The oracle suggests Swiss.
Might be a job for Phil Wood.
what cranks, you need to know spindle length and axle type (JIS/ISO)
unless its external

swiss is a bit unexpected, apparently the old owner said it was "italian with english thread" which makes little to no sense. 
old owner said it was "italian with english thread" which makes little to no sense.![]()
Did you get that scott frame from westbrook inQ?

Well via a work colleague who bought it, built it and used it for a few weeks but found it was a bit big for him (he is 5ft 5in, i am 5ft 8in, frame is a 52cm/small).
Got it for a slight discount on what he paid as well.![]()
I read it as an italian built frame with an english thread.[DOD]Asprilla;24625533 said:It means it was cut as italian
No you cant? They thread in different directions.[DOD]Asprilla;24625533 said:bit you can force an english BB into an italian thread.
No you cant? They thread in different directions.
I would guess you need a 68-110 bb. (68mm shell, 110mm axle)
[DOD]Asprilla;24625573 said:Hmmm.
I'm 5'9 and use a 54 with a layback seat post and a 110mm stem. I don't have a very long back.
I don't think it's an Italian shell. Italian threads are 36mm diameter, English threads are either 34.8 or 34.9italian shells at 70 wide not 68
Current Boardman is a 53 with a layback seat post and 100mm stem, seat is pretty much as far forward as it will go though.
Seat tube angle is 73deg on the Boardman and 74.5deg on the Scott, top tube on the Scott is 25mm shorter, thinking this would make the seat in a similar position to the Boardman but would be clamped more centrally.
The shorter top tube on the Scott will be partly because of the 1.5deg difference in seat tube angle.
The headtubes are the same angle (73deg) but the Scott's is shorter.
According to the Scott size guide i am top end small frame size.
I have a spare 110mm stem which i will try, may need a 120mm, think 130mm will be too big.
Gone for compact bars as well, less of a drop to the drops.
Hey Damien, remember how I said Matchmoor Lane, where we went last night, was the highest you could get round our way?
I was wrong.
Cat 2 climb (albeit with a descent in the middle to take in Foxholes!) going up to 1400 feet. Over 300 feet higher than we got to last night.
There's a few routes you can start from, actually, but the key bit is getting to the top of Foxholes and on from there. If I were doing it, I'd probably go up Chorley Old Road from the roundabout near the Barn, turn left at the top of Chorley Old Road and work from there, rather than doing Foxholes which would destroy me before I'd even got to the fun bit. Here goes, this looks like a good one.
It shall be climbed. Oh yes, it shall be climbed.
I might try that Saturday morning, actually, if I feel like I'm up to it.

Looks beautiful!