Riding I started with the Gambler in the low / progressive setting, which delivers the most amount of beginning stroke suppleness in order to maximize traction in steeper, loose terrain. That setting worked as advertised, and on more natural tracks the fact that it took barely any effort to initiate the rear travel helped keep the back end stuck to the ground. Add in the tenacious grip of the Maxxis Assegai tires and you've got traction for days.
The downside to all the suppleness became apparent when I headed to the Whistler Bike Park. In that setting, where the speeds were higher and the trails weren't quite as steep or rugged as the natural tracks I'd been on previously, I found myself sitting a little deeper in the travel than I wanted, and there wasn't quite the level of support I was looking for on jump- and berm-filled trails. Out came the wrench, and within a few minutes I'd swapped the shock to the linear / low position. That setting created a more supportive beginning and mid-stroke, and felt much more appropriate for the bike park, while still retaining enough ramp-up to avoid any harsh bottom outs.
The Gambler is an incredibly neutral feeling bike – it's free of any unwanted surprises, and no matter the terrain, whether it was extra-chunky and blown out, or fast and smooth, the handling remained consistent. Grab a handful of brake in the steeps and the rear end will still keep sucking up those bumps; compared to the Kona Operator I'd been on previously it was a bit surprising how unaffected the rear suspension was. I personally prefer a little more anti-rise than what the Gambler delivers; I'm willing to trade some plushness for geometry preservation, but it didn't take long to adapt to the Gambler's handling. The 450mm chainstay length felt well-matched to the 460mm reach number, which meant that I never switched to the shorter setting, but the option is there for riders who want to experiment a little.
The Gambler never felt delicate or too floaty for me despite its impressively light 34.5-pound weight. It has the solidity you'd expect from a DH bike, without a hint of sluggishness when it comes time to get airborne or lift up and over a section of chunky trail. The “weight doesn't matter” motto gets tossed around all the time, but there's something to be said about starting with a lighter chassis rather than spending time and money further down the road trying to knock off a few grams. That lighter weight also means it's easier to add things like tire inserts or aluminum parts without worrying about the number on the scale climbing too high.
Then we'll send you a Session.
cutt.ly/ue5l0CS
"Looks like a Session,"
Send me the Gambler instead. It will cost you less!
(prefer the Gambler tho)
Good work though, bike looks awesome
Thanks @SCOTT-Sports it’s good to see not everyone takes life too seriously.
Well played.
*dreams of owning a Scott Gambler*
Is the paint colour a tribute to the US President "The Mandarin Candidate"??
BTW, how does it pedal??
Your mom ‘likes’ a session
Why don’t you get together with @DVOSuspension and make a new metric wheelsize 650mm? A bit like 30”. The whole super long and slack histeria is driven by long people. Give them what they need.
WHERE ARE THE BIG BIKES?
Jeebus dude.
That was effin horrible.
Never change..
Kamelåså
Where most other bikes have a front triangle, V10s have a weird squished trapezoid with a seat tube sticking to the side... ;D
But too bad though that Scott’s warranty on downhill bikes is 2 years only. Light DH bikes with stingy warranty is certainly cause for reflection … I have heard a few horror stories on dealing with their customer service so it's really my only hesitation on pulling the trigger on this beauty.
What a bike !
Go chat with your LBS so they can help you out when you send it too hard.
They have taken care of me to the point where I will keep them on the list of next bike to look for. Aside from the soft paint, the Ransom has been the best bike I have owned. I would suspect this DH bike would make anyone happy for years.
There’s either a small amount of companies who really know what they’re doing and everyone else is overbuilding and pissing in the wind or these things break all the time?
Your move Pinkbike.
Haha.
Haven't even considered weighing mine. Probably even worse considering my studded tires and brooks saddle.
I love my enduro bike. But I'd love it even more if it weighed 28 pounds and could still be rock solid for 99.8% of the riders out there. And yes, I do feel a difference when the water bottle is full or empty, and the difference between a 900 gram tire and a 1100 gram tire is really really noticeable.
Here we have a DH bike built for giant hucks all day that weighs 34.5 pounds with DH casing Assegai tires. That is freakin sweet.
Part of it might also be different target demographics. Some companies build bikes for the 130kg bikepark rider, others aim for the 70kg racer.
Coincidentally those two companies are also very experienced in carbon and at least giant is running their own factories.
Sick bike though, insanely light for an off-the-shelf DH rig! And it's beautiful.
Also, it looks like a Session.
So yeah Id say Brendog may actually be someone you could trust when he has an opinion about the bikes he rides.
Please send me the 910 level, @Scottsports for Moab DH testing.
Friday afternoon in design department.
Shall we go to the pub. Yea that will do. Let’s go.
Scott, what carbon magic are you doing? Quite an impressive weight.
What if I have a need for speed wheelies?
My Medium Trek Session 9.9 full carbon with 27.5" wheels weighs 13.6kg with full dh set up and pedals. This is light enough?
Nice one @SCOTT-Sports
I think the context of that weight needs to be considered.
If you're talking bike to rider weight in regards to maneuverability, then yes, weight is quite important. Removing 2 pounds of bike weight, for example, for a 160 lbs rider trying to pick out the perfect line has some significance, and double if it's removed from the rims and/or tires. Taking 1 pound off the frame for for a 120 lb rider is much more significant than for a 210 lbs rider Especially if losing that 1 pound of bike means I'm going to break it just that much faster/easier (and double if saving that 1 pound from the wheels means I get more flats and destroy more tires and/or rims.
But taking 2 pounds off a bike _just_ to save a second or two off cranking up a half mile long fire road, that's what "doesn't matter" for 99% of riders (can be argued it will help a professional racer who needs results to earn a living, but that's not most people). Especially if losing that weight means you can't go back down as fast or confidently.
www.pinkbike.com/photo/17905454
you can see "dh casing" at the end identical to
ep1.pinkbike.org/p4pb14482793/p4pb14482793.jpg
Maxxis Assegai 29x2.5" | 2x60TPI Kevlar Bead | DH | TR | 3C Maxx Grip
So two layers of 60tpi.
Otherwise you'd lose the "bike-parky, freeridy" behaviour that the previous Gambler had (and was liked for).
@SCOTT-Sports can we get some clarification?
Well, that's hard to believe since one of the hardest things about suspension tuning is getting the perfect compromise between those two extremes. Also, in the previous paragraph you said that the suspension settings that felt good on the steep and rugged natural trails (so chunky and blown-out) then didn't feel good in the park "where the speeds were higher and the trails weren't quite as steep or rugged" (so, fast and smooth).
Which is it?