Anyone tried both? Are they essentially the same bike just different frame material?
Watching with interest, as they're both on my list. What I do know about the Big Dog, after lifting one over a gate, is that it's a bit of a lump. I'm kinda hoping the Scandal will be a chunk lighter.
Slightly longer chainstays than the scandal, I presume to give similar tyre clearance without having to kink the seatube.
I like my Scandal, it's not harsh and is a chunk lighter. I rode nothing but steel bikes for quite a while and between CEN making steel bikes stiffer and aluminum bikes getting better I don't think the old labels really match them anymore.
The steel frame is 2.7 kg vs 2.0 for the aluminium.
Ah that's interesting thank you. Do they both have the same tyre clearance?
I love steel hardtails, I think they look great especially the Big Dog but Im tempted by the lighter and cheaper Scandal plus the shorter chainstays although I don't think it looks quite as good.
You can get a 2.3* on the big dog with plenty of space, but I don't think many 2.6's will fit. This and the standover height are the 2 gripes I have with it. The weight is only a problem when you have to lift it over something and it's no worse than most of the other 'hardcore' hardtails.
Not sure about the Scandal.
*edit. And website says 2.35 max, although that may be a little conservative.
What's wrong with the stand over height?
It could be lower. I have relatively short legs, so it is probably not an issue for most folk.
Thanks everyone.
This is a hard decision.
It could be lower. I have relatively short legs, so it is probably not an issue for most folk.
Standover on a Scandal is low. Just looking at a picture of mine (large) and the standover is about the same height as the rear wheel - I've a 200 dropper in too, so loads of usable seat tube.
Not sure what the max on the Scandal is but it's masses arround the 29x2.4 Goma it came with. I know someone was running one with B+ wheels and there's still room to get your fingers between the tyres and stays with 2.8's.
I wouldn't want to go bigger than that really as I don't think any bike benefits from having the BB raised so the B+ mullet probably makes more sense if 2.8-3.0 tyres were a preference.
I’ve been running 2.6 x 29 mezcals on my big dog. On the weight, it feels heavy to lift but rides quite light.
I have a 2.6 x 29 Bontrager XR4 on my Scandal which seems fine.
I've had a LOT of water in the bottom bracket. Enough that it runs out when I remove the cups. This has cost me 2 sets of bearings in 800km. I'm wondering if it's due to the internally routed cables; the big dog appears to be externally routed.
I'm running 2.6 Nobby Nics on my Big Dog. Clearance is fine.
Have a picture...
I have both.The Scandel is a lighter frame with shorter chainstays and reach. On really steep grass banks the front end wants to lift a touch. I have a short torso and long legs and the seat angle at my elevation is slacker. I just have to get on the saddle nose a bit. I have a 40mm stem on the Scandel and a 35mm on the Dog. They ride in a remarkably similar way though the Scandel is stiffer laterally at the headtube. It's possible to get the Dog headshaking flat out out of the saddle pedalling downhill. I couldn't get the Scandel to do that. The Scandel doesn't have rack mounts. I actually prefer the Dog as a tourer. I like the position better, but if I had to choose it would be the Scandel. Though the Dog is not in anyway draggy [Gomas], the Scandel is a touch sharper.
I keep the Scandel for dry weather, for an ally frame it's vertically very compliant, not at all harsh. I was very surprised at that, which took away my reason for initially choosing steel.
Thank you eve and thank you Cloggy, great to hear from someone who has both.
How do you find the weight difference, is the Big Dog much heavier?
Is the rear tyre clearance about the same, could you run a 2.6 on the Big Dog?
The Gomas come out at 2.48 and there's about 4mm clearance on the non drive side chainstay. They've never rubbed. Acres of room elsewhere, so yes.
The spec isn't the same as I built an ebay Scandel frame up in the mistaken belief I could do it cheaper.... I have slightly lighter wheels fork tyres and no dropper on that. The Dog has a Brooks sprung saddle which is very heavy + mudguards.
If I get off one onto the other I notice it but really only when climbing.
Put it this way: with hindsight whichever one I originally chose there was little point getting the other.....
One further thought. Although the Scandal reach is 9mm shorter, the handlebars are way further away. I have the saddle on the Dog as far back as I can [otherwise it hits my backside out of the saddle], and as far forward as I can on the Scandal. Despite this the saddle to steerer stem distance is 2cm more on the Scandal. I have very long legs apparently, so that makes the effective seat angle even slacker, given that the Scandal has a bent seat tube. I've belatedly sourced a Fizak Thar saddle to try and close the distance, as the Dog fit is really good.
I did have a Big Dog, but managed to bend the frame piling headlong into a tree. I did like how it rode though. All the bits off it are now on a Nukeproof Scout 290 frame, which I prefer.
Fizak Thar saddle sorted it, but really the seat angle is a bit slack as it comes.
Isn't it now No. 10 Big Dog Scandal?
