2022 Scott Spark

I think you’re just cynical :man_shrugging:. Don’t get me wrong, some cynicism is healthy, it helps to take emotion out of decisions if you want to analyse things more critically, it feels like you are determined to hate this bike regardless though almost because it’s different?

Is it heavier relative other 120mm travel bikes? Genuine question, I recall seeing it compared to the weights of some other 100mm rigs.

As far as your other concerns, we don’t know, we are assured that they have designed it to be easily maintained and in theory require less work. The few reviews we’ve seen suggest that it’s maintained the Scott Spark design in terms of suspension activeness. There’s no way of knowing for certain if that agrees with your riding style without riding it. It looks pretty promising though.

They actually did achieve something with regards the second bottle cage mount also (I’m not as enthused about that as others, but it’s still a plus for many). Plus, if the aesthetics appeal to an individual, then they’ve made a better looking bike.

The extra bottle mount is definitely a good thing in my book. But nothing else you’ve described has indicated that it’s a game changer. It’s just another fs xc bike. Hiding the shock just changes its aesthetics not its performance.

  • Have we seen pricing on the bikes yet, to know one way or the other if the design impacts actual customer $?
  • Likely true.
  • Not sure I see anything more proprietary here compared to any other single-pivot faux-bar suspension. It’s not like you can pull random links and rear ends off the shelf for an Epic, Blur, etc. The Scott seems to use a regular length shock with cable control like other remote lockouts.
  • Like above, how is this any worse than something like the Epic, Blur, etc.?
  • Fine to wonder, but seemingly reviewed and a non-issue according to Scott (per their MKT material) and the fact that Bold has been selling bikes like this for years without apparent rashes of issues, even with bikes having more travel and likely harder use (Trail/Enduro-ish models).
  • Not sure how much it all matters, but the concept of lower center of mass is legitimate for bike dynamics compared to others with higher shocks (all else being equal).
  • I’m not into the hype, and just waiting to see a range of reviews before taking much more than superficial ideas from it all.

I do like it. It looks nice and the Spark has always been right amongst the top performing bikes.
It’s purely the statements I keep seeing that the new Spark ‘completely redefines the xc bike’ that confuses me. Why?

It’s the first of the full race XC bikes to go with 120mm front and rear. That’s not a game changer from 110/100 etc, but is a new benchmark.

Aesthetics matter to some, if the way a bike looks makes someone happy, or ride more, or feel fast, then that’s awesome. I wouldn’t buy a bike purely for aesthetics, I think the new Spark looks pretty slick (except the headset / headtube area) but I’m quite aware some people won’t dig it. That’s cool too.

Because it’s marketing… no one would be excited about or rush out to buy something that’s touted as “it’s pretty good but basically the same as everything else”

Why is going 120mm both ends such a groundbreaking thing? If so why was the Topfuel so lauded when it replaced the Fuel EX? Less travel - more racey - better.*
That was the message in 2016. Have courses really changed that much? Or have we all been drip fed the longer, lower, slacker, your 4 year old bike is now obsolete message from the industry and followed along obediently.
Forgive me, I do like to play devil’s advocate, but I also question everything.

*In fact with the Supercalibre, Trek are saying; even less travel - even more racey - better again.


When hurtling round an xc race, I always think; 100mm fs, feels effing bang on! Quells any desire I have for a change when I’m actually racing that bike.

1 Like

It’s precisely what I was looking for when purchasing my new race bike. I wanted 120mm travel front and rear so that I can race XC, climb the hills, and if I choose to I can point it down some much chunkier stuff than I was capable of previously.

The Top Fuel is the closest thing to the new Spark really, it’ll be interesting to see what they do with the next model. I don’t know, but I assume it’s heavier? I was choosing between the Top Fuel and Spark.

I’m not trying to argue that the new Spark is the greatest invention since sliced bread, but to claim they’ve only changed the bike for aesthetics is in my opinion not accurate. We’ll know more if they’ve executed well once we see more people on it.
I’m confident it’ll be a great bike for a lot of people as it’s basically the exact same as mine. Some of the changes of getting the RC would be fantastic, some would be nice to try, some I could take or leave but can’t complain that Scott had a go at trying to move forward with things.

1 Like

Agree, we need more unbiased reviews before we can distinct hype from reality. For now, I’m sticking with the hype though :sweat_smile:

As far as weight goes, it seems the HMX-SL and HMX have increased in frame weight (from 1779 / 1885 grams to 1870 / 1990 grams respectively) whilst the more affordable HMF has actually decreased in weight from 2200 ro 2150 grams. The RC Team Issue AXS version with HMF frame has increased in weight from 11.2 to 11.55kg, of which a large part is probably due to the wider rim/tyre combo.

Pricing seems to be a bit weird in Euro compared to the Dollar. For example, the RC Team Issue AXS is 5.499 Dollars, which turns to 4.999 Euro. That’s a considerable amount less than the previous version which came in at 5.499 Euro. However, the one spec higher RC Pro comes in at 6.499 Dollar and 6.799 Euro. That conversion makes little sense to me. This huge price difference makes the RC Pro less interesting in Europe and makes the RC Team Issue AXS great value for money imo. I can’t think of any other 120mm XC bike with similar spec for the price.


Yes… But not a fair comparison if you only look at 120mm xc… all other 120mm bikes are not pure XC bikes, but marketed as DC

Fair point. Which DC bike would you consider of similar spec for price?

Maybe the spur?

I considered the Spur, but it’s a bit too much bike for what I ride. That 66 degree hta is more downhill focussed. It’s also a bit more expensive compared to the spark where I live and harder to get. Definately a great bike though!

1 Like

Same for me (fellow dutch), the spur is too much for our flat pancake country :smiley:

the spur is a beautiful bike, but I want something that’s really fast on the local trails (a supercaliber would probably the fastest, but I want to ride it on Ardennen marathons too)


Agree, 60mm rear and the light weight would probably be fastest.
Our local trails (Rheden / Zeddam) have gotten a fair bit more technical over the last few years and I like to do bigger >100km rides. So I figure the 120mm xc tuned suspension might be the sweetspot for my intended use. Have never ridden in the Ardennes before, but it is on my to-do list for sure.


Does anyone have any news of availability in the US? The silence from Scott is deafening…

Local shop told me maybe August but could be as late as October. Not sure if they were just repeating press release info or if they had some real info. 64 customers already in line when bikes show up. Also, prices just jumped by as much as a grand. The 8k world cup model is now 9k on Scott’s website.

I was told about a week ago from my LBS July 28th-ish. May want to check in with your shop around then.