Page 1 of 19 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 1859
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes



    The 2016 Trek Fat Bikes are officially up on their website now, bringing a whopping 5 new models to the mix.

    Here's the models, pricing, and links:


    Farley 5 w/ MSRP of $1,729.99
    Farley 5 - New! - Trek Bicycle

    Farley 7 w/ MSRP of $2,399.99
    Farley 7 - New! - Trek Bicycle

    Farley 9 w/ MSRP of $3,199.99
    Farley 9 - New! - Trek Bicycle

    Farley 9.6 w/ MSRP of $2,999.99
    Farley 9.6 - New! - Trek Bicycle

    Farley 9.8 w/ MSRP of $4,799.99
    Farley 9.8 - New! - Trek Bicycle

    ​Discuss!

    *8/21 Updated Pricing Map
    Last edited by moshock; 08-21-2015 at 01:42 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    We've been discussing, but someone decided the discussion should be consolidated into the 2015 Farley thread - not sure why.

    Anyhoo. the 7 seems to be the sweet spot, and that's the one I have on order.
    Getting the 5 for my wife. I may end up building up a second wheelset for it @ 27.5 just for grins.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bcriverjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    265
    Looks like they are going to keep the 6-8 models.
    Marin Bobcat Trail 29er - Trek Farley 8

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Gambit21 congrats on your Farley 7 pre-order! I think I would have sprung for the 7 if it were a different color.

    bcriverjunky my dealer said once the 6's and 8's are gone, they're gone, and they have no more coming in.

    My Farley 5 is expected to arrive mid-late August. Woohoo! Can't wait!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    I go back and forth on the purple. It's growing on me I think. (I wish it was orange) I hate the odd blue and green scheme of the 9.

  6. #6
    because GIANT
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,086
    Are most of these new models for fitting tires bigger than 4.0 ?
    [2015 farley 6 it is clear you cannot go bigger than 4.0....]

    IMHO, for me....4.0 or 3.8 is plenty for a fatbike incl snow, but for even more snow ability you haveta go bigger.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tyriverag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,053
    Yes, that, and slight changes to geometry, and their own expanded rim and tire sizes.

    Like you, I own a Farley 6, and have not found myself in need of bigger tires. Would be nice, but with all the fat bikes I test rode, and how perfect this one fits me, I am cool with that.

    Also, I read from multiple people that Dillinger 5s fit in the rear.
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2009 Fuji Cross Comp
    2001 Schwinn Frontier SS



  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    130
    I just got the Fatboy SE but the good axles, factory hydro brakes, the 1x11... I would have bought that.

    Colors seem odd except on base model.

  9. #9
    because GIANT
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by tyriverag View Post
    Yes, that, and slight changes to geometry, and their own expanded rim and tire sizes.

    Like you, I own a Farley 6, and have not found myself in need of bigger tires. Would be nice, but with all the fat bikes I test rode, and how perfect this one fits me, I am cool with that.

    Also, I read from multiple people that Dillinger 5s fit in the rear.
    in rear ? will need to research that....
    wow here it is

    2015 Trek Farley 6 and 8 fat Bikes - Page 23- Mtbr.com



    anywho...9 years on an original super-tank pugsley (yes with SS cog on front and large marge heavies) and swapped to Farley 6 tubeless...like night and day!!!!!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by bwheelies View Post
    Colors seem odd except on base model.
    This! They aren't bad, just odd indeed.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    74
    I really like that purple color of the 7. I would have picked one up but I got to impatient and went with something else haha.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    This! They aren't bad, just odd indeed.
    With regard to the new models - Grey is fine, so is the purple. The blue/green scheme is ugly and just poor design imho (I happen to be a designer) The upper 9 models after that aren't ugly, just unremarkable.

    I may end up with a grey and orange 7 (dealer is willing to swap parts) but haven't decided yet. The purple is kinda nice too...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bcriverjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    265
    You are not going to fit a D5 on the rear of a 6 or a 8
    Marin Bobcat Trail 29er - Trek Farley 8

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by bcriverjunky View Post
    You are not going to fit a D5 on the rear of a 6 or a 8
    I've seen a few that fit them when the tire was new, however given time to stretch it usually results in rub.
    '17 Cutthroat
    '16 Bucksaw Carbon
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  15. #15
    because GIANT
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,086
    took another long look at farley 6 17.5 with hodag and that thing barely clears

    I agree a 5 ain't gonna fit unless it's really skinny 5

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    824
    I love the color on the 9, the rest are so-so, don't hate any of them, don't love any of them. Wouldn't keep me from buying one. Can't wait to see one in person. I have a friend with a 9.8 on order. Can't freaking wait to see and ride it.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bcriverjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    265
    Marin Bobcat Trail 29er - Trek Farley 8

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Thanks for sharing! Cool video!

  19. #19
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,966
    the frame size inflation is aggravating; what they call a 21.5" frame, actually has a 20.5" seat tube, which effectively rules that out as a possibility. That's a shame, my team is having a bike buying night next month (we're sponsored by Trek & Bontrager) and we'd get the bikes at dealer cost. <sigh> looks like i'll be getting a Boone CX or a Fuel, instead and a Ventana this fall.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    571
    damn these new farleys look sweet...actually thinking of dumping my Surly for one
    SWING YOUR LEG OVER IT AND PEDAL

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sparky697's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    the frame size inflation is aggravating; what they call a 21.5" frame, actually has a 20.5" seat tube, which effectively rules that out as a possibility. That's a shame, my team is having a bike buying night next month (we're sponsored by Trek & Bontrager) and we'd get the bikes at dealer cost. <sigh> looks like i'll be getting a Boone CX or a Fuel, instead and a Ventana this fall.
    Even though it's 20.5 shouldn't it still fit like a 21.5?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  22. #22
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    Ya everything I know with trek is they run shorter seat tube for better stand over but the frame fit is the "inflated size". One of those "dont worry about the numbers so dang much, test it out" things. I actually like that trek (provided its being done right) is puttin stand over more into the equation by building the frame to fit at "listed size" then cutting the seat tube lower to give the boys a little more room. We all aren't all legs you know.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Another new Farley video: https://youtu.be/w91OGtInmAw

    That blue Farley 9 looks pretty cool!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Have the 9 on order,my LBS gave me a could not refuse price for one
    ,plus the 27.5 was a major incentive!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    488
    I was looking at the build sheets between the Farley 7 and the 9.6 and they seem like they are pretty much the same builds except for the tire wheel combo. So my question is what will be the weight different between the aluminum frame of the 7 and the carbon frame of the 9.6?

  26. #26
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!
    AND....it has thru axles

  28. #28
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by litespeedaddict View Post
    AND....it has thru axles
    yes, i noticed

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by techfersure View Post
    Have the 9 on order,my LBS gave me a could not refuse price for one
    ,plus the 27.5 was a major incentive!
    On that note - if anyone walks into a Trek dealer and they quote you the MSRP on the Trek site and won't budge - walk away and go to another dealer. Be looking for $200 off that MSRP at least. I did a little better because I bought 2 bikes.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!
    Yep, but the 7 is the best bang for the buck in the lot IMO.

  31. #31
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    is there a difference between map and msrp?

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    is there a difference between map and msrp?
    That I'm not sure of - I just know that a high volume Trek dealer has some room on these.
    I think even a lower volume dealer has a bit of room since that MSRP is inflated a bit to allow for this.

  33. #33
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    been a loooong time since i sold trek, so i can't even remember how their pricing works or what the margins are depending on volume brought in.

    i know i hardly ever ordered from Q when i sold trek cuz bontrager offered a pretty complete selection of parts/accessories and i automatically saved 5-10% on those orders by being a trek dealer. make money in the buying, not the selling

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!
    Yeah- I'd put money down on one as a snow bike if I could get it with 26" wheels. The 27.5"s might work for those on groomed trails, but I'm usually the trailer groomer....
    '17 Cutthroat
    '16 Bucksaw Carbon
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  35. #35
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,966
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky697 View Post
    Even though it's 20.5 shouldn't it still fit like a 21.5?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    not if you have a 35" inseam...

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chad_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    420
    Does the 5 or 7 have thru axles on both front and rear. It looks as though the front is still QR?

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    488
    It looks like the 5 is QR and the 7 is thru axle.

  38. #38
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    ava likes the 5 and doesn't mind qr's at all. and daddy don't care so long as wifey leaves the house unlocked and ava calls me dada. 42 with an 8 month old......livin the dream yo!


    the 5 has the best color. love the orange lettering

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?

  40. #40
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?
    Smoke n mirrors.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?
    TA, while probably the solution you'd arrive at if designing a bike for the first time right now, offers little if any true, quantifiable advantage in the rear or with a rigid fork. It offers much needed stabity and stiffness with a suspension fork.
    Stories of rear hub flex (therefore thru-axle) are BS in my opinion. With a tightened QR and laced wheel there's no place for the hub flanges to go.

  42. #42
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Haha a suspension fork already has too much unnecessary flex and movement to begin with, what's the problem with having more? Might as well have a bit of side to side to go with all that up n down and all that extra weight leading you thru hill and dale. Lol!

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    What, don't you love it when your lateral energy is absorbed and turned into vertical energy and you lose momentum?

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    [QUOTE=newmarketrog;12041758]been a loooong time since i sold trek, so i can't even remember how their pricing works or what the margins are depending on volume brought in.

    i know i hardly ever ordered from Q when i sold trek cuz bontrager offered a pretty complete selection of parts/accessories and i automatically saved 5-10% on those orders by being a trek dealer. make money in

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    On that note - if anyone walks into a Trek dealer and they quote you the MSRP on the Trek site and won't budge - walk away and go to another dealer. Be looking for $200 off that MSRP at least. I did a little better because I bought 2 bikes.
    2550.00 for Farley 9 , LBS loyalty pays off ! can't wait until it comes in !

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?
    All you need to know is you want them. If you buy a new fatbike now without them, all you need to know is your local shop is glad you walked thru the door and took it off their hands.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by litespeedaddict View Post
    All you need to know is you want them. If you buy a new fatbike now without them, all you need to know is your local shop is glad you walked thru the door and took it off their hands.
    I pre-ordered a Farley 5. Is it QR or Thru Axle? Still don't know what the physical difference is.

  48. #48
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by litespeedaddict View Post
    All you need to know is you want them. If you buy a new fatbike now without them, all you need to know is your local shop is glad you walked thru the door and took it off their hands.
    spiked koolaid. you 3 sheets to the wind yet?

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tyriverag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,053
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    I pre-ordered a Farley 5. Is it QR or Thru Axle? Still don't know what the physical difference is.
    If you don't know if your bike has either, or what the difference is, you won't be able to detect the very subtle differences between the two when riding. I wouldn't let this affect a bike purchase decision.

    Honestly I think the biggest benefit of going TA is so you don't have to listen to people preaching the benefits of them lol.
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2009 Fuji Cross Comp
    2001 Schwinn Frontier SS



  50. #50
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by tyriverag View Post
    If you don't know if your bike has either, or what the difference is, you won't be able to detect the very subtle differences between the two when riding. I wouldn't let this affect a bike purchase decision.

    Honestly I think the biggest benefit of going TA is so you don't have to listen to people preaching the benefits of them lol.
    You mite bee meye fave poster twodae

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    I pre-ordered a Farley 5. Is it QR or Thru Axle? Still don't know what the physical difference is.
    TA rear, QR front.

    Cute kid Rog.

  52. #52
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    TA rear, QR front.

    Cute kid Rog.
    thanx!

  53. #53
    zeb
    zeb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    360
    Is it possible to use same RF crankset that works on 2015 model with new 2016 frame?

    This was found on bikerumour site:
    The 26×5 are what Trek considers the size for exploration. Still ideal for loose or soft terrain, the bigger tires were made possible thanks to the wider rear end, but the pressfit 121 bottom bracket keeps the same q factor as the 177 bikes previously.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Anyone know when the 16's will start hitting dealer floors? I'm getting anxious!

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    944
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    Anyone know when the 16's will start hitting dealer floors? I'm getting anxious!
    Sept/Oct and this may only be if your dealer and/or customer preordered them.
    http://Theclydeblog.org Big guy cycling product tester

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    167
    Hmm, that 7 though.
    Now I am even more upset that the FatCaad is pretty tame/ugly compared to the purple 7, or even what looks to be the orange Fatboy comp. Just wish fatboy was 150TA front in case I felt crazy enough to get a bluto for summer fun.

  57. #57
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    that new fatboi comp looks super tasty. nice to see the rf turbine cinch and 1x on it. i'd ride that bike fer sure, and i just might. or get a frame/fork and put some dt swiss wheels on it.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    that new fatboi comp looks super tasty. nice to see the rf turbine cinch and 1x on it. i'd ride that bike fer sure, and i just might. or get a frame/fork and put some dt swiss wheels on it.
    That does make me more interested in the fatboy for sure. 1x and ROaRANGE is the fastest color, or so I hear. Wonder if the rims set up tubeless easy. And if I am honest, it will be a bit before I jump to bluto since this is a winter purchase in central PA. I can always build new wheels if I go full-fat.

    Every time I work at the shop I check to see if they have new releases on the dealer site. I did see they have some new merino wool jerseys, which should come in cheaper than any rapha stuff (and hopefully nice enough).

  59. #59
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    ya i tried front suspension forks over 20 years ago and have owned them here and there since. suspension forks would be the ticket if they didn't move at all and were pounds lighter

    i've never been sold on front squish no matter how rough and tough the riding/racing gets. fat tires at low pressure makes squish of any kind even more senseless. imo

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tyriverag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,053
    I'm with rog. I raged my Farley 6 last night in one gear, and was on the tail of a better rider (skills not engine) on a carbon Bucksaw last night. He usually stays ahead of me on rides, because my coordination is low, and tendency to fly off the trail is high. What I would lose on more technical sections, I'd make up for in climbs and straight shots.
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2009 Fuji Cross Comp
    2001 Schwinn Frontier SS



  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    167
    The concept that all suspension is useless is silly, and could just more dependent upon your location. I can't really imagine enjoying rigid on all of these #eastcoastrocks. Hell, even Rich Dillen opted for a squish fork for a stage or two of the Transylvania Epic race.

    But I can probably live rigid for the fatbike, as it won't be the real gnar bike of choice for me.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    It's not a location thing

  63. #63
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    It's not a location thing
    nope^^^^^^^^ come ride where i ride and you might want a full on dh rig

    maine is pretty chunky to say the least.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    I might or might not - it's not a location thing, it's a preference thing.

  65. #65
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    I might or might not - it's not a location thing, it's a preference thing.
    i was speaking to lwkwafi.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Never mind, I thought I was still speaking to him as well. Damn phone and tiny screen

  67. #67
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    Never mind, I thought I was still speaking to him as well. Damn phone and tiny screen
    HA! looking forward to your purple beauty? or did you get it already?

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    HA! looking forward to your purple beauty? or did you get it already?
    Getting the 7 and a 5 for the wife, finances dictate that they will go on layaway for a while after they arrive.

  69. #69
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    Getting the 7 and a 5 for the wife, finances dictate that they will go on layaway for a while after they arrive.
    hey gotta do whatcha gotta do

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    1
    I just went in to pre-order a new Farley 5 and the sales guy recommended I go with a 19.5 based on my 5'10" height and 32" inseam. I assumed I would best fit on a 17.5 but he explained that for around here (Minneapolis, MN) I'd primarily be riding in not very deep snow and occasionally deeper stuff.

    My intended use for the bike will most likely be a daily commuter (in winter), single track (4 season) and I'd like to also be able do some exploring on unplowed/ungroomed stuff as well. So a little of everything. He recommended that if the 19.5 felt to big on deeper stuff I could get a dropper post to help.

    I know the best route is to just try them out, but they didn't have any of last years models to try unfortunately. He said if I didn't like how the 19.5 feels/rides after they get it in I could switch to a 17.5.

    I'm just curious if people here think this all checks out. It'll also be my first foray into mountain biking and I don't want to end up on something to big to comfortably maneuver. I trust what the guy is saying, just want to get some second opinions.


    Thanks.

  71. #71
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by billbiwer View Post
    I just went in to pre-order a new Farley 5 and the sales guy recommended I go with a 19.5 based on my 5'10" height and 32" inseam. I assumed I would best fit on a 17.5 but he explained that for around here (Minneapolis, MN) I'd primarily be riding in not very deep snow and occasionally deeper stuff.

    My intended use for the bike will most likely be a daily commuter (in winter), single track (4 season) and I'd like to also be able do some exploring on unplowed/ungroomed stuff as well. So a little of everything. He recommended that if the 19.5 felt to big on deeper stuff I could get a dropper post to help.

    I know the best route is to just try them out, but they didn't have any of last years models to try unfortunately. He said if I didn't like how the 19.5 feels/rides after they get it in I could switch to a 17.5.

    I'm just curious if people here think this all checks out. It'll also be my first foray into mountain biking and I don't want to end up on something to big to comfortably maneuver. I trust what the guy is saying, just want to get some second opinions.


    Thanks.
    honestly, that "salesguy" should find something else to do. if yer 5'10 yer gonna be a lot closer to a 17.5 than a 19.5. recommending putting a dropper on to help is stoopid.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Yeah - saves me a post. I was going to respond earlier but too long to type with the phone.
    Rog, I got a call from the shop. I'm heading down tomorrow -I think they want to try and talk me into a Stache 29+. Probably just because they have them in stock now, and they're so enamored with this model themselves from what it sounds like.

    I've never been on a 29+ - thoughts?

    Seems to me the Farley is close to the Stache, just a little more evolved even. There's less than an inch difference in chainstay length (in case the "wow, look at that short chainstay" argument comes up. So then I'm left with capability, and from where I sit the Stache is limited to 3" tires, where on the Farley I can run 27.5+ (3" and upwards) if I feel like it, all the way up to 4.8" on the 26" wheels. So not sure what their thinking, but I have to run down there and change the wife's bike order to a Helga anyway, so I'll hear them out.

    I'm counting on 27.5x65mm wheels being released, couple that with 4" tires and the Farley and I don't think I'll be thinking about the Stache.

  73. #73
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    Yeah - saves me a post. I was going to respond earlier but too long to type with the phone.
    Rog, I got a call from the shop. I'm heading down tomorrow -I think they want to try and talk me into a Stache 29+. Probably just because they have them in stock now, and they're so enamored with this model themselves from what it sounds like.

    I've never been on a 29+ - thoughts?

    Seems to me the Farley is close to the Stache, just a little more evolved even. There's less than an inch difference in chainstay length (in case the "wow, look at that short chainstay" argument comes up. So then I'm left with capability, and from where I sit the Stache is limited to 3" tires, where on the Farley I can run 27.5+ (3" and upwards) if I feel like it, all the way up to 4.8" on the 26" wheels. So not sure what their thinking, but I have to run down there and change the wife's bike order to a Helga anyway, so I'll hear them out.

    I'm counting on 27.5x65mm wheels being released, couple that with 4" tires and the Farley and I don't think I'll be thinking about the Stache.
    so i had a customer of mine (i mainly do repair work on bikes that he buys elsewhere due to brands he prefers) pull in with a sexy @ss brandy new stache 5, the one that has kinda that bianchi celeste thang going. SICK LOOKING BIKE. light and sexy for the money. if i were gonna stache it up i'd definitely go with that one.

    problem for me is, the fvcking wheels are HUDGE. i've been a 29er devotee since 03' but having tried 29+, imo, the wheels feel way to big. i like flicky and i ride where it's twisty turny techy wicked frequent steep up/down.

    27.5+ seems like the ticket to me and i guess you can run them on that bike if you want.

    only problem is you can't run fat tires on it, but why would you? go farley if you want that.

    why would you go + on a fatbike or regular skinny wheels on a plus bike? THAT i just don't get.

    again tho, the bike looks SICK!

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Yeah that green is the one I'd pull the trigger on too - swapped with the 7 build kit tho.
    I ride a trail with a few turns that are 6' radius - so I'd be worried a bit about those huge wheels as well.

  75. #75
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    the plastic fork is legit too. seamless with the frame. this customer sold his sweet blue alu beargrease and is gonna run the stache all winter in the snow cuz honeybadger don't give a $hit

    i'll prolly hook up with him as he wants to check out the killer dozens of miles of snowmo trails that are near my house. i'll get to see how his wagon wheel 3's do compared to my 4's

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    877
    As a owner of a 6 i would be getting a 7. Adding some blue to it and riding the hell out of it! 150 front? Could ad a bluto and would have a cheaper nicer 9 with 5" tires and a less expensive drive to destroy in the winter.
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    As a owner of a 6 i would be getting a 7. Adding some blue to it and riding the hell out of it! 150 front? Could ad a bluto and would have a cheaper nicer 9 with 5" tires and a less expensive drive to destroy in the winter.
    Yep - with my DTswiss rims and hubs, XT brakes and Enve bar I figure l'll have a Farley 10

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by billbiwer View Post
    I just went in to pre-order a new Farley 5 and the sales guy recommended I go with a 19.5 based on my 5'10" height and 32" inseam. I assumed I would best fit on a 17.5 but he explained that for around here (Minneapolis, MN) I'd primarily be riding in not very deep snow and occasionally deeper stuff.

    My intended use for the bike will most likely be a daily commuter (in winter), single track (4 season) and I'd like to also be able do some exploring on unplowed/ungroomed stuff as well. So a little of everything. He recommended that if the 19.5 felt to big on deeper stuff I could get a dropper post to help.

    I know the best route is to just try them out, but they didn't have any of last years models to try unfortunately. He said if I didn't like how the 19.5 feels/rides after they get it in I could switch to a 17.5.

    I'm just curious if people here think this all checks out. It'll also be my first foray into mountain biking and I don't want to end up on something to big to comfortably maneuver. I trust what the guy is saying, just want to get some second opinions.


    Thanks.
    I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I also thought 17.5" would be correct for me, but my dealer (two guys that both own fatbikes themselves) highly recommended the 19.5" as well. I did test ride a 15.5" Farley which felt small, did a lot of reading online, and ultimately decided the 19.5" (18.5" actual frame size mind you) seemed legit. I pre-ordered it.

  79. #79
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I also thought 17.5" would be correct for me, but my dealer (two guys that both own fatbikes themselves) highly recommended the 19.5" as well. I did test ride a 15.5" Farley which felt small, did a lot of reading online, and ultimately decided the 19.5" (18.5" actual frame size mind you) seemed legit. I pre-ordered it.
    yer 5'11", not 5'10". i'm 5'11.5 and wear 32 pant and i'm 19.5 fer sure. but if i were 5'10" with similar leg length, my reach might not be ideal for the 19.5 and closer to 17.5.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tyriverag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,053
    I generally ride "medium" sized bikes (17ish-18ish) and went with the 17.5 Farley 6. It supposedly fits like a size 16.5. I did ride the 19.5 (fits like an 18.5), and am about 5'10.5", no idea what my inseam was. They both felt pretty similar, with the 17.5 feeling a hair more comfortable.
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2009 Fuji Cross Comp
    2001 Schwinn Frontier SS



  81. #81
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    17.5 fits like a typical medium, 19.5 fits like a typical large.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    yer 5'11", not 5'10".
    Thanks for reminding me, LOL.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    525
    Is the Trek 9.6 / 9.8 carbon frame available in a frame only option? Would love to swap over what I have onto one of those.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    944
    Yes, the 9.8 will be. At least according to the dealer site. No eta though. May just be listed for future warranty claims?

    Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk
    http://Theclydeblog.org Big guy cycling product tester

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    10
    I wish bike companies would start to make their bikes longer I'm 5"10 with 32" inseam and would want the 21.5" frame for the correct reach but I wouldn't have space to run a dropper seatpost as the seat tube is too long.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Uhh...if you need an XL frame for proper reach at 5'10" your inseam isn't the story here.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    10
    What can I say, wide bars short stem improve handling no end, but only when the frame is long enough.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Still not making sense from a fit standpoint, the bikes have short stems.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    10
    The XL has a 444mm reach, the same as my large enduro 650b which is spot on for me with a 50mm stem.
    I guess it comes down to how/where you ride. With the exception of a DH track I ride my fatbike in all the same places I ride my 160mm enduro, so for me at least a similar fit would be the goal

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    So came in to a built Farley 5 19.5


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    If you can, throw/hold (I know the hub is different) a set of Stache 29+ wheels in there and see how much clearance there is. I'm curious.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    18
    That's awesome! Does this mean that the Farley's are starting to roll in? I pre-ordered a 7 and can't wait to get my hands on it!

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,134
    FYI: Looks like Trek dropped the MSRP across the board on the Farleys's

    9.8: $4799
    9.6: $2999
    9:$3199
    7:$2399
    5:$1729

    Farley - Trek Bicycle

    9.8 is really tempting. Would look really nice with the correct sized DT Swiss BR2250 wheels I just ordered. I wonder what I could sell the carbon 27.5" wheels and tires for?
    '17 Cutthroat
    '16 Bucksaw Carbon
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    Sorry no 29+ stuff around here. They came in completely unexpected. Not sure how soon the others will ship. I have a 9.8 on order...can't wait!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Thanks for sharing the Farley 5 pic Natedeezy, can't wait to pick mine up soon!

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    488
    Put my deposit down on a Farley today. Only one they have in the local shop now is a 5 but I am wanting either a 7 or 9.6 so it sounds like I will have first chance at whichever shows up first in my size. Can't really decide which until I can actually see them in person. I can see pros and cons to both. Do I really need a 4.7 in tire, but is the new 27.5 rim really necessary? On top of that, The owner of the store keeps trying to sell me the 9.8. I think that is way too much bike for my needs. At this point, it doesn't sound like I really have to make my decision until October, that is when they are scheduled to arrive. What would be youur model choice?

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzwardo View Post
    What would be youur model choice?
    Haven't we been answering that?

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,150
    I'm busy researching the 27.5x4 wheels now but the bike I think I want is the 9.6. It's going to be ridden primarily in the winter and on tracks made by snowmobiles or on the sand near the water (packed). Since we get some freeze/thaw here, I'll probably add studs to the tires. I don't need or want suspension at this point. The 27.5's are probably a good improvement over the 26x4's in terms of patch size.

    If the 27.5's don't work, then I'll get a set of 26x5 wheels and have the best of both worlds. So that would be the downside.

    J.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnJ80 View Post
    I'm busy researching the 27.5x4 wheels now but the bike I think I want is the 9.6. It's going to be ridden primarily in the winter and on tracks made by snowmobiles . Since we get some freeze/thaw here, I'll probably add studs to the tires. I don't need or want suspension at this point. The 27.5's are probably a good improvement over the 26x4's in terms of patch size.

    If the 27.5's don't work, then I'll get a set of 26x5 wheels and have the best of both worlds. So that would be the downside.

    J.
    This is pretty much where I stand right now. The only downside would be dropping a large amount of money on a 2nd wheel set.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    7, second summer wheel set maybe.

Page 1 of 19 1234511 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2015 Trek Farley 6 and 8 fat Bikes
    By Robg68 in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 1881
    Last Post: 3 Weeks Ago, 10:35 AM
  2. When should the 2016 models roll out?
    By Tizom in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 580
    Last Post: 12-05-2015, 12:58 PM
  3. Remedy 29 availability in EU, 2016 models ?
    By 20.100 FR in forum Trek
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-17-2015, 06:29 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-2014, 11:31 PM
  5. Trek Farley 6/8
    By BigVaz in forum Trek
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-23-2014, 08:29 AM

Members who have read this thread: 399

Posting Permissions

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