Scott Speedster S60 VS. Giant ORC 3

[dizzydy]

Hello all, I am a newbie that needs your opinions to help me decide what bike to get. After some searching around I have found two bikes that look like they fit my needs and my budget.

I will be using the bicycle to join some of the lbs rides and some charity rides. I don't see competition in the very near future. I am male, 5'6 and 120lbs, and there are considerable hills around my area.

The LBS that carries the Scott is offering free maintainance for life (I'm guessing minor stuff like brake/gear adjustments and such) and the other one carrying the Giant has the same offer for just the first year. Both of the bikes feel good when I am on them but the Scott looks a little more wicked If it has anything to do with it.

Sott Speedster S60 - $620 USD
Giant OCR 3 - $650 USD

So here are the Specs and where I need your experienced comments because most of this is pigeon talk to me.
GIANT OCR 3
frame ALUXX butted aluminum, Compact Road Design
fork formulaOne Composite w/aluminum steerer
handlebar 6061 Alloy W:short reach / shallow drop
stem 6061 alloy Adjustable
seatpost Alloy 27.2x350mm
saddle M: Selle Royal Viper W: Sell Royal Viper for Women
pedals Caged w/ Clips
shifters Shimano Sora
front derailleur Shimano Sora
rear derailleur Shimano Sora
brakes TK521AG long reach
brake levers Shimano Sora
cassette SRAM PG850 M: 12-26 8-speed W: 12-27 8-speed
chain KMC Z72
cranks FSACK400SST
bb BB7420
rims DA22
hubs Alloy Sealed Bearing
spokes Stainless Steel
tires Kenda Kontender 700x25



SCOTT SPEEDSTER S60

22 lbs

Frame
Alloy tubing 7005 P.G.
Road geometry
Integrated headtube
Fork Alloy / 1 1/8" / steel steerer
Headset Integrated steel cup
Derailleur (Rear) Shimano RD 2200 / 24 speed
Derailleur (Front) Shimano FD 2203 - F
Shifters Shimano Sora ST-2200
Dual Control
Brake Levers Integrated
Brakes Scott Comp SCBR-350
Crankset Truvativ ISOFLOW 30x42x52T
BB-Set Truvativ 07BB 68mm shell / 113mm spindle
Handlebar Scott Road Drop OS / anatomic / 31.8mm
H'stem Scott Road Team OS
1-1/8" / four bolt / 31.8mm
Seatpost Scott Alloy 31.6mm
Seat Scott Road
Hub (Front) Scott Comp
Hub (Rear) Scott Comp
Chain KMC IG 51
Cassette
Shimano CN-HG50-8
12-25T
Spokes 14 G stainless silver 2mm
Rims
Alex R 500 black
32H F. & R.
Tires Conti Ultra Sport / 700x23C

I am also looking at a 2005 TREK 1000c from a private seller who claims it has never been ridden for $450.

Thank you in advance for the advice.

 

[senator52]

The predominantly Sora groupset on the OCR3 is a level above the 2200 on the S60. Components wise i would take the Giant. However a large part of cycling is the fit of the bikes, ultimately you will have to test ride both and see which you feel more comfortable on. Both bikes should distinguish themselves from the other by their geometry. The OCR has 'compact' geometry whilst the S60 has more 'traditional' geometry. Both bikes are solid entry level rides, but you will find it hard to go past an OCR in terms of entry level value. The Trek 1000 is also a great entry level ride, also having 'traditional' geometry. Good luck with your purchase, hopefully you will have pictures soon!

 

[dizzydy]

Thank you Senator!

I am leaning towards the OCR now because of the better components (even though the S60 has a better paint scheme, we won't make the decision based on that now will we?)

The problem is the two LBS I am looking at do not carry both bikes. Maybe I'll go to the shops this weekend back to back and get on the bikes again.

What are the highlights of a 'traditional' frame vs. a 'compact' frame??

 

[KellyT]

The Trek 1000 is also a great entry level ride, also having 'traditional' geometry.D

That has my vote as well. Excellent budget bike, without a fault that I can readily think of.

 

[dizzydy]

What is holding me back from the Trek 1000c is that, even though the seller claims it has less than 1 mile on it and it is cheaper, it comes without a warranty and the money I would save would quickly be eaten up by maintainance costs (the Bike shops are offering free lifetime/1 year maintainance).

Is the relationship and warranty you get from LBS enough to justify purchasing from them as opposed to a private seller?

Can anyone shed more light on 'traditional' vs. 'compact' frames?

Thanks

 

[KellyT]

What is holding me back from the Trek 1000c is that, even though the seller claims it has less than 1 mile on it and it is cheaper, it comes without a warranty and the money I would save would quickly be eaten up by maintainance costs (the Bike shops are offering free lifetime/1 year maintainance).

Is the relationship and warranty you get from LBS enough to justify purchasing from them as opposed to a private seller?

Can anyone shed more light on 'traditional' vs. 'compact' frames?

Thanks

I suppose the warranty might be enough to swing it. I haven't made use of warranties myself. I bought my Trek 1000 from a shop that I discovered couldn't set up derailleurs to save their life. So a warranty through them, isn't worth much to me.

Traditional geometry has a horizontal top tube and less 'stand over' clearance - like the Trek. Compact geometry has a sloping top tube and much more 'stand over' clearance - like the Giant. The Scott is slightly compact, and falls between the two.

Geometry is to an extent a personal thing. I only seem to cycle well on traditional geometry and I struggle horribly on a compact. I hate them. But I suppose some people have found the exact opposite. You need to ride each (and ideally for quite a distance) to know if you will have a preference for one or the other, or better still, if you can't really notice any difference.

 

[Unbelievably]

... but the Scott looks a little more wicked If it has anything to do with it.

Styling has alot to do with it.
Don't be diluted by which has better componentry...
Either one has VERY entry level stuff leaving the Scott as my choice between the two.