Field Test: Scott Ransom
PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
SCOTT RANSOM 900 TUNED
The bike’s 64.5° head angle means that it’s a comfortable descender. When you consider the long wheelbase too, it’s clear what sort of riding this bike is aimed at.
Words by Paul Aston, photography by Trevor Lyden
SCOTT RANSOM 900 TUNED
The bike’s 64.5° head angle means that it’s a comfortable descender. When you consider the long wheelbase too, it’s clear what sort of riding this bike is aimed at.
Words by Paul Aston, photography by Trevor Lyden
2019 marks the return of the Ransom. It used to be Scott’s do-it-all bike back in 2009 before enduro became its own discipline. It rocked 160mm of travel, tipped the scales at around 30lbs and had a funky looking pull shock system dubbed the “Equalizer”.
With the Genius happily taking its place as the trail bike in Scott's range, this leaves the Ransom to fill the gap between that and the Gambler downhill bike. With 170mm of travel front and rear and 29" (or 27.5+ wheels), the new Ransom blurs the boundaries between enduro, freeride and downhill but climbing still receives a nod with the TwinLoc system.
With the Genius happily taking its place as the trail bike in Scott's range, this leaves the Ransom to fill the gap between that and the Gambler downhill bike. With 170mm of travel front and rear and 29" (or 27.5+ wheels), the new Ransom blurs the boundaries between enduro, freeride and downhill but climbing still receives a nod with the TwinLoc system.
Ransom 900 Tuned Details
Travel: 170mm front and rear
Wheel size: 29" or 27.5" (700 Tuned)
Frame construction: carbon
Head angle: 64.5º
Chainstay length: 438mm
Sizes: S, M, L, XL
Weight: 29.10 lb / 13.20 kg (size L)
Price: $7,500 USD
More info: www.scott-sports.com
Travel: 170mm front and rear
Wheel size: 29" or 27.5" (700 Tuned)
Frame construction: carbon
Head angle: 64.5º
Chainstay length: 438mm
Sizes: S, M, L, XL
Weight: 29.10 lb / 13.20 kg (size L)
Price: $7,500 USD
More info: www.scott-sports.com
The geometry is modern but arguably still slightly conservative, considering its intentions (and the similar numbers found on its trail brother, the Genius), with a 64.5° head angle, 467mm reach on our size large, 438mm chainstays and a 75° seat angle.
This 900 Tuned model features a Fox 36 FIT4 fork, SRAM X01 Eagle 12-speed drivetrain, Code RSC brakes, and wheels and finishing kit from Syncros to arrive at the $7500 USD price.
Climbing
As a 170mm travel enduro race bike, the Ransom has well thought out geometry for climbing and Scott’s own TwinLoc system makes the suspension sit up in its travel in climb mode.
That said, it still climbed better after I had adjusted the seat so that it was as forward as possible and angled the nose down to help get my weight further forward on the uphills, which suggests that the seat angle could be steeper. Unfortunately, the TwinLoc system still keeps the fork high in its travel. It does tilt the bike forwards slightly but would climb even better if the rear end rode higher and the fork sagged more.
I found the bike’s rear suspension supportive in open mode, which is surprising considering Scott’s choice to spec all of their bikes with the TwinLoc system. There's a bit of shock movement if you're standing up and cranking with the shock in the fully open mode, but nothing too crazy, and it was more than acceptable on all but the smoothest of climbs I took the bike on. Plus, the additional levels of traction really helped when things were exceptionally steep or rough.
Descending
The bike’s 64.5° head angle means that it’s a comfortable descender. When you add the long wheelbase to the mix, it’s clear to see what sort of riding this bike is aimed at. I do feel that the ride would have been enhanced with even more aggressive geometry and it would have been nice to see a slacker head angle, which would increase the bike’s stability even further. Yes, considering their Genius trail bike, that has 150mm travel and a 65º head angle, is not an enduro bike it would have been nice to see another degree knocked off the head angle to get it into real downhill bike territory.
Although there are plenty of arguments either way for fork offset, I found that the lower 44mm offset number really helped with the bike’s steering stability in high-speed situations, particularly when there were lots of uneven smaller bumps, such as natural roots and rocks that fed back their input into the bike’s bars. Equally, the bike didn’t feel especially twitchy, and I liked the feeling of needing to make positive inputs to change the bike’s direction.
Pros
+ Good looking, well-specced bike
+ Fantastic on big hits
+ Light weight
Cons
- TwinLoc system compromises suspension
- Geometry could be more extreme given its intended purpose
- EXO casing tires on an enduro race bike
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
"it would have been nice to see another degree knocked off the head angle to get it into real downhill bike territory."
This isn't a downhill bike; yes it's main purpose is to rip descents but it still needs to climb to the top, so Scott engineered it to do both.
I don't think anyone looks at the specs on this bike and thinks Scott only intended for it to be good for the down only
@tom666 TwinLoc would be great if it dropped the fork instead of holding it at full extension, and if it was bolted to the standard X2 shock that the bike deserves. The shock specced is impressive even without a piggyback, but at this level we'd rather see the non-proprietary damper.
It's not an enduro racebike - probably a litle behind that Ransom in climbing, but for sure it is equal in descending... with a price tag way under 50% of it.
And i can choose my spec!
My Machine pedals amazing, granted I am no tech climber, but hey - get's me up the hill without feeling gassed with all the DH like excitement.
The way i see this - 2 extreme ends
XC bike climb = 100%, descent = 10%
DH bike descent = 100%, climb = 10%
these new 29 Long travels can be very close both extremes - Climb = 85% Descent = 90% (eg. Pole Machine/Stamina) just that they don't because something is always missing - not enough travel, not slack enough or seat angle not steep enough. Which is why I want to see how machine stacks up to these big companies
My bike has a 62.5º HA with a 76.2º ST 520mm of reach and 460cm CS and it is by far the best climbing bike I have ever had!
Since the only inline shock that Fox sells is the DPS, which overheats on long descents, is this shock completely custom made and if so, why doesn't Fox sell this not-overheating inline shock sperately? A lot of people with frames that don't accommodate piggyback shocks with waterbottles would be stoked.
Also the fit4 is unproven? I'm riding it on my bike...seems to work fine.
Also any telescoping fork binds under huck to flats or really any off angle impact, it just matters if the other forces over ride it, its just the nature of the design. You can pick up one of those TRUST forks and avoid this
Throw in the obligatory jab at EXO casing, but forget to mention that despite it's 170 extreme super enduro nature there's no piggyback shock, zero mention either of the unique changeable progression shock, nor any comment about the use of Fit4 over Grip 2.
I'm not sure I took any useful info out of this review.
I have ridden EXO casing tires forever in the rockiest, dustiest, dryest, tire slashing conditions in SoCal. I have flatted once in 5 years and it was a huge burp. I am 215 geared and ride in the top 5% ( that's top 100 times out of about 10000 on some DH trails) on almost all DH trails in Laguna. I do understand that for racing DD is better because of the risk of flatting and ruining your race. What i don't understand is how they flat tires so much. Maybe you should try not smashing the bike through everything you ride and actually avoid the rocks that flat tires.
I really don't understand how these 150-160 lbs rider/testers destroy tires and wheels. I think maybe you should learn not to take terrible lines and then maybe you would not flat every week.
I do understand that accidents happen and things break but at the frequency you are breaking and flatting maybe its your riding and not the product????
I generally run 23F - 25-27R
I am actually jelly of what you get to ride, but most of us in the southwest watch these videos and laugh when you guys are complaining about dry conditions. I grew up riding in England (similar weather to PNW and Whistler) and the dirt in that hemisphere reacts very differently to what we experience.
Recently we received a few days of rain. It just dried out a week later but the rain created rut city, loose rocks everywhere and actual trail work has to be done to rebuild the trail.
I am not discounting that you guys have some very rocky terrain, but i am commenting on the sections of trail that are being ridden in these videos.
I guess i just don't understand the logic of riding pressures so low. I am assuming we are talking about tires in the 2.3-2.5 range. If you are running 2.6+ i can understand why the lower pressures are needed.
www.pinkbike.com/news/the-interview-chris-porter-2017.html
I've also been on EXOs on Stans wheels for years consecutively with zero flats. I'm not far from there and smash similarly rocky trails regularly. I definitely want more casing for the bike park but I never felt the need for anything more on the trail bike. Sounds like some of these guys missed the memo on realistic tire pressures.
Now, the super steep STA, that causes some issues particularly on rolling terrain where you don't want your dropper down all the way (it tries to throw you a bit too forward) or flat terrain where you aren't using your hamstrings most effectively.
But otherwise, it's the best bike I've owned by a longshot.
I´m sure he would also say go longer in the CS lenght to go with it as he views geometry as a complex topic, not collection of separate numbers. CS lenght is still pretty short on Sentinel, reach and WB aren´t huge either, but it´s a bit more progressive than most mainstream manufacturers.
The SB150 is the better climber, no question; there's no need to use any levers on the rear shock, and the steeper seat angle is also beneficial.
In a head-to-head race I don't think there would be a clear winner - both bikes have plenty of podium potential.
Nope! Just an observation based on how I've interpreted the field test reviews.
I always get the feeling that nobody takes Scott up on the potential of TwinLoc. At Galbraith, everyone just climbs the fire road with their suspension "on".
I've seen reviews that complain about the twinloc under the bars when the dropper lever should be the priority.. Scott give you that option and supply a second lever allowing a regular 1x style lever to be used.
Every time I read a review by Paul, it seems like he’s comparing every bike to the GeoMetron, which he clearly loves. Comments always seem to center around “SA could be steeper, or HA could be slacker”. He’s clearly a very good rider, but also clearly has pretty extreme preferences, which always seem to come through in his reviews of DH bikes and bigger enduro bikes. Having ridden a GeoMetron around briefly, I can say that they’re beautiful, weird ass bikes - good weird for some, bad weird for others (me).
Question to PB: are these reviews in the field test based on opinions of one dude (article author), or of several of the PB testers?
"That said, it still climbed better after I had adjusted the seat so that it was as forward as possible and angled the nose down to help get my weight further forward on the uphills, which suggests that the seat angle could be steeper."
All I'm going to do is think it needs a 10mm longer stem and that the chain stays are probably too short.
Stems are now 35-50mm on a lot of bikes. That's down from 60-90mm a few years back.
Reach has increased enough to compensate.
But now steep seat tubes are costing us another 25-50mm. Still waiting for that to come back...
The 2015 Giant Reign? You mean the year they didn't even import XL bikes to the US? Great argument.
What kind of seatpost angle did that come with? How far over the rear wheel do u end up while climbing? May not matter to some but at 6'3" it's important to me...
It's all about preferences. I hate super short chainstays, I wish head tubes were taller, 495mm seat tubes are nice, I really like slack head angles, I prefer a balanced feel front to back with a bit of pop and I can't stand a bike that requires a climb switch.
#2 if your tall but have short legs than it makes sense that a slack STA isn't as big a deal to you. Most tall people also have long legs which mean were sticking the seat WAY up in the air. the farther UP it goes also the farther BACK it goes due to the angle and you end up further over the rear wheel and then on steep terrain your bike sits further into the rear travel throwing your weight even further to the back. A steep STA fights against that. A steep STA and extending reach so that your cockpit length stays the same is essentially optimizing your bike for the two extremes of steep UP and steep DOWN. (which for most is where you want your bike to excel?) Fortunately if you find them too steep it's easy to use a layback post and if needed also size down to get to "old school" geo feel.
But, I kinda don't get your logic when your on a bike with a really long reach and an old school slack seat tube angle and you have to size down to a large because of it. They extended reach without steepening their seat tubes and it just makes them feel really long and stretched out, you have to be flat back like a roady for seated climbs on those things!!!
Also, your downhill bike must be a pretty decent climber? OR your Sentinel shock/set up was really clusterflucked...?
It sounds like we at least both can agree on taller head tubes?
On the climb switch thing. I have never rode a switch infinity. So maybe it is really the holy grail of plush but also a supportive climbing platform? But so far every bike I've spent time on that had some kind of mechanical system/leverage curve to create a climbing platform was never as plush. I mean it's not that it's detrimental, various DW, VPP, Maestro, etc. You get them feeling good and it seems like they are totally plush and all. But then you go back to a Horst link in Open and it just feels like it's so much smoother... It's like when you ride a new fork VS one with the seals broke in and the stiction worked out? I mean honestly I'm good with most modern suspension designs. And for sure there are tons of bikes I've never rode on, or rode enough to know. Just think that there is still merit in a climb switch. Heck, when my legs get tired it doesn't matter how good the suspension is. I'm still flipping that switch!
Anyway, Santa Claus is coming to town...
Should mention the bike has no ISO mounts as this rules it out for some.
This is the best review I've seen on it.
Also, how many of these "great climbing enduro bikes" are left out there when you add almost a pound of rotating mass?
EXO tires were spec'ed on my new bike this year and I used them for a single month. I popped them several times (3 times requiring significant repairs), ruining a lot of terrific descents that I had earned so hard. The sidewalls tore up easily and I bent a rim following one of those failures. I thought the new bike was at fault!
I switched to my old bike's exact tire setup (all-mountain, not DH) and haven't had even the slightest problem. And now that I trust my new bike, I'm been riding the same trails more aggressively than ever for months with zero flats.
I ride things that need a really good bike configuration, but I'm nothing special beyond that. In my case, there isn't a shadow of a doubt in my mind that EXO tires were exactly as bad as the jokes being made.
I know Strava is evil, but for reference I have several semi rocky, rooty runs with 400-1000ft elevation changes, often times doing those trails 2-3 times per ride. I am no rocket, but I post decent times, top 10-20% on Strava and my EXO casing DHF is 16 months old and no punctures or tears. It's also seen about 3 days of lift access including one run down a World Cup DH trail (very slowly, no doubt). Also took a trip to AZ last year and rode for 3 days on fairly rocky trails with EXO DHRII front and rear on a rental bike. Never touched these trails before and again, evil Strava showed I was moving at a decent pace. I'm no Martin Maes, but faster than most of the people out there those days. Again, tires were perfect.
I just think some perspective is needed before trashing the EXO casing. If you're the type of rider, riding terrain that's going to tear open EXO casings, you know who you are. If you don't know who you are, you are probably fine with the EXO casing.
I love my 6" bike on steep terrain that shreds EXO tires, but it's slow and boring on the tamer trails where you can get away with light tires. I have an XC/trail bike with less travel and lighter tires for those rides, and it's faster, more responsive, and fun.
We hear that for 2019/2020 a lot of brands are switching to tougher casings, so we aren't the only ones with this perspective.
It should have had the other shock.
The tires are wrong.
I've had to adjust something.
Climbs exceptionally well for what it is (what are those, not even the reviewers know: they seem to want all bikes to be DH but still climb well).
I can't believe it's better than the Yeti/SantaCruz, so it isn't.
*All the reviews.
It's like they've been told they can only change two things per new model, when there's a list of half a dozen changes that need to happen.
Point being everyone has different wants in a bike, not everything needs to be 64HA, 75SA, 470mm reach and 44mm offset to be good.
Well at least it's pretty.
Did your's come in British Racing Green like mine??
(the real reason why I bought it, geo and specs be damned - colour is where it is at in mountain biking)
www.bikemag.com/2018-bible-summer-camp-mammoth/tested-scott-ransom-900-tuned-7200
What they should do is also do a "race version" with the grip2 and X2 with normal bar stem and DH tires and let the customer order it that way if they choose.
That way you can be all enduro-bra right off the salesroom floor if that's your jam. (Or if you actually spend more time racing than trail riding, etc.)
@Paul Aston: The old Ransom doesn't use a pull shock. You could swap the Equalizer 2 with something like an rp23 IIRC. The old Genius had the pull shock Equalizer 3.
Makes sense and gives you good options when riding for on the fly, easy rear shock switching. On the fork it is not necessary and even a hindrance when climbing which is what the TwinLoc system was designed for. As stated, would be better if it pulled the fork down in its travel when activated, if not take it off the fork and leave the fork open and have reduced travel at the rear for climbing which works well on the bikes geometry.
Tire does not hold up to exposed rocky terrain like bigsky resort has.
No problems yet with DD
Why kind of terrain do your tires hold up on?
Maybe it's not the most aggressive. I've never actually pinched in there. And maybe I haven't used EXO tires at the rear much. Now that I think about it the reviewer may have a point. It's just that all the races for the national enduro cup this year would have been fine with full EXO. I have pinched Schwalbe's SG tires at previous seasons and started using a DH tire at the rear because of that, and then moved to DD when it came out, but this year there really was no need, and the lighter the bike the better. So like I said, it depends. Maybe this bike could be considered overkill for the Portuguese enduro cup as well.
www.bikemag.com/2018-bible-summer-camp-mammoth/tested-scott-ransom-900-tuned-7200
The frameset only price is more than the full build HMF front/Alloy rear 910 though.
More trail/AM bikes please?
Do people seriously still think that rider height and wheelsize are in any way related? It isn't 2007 anymore.
Maybe not as fast, but definitely more fun.
I have no problem sending crabapple on my 160/150mm bike, and love to pedal 1000m+ to the top of the local hill to bomb back down it.. all on the same bike!
For many thousands less...$4k is pretty much gna get u top of the line stuff.