Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6

    New question here. Trek Superfly 100 AL Pro vs Trek Fuel Ex 9 29er?

    Any thoughts or recommendations between these two bikes?

    I was considering between the Tallboy SPX vs Superfly 100, but now that the Trek Fuel ex9 has come out in a 29er I feel that this should also be considered!

    I ride a variety of tight single trail with a mix of flowing track, switchbacks and its fair share of rooty/rocky stuff.

    A fairly even mix of climbing or descending - but nothing too extreme in either direction.

    I like doing smallish jumps and dropoff - but nothing too hard core0, I'd never get more than about 4 foot off the ground - but I still want a bike that I'm not going to break doing this (i'm about 200 lbs as well for reference).

    Not looking to race competitively and mainly just out to have fun on a bike - however, I still want something that is fairly light.

    I briefly also considered the Tallboy LT - but this is probably overkill for my needs.

    The Superfly 100 and Tallboy are top contenders - however, the fuel peaked my interest because it is a little more AM oriented with the dropper post and slightly longer travel - and I wonder if this might be better suited to my riding style?

    I'm interested in any opinions. Cost is a factor for me too. In my area the Tallboy SPX will cost me about $1200 more than either of the trek options - which is quite off putting.

  2. #2
    Bike everywhere!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    For Trek, I'd say go with the Fuel EX 29er. The Superfly 100 is designed more for XC racers and not tuned to take a lot of big hits. The Fuel EX has Trek's DRCV tuning which is pretty sweet - great over small bumps and can take some bigger hits. It will also offer a more "relaxed" riding position, being designed around single track riding, not racing.
    The Superfly is a great bike and weighs a bit less, but the Fuel has a way better tuned suspension for single track. If you're looking for a fun bike, I'd go with the Fuel, you can monster truck over anything and not have to worry about it!
    Test ride them all and see if you can demo them on your favorite trail. Some shops will let you, some won't. Hope this helps!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,152
    + 1 on what Mossy said.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Recently I had the same question. Just as a data point, my new Fuel EX 9 21" (I have only ridden it 1 time) weighs in at 30.3 lbs stock with Geax aka TNT tubeless setup and XT spd pedals. Coming from a 2012 Rumblefish Elite, the Fuel is not a light bike either. Just saying.
    Last edited by Sunderland; 06-04-2013 at 06:34 AM.

  5. #5
    kabouterclan member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by Sunderland View Post
    Recently I had the same question. Just as a data point, my new Fuel EX 9 21" (I have only ridden it 1 time) weighs in at 30.3 lbs stock with Geax aka TNT tubeless setup. Coming from a 2012 Rumblefish Elite, the Fuel is not a light bike either. Just saying.
    Seeing you rode both: i'm curious about first impressions, especially in comparison to the Rumblefish!?
    Sent from my HAL 9000

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by de lars cuevas View Post
    Seeing you rode both: i'm curious about first impressions, especially in comparison to the Rumblefish!?
    It's probably a bit too early for me to say since I've only ridden the Fuel EX 9 one time and the ergonomics and suspension were not dialed in perfectly yet. But I will say that the extra money for the XT groupset was worth every penny. The SLX stuff works good but doesn't feel as crisp and precise. I really noticed how well the improved shocks/forks worked on the downhill. Like they say, "smooth as butter." The Fuel also feels less bulky/heavy than the Rumblefish but it's just that it's not really that much lighter. I had my Rumblefish down to the same weight when I sold it (went tubeless with Continental RK back & MK up front), updated to an XT cassette, and Thompson Elite seat post.

    One other thing, I'm in my mid fifties and only ride for exercise(which is fun for me) -- don't do any technical riding. So can't comment much on how it handles on technical trails.

  7. #7
    kabouterclan member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    400
    I see. Thanks anyway.

    Looking at the aluminium frames, the EX can hardly be lighter than the RF indeed.
    Sent from my HAL 9000

  8. #8
    Rohloff
    Reputation: bsdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,485
    I'm thinking a Tallboy and a Superfly are similar in that they both have about 100mm of travel and more XC geometry, and the Tallboy LT and the Fuel EX are similar in that they have about 120mm of travel and more Trail geometry. So, I think you want to first match your apples with apples and your oranges with oranges. Then you have to decide if you want an apple or an orange.

    Apples and oranges ride differently. If your trails aren't too rough and/or you like a tighter feel then one of the 100mm bikes might work best for you. If you have rough trails and/or want a plusher ride you'll notice the difference going to one of the 120mm bikes. Once you decide that, then you have to decide if you want a deal or a chi-chi bike.

    In my experience, I don't think chi-chi isn't necessarily better. I would go with one of the Trek bikes, unless you have a lot of experience, test rides, money and you know what you want.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,598
    I built up a 2012 Superfly 100 AL with a 120 TALAS fork to use as a trail bike. I figured it is the same frame and geometry as the 2011 and earlier Rumblefish, except without the DRCV shock, so it could handle the fork just fine. I drop the front end to 95 mm for long climbs or really tight single track, but mostly use the full 120 mm travel. I set it up with a Kashima shock and fork, through axles both ends, with lots of other upgrades (XO trail brakes, Thomson Masterpiece post, King hubs+Rhythm rims, RXL bars, upgraded crank). I may part ways with it for less than the cost of an AL Elite if anyone is interested.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5
    i had this same question. i currently ride a fuel ex 9 26r and was between these 2 bikes. i believe i will go with the fuel because of the suspension!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6
    If it helps, I have the Superfly AL. Love it to death, but I am more of a XC rider. If I was more aggressive, I would prob go with something different.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,000
    The only two modern full suspension mountain bikes are a 2012 GT Sensor 9r Elite (returned it) and the 2013 Trek Superfly 100 AL Pro I have now.

    The GT was more of a trail bike and the Superfly is XC, but a much higher level bike. I haven't ridden a comparable trail bike, but I can't say enough good things about the Superfly. I've ridden is on trails but mostly XC.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5
    I had just recently purchased the trek fuel ex7 large and i hope that it was the right choice. i am 6ft and 33 inch inseam. i ride single track about 3 times a week with a day or two added of xc! i almost bought the superfly but figured that it wouldnt be a comfy single track cruiser! my question is... do you think i made the right choice? i have done research and i am confidant w/ ex7, just need reassurance! ALSO, had bought my wife a lush sl 15.5 shes 5'6... we both are coming from 26 inch bikes that are to big me xl her med!!! your thoughts??? OH and both 29ers...
    the wifes bike was bought to balance the purchase of a secret buy HAHA she doesnt know yet! ha

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,163
    With your size and the terrain you described, I would choose the Fuel. Shoot, I would choose the Fuel over the Fly 100 for endurance racing. For pure xc racing, I would choose the Fly over the Fuel.

    The Full Floater rear suspension combined with the DRCV shock is pretty sweet, and a 120 fork gives a noticeably more plush ride in the roots/rocks than a 100 does.

    Personally, if budget were an issue, I would buy the top end aluminum Fuel, and negotiate a wheel upgrade before the bike even left the shop.
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

Similar Threads

  1. 2012 trek superfly 100 AL or 2011 fuel ex6?
    By bczapl in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-24-2012, 08:13 PM
  2. Trek Fuel Ex 8 vs. Fuji reveal 2.0 vs. Trek Fuel Ex 6
    By WilliamM10 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-15-2012, 05:19 AM
  3. 2011 Trek Fuel EX5 or 2008 Trek Fuel EX9
    By tavorh1 in forum Trek
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-08-2011, 06:07 PM
  4. My new 29er - Trek Superfly
    By tehan in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-18-2011, 03:41 PM
  5. 2010 Trek Top Fuel 8 vs 2011 Trek Fuel EX 8
    By David S - Sydney in forum Trek
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 06:08 PM

Posting Permissions

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