# CR1 over Addict for me



## martins (Feb 6, 2007)

I guess us Scott fans know that the new Addict is the lightest road bike out there, By further developing on the successful CR1 process, Scott have created the state of the art Integrated Moulding Process. (IMP) and mated it with the Naked External Tubeset (NET). This removes the cosmetic layer of carbon and shaves approx 95 grams off the entire frame, combined with the slimmer carbon IMP fork that weigh only 330 grams,

The Addict weighs in at 790 Grammes, against the CR1 885, given the Geometry/Forks of the addict, I think the CR1 be a better real world frame,


----------



## sevencycle (Apr 23, 2006)

My CR1 SL Frame (xs) is 860g Look HSC5 fork 260g = 1120g . Same as Addict F & F weight. Not the latest greatest but alot less $$$ and 99.999% of performance. I still love to see Scott take it to the next level!!! Take a look at Trek with no Integrated headset just to save $$ on old castings (chris king wont complain).Scott is not that type of company and I am glad for that.


----------



## wasfast (Feb 3, 2004)

David Millar said on pezcyclingnews (http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=4677&status=True)

"Pez: What's your take on the new road bike? 
DM: The Addict is more aggressive than the CR1. The CR1 was a great bike but maybe too comfortable, the Addict is a pure race bike and it's very light."

One man's opinion that's ridden both. For my money, I'd buy the CR1 for the HUGE difference in price.


----------



## sevencycle (Apr 23, 2006)

*pro view*

I like to hear the Pros views because price is not a factor. Even at his level wonder which model would he choose if he had to pay for them (remember he would have to purchase a few).That would be a true "pro deal".


----------



## heliskyr (Feb 21, 2005)

I absolutely love my CR1 Team Issue and while the Addict sounds cool, I am not worried I'm missing out out any added performance. Sure, shaving 118 grams is nice (my frame weighs in at 908g., not the 885g Scott quotes) but not worth the multi-thousands it would cost for me to switch to the Addict. Plus, 118g is easy to shave off of other parts, esp. wheels.

And I have to say I like the gaudy yellow stickers all over my CR1- it looks serious!


----------



## wasfast (Feb 3, 2004)

I posted the previous remark as information. He knows where the money comes from and says good things about his sponsors bikes. The price/performance ratio isn't very good on the Addict. I'd get a CR1 myself and considered it this year.


----------



## heliskyr (Feb 21, 2005)

Don't get me wrong- I'm sure the Addict is a great bike. I'm just so happy with the CR1 that I would find it hard to pay twice as much for any incremental improvement in weight savings. Of course, with bikes the final couple hundred grams to shave off are always the most expensive.


----------



## Coppi51 (May 30, 2002)

heliskyr said:


> ...that I would find it hard to pay twice as much for any incremental improvement in weight savings...


It is more...but not quite double 

msrp's from ScottUSA website:
CR1: $3019.99
Addict: $3719.99


----------



## martins (Feb 6, 2007)

The Addict frame is approx $1000 dollars more in the UK, £500 the shop pushed me in the direction of the CR1 2007, Which I purchased, they said for a race machine fine, but the geometry of the head would be too harsh for the normal real world 63 mile runs that I do,


----------



## sevencycle (Apr 23, 2006)

Coppi51 said:


> It is more...but not quite double
> 
> msrp's from ScottUSA website:
> CR1: $3019.99
> Addict: $3719.99


Dollar per Performance ratio. Best would be to buy CR1 and take the extra money and replace parts to improve performance in other areas.Depending on your own riding specifics.Money aside buy Addict and trick it out!!!


----------

