Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: V8Interceptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    568

    2017 Trek Fuel EX vs Hightower

    I started a thread here a few weeks ago asking about the Fuel vs Tallboy. There are no SC Demos coming my way, so I wanted to hear from folks who have ridden both the Fuel & Hightower. It seems all the reviews out there are giving both much love.
    1992 Trek 800 Antelope
    2009 Haro Mary SS
    2015 Trek Stache 7
    2017 Trek Fuel EX 9

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sml-2727's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,607
    Go to youtube and search mtbyumyum he has two great reviews on both bikes..

    On a side note I own a HT and my riding buddy owns a 16 fuel both bikes feel completly different from one another..im running a 150mm fork and hes running a 130mm... in a nutshell I can bomb down hills faster and he can climb a little quicker...thats not to say the HT cant climb well...im throwing on my pike 140mm soon and will see how much that changes.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,209
    Quote Originally Posted by sml-2727 View Post
    Go to youtube and search mtbyumyum he has two great reviews on both bikes..

    On a side note I own a HT and my riding buddy owns a 16 fuel both bikes feel completly different from one another..im running a 150mm fork and hes running a 130mm... in a nutshell I can bomb down hills faster and he can climb a little quicker...thats not to say the HT cant climb well...im throwing on my pike 140mm soon and will see how much that changes.
    Your fuel compared to his buddies Fuel are two different bikes.
    Both ride completely different.


    OP. Both bikes look nearly the same on paper, The Fuel may climb a little better but the geo and travel points to the Hightower taking the lead on the DH. Does have more travel and a little slacker HA.

    I would really really try to find one to ride.
    I have only ridden the 2017 Fuel, I don't know anyone around here with a Hightower.
    Fuel was fun. climb well went DH better than the 2016's Fuels but they are a little heavy
    Too Many .

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    737
    Might depend on your terrain. I thought the Hightower was a very poor climber. Ascents here are technical and rocky and it performed pretty poorly IMO. Too much pedal kickback and it liked to break traction too easily. The Fuel was much better in this regard as the suspension could stay active and it was much easier to clear various obstacles.

    Downhill the Hightower is more stable. The Trek felt a little more playful but that could also be due to sizing. Rode a large hightower and a 18.5 virtual Fuel. Perhaps weight was shifted further rearward on the Trek. Easier to get the front end up and change lines or just goof off and wheelie/manual on more sedate terrain.
    Everyone is entitled to my opinion.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    59
    Anyone else have any thoughts on this? I've only been able to ride the HT so far. Liked it a lot, but would love to hear how it compares to the 2017 Fuel (since Trek has compared the 2017 Fuel to the 2016 Remedy 29).

  6. #6
    SS in CO
    Reputation: Jayson44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by ghoti View Post
    Might depend on your terrain. I thought the Hightower was a very poor climber.
    this. I demo'd a HT last year out in Santa Cruz from their shop. it was the crazy $10k version with carbon & Enve everything. I hated it on the climbs. it was very hard to keep the front end under control on techy climbs.

    I just got a 2017 FEX9 in March and have been loving it. I live in the mountains west of Denver and the climbs are long and techy. the front stays planted well and the suspension in the rear gives lots of traction w/out much pedal bob, if any. I'm coming from a hard tail, so that's saying something.

    on the downs, the bike is more capable than I am, and begs to go faster than I am willing (most of the time). I plan on bumping the fork to 140mm as I've read that helps with the pedal strikes (I'm not yet used to the new geo) and makes descending more fun.

    in short, I'd really have to be convinced to try the HT again after riding my Fuel.

    J.
    are you a bike shop owner? or a custom builder? I want to talk to you about your website

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    59
    What size Hightower and Fuel did/do you ride? (I'm 6'3, and didn't love the way the Hightower climbed either. Also, with my saddle height I felt further over the rear axle than I like to be, and had to slam the seat forward).

  8. #8
    SS in CO
    Reputation: Jayson44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    574
    I demo'd a large HT. I'm 6,1" and all legs. I bought the 21.5 Fuel EX9. I had to get a 35mm stem to make the bike not feel too big though.

    J.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayson44 View Post
    I demo'd a large HT. I'm 6,1" and all legs. I bought the 21.5 Fuel EX9. I had to get a 35mm stem to make the bike not feel too big though.

    J.
    How do you like the fuel after owning it for several months? Think I'm about ready to pull the trigger on one.

  10. #10
    SS in CO
    Reputation: Jayson44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by brogo View Post
    How do you like the fuel after owning it for several months? Think I'm about ready to pull the trigger on one.
    I'm loving it! granted, I've not owned any other FS bikes ever in my life, so not much to compare to. but I really do love how well this bike climbs and descends for 130mm of travel.

    I did end up putting the fork at 140, and it does help it get even more rowdy going down. I've hit 30+ mph on gnarly, rocky descents on the Front Range of CO on numerous occasions, and I'm sure the bike could go faster.

    I think Trek really has something awesome in this bike. I'm a fan.

    J.
    are you a bike shop owner? or a custom builder? I want to talk to you about your website

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayson44 View Post
    I'm loving it! granted, I've not owned any other FS bikes ever in my life, so not much to compare to. but I really do love how well this bike climbs and descends for 130mm of travel.

    I did end up putting the fork at 140, and it does help it get even more rowdy going down. I've hit 30+ mph on gnarly, rocky descents on the Front Range of CO on numerous occasions, and I'm sure the bike could go faster.

    I think Trek really has something awesome in this bike. I'm a fan.

    J.
    Awesome, thanks for the info!

Similar Threads

  1. Trek Top fuel 8 (2017)
    By Rynkefinn in forum Trek
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-01-2017, 10:27 AM
  2. 2017 trek top fuel 9.8 size 17.5
    By fastmq in forum Classifieds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2017, 08:06 PM
  3. Trek TOP fuel rsl 2017 or Scott spark 900 rc sl 2017
    By blurxc11 in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-02-2016, 08:29 PM
  4. Replies: 39
    Last Post: 10-22-2016, 04:44 AM
  5. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-23-2016, 11:14 AM

Members who have read this thread: 33

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.