Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 51
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893

    Best bang-for-the-buck upgrade?

    Say you've got 3-500 bucks to spend on upgrades for a pugsley. Say you've already replaced everything but the front derailleur, the wheels and tires, and the fork.

    Do you go with better/lighter tires? Never had a problem with the stock tires, but some of the new tire options do look pretty sweet...

    Lighter wheels/rims? A set of Marge lites would be pretty nice.

    Carver O'beast fork? Because carbon.

    Or is there something I've missed?

    Drivetrain is pretty much where I want it, bars, shifters, brake levers, saddle, post, etc, all good. Thought about upgrading to hydraulic brakes but can't see any major benefit.

  2. #2
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,571
    rims/tires would be my choice.

  3. #3
    9:zero:7
    Reputation: Morej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    rims/tires would be my choice.
    +1 on this one.
    Only the dead fish swims with the current!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jaredbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    258
    Although tires would be the most noticeable I think long term going to Rolling D. rim's is the way. Let the best tire for your needs rise to the top of the new heap of choices while you get the rim's now.
    laotzucycles.blogspot.com

  5. #5
    Dirt Huffer
    Reputation: AC/BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,635
    Rims and tires are the only things worth upgrading. The fork isn't going to make you any faster.

  6. #6
    R.I.P. Pugsley.
    Reputation: Rabies010's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,706
    Maybe go with a IGH ?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    279
    Number 1 for me would be going to lighter and/or wider rims. Holy Rolling Ds are what i put on my Pugsley, but my heart belongs to the 100mm rims.
    Number 2 would be tires. Although i don't hate the endomorphs or larry's like some folks do, i like other tires better. On my pugsley i had big fat larrys but if it had an Alfine 8 speed so it cleared the wider tires.
    Number 3 would be an alfine hub. I really like the alfine when things get slushy or salty.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    IGH is right out. I like my drivetrain the way it is.

    My goals are mostly lighter weight without any loss of strength- I still want to be able to ride singletrack in the summer...

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    221
    If you are still running Large Marge's you will be amazed when you switch to Marge Lites. Best place to put your money and lose weight.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Depends on your use of the bike. It could be anything from a GPS to a dropper seatpost. Probably wheels though, which ones depends...

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    66
    If you're running DH thick n'stable tubes, you might save a few grams by switching to lighter tubes. Bontragers from Fatbikes.com for example.

    Or carbon seat post and a carbon bar to give more comfort?

    Bj

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    374
    best and cheapest is to drill your rims

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    Quote Originally Posted by cozz View Post
    best and cheapest is to drill your rims
    'cept there's no way I could get nearly as light drilling out a pair of stock LM-DH rims as I could replacing them with marge lites...

    Looks like rims is the way to go, followed by tires.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    479
    Is there even a market for the stock large marge wheel set? I wonder what the cost differential would be upgrading to marge kites after selling the LMs

  15. #15
    Icebiker
    Reputation: Bugeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    443
    I've been wondering same thing for my Muk 3. I don't have Buck's budget at the moment, but am considering drilling my RD's and installing DH tubes. Based on what I've read on MTBR threads, as well as using tube weights published on fatbikes.com, I figure:

    Drilling RD's: saves roughly 150 grams/wheel = 300g
    Switching to Bonti DH tubes: saves about 160/wheel = 320g

    total savings = about 1.4lbs rolling weight

    1) Does this sound right?
    2) I've not tried DH tubes...if I run my Muk at between 7-10 psi with standard fat tubes, will the DH tubes serve me well? (e.g. sufficient size to hold my weight?...I'm 210 or so).

    Thanks

  16. #16
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,074
    Hopefully the spokes are still the right length it could be an easy swap to Marge Lites, if not they are only $80 from jenson's for Revo's.
    BTW Jenson price matched the cheapest price for Marge lites i could find at the time at $136us.

    Going this way and even possibly with lighter spokes will save the the most weight in the best place possible.
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    FM190 Fatty
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    463
    Put your bucks in a sock untill you now what you want???

    Marge lites are nice, but if it's for trail riding the 47 mm trial tech rims might be better?
    But maybe you need more float? or a 29'er set??

    You might profit more from a front suspension? A seat dropper, other brakes,..

    In 2 years time bud and lou on 100 mm rims might seem tiny, and you'll want to go 32" and 6" wide, but you spended your budget on a few upgrades on your old bike!

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    Quote Originally Posted by Nothing's impossible View Post
    Put your bucks in a sock untill you now what you want???

    Marge lites are nice, but if it's for trail riding the 47 mm trial tech rims might be better?
    But maybe you need more float? or a 29'er set??

    You might profit more from a front suspension? A seat dropper, other brakes,..

    In 2 years time bud and lou on 100 mm rims might seem tiny, and you'll want to go 32" and 6" wide, but you spended your budget on a few upgrades on your old bike!
    I'm totally happy with the width of the large marge rims- they seem like a really good balance for what I do with the bike. I just want the bike to weigh less.

    Have had no need for a front suspension, seat dropper or brakes. THe trails around me aren't that vertical.

    I pretty much know what i want- a lighter pugsley. That's why I'm looking at trying to get rid of weight. Lighter wheels, fork and tires are about all that's left for me to lighten up. Doubt it will make earth-shatteringly huge differences in the way the bike rides, but that's OK because I like the way my pugsley rides. Just wish it was a few pounds less.

  19. #19
    Bad cat!
    Reputation: montana_ben's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    357
    I'm totally happy with the width of the large marge rims- they seem like a really good balance for what I do with the bike. I just want the bike to weigh less.
    Hey Buck, for what it's worth, the weight difference between my winter wheelset (stock Mukluk wheelset w/holy rolling darryls, salsa hubs, 27tpi nates, tubeless) and my summer wheelset (marge lites, ultralight nate/husker du, hope hubs, dt supercomp spokes) is almost 3.5lbs. The only problem I can see is realistically getting there for $500 even lacing them up yourself (I did), all those parts add up in a hurry. Maybe with some dedicated deal searching you could get close but might have to skip the hubs/spokes...

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    Quote Originally Posted by montana_ben View Post
    Hey Buck, for what it's worth, the weight difference between my winter wheelset (stock Mukluk wheelset w/holy rolling darryls, salsa hubs, 27tpi nates, tubeless) and my summer wheelset (marge lites, ultralight nate/husker du, hope hubs, dt supercomp spokes) is almost 3.5lbs. The only problem I can see is realistically getting there for $500 even lacing them up yourself (I did), all those parts add up in a hurry. Maybe with some dedicated deal searching you could get close but might have to skip the hubs/spokes...
    Totally understand- figure I can re-rim my current wheels or build up a new set for 3-500 depending on the quality of hubs I can find at the swap in january, then get new tires next spring when they'll make a difference- the stock tire combo is heavy, but it's not bad.

    I kinda figured I could do one thing- fork, tires or rims, but only one.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vmaxx4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    320
    I think one of the best upgrades for your dollar is the cassette. Not many people talk about this. I think I saved close to a pound of rotating mass when I swapped out the "boat anchor" of a cassette that came stock on my Mukluk 2.
    2010 Intense Spider 2
    2010 Ibis Tranny SS
    2012 Salsa Mukluk 2
    2013 Salsa Spearfish 1
    2013 Trek Domane 5.2
    2014 Hakkalugi

  22. #22
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,571
    Quote Originally Posted by vmaxx4 View Post
    I think one of the best upgrades for your dollar is the cassette. Not many people talk about this. I think I saved close to a pound of rotating mass when I swapped out the "boat anchor" of a cassette that came stock on my Mukluk 2.
    what came stock and what was the replacement?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,215
    Lighter tubes and holey rims. Get a hacksaw and cut off the surplus on your seatpost - anything more than the minimum insertion is surplus. Foam grips instead of lockons. So far, cost next to nothing, and major weight saving.

    Next lighter tyres.

    Then lots of money on shiny bits because they look nice and save 10 grams all up.

    Rest to be spent on a barrel of beer....




    Oh, and you can save another 40gms by bonding your seatpost into place and dumping the seatclamp.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smthgfshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    187
    the best bang for buck weight savings if I had $500.....and your bike...

    #1 - buy carver fork ($300) sell old fork ($50) = 250
    #2 - sell old rims ($100) buy marge lites ($300) = 50
    #3 - buy ashima rotors ($50) = 0

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ze_Zaskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    854
    Best bang for the buck? Easy, lighter tubes

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vmaxx4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    what came stock and what was the replacement?
    Shimano HG-50 9-Speed 11-34T is what Salsa lists it at. I think it is about 450 g. I put on a Sram PG 990 which is about 300 g. Close to 1/2 pound I guess. Sure feels like a lot more when your holding them. Still for $55 dollars a good weight savings.
    2010 Intense Spider 2
    2010 Ibis Tranny SS
    2012 Salsa Mukluk 2
    2013 Salsa Spearfish 1
    2013 Trek Domane 5.2
    2014 Hakkalugi

  27. #27
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,571
    Quote Originally Posted by vmaxx4 View Post
    Shimano HG-50 9-Speed 11-34T is what Salsa lists it at. I think it is about 450 g. I put on a Sram PG 990 which is about 300 G. Close to 1/2 pound I guess. Sure feels like a lot more when your holding them. Still for $55 dollars a good weight savings.
    yup thats a worthy change.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    479
    Quote Originally Posted by smthgfshy View Post
    the best bang for buck weight savings if I had $500.....and your bike...

    #1 - buy carver fork ($300) sell old fork ($50) = 250
    #2 - sell old rims ($100) buy marge lites ($300) = 50
    #3 - buy ashima rotors ($50) = 0
    How do you get a pair of marge lites laced for $300

    I am on the same quest.. Just bought new platform pedals.. 350g for the new pair to replace my old 520g pair of pedals

  29. #29
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,840
    $ for $, best upgrade for me was switching to husker dus from Larry endo combo. Next was squishy forth.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    859
    120TPI Husker Dus, tubeless.
    With rims if you can swing it--Marge Lites or Holy Rolling Darryls.

  31. #31
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,074
    Quote Originally Posted by boogman View Post
    How do you get a pair of marge lites laced for $300
    You probably wont if you get other people to build your wheels unless you call in a favour with a mate.

    I would say going by comments on other threads theres quite a few of us here build our own wheels. That costs a few hours of your time but zero $$ and = a whole lot of self satisfaction

    Theres a warm and fuzzy feeling about building your first set of wheels... after that its just a given that you will be building your own from then on in.
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    FM190 Fatty
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    Quote Originally Posted by Ze_Zaskar View Post
    Best bang for the buck? Easy, lighter tubes
    C'mon guys, I'm not a moeron.

    Tubes, replaced. Cassette? cast iron monstrosity replaced with a Ti XTR cassette. xt shadow derailleur. Carbon seatpost, WTB silverado saddle. Boat anchor crank replaced with a much lighter race face crank. Big ring replaced with a lightweight bashguard. horrible deore shifters replaced with super awesome pauls thumbies. Bars, replaced and cut down to fit through trees.Stem, replaced with something lighter.

    I've gotten all the easy stuff.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    I've done it all, Lighter tubes, Carver fork, Lighter rims w/ light gauge spokes and lighter hubs.
    Even with heavy tubes and heavy wheels I punctured the tires, surprisingly enough light tubes and light tires have had less punctures!

    By far the lighter complete wheel had the most effect, I ran the same HuDu on the heavier wheel and the difference is remarkable. I never had the front end lift up like it does now. My front wheel built up is 1000g, All in, including HuDu tire was close to your target amount, it's not a cheap fix.
    If you have the skills, smthngfishy's suggestion involving buying and selling and tearing apart old wheels to build new ones seems to be the only way to spread the dough around effectively.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    double post - error 505`s

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by smthgfshy View Post
    the best bang for buck weight savings if I had $500.....and your bike...

    #1 - buy carver fork ($300) sell old fork ($50) = 250
    #2 - sell old rims ($100) buy marge lites ($300) = 50
    #3 - buy ashima rotors ($50) = 0

    I hesitate on the Ashima rotors, too aggressive on most brake pads. Magura Storm SL would be a safer option

    Only downside is it assumes you have the skills, or a friend who can do it for free.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    340
    From my experience and swapping wheelsets from the Large Marges to the Marges Lites, that would be my vote.

    For good pricing on complete wheels, check out AEBike.com:
    Shop for bicycle parts and accessories - AEBike.com

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smthgfshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    187
    [QUOTE=boogman;9968556]How do you get a pair of marge lites laced for $300

    lace'em yourself or call in a favor to a friend.

    with that plan, assuming he's got a stock pugsley fork, stock undrilled RD's, and something equivalent to Avid g3's, he'll save somewhere right around 3 pounds. He could also drill them himself, and put the $300towards an E-13 crank which would bring his savings close to 3.5lbs.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    479
    Quote Originally Posted by Turtle01 View Post
    From my experience and swapping wheelsets from the Large Marges to the Marges Lites, that would be my vote.

    For good pricing on complete wheels, check out AEBike.com:
    Shop for bicycle parts and accessories - AEBike.com
    How come i always see laced up rear wheels for sale more often than fronts?

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,215
    Quote Originally Posted by buckfiddious View Post
    ...I've gotten all the easy stuff.
    Then dare I suggest a bit of the harder stuff?

    Singlespeed it.

    The biggest improvement you can make to the feel of just about any bike IMO.

    However as a singlespeed rider of longstanding, I actually advocate having gears on a fatbike. This is because if you gear it for the sort of tricky stuff you can ride fat on, you'd be spinning madly to get there on normal trails.

    Setting up as a dinglespeed or tringlespeed may be a light method of having some gearing available though.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Smallfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    However as a singlespeed rider of longstanding, I actually advocate having gears on a fatbike. This is because if you gear it for the sort of tricky stuff you can ride fat on, you'd be spinning madly to get there on normal trails.
    So glad to read this. I'm a single speeder at heart. But have planned a 1x10 drivetrain for my fatbike. As delivery of the frame approachs I find myself with this gut feeling to build it up SS to start with. Basically to get the feel of the bike before I confuse myself with gears. Think maybe I should let my head rule my heart on this one.

    A big boy did it, and ran away.
    62*28'

  41. #41
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    However as a singlespeed rider of longstanding, I actually advocate having gears on a fatbike. This is because if you gear it for the sort of tricky stuff you can ride fat on, you'd be spinning madly to get there on normal trails.
    I'll not have been riding SS as long as you but i rode mine constantly for about 3yrs before getting a fatbike (still ride it), depending on where you live and what you ride also, i agree that gears are great fun on a fatty, i can clear techy sections that i wouldnt be able to if i had one gear. Set up as 1 x 10 is good enough, i have a 30t HBC on the front and 10 at the back, so my highest is 30:11 and lowest 30:36 and im hardly in the lowest unless in riding up steps or something silly steep.
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    FM190 Fatty
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Smallfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    I'll not have been riding SS as long as you but i rode mine constantly for about 3yrs before getting a fatbike (still ride it), depending on where you live and what you ride also, i agree that gears are great fun on a fatty, i can clear techy sections that i wouldnt be able to if i had one gear. Set up as 1 x 10 is good enough, i have a 30t HBC on the front and 10 at the back, so my highest is 30:11 and lowest 30:36 and im hardly in the lowest unless in riding up steps or something silly steep.
    Interesting. Im looking to run 31(also HBC) : 11-36.

    My SS 29er is amazing if you dont need to cycle asphalt for too long. Then spinning the long cranks gets annoying.
    A big boy did it, and ran away.
    62*28'

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Then dare I suggest a bit of the harder stuff?

    Singlespeed it.

    The biggest improvement you can make to the feel of just about any bike IMO.

    However as a singlespeed rider of longstanding, I actually advocate having gears on a fatbike. This is because if you gear it for the sort of tricky stuff you can ride fat on, you'd be spinning madly to get there on normal trails.

    Setting up as a dinglespeed or tringlespeed may be a light method of having some gearing available though.
    I tried a singlespeed, it just wasn't for me. I really wanted to love it but ended up just cursing it constantly. I gots much respect for anyone who can singlespeed but for me it's not to be.

    I've thought about just running a granny ring up front but I use the middle ring enough to keep 2 rings in the front.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    340
    Quote Originally Posted by boogman View Post
    How come i always see laced up rear wheels for sale more often than fronts?
    I'm guessing it's because QBP distribution is the widest of the fatties, and up until recently for them the Pugsley offset fork was their mainstay. Soooo, two rear wheels

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drofluf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    369
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Then dare I suggest a bit of the harder stuff?

    Singlespeed it.

    The biggest improvement you can make to the feel of just about any bike IMO.

    However as a singlespeed rider of longstanding, I actually advocate having gears on a fatbike. This is because if you gear it for the sort of tricky stuff you can ride fat on, you'd be spinning madly to get there on normal trails.

    Setting up as a dinglespeed or tringlespeed may be a light method of having some gearing available though.
    Totally agree. My 29er is perfect as a singlespeed and the Pugsley a lot of fun over the summer as a singlespeed but I've just put an Aline 8 on it and it's made a world of difference! Because I can stay seated I can get far more traction on the climbs and the higher gears mean I'm fast on the flats.
    If you need me I'll be at the bar

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smthgfshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    187
    Wait a second....back the bus up....you're running a 2x setup??

    run 1x9/10 for sure....lots of options to suit your style. there goes another pound at least.....

  47. #47
    PRETENDURO
    Reputation: Leopold Porkstacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7,235
    For me, it was the tires. More specifically, replacing the Larry/Endomorph combo with a Nate/Nate combo. Monumental buttloads of traction now, I am on my fourth set of Nates and love them very much.
    QUOTE from MTBR.COM: You have given Brewtality too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

  48. #48
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,571
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Porkstacker View Post
    For me, it was the tires. More specifically, replacing the Larry/Endomorph combo with a Nate/Nate combo. Monumental buttloads of traction now, I am on my fourth set of Nates and love them very much.
    having used 4 sets would you say the rubber compond is soft compared to others??

  49. #49
    PRETENDURO
    Reputation: Leopold Porkstacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7,235
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    having used 4 sets would you say the rubber compond is soft compared to others??
    Yes, and I have come to the conclusion that perhaps Surly/QBP ought to offer a harder compound version, maybe call it the Hard Nate or something whimsical along those lines. I’m not sure if there is enough interest in them going to the trouble though.

    At $90/tire (for the 27tpi version—having tried the $150 lightweight versions I did not notice any stellar performance improvements) I’d like to think I can get the same number of miles as on high-end (high-dollar as well) 29er race tires, but those last longer than the Nates. I’ve managed between 300 - 500 miles per set of Nates, bike (2012 aluminum 9:zero:7) is ridden on rocky/loose/technical singletrack and fire roads, as well as muddy/mucky stuff and perhaps 13% of the miles on asphalt.
    Last edited by Leopold Porkstacker; 12-15-2012 at 11:16 AM.
    QUOTE from MTBR.COM: You have given Brewtality too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

  50. #50
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,571
    sadly not many miles under those conditions. Would the Knard work for these conditions as an option?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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