Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32
  1. #1
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    81

    cant decide - obsessed

    been reading reviews, researching, etc. I know i want a fatbike, just not sure if i want to go with one of the sub 1k models or go nicer. I have a couple of issues, one, i have never ridden one, two we normally don't get much snow where i live (about 25-26 inches per year), but it usually melts quick. So i would want a bike that is good when no snow too.

    i have a trek superfly fs bike as my main ride. i also have a trek hard tail 29r. I mainly use the hard tail for knocking around, backup bike and for trail work. I was thinking i could sell it and replace it with a fatbike. this would also give me something to ride when its muddy or when we do get snow.

    i have a buddy that can get me a good deal on one of the origin 8 bikes, but reviews are scarce and the weight and igh kind of scare me. all reviews complain about both.

    so for my intended use. occasional snow, trail work, backup bike, exploring. which bikes should i consider?

    I really like the looks of the trek farley - especially since its based on the superfly frame, but of course they are hard to find. i was also considering the 9zero7 bikes and the bicycle direct

  2. #2
    Missouri sucks...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,290
    In my mind, I think the Salsa Mukluk 3 is the best beginner/toe in the water fatbike. Solid build spec for the price. Aluminum frame and fork. Serviceable hubs. Swinger dropouts so you can go singlespeed or adjust your wheelbase. If it wasn't on your radar, check it out

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    110
    I am in the same boat as you. I have a Superfly and a Fuel ex 7 and really want a fatty. I have only test ridden a Salsa Beargrease so far but hopefully next week I can test out a Farley and a 9:zero:7. As for the Beargrease, wow is all I can say. It is just as light as my Superfly and handled great , at least thru the bike stores parking lot and snow drifts.


    I really depends on your price range, but I think you'll fall in love with a fatty.

  4. #4
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    81
    hmm, thanks guys for giving me even more choices! lol

    would the mukluks be good with no snow too?

    fuzzwardo, where are you able to find all of these bikes to test at? no one has anything around me. but i guess since i don't live in typical fatbike country that makes sense.

    the farlely is what i really would like. i talked to a shop in MN that has ones they built i guess you're not allow to ship a trek per the dealer agreement.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,781
    I wouldn't buy one of the discount fatties, but that's just me. For what you described any fatbike from Surly, Salsa, etc... is going to be fine. The most important thing is that it fits well.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  6. #6
    MTB, Road, Commuting
    Reputation: bedwards1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,073
    If I had it to do over, I'd go a little higher end right out of the gate. I got a pugs last year (holdover 2012 model) and it's heavy. My theory is you never get bike parts cheaper than when they come on a bike.

  7. #7
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,646
    I have a Motobecane FB-4. I went around and around on what bike to buy (info in that list is obviously out of date now). I am on a budget so the cheaper bikes were a real draw for me. I get obsessed with bikes and went through a period of extreme scrutiny (in some ways I'm still there).

    After owning the bike for 3 months and riding it about 200 miles I can honestly say it was a good purchase for me. I bought the Elite model and went in with eyes wide open knowing I'd need to replace some parts. I think I have something like $1,100 into the bike - I never did the math exactly. That price is about what a base line Pugsley would cost, and I feel like my bike is far better than a base line Pugsley - it weighs around 34 pounds (never weighed it, just going off what other people have reported on weights). I rode a Pugsley right before buying my bike and there really was not much difference in the ride, besides the weight!

    I have a RIP9 in my shed as well, I am surprised how often I reach for the fatty for rides. I love the ride of a fatty, its not the fastest bike, but for a lot of rides, it is the most fun.

    I would REALLY like a lighter fatty, but to get lower than 34 pounds you get into some expensive parts.

    I guess it comes down to how comfortable you are with not having local support and changing parts, if you are ok with that, the cheaper bikes are a really good option.

    The one thing that seems to be consistent on the low end bikes is the Vee Tires Missions - they are terrible tires, and to get a good fat bike experience you really need to swap those out, be prepared for that.
    Big Strings, Big Wheels, The Jisch Blog

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    410
    For the use you are describing I think you nailed it with the Trek Farley. Good specs at a good price. 170 makes a great all around fat bike. Here in RI (probably very similar to Jisch in CT?) we have the same snow situation. Not a whole lot and the freeze/thaw cycle is usually not more than 2 days. The fatbike is great to have when you have no clue what the trail will be like on any given day. Did the snow disappear when it was 45 degrees yesterday or did it just get soft and then freeze again overnight? With the fat bike your chances of getting to the trail and saying "crap, I can't ride this" are dramatically reduced.

  9. #9
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    81
    no trek farleys to be had around here. i found some in MN but thats 10 hour drive. no farley eta this year either.

    i found a salsa dealer about an hour from me that has some in stock. i'm gonna go check them out.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,896
    Quote Originally Posted by bedwards1000 View Post
    If I had it to do over, I'd go a little higher end right out of the gate. I got a pugs last year (holdover 2012 model) and it's heavy. My theory is you never get bike parts cheaper than when they come on a bike.
    perhaps not but you do get to choose them whilst paring weight as i did and managed a 31lb pug when done.

  11. #11
    MTB, Road, Commuting
    Reputation: bedwards1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,073
    ^^True but I would have paid more attention if had it to do over. Like I would have looked for something with lighter rims. A 31lb pugs is pretty good. What were your top 5 weight saving areas?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    809
    Check out the Norco Bigfoot 1499.00 double wall rims drilled, ali frame and fork not a bad bike for the price, oh yeah KHS makes a fatbike as well now.
    Giant XTC 2 29er
    KHS Flagstaff 29er FS
    Neon Bow Trials Bike
    Norco Fluid 9.2 29er FS
    Norco BIGFOOT FATTY

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,529
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I wouldn't buy one of the discount fatties, but that's just me. For what you described any fatbike from Surly, Salsa, etc... is going to be fine. The most important thing is that it fits well.
    Yeah, fit and how it feels to you is paramount. Though I do love to examine the differences in geometry, tire size/tread and casing design and rim width/design and the different performance ability's/issues and etc... on group rides, all the fatties get the job done (and everybody's smiling). I know lots of potential buyer's have been turned off because they took they're 1st test ride with low pressure on the pavement outside the shop, or w/ too much pressure on a soft/ loose surface. Ideally, you'll get to try stuff out properly adjusted and on a fat "worthy" surface to really get the feel. If not, keep an open mind and unless you've got an unlimited budget and/or want to compete in big race's with the latest & lightest, they're all pretty dang fun!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,896
    Quote Originally Posted by bedwards1000 View Post
    ^^True but I would have paid more attention if had it to do over. Like I would have looked for something with lighter rims. A 31lb pugs is pretty good. What were your top 5 weight saving areas?
    ML's, no FD,shifter,cable etc,hubs, drivetrain. It could be less had i not opted for devist8ers which are 1800gms each.

  15. #15
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,646
    I brought my RIP9 to a ride yesterday - we had less than an inch of snow that fell overnight. 2 out of the remaining 4 riders were on fat bikes. I was bummed I brought the RIP. 1 mile into the ride my fork de-aired itself and I had to do the walk of shame out. The first mile was pretty slick on the RIP, but I was keeping up. The fat bikes both just rode like there was no snow there. Apparently once the trail turned technical and up, the guys not on fat bikes got frustrated and turned around. The fat bikes were having no issues - nothing worse than being the guy(s) having trouble. Just to say even in just "slippery" conditions the fat bike has advantages.

    I just got back from a technical trail ride on dirt - the fat bike did great, so much fun to crank around on that thing - I had no problem keeping up to the other rider on a regular bike.

    The alternative to this is I know a few people who have tried fat bikes and can't stand the rolling resistance, weight and lack of suspension, so there's that too.
    Big Strings, Big Wheels, The Jisch Blog

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    110
    If you search a thread I started called "Wanna get Fat in Northern Illinois" the guys on here came up with quite a few shops in the Chicago area. The only Farley I have found is in Whitewater Wisconsin so that is a bit out of your way. I still have to make it up there to ride it but like you, think I would like it simply because of your other experience with Treks.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Your top priorities seem to be price, then weight, but functionality seems to be low on the list. A Pugs may be a little heavy, but you could build one frame up and end up with a 30-32 LB fat bike that is highly functional, so if that is a priority, don't rule it out yet. Other than rims and tires, the crank is the only fat-specific part. The ability to use standard hubs is a real bonus. Having owned a Mukluk, Beargrease and a now own a Kona Wo, and ridden several others, I have to say I keep coming back to my Pugs as my go-to bike.

  18. #18
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,614
    If multi surface ride-ability is what you're after, I'd go Pug.

    The geometry will be most like a "regular MTB", but has the fatties for flotation when it does become something you want.

    Weight is what it is, get used to it, and move on. Sure, you can spend a bunch making it a few lb lighter, or do the usual suggestions when weight discussions crop up, take a dump, push away from the table sooner, ride more, etc.

    Tubeless is a super cheap way to drop weight where it matters most too, it won't affect "scale weight" as much, but it sure makes the bike ride lighter, which is what you'll notice most.

    Have fun!
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,529
    The Trek is also pretty "regular MTBish". One of the guy's on Saturday's group ride in the Methow Valley Wa. was riding one. Won't fit the 5" tires or 29+, but it's a quick handling/fast fat bike for sure (plenty short in the chain stays). And w/ a 490mm A to C it will easily accept a susp. fork (if and when they become more widely available). Just my opinion, but w/ a susp. fork, I think that Trek is going to rip on the trail... for a fat bike that is. If you want a quick, "all rounder"... might be worth the wait.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    156
    Don't know what size Trek you are looking for but I'm sure I could get a med or a large shipped to ya.

  21. #21
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    81
    couldn't stand it anymore so i went up to a shop an hour from me that had a mukluk 3. i was able to ride it for a mile or so down an abandoned rail bed in 3-4 inches of snow. i liked it so much i bought it and took it home! i then strapped my lights on and went for a 2.5 mile ride on the trails behind my house. very fun stuff. sure there were a few drifts that stopped me, and lots of places that were hard to ride due to frozen quad tracks. but overall very fun. i part of the same trail saturday on my superfly and only made it .8 miles before i gave up.

    thanks for all the help. i may not have gotten what you think is the best, but without a lot of other options around me to test with it was pretty much my only choice - and so far i'm very happy so thats all that matters in the end.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    110
    The only opinion that matters is yours. Congrats.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hobine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    101

    cant decide - obsessed

    Mukluks a great bike. Been riding mine since October. Congrats and enjoy!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tradera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    65
    I bought my muk3 for a beach camp trip back in august. Since then it has been my go to bike. NO RAGRETS.

  25. #25
    Missouri sucks...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,290
    That's what I would have picked over the others anyway Good choice!

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Obsessed Noob!
    By ZEF_SIDE in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-21-2013, 12:00 AM
  2. Are you also obsessed with your BP?
    By fatcat in forum Off Camber (off topic)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-22-2012, 10:25 AM
  3. Think I've become obsessed???
    By Andy Pancroft in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-30-2011, 12:30 PM
  4. We are a Bike Obsessed Family
    By HSCoach2 in forum Families and Riding with Kids
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 07:50 AM
  5. A Bike Obsessed Family
    By HSCoach2 in forum Videos and POV Cameras
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-11-2011, 05:52 AM

Posting Permissions

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