikeRadar is that the reviewers aren't afraid to say negative things. In this case, though, the reviewers at sister publications may not have seen quite eye-to-eye.

While we're on the topic of feeling comfortable on a given bike, let me remind us all of what we all already know, the primary importance of proper sizing and fit. In my case, I tried a 54cm CR1 first, but it felt too big - mainly too high at the bars (yes, tall headtube), and maybe too long also. Then I tried the 52cm, which I bought. It fits great.

But even so, on my very first ride of the 52cm CR1 it was only after I stopped and made about a 5mm or so front-back adjustment of the saddle that it felt right. Just last weekend, I was riding a different bike and it felt all wrong - then I realized that the seatpost height was low. An adjustment of about 1cm or less, and it felt just right. These are pretty small adjustments. It makes me wonder how reliably one can discern differences between different frames via test rides unless one works very hard, and takes the time, to get the fit just right.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am planning to sell my CR1 in the spring, so I'm unlikely to disparage it publicly. But I'm only selling it because I decided I really wanted to have a Ti bike, about which I have posted elsewhere in these forums. If my CR1 was made of beautiful brushed Ti, I would keep it in perpetuity.


----------



## paulfeng

*Really?*



marcalans said:


> Also helping me with my decision not to purchase was a report out of Australia that some CR1 owners were planning a lawsuit against Scott because they claimed the CR1 carbon frames were defective and cracked easily. Here is a link to previously posted photos of the bike of a CR1 owner who would, no doubt, agree with this claim. He apparently shattered his CR1 Team frame after hitting a pebble at an awkward angle, which forced him into a small pothole.Pictures by Steebler - Photobucket


As for this... seriously?

I don't doubt that that fellow's CR1 frame broke as reported, but I can't see that as evidence that there is a blanket problem with CR1 frames. I don't think we can use web anecdotes as objective evidence, unless perhaps we have a statistically significant sample.

While we are sharing anecdotes, though, I can report that I hit my fair share of potholes this year with no apparent frame damage. Actually, I have been amazed that the stock Alex rim wheels that came with my CR1 Comp do not appear to have suffered any ill effects from the potholes either. They may not be superlight, but they are hardly "hefty" (as Cycling Plus / Bike Radar said) either. They do appear to be well built and robust.


----------



## mtnroadie

> Also helping me with my decision not to purchase was a report out of Australia that some CR1 owners were planning a lawsuit against Scott because they claimed the CR1 carbon frames were defective and cracked easily. Here is a link to previously posted photos of the bike of a CR1 owner who would, no doubt, agree with this claim. He apparently shattered his CR1 Team frame after hitting a pebble at an awkward angle, which forced him into a small pothole.Pictures by Steebler - Photobucket


Wow, I was hoping never to see anything like that happen with my frame. 

I ride a 2009 CR1, I am satissfied with it, and i have put it through its paces, gravel roads dirt roads etc. I never had any speed wooble issues, the only thing i have to complain about is that I have it so light now that I get blow around by the wind. 

Also I am pissed that I cant break 46 mph, no matter how steep of a grade i find or how fast i pedal ( i ride a compact crank). I boke 44mph on my mtb i should be able to break 50 mph on my 15.5 lbs road bike, no?


----------



## marcalans

paulfeng said:


> As for this... seriously?
> 
> I don't doubt that that fellow's CR1 frame broke as reported, but I can't see that as evidence that there is a blanket problem with CR1 frames. I don't think we can use web anecdotes as objective evidence, unless perhaps we have a statistically significant sample.
> 
> While we are sharing anecdotes, though, I can report that I hit my fair share of potholes this year with no apparent frame damage. .


Here's a link to the rider's story in his own words, originally posted on another forum.

Safety issue- help required

I agree that we should not make general assumptions based on a few anecdotes, but such accounts should not be entirely dismissed either, especially when coupled with concrete evidence -- the broken frame in this case. The anecdote is the man's account of how this occurred, which some might question. This could just be the result of an isolated defect or anomaly of some kind.

Scott does place a lot of emphasis on light weight and offers only a five-year carbon frame warranty (but so do a lot of other bike companies) and any implication of this related to frame durability has not been examined in any substantial way of which I am aware. Perhaps someone else can shed more light on this.


----------



## paulfeng

mtnroadie said:


> i should be able to break 50 mph on my 15.5 lbs road bike, no?


Terminal velocity is higher for heavier objects (if the aerodynamics are the same). Not necessarily saying that you are pushing up against terminal velocity, but you might need to add some weight to you or your bike.

That's the basic idea behind my user title, The Pb (i.e., Lead) Torpedo. With my weight, coupled with a decent tuck, I can out-descend anyone that I ride with.


----------



## framesti

any similar problems with Scott Foil?


----------



## kneejerk

Well, even after my "wobbly" impressions of the handling I purchased the bike (used) as I rode a few others I was considering and couldn't pass up the deal on this bike, plus I feel there may not be a smoother riding carbon fiber frame out there.

I've scratched my head on what I may do to "fix" the wobble if I cannot "live with it". I've thrown out the idea of getting an aftermarket fork as it appears the fork length is longer than any aftermarket stuff I see available. Maybe a call to Scott bikes for a fork with more rake than the 54cm frame is speced with is an option. I tried to measure the rake and it seems to be the same as my rock stable Raleigh bike fork (around 45mm) but I could be wrong. Sitting hear I'm thinking I don't need to be breaking any speed records down hills any longer I'm getting old. Now considering a novice getting onto a wobbly beast at speed (I experienced) that scares me a bit. Time will tell, as I only did a 20 mile ride on the bike so far. I'll know more in the coming months.


----------



## kneejerk

Here it is!
Built up with my lightest parts. I'm ready to test the "wobbly"... I've already done something to try and tame it (added a 2.5mm cassette spacer under the crown race).
Weighs ~19lbs. as seen in the photo


----------



## wolfboy0000

*good looking machine*

Let us know if you have tamed the wobble


----------



## kneejerk

Well, yesterday I did some around the neighborhood setup rides on my two road bikes back to back to back type stuff. My Raleigh now has the "heavier" parts I took off the CR1 and vice versa. The Raleigh is a special riding bike, the steel just feels so good over smooth pavement, it's slower steering is confidence inspiring and stable, very little flexing going on. Then rode the CR1 and did a stem swap and adjusted saddle position on numerous small rides. I immediately notice the lighter weight (about 5 pounds now between the two bikes) and smoother ride character, I hope to do some longer rides in the coming days and get her up to speed to see what I think of the handling character, I don't notice any rude wobbling at slower speeds around town although it does feel more sensitive to handlebar inputs around town,

I did 70 miles on the bike today. It's a great bike. I'm still a little sore from road vibrations and such. There is not much comfort in 23mm wide tires pumped to 120-130psi. Roads around here are a little rougher than I remember too. I hit a max. speed of 40mph today. I'd have to say I didn't experience any problems with the handling character. It's a little more responsive but behaved well. Maybe that 2.5mm spacer under the crown race has made me happier (or my brain is failing!,.... you shouldn't read that!).

updated 7/31/2012: It's the middle of summer now and I'm putting in a lot of miles on the CR1, still an amazing bike, it's smooth, very smooth over rough roads, it swallows them up (actually), not sure if it's the summer heat that has added to this comfort impression (or what), but I think I would say it is smoother riding on a hot day, ... using a Ritchey saddle now that has been a revelation of sorts,


----------



## kneejerk

I'm approaching a few hundred miles done on the CR1 now.... I'm gelling with it pretty well. Very smooth ride. I think a step ahead of the 2005 (or so) Madone 5.2SL I had for comfort. I got it up to 42mph the other day and I wasn't panicked what so ever, actually down the same road I previously made the "wobbly" observation. The 2.5mm cassette spacer I've placed under the fork crown race seems to have helps the stability situation. I'm thinking I now have a road bike that has a bit of suspension under me. This frame and fork really moves around to absorb bumps... vertical compliance is excellent... not close to my full suspension mountain bike but it's 10lbs. lighter and has bigger wheels.


----------



## Swerny

kneejerk said:


> I did 70 miles on the bike today. It's a great bike. *I'm still a little sore from road vibrations and such. There is not much comfort in 23mm wide tires pumped to 120-130psi. * Roads around here are a little rougher than I remember too. I hit a max. speed of 40mph today. I'd have to say I didn't experience any problems with the handling character. It's a little more responsive but behaved well. Maybe that 2.5mm spacer under the crown race has made me happier (or my brain is failing!,.... you shouldn't read that!).


What do you weigh to be running pressures that high?

:mad2:

I weigh 200 and run 25c tires at 105 PSI


----------



## paulfeng

Swerny said:


> What do you weigh to be running pressures that high?
> 
> :mad2:
> 
> I weigh 200 and run 25c tires at 105 PSI


You raise a valid point, although the :mad2: emoticon might be uncalled-for. I don't know how the conditions of the roads he rides on compare to conditions of the roads you ride on, in terms of risk of pinch flats. A friend from the Madison, WI area was shocked by the roughness of the roads I ride on in St. Paul & Minneapolis.


----------



## kneejerk

I've got about 300 miles now on the CR1. I've taken it down some of my favorite downhill sections of road. Only time I notice any tendency to wobble is in a cross wind. I find it more difficult to get my windbreaker on/off riding with no hands as I often do. At speed I'm not at all going to let go of the bars on this bike, it's just a little more nervous than my super stable Raleigh. As I reported before, I'd call this bike a quick steering criterium racing geometry bike. Excellent for climbing hills and a rider that is in tune with what is going on. The bike makes easy work of bumpy roads. It's really what I wanted in a smooth riding carbon fiber bike. 

I've been taking some vids. with my Contour Camera mounted
check them out here Contour | Users | kneejerk


----------



## wolfboy0000

I've rode 20 inch, regular road bikes, and motorcycles, 1 or 2 inch longer frame makes all the difference, it's smoother to steer, keeps a straighter line down the road. Like sport motorcycles the short frame make the bike quicker in the corners, but harder to prevent wiggle down the straight sections. I was riding a 57 cm road bike this one is 52 it's very quick. I was very confident with the bianchi it was slower to respond which made it feel smoother (safer). The shorter CR1 is very quick, and I had to adjust timing for entering corners, and changing lanes with co-riders, but I love the ride, and comfort of the bike.


----------



## velocanman

I have a 2009 CR1 Pro and have never noticed any wobble at speeds up to 45 MPH. I believe 2009 is the last year before they made the CR1 less stiff in the rear. Anyway, I had a 2006 CR1 Pro XL before upsizing to the 2009 CR1 Pro in XXL. I am 74" and needed the longer top tube. I believe the Pro is more stable than the SL, for what that's worth.

Sent from my HTC Incredible using TapaTalk.


----------



## kneejerk

I had some Michelin Optimum 25mm tires to try recently. Unfortunately when installed there is only a few mm of clearance to the frame/fork so I pulled them off after a few outings. Looks like 23mm is all I will use on the CR1. After hearing some hype on how 25mm tires "roll better" and such I gave them a shot. I noticed an increase in vibration damping and like the fact I don't have to pump the tires as much. But, I didn't notice any drastic grip increase in corners or any performance increase... actually I think they felt slower rolling for me. 

...... and I did it yesterday.. while riding down hill I tucked my wind breaker into my back pocket while riding with no hands, something I was thinking I wouldn't be able to do on this bike when I wrote this thread.... but, it was on very smooth pavement and probably just over 20mph...


----------



## kneejerk

I guess I've been able to "tame the wobbles", the CR1 is a very capable road bike. Smoothes out the road irregularities quite nice. I think I've come to the conclusion that if you are looking for a comfortable frame design look for one that you can squeeze the tubes on with your fingers (as I can on the CR1 in locations), not sure how that bodes for long term use but for now I like comfort! 

I tried installing 25c tires but found clearance was rather small so I switched back to 23c tire width. Although, the 25's that I installed actually measure 27/28 when inflated.

Here is a link to my Contour Camera vids Contour | Users | kneejerk


----------



## abadyam

Coming down Mt. Mitchell once I hit 50 for the first time I said this was enough and tried to trim a little speed, got a bit of a speed wobble but that could have been anything. Kept it around 45 after that. But as far as handling goes I've always felt fine at speed, cornering, etc...2011 CR1


----------



## jamesdak

Hmm is there a difference in the new ones and my 2009 CR1 Pro. Just had it up to over 51 mph yesterday and it was rock solid. I also ride a 2001 Trek Madone 5.9 and while the Trek handles just fine for me it does feel twitchier.


----------



## kneejerk

jamesdak said:


> Hmm is there a difference in the new ones and my 2009 CR1 Pro. Just had it up to over 51 mph yesterday and it was rock solid. I also ride a 2001 Trek Madone 5.9 and while the Trek handles just fine for me it does feel twitchier.


Yeah, the newer CR1 has tuned flex in the rear triangle and fork which likely makes it a little more wobbly at high speeds. I'm not necessarily complaining as it is a very smooth riding bike and I'm getting quite attached to the ride quality. There are always compromises. ...and I guess I like comparing Apples with Apples.


----------



## velocanman

jamesdak said:


> Hmm is there a difference in the new ones and my 2009 CR1 Pro. Just had it up to over 51 mph yesterday and it was rock solid. I also ride a 2001 Trek Madone 5.9 and while the Trek handles just fine for me it does feel twitchier.


I believe 2009 was the last year of the "stiff" CR1. They retuned it for ride quality in 2010 which might have affected high-speed stability. 

I also have a 2009 CR1 and it was almost as stiff but smoother than my 2011 Addict.


----------



## jamesdak

Hmm, rode it for 100 miles that same day. Seemed "comfortable" enough...


----------



## kneejerk

sorry to resurrect an old thread but,... I think I have found some of my struggles with the bike.... after setting this bike aside to my "B" bike... I built it up with some Tiagra 4600 shifters on the handlebar without under the bar tape cable routing for the shifters.... and guess what!!... it has changed that characteristic wobble to some degree I was concerned about! Previously it was built up with shift cables running under the handlebar tape and I convinced it had (has) an effect on the steering and stability character. Being that the cables exit near the steering axis they have a greater effect on the turning (or lack there of) of the bike. Just thought I'd resurrect this! Hope I didn't scare anyone! Cheers!


----------

