# SCOTT CR1 Frame.



## dgrizzly

In response to another post, I'm still curious if there is a reall difference between the SL, PRO, and Team frameset. Someone posted a link to scotts website, however it doesn't specify if there is any real difference besides the SL containing HM Carbon fiber. Any ideas??


----------



## markaz

*Sl< Pro< Team*

I belive be sides the group and wheels thw SL and the Team (frame and fork)are 100 grams lighter than the Pro...I just bought a Pro and it is a great bike. I don't race and I am 230lbs so I don't think I even notice the 100 grams. Hope that help a little


----------



## goose127

*Scott Pro vs SL*

I have a Scott Pro, just picked it up a couple of weeks ago. Great ride. The SL frame is about 100 grams lighter due to more expensive carbon. I think the other difference is the fork. The Pro fork is not light, and in reality the SL is not overly light either. Check out weigh weenies and you can see the comparisons. Othewise the geometry is the same. The Pro and the Team have the exact same frame and fork. I also have a Giant TCR from 2003, full carbon. The Scott Pro is much stiffer, suprsingly so. and rides smoother and more muted than the Giant. So far so good for me. I debated about getting the SL, but I was able to get a very good price on the Pro and swapped out some parts on my old ride. 

Don't believe the weights that Scott has on thier web site. It claims that the bike would weigh 16.4 pounds, my size 56CM weighed 17.1 without pedals. I am sure the smallest size would be less weight, but I wonder how it could make up that kind of a difference. using my own wheels, zero gravity stainless steel brakes, a dura ace crank and derailuer my bike weighs 16.5 pounds with pedals, botle cages, and Polar computer and sensors. a real world weight. It will be lighter with race wheels. Even if you had the bike stock and added pedals etc, you would be well under 18 pounds, which is still a light raceable bike.


----------



## asawlrider123456789

they are both beasts.


----------



## dgrizzly

*Cr1 Sl*

Thanks for the replies. I went ahead and ordered a Cr1 SL. I guess thats the one with the high modulus carbon. I will post pics once a build it.


----------



## TI_roadracer

goose127 said:


> I have a Scott Pro, just picked it up a couple of weeks ago. Great ride. The SL frame is about 100 grams lighter due to more expensive carbon. I think the other difference is the fork. The Pro fork is not light, and in reality the SL is not overly light either. Check out weigh weenies and you can see the comparisons. Othewise the geometry is the same. The Pro and the Team have the exact same frame and fork. I also have a Giant TCR from 2003, full carbon. The Scott Pro is much stiffer, suprsingly so. and rides smoother and more muted than the Giant. So far so good for me. I debated about getting the SL, but I was able to get a very good price on the Pro and swapped out some parts on my old ride.
> 
> Don't believe the weights that Scott has on thier web site. It claims that the bike would weigh 16.4 pounds, my size 56CM weighed 17.1 without pedals. I am sure the smallest size would be less weight, but I wonder how it could make up that kind of a difference. using my own wheels, zero gravity stainless steel brakes, a dura ace crank and derailuer my bike weighs 16.5 pounds with pedals, botle cages, and Polar computer and sensors. a real world weight. It will be lighter with race wheels. Even if you had the bike stock and added pedals etc, you would be well under 18 pounds, which is still a light raceable bike.


How tall are you?

What is your inseam?

Do you find the frame fits well?


----------



## ncfitton

goose127 said:


> Don't believe the weights that Scott has on thier web site. It claims that the bike would weigh 16.4 pounds, my size 56CM weighed 17.1 without pedals. I am sure the smallest size would be less weight, but I wonder how it could make up that kind of a difference. using my own wheels, zero gravity stainless steel brakes, a dura ace crank and derailuer my bike weighs 16.5 pounds with pedals, botle cages, and Polar computer and sensors. a real world weight. It will be lighter with race wheels. Even if you had the bike stock and added pedals etc, you would be well under 18 pounds, which is still a light raceable bike.


My 58cm Team Issue was 16 lbs with full Record groupset, Ksyrium SSL's, no pedals and crazy saddle and bars. With my favourite saddle and anatomical carbon bars and Look keo's, it is 16.5 lbs. As measured on my digital bathroom scales with me holding it.


----------



## jnrpsycho

Does the CR1 Pro use high modulus CF like the SL, or is it a budget quality carbon fibre? Also does anyone know if the 2007 CR1 pro frames have changed and whether they have replaceable derailleur hangers?


----------



## snowkarver

jnrpsycho said:


> Does the CR1 Pro use high modulus CF like the SL, or is it a budget quality carbon fibre? Also does anyone know if the 2007 CR1 pro frames have changed and whether they have replaceable derailleur hangers?


All CR1 models from the last couple of years used some form of HM carbon fiber - the 100 gram difference between the SL/Team Issue and Pro/Team frames comes from a slightly different, slightly less expensive blend of fiber. I wouldn't call it a "budget quality" CF, as it is still a high modulus product equal to the top-end materials used by other manufacturers.

From a technical report on the 2005 CR1 models (I don't believe this changed in 2006, nor will it change for 2007):

"The CR1 Pro frame is the same design and build process of the CR1 Team, but actually weighs a whole 100 grams more! It’s still made with their own high modulus carbon fiber, built from tubes made in house to their own specs, but with a slightly different carbon blend that is less costly to produce and weighs the tiny bit more."


----------

