Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 177

Thread: Fat Bike FAQ's

  1. #26
    bored ex-shop rat
    Reputation: velopax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    375

    Caution;  Merge;  Workers Ahead! 100mm BB/crank options

    That's a short list of the 100mm BB & cranks options:

    [SIZE=3]Phil Wood square JIS BB with some square cranks
    [/SIZE]










    [SIZE=3]FSA Platinum Pro DH or Truvative GigaPipe Team DH ISIS BB with some ISIS cranks[/SIZE]









    [SIZE=3]Race Face Atlas FR & Diabolus DH cranks/BB sets
    [/SIZE]





    [SIZE=3]Profile Racing BMX cranks/BB set[/SIZE]





    [SIZE=3]Truvativ Howitzer Team BB with some Truvativ cranks with Howitzer interface
    [/SIZE]








    [SIZE=3]Surly Mr.Whirly cranks with some external bearing BB
    [/SIZE]




    [SIZE=3]The Hive 15G cranks/BB set
    [/SIZE]





    It's maybe helpfull
    Last edited by velopax; 01-06-2010 at 01:46 AM.
    Life is like a ten speed bicycle. Most of us have gears we never use. Charles M. Schulz (1922 - 2000)

  2. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by wheelbender6
    Does a 24"X3" qualify as a Fat Bike? Some Felt cruisers are sold with 24X3.
    Seems that fitting a 24X3 to an MTB frame designed for 26X2 would be simple.
    I think this was the point that Surly was trying to make with the Rat Ride 1x1=11 Anniversary bike. It's got slick Hoggy g 24x3.5 tires as stock equipment on 24 inch Large Marge rims.

  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    73
    Yep. Either that or a 1X1 built up as a Mini Pugs could be called a Poor Man's Fat Bike. There is no need to get a specialized Fat Bike when you can do the same thing with a generic MTB that will also allow you to run conventional MTB tires most of the year.

  4. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,280
    I've spent lots of time on Snowcat rims with 2.5 inch Diesel Pro's on a regular mountain bike and there is no comparison to a real Fatbike. If you can find a fatbike in your budget you will not regret it.

  5. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    73
    I'd maintain a Fat Bike built up with more affordable components is a real Fat Bike. Until you've tried a 1X1 Fat Bike, don't knock it.

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,417
    fyi: niner carbon fork (the 550 gram one) fits a 3" gazzi on a sun s-type rim.
    don't have an endo but doubt it'd work, but for half-fat folks... there you go, lightest fatty fork around.

    edit: oh! just notice the profiles up there, reminded me; i had top grab aftermarket cups for my profiles, decided to try them without the spacers, lspaced the cups furthest out (to simulate wide bb)- they measured out a smidge over 90mm wide.
    I think with those lower profile cups and the arms a couple mm out from fully pressed on you would get the bb cups spaced out for 100mm easily.
    If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!

  7. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,417
    Quote Originally Posted by byknuts
    fyi: niner carbon fork (the 550 gram one) fits a 3" gazzi on a sun s-type rim.
    don't have an endo but doubt it'd work, but for half-fat folks... there you go, lightest fatty fork around.

    edit: oh! just notice the profiles up there, reminded me; i had top grab aftermarket cups for my profiles, decided to try them without the spacers, lspaced the cups furthest out (to simulate wide bb)- they measured out a smidge over 90mm wide.
    I think with those lower profile cups and the arms a couple mm out from fully pressed on you would get the bb cups spaced out for 100mm easily.

    edit numero dos: shaved the side knobs down on the gazzi, fits in a fox talas fork now.
    mud clearance is on the short side, but the notion of 3" of tire under 5" of fork was too intriguing for me not to try it. it's an older talas too, not the nifty new 140mm guys, they might be even easier to work with.

    scratch the previous: it WILL work, but you have to shave the center knobs down to a very minimal height. (think endomorph tread depth) which quite frankly for a front tire makes no sense.
    so as much fun to look at as it may be it's not REALLY going to work for anything but beach duty.
    fits just fine in a fox 36 though.
    Last edited by byknuts; 08-08-2010 at 10:32 AM.
    If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!

  8. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jddjirikian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    416
    What about recommended tire pressures?

    Snow v. Sand v. Hardpack?

    I suspect the snow answer will depend on the type of snow (fluffy, wet, heavy, etc.)?

    Thanks

  9. #34
    Woodybearsinglespeed
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1

    New question here. frame offset

    hi,

    might be asking an old question, but here goes

    if running single speed/hub gear and fat tire could you work something with an 83mm BB and a non offset rear triangle

    only asking as my surly 1x1 got damage by a car and needs rear triangle repairing, and the car driver insurance is paying for the repair (tried for a new frame but not having it )

    thanks for your help


  10. #35
    30-ton War Machine
    Reputation: edgerat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    793
    Gyroscopic effect of all that mass? We don't have much snow here in WA but, I would like to toy around with a Pugs.
    Isaac

  11. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,031

    Salsa Enabler Fork questions

    Q: What is the required hub/brake setup on the Enabler?
    A: The Enabler is designed to use a standard 135 mm spaced, 10 mm axle rear hub (cassette, single speed, ect) and a standard front IS mount disc brake*.

    Q: Can I use a 135 mm spaced FRONT hub (Paul, Fatback/Hadley) in an Enabler fork?
    A: No. The brake rotor will be too close to the IS disc tab, and the 9 mm axle ends will be too loose in the Enabler's 10 mm dropout slots. Modifications could be made to make it work, however.


    *A word on IS mount dimensions.
    For the most part, most "front" and "rear" brake calipers are identical. Front and rear caliper adapters, however, are different dimensions, because the IS radial dimensions are different front to rear.
    The IS axial dimensions (distance from IS mounting tab to the rotor mounting surface of hub) are the same front to rear. However, the IS dimensions from the axle end/dropout surface (not the IS tab) to the rotor mounting surface of the hub is 10 mm in the front and 15 mm in the rear. This is why a 135 mm spaced front hub won't work in an Enabler; the brake rotor will be 5mm too close to the fork's IS tab.

  12. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,031

    Surly Pugsley forks

    Surly offers the Pugsley fork in three variations: Symmetrical with 100 mm axle spacing, symmetrical with 135 mm axle spacing, and offset with 135 mm axle spacing (the original Pugsley fork).

    The 100 mm non-offset fork uses a standard 100 mm front hub, and requires a front brake caliper adapter.

    The 135 mm non-offset fork uses a standard 135 mm REAR hub, and requires a front brake caliper adapter. This is the same setup as the Salsa Enabler fork.

    The 135 mm offset fork uses a 135 mm REAR hub, and requires a REAR brake caliper adapter.

    Trying to use a 135 mm front hub (Paul, Speedway, ect.) in either of the 135 mm spaced forks will encounter the same problems as mentioned in the above post on the Enabler fork (brake rotor spacing and axle diameter).
    Last edited by Andy FitzGibbon; 07-06-2011 at 04:40 PM.

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,031

    135 mm front hubs

    The Paul WHUB and the various offerings from Fatback (Hadley and import) are all true 135 mm FRONT hubs. They have 9 mm axle ends and front disc rotor spacing, just like a standard 100 mm front disc hub. These hubs will work in Fatback forks and the 907/White Bros SnowPack fork. They won't work in the Salsa Enabler or either of the 135 mm Pugsley forks without modifications.

    Surly's New Disc 135 mm front hub is actually just a rear hub without freewheel threads. So, it has 10 mm axle ends and rear disc rotor spacing. This hub will work in the Salsa Enabler or either of the 135 mm Pugsley forks, but won't work in any of the Fatback forks or the 907/White Bros. Snowpack fork without modification.

  14. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ironbirdexplorer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7
    I just bought a SALSA MUKLUK two months ago. I put it together with a bike mechanic-friend of mine and hit the trails. The terrain here in southwestern Manitoba is relatively flat (Canadian prairie) and sandy. I was out on the sandy trails about a month ago, and experienced some chain suck in the wet sand. I've had chain suck before, but this time seemed much worse. I was able to keep going, but I noticed things just didn't "feel right". When I got home, I examined my drive train and noticed my middle chain ring was bent in a couple of different places and there were slivers of metal poking out from the sides of the teeth in the chain ring where the chain had sheared into the metal of the chain ring.

    My mechanic friend hasn't seen it yet, but he says that we might be able to file the slivers off between the teeth and try to straighten out the chain ring.

    Has anybody else experienced this before? I don't think it's just because it's a fat-tire bike, but I haven't had it that bad on my other bikes.

    Should I stock spare middle chain rings? Should I keep separate drive trains for winter and summer?


    Steve
    (ironbirdexplorer)

  15. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    79
    I'm planning to build "fatbike" based on the Troll frame and 26x3.0 tires ( duro leopard or gazzaloddis ), for autumn-winter-spring riding ( and to swap wheels to 700c for summer commuting ). So I decided to ask here. Not going for true fatbike, because I just dont have a place for three bikes ( now paragon 29er + commuter rigid, which frameset will be changed to Troll )

    How critical is rim width ? Is it absolutely necessary to use widest rim possible ( large marge, 65mm ) ?
    Or it will be almost identical with 47mm trial rims ? It is a matter of money, i can get 47mm rims almost 4 times cheaper , than 65mm marges...

    Will I be able to use non offset large marge rims on standart slx hubs wheels ( front 100mm and rear 135mm ) on true fatbike frameset ?

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,536

    Tire Weights and Widths

    Surly Big Fat Larry 26x4.7
    Weighs: 1433gr (120tpi)
    Measures:
    65mm Rim-98mm-100mm
    80mm Rim-104mm
    100mm Rim-113-118mm

    Surly Larry 26x3.8
    Weighs: 1530gr (27tpi) 1400gr (120tpi)
    Measures:
    65mm Rim-92mm
    80mm Rim-96mm
    100mm Rim-105mm

    Surly Endomorph 26x3.7
    Weighs:
    Measures:
    65mm Rim-92mm
    80mm Rim-
    100mm Rim-

    Surly Nate 26x3.8
    Weighs: 1637gr (27tpi) 1530gr (120tpi)
    Measures:
    65mm Rim-96-98mm
    80mm Rim-
    100mm Rim-

    Surly Black Floyd 26x3.8
    Weighs: 1237gr (27tpi)
    Measures:
    65mm Rim-
    80mm Rim-
    100mm Rim-

    Rims:

    Surly Large Marge 65mm
    Weighs 1150g (DH), 950g (XC)

    Surly Rolling Darryl 82mm
    Weighs 1030g (solid) 850g (drilled)

    Flattop 100mm
    Weighs 1150g (solid), 950g (drilled)

    Flattop 80mm
    Weighs 980g (solid), 795g (drilled)

    Vicious Cycles Graceful Fat Sheba 80mm
    Weighs 1310g

    Credits: benwitt11, FTMN, mikesee, Andy FitzGibbon, wadester

    I'm trying to complete this table, so if you have a missing piece please PM me. Thanks!
    Last edited by JAGI410; 09-13-2011 at 07:33 PM.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  17. #42
    Vagician
    Reputation: EPcycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    290
    Great job with the table. Exactly the information that I was looking for with the new and current tires. Thanks. Also, I currently am running my larry 3.8s tubeless on 47mm trial tech rims for summer. They both measure 88mm.
    Last edited by EPcycles; 08-28-2011 at 08:13 PM.

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jfkbike2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    958
    My weights are similar...

    BFL. 120 tpi 1420 gr
    Nate. 120 tpi 1520 gr
    Larry. ? 1480 gr

    Very interesting that the BFL is lighter than the skinny Larry.

  19. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wieczorek24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    On post #24 there is this information

    Speedway 70mm rim with Endomorph: 94.5 - 95.5 mm
    Vicious Cycles 80 rim with Endomorph: 95.5 - 96.5 mm
    100mm rim with Endomorph: 106.5 - 107.5 mm

    Found it when looking for endo widths

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,031
    Surly now offers two different Mr. Whirly spindle lengths for 100 mm bottom bracket shells:

    Pugsley: 157 mm
    Moonlander: 171 mm, includes spacers to take up additional space between crankarms and bottom bracket cups.

    The Moonlander spindle is longer so that the crankset's chainline will match up with the 28 mm rear offset. But, it could easily be used on other bikes to deal with crankarm or tire/chain clearance issues.

  21. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    417

    tire weights, additional

    very slightly worn Endomorph 3.7, unknown tpi = 1330g

    Larry 3.8, 120 tpi = 1430g

    Larry 3.8, 27 tpi = 1500g

    weighed on Alpine hanging digital scale.

  22. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    14

    Please, please read..

    Hello all,

    I am carrying out initial market research for my Final Year Project for my BEng Mechanical Engineering Degree at the University of Hull. I would be incredibly appreciative of any response and questions you may have. I am very new to the idea of FatBikes so please if I am stating incorrect information please correct me. My supervisor at the University of Hull has given me the following task:

    A new generation of off-road bike, so called 'FatBikes' utilise large (100mm wide) tyres running at relatively low pressures (5-20psi) to handle soft terrain like snow, mud and sand. Conventional portable bicycle pumps are designed to deliver low volumes of air at high pressure (60-120psi). Fatbike tyres are relatively easy to puncture and cyclists are faced with an onerous task to repair and re-inflate them when 'on the trail' due to their relatively large volumes. Additionally cyclists like to 'tune' the running pressure to the terrain, and therefore some means of measuring the absolute pressure accurately is required. The scope of the project is to design and evaluate a low-weight, highly portable, manufacturable solution to this issue. There is no preferred conceptual solution, the project should include a widely ranging survey of air-pumping technologies.

    Adding to this, im hoping to manufacture a prototype and then test it.

    Firstly can anybody suggest any pumps on the current market and/or send me a link to the relevant websites?

    Sounds obvious but do FatBike tyres have an inner tube and is the value on this inner tube the same as a conventional bike tyre?

    Many, many Thanks

    Dave

  23. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    263
    [QUOTE=daveyboy150;8523581]Hello all,
    Firstly can anybody suggest any pumps on the current market and/or send me a link to the relevant websites?
    Any standard mechanical portable pump cycling will work. Look at Topeak, Blackburn, Lenzyne, Portland Design Works etc. Google them. Also, portable CO2 powered "insta-flate" style gas canisters can work too though big tires need multiple compressed gas tubes to get them up to adequate pressure.

    Sounds obvious but do FatBike tyres have an inner tube and is the value on this inner tube the same as a conventional bike tyre?
    Most fat tire bikes use butyl rubber inner tubes. They are larger in volume due to the larger tire size. They typically use either Presta ("French") or Shraeder ("automobile style") valves. Some enthusiasts have experimented with tubeless style setups similar to those used in conventional MTB tires, though the rims and tires available for fatbikes are not tubeless specific, meaning the tire casings are not sealed and the rims do not have double wall sealed construction and the tight beads as seen n conventional MTB tubeless systems. Some fat bike users will put tubeless tire sealant (Stan's No Tubes) in to the innertube to help seal the inner tube against small punctures from thorns if riding in sandy, desert type conditions.

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    14
    thank you very much for this information, I will be using this for my research.

    Dave

  25. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    14
    Ps are there any websites that give clear details on the tyres / inner tubes so that I can reference this in my report?

    Many thanks

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 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
  •