They were both known as good hardtails. There was great competition between them, the Zaskar in the 90s, the Stumpjumper M4 in the early 2000's. I own a 96 GT Zaskar and have ridden briefly on a Stumpjumper M4. This was years ago and don't really remember the ride of it. From my hazy recollection:
Stumpjumper: Shorter wheelbase than the Zaskar, more 'nimble', more flickable. Excellent Climber. Not as front-focused as the Zaskar, the rider is put a little more in the center of the bike. Well-balanced. A little more upright. More comfortable. Easier to do tricks: bunnyhops, wheelies, the rider is able to 'go crazy' on it easier. Cat-like. A little twitchy in long, steep descents? Stiff, but not as stiff as the Zaskar. Very good acceleration.
Zaskar: Much more experience with this frame hence more detail. Longer wheelbase, more stable. Handling is "point and shoot". The rider is like a shooter who picks a line/target in a turn and the bike flies into it accurately. Sharp, decisive handling. 100mm+ stems or the steering feels too fast and twitchy. Because of the longer wheelbase the rider is more planted on the bike, it is more difficult to flick around. More linear, like a Wolf running in the woods, very fast and prefers long lines but still agile when necessary. Rider is put in a more front-based position. On long, fast descents it feels more stable. Excellent Climber. Stiffer than the Stumpjumper, but not overly so. Strong. Frame feels alive acceleration is the best I have seen, loves to be pedaled with power.
If anyone has some experience with the two bikes in question please feel free to share your thoughts. Considering an addition to the stable of a Stumpjumper M4 or M5.
Stumpjumper: Shorter wheelbase than the Zaskar, more 'nimble', more flickable. Excellent Climber. Not as front-focused as the Zaskar, the rider is put a little more in the center of the bike. Well-balanced. A little more upright. More comfortable. Easier to do tricks: bunnyhops, wheelies, the rider is able to 'go crazy' on it easier. Cat-like. A little twitchy in long, steep descents? Stiff, but not as stiff as the Zaskar. Very good acceleration.
Zaskar: Much more experience with this frame hence more detail. Longer wheelbase, more stable. Handling is "point and shoot". The rider is like a shooter who picks a line/target in a turn and the bike flies into it accurately. Sharp, decisive handling. 100mm+ stems or the steering feels too fast and twitchy. Because of the longer wheelbase the rider is more planted on the bike, it is more difficult to flick around. More linear, like a Wolf running in the woods, very fast and prefers long lines but still agile when necessary. Rider is put in a more front-based position. On long, fast descents it feels more stable. Excellent Climber. Stiffer than the Stumpjumper, but not overly so. Strong. Frame feels alive acceleration is the best I have seen, loves to be pedaled with power.
If anyone has some experience with the two bikes in question please feel free to share your thoughts. Considering an addition to the stable of a Stumpjumper M4 or M5.
