Results 1 to 47 of 47
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fat_tires_are_fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    508

    Fat bikes in 5 years

    Its really fun to watch the fat bike craze start to really grow. I am new as an owner, but have been aware since first seeing them about 7 years ago.
    it is a great time to be a company that is in the fat bike market because it seems that supply cant keep pace with demand. That said, with big companies jumping in the game, the market will soon be plentiful and people will be looking closer at value and quality.
    I am really curious to see what the norm is in 5 or so years....will it be rigid, full sus, front sus, 5 inch tires, carbon frames?
    I realize that regular mountain bikes have tons of options and all have their place, but up until very recently full rigid was the only real option for fat bikes unless you wanted to modify yourself a lefty or something.
    Pricing should also be interesting...as companies start to recoup their initial investments and tooling , you would think the mass produced products will get much less expensive. Items like wheels, frames, tires, etc should become commonplace, and the more expensive bikes will be the ones that continue to push and innovate just like in regular mtb.
    Will we see $250 carbon frames on ebay from Asia? I dont see why not...
    any thoughts on the future of what seems to be the end of a niche market?

    Or will this be a flash in the pan and go back to snow and beach only? Will everyone look back and laugh at this era like they do with outdated hairstyles and sweaters?
    - MOOTS Mooto X
    - Salsa Fargo
    - Surly Pugsley

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,564
    Good question, and only time will tell, but I think there will be a separation between the types of fat bikes, just like there is in the MTB world. I can see light, carbon 1x11 rigid race bikes and slack geo trail bikes with all sorts of "standard" hubs and BB's. The problem now is everybody has their own vision of what a fat bike should be, so there is a lot of tweaking going on to make them fit their owners needs. I think it's a mistake to believe that a $5,000 carbon fat bike will be perfect for everyone, when a Pugsley-type bike will serve many peoples needs just fine. In the end, the only people who will win are the bike company marketing guys, who treat every micro-evolution as a revolution, and dole out the products in small dollops to keep the fervor going.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Solo-Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    274
    I kinda remember a time when you only had one bike. Now with so many sud- groups. 650b, 26er, 29er, single, 27, 30 speeds, front suspension, full suspension, fat bikes.

    I wonder how much the market can support.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Solo-Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    274
    I will add, fatbikes are visually appealing and can be ridden in all types of situations.

    So unlike 69ers or 36ers. Fatbikes, will be around a long time. Just need to make them more affordable to the masses.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fat_tires_are_fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    508
    Both good points. It will be interesting to see if in the long run all fat bike raiders relate to one and other, or if they fall more in line with the already established sub groups.
    So, for example, will a fat bike SS rider relate more to fat bikes in general, or with the singlespeed folks...
    To the next point, I agree there are an abundance of choices right now. I think many niches are being supported by riders that own multiple bikes. I think I am in the majority in owning more than one bike, aside from my fat. I know some people only have one bike and it is a fat bike, but I believe that is not the common scenario.
    - MOOTS Mooto X
    - Salsa Fargo
    - Surly Pugsley

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Current fatbikes will be the normal mtbs.

    Future fatbikers will be debating whether there is a handling problem with the 50mm offset chainstays on the 8" tyre SuperPug.

    Packraft companies will be going broke because fatbikers are riding straight across the water on their 8" tyres.

    We'll be complaining that there's no carbon rims over 120mm, and whether foamed polycarbonate is a suitable material for rims.

    There will be a Walbatross which weighs 80lbs, which will be popular with the yachting community for its anchoring properties.

    Gates will introduce the Carbon Drive chain which will be promoted as replacing old hat belt drive, but it will be an odd metric size and only fits their proprietary chainrings.

    Shimano will introduce an electronic 179mm hub gear which doesn't fit anything.

    Chainrings with all teeth the same thickness will be patented by one of the big Bike Cos.

    Jones will at last discover that straight tubes are lighter and make a stronger structure than curly ones but nearly goes broke because everyone with a fat wallet prefers curvy bikes.

    And I'll still be trying to prove steep head angles are better than slack for handling in ruts....
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fat_tires_are_fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    508
    Thats good stuff...
    I particularly like the line about Jones.
    Also, your point about normal mtb may be true...this could be the revolution
    - MOOTS Mooto X
    - Salsa Fargo
    - Surly Pugsley

  8. #8
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    I just hope that the 10" 20 pound Mars Carbon Rover is out soon.

  9. #9
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712

    Re: Fat bikes in 5 years

    Fat bikes will hover in the future. Kind of like those hoverboards from the movie "back to the future". We will all be comparing how fat our hover is... or how we need lighter flux capacitors... or something.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  10. #10
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,613
    Velobike, knowing your tastes, I like how you mixed in a bit of serious and bit of satire. Love it.
    Disclaimer: I run Regular Cycles (as of 2016). As a profiteer of the bicycle industry, I am not to be taken very seriously.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,099
    We will make our own frames at home using 3D printers that extrude a carbon nanotube/ceramic/titanium matrix suspended in a soy-based bio-resin. Tire compounds will soften/stiffen according to the terrain and will be self-healing. Rim tape will use backlit e-ink.

    And a big name manufacturer will show a prototype suspension fork at the Galactibike 2018 show, but won't actually put it into production.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post

    And I'll still be trying to prove steep head angles are better than slack for handling in ruts....
    And somewhere in the highlands of Scotland a beloved gent nearing his mid...will still be struggling to lift his now sub 20lb fat bike over a fence...

    The more things change...the more things stay the...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    68
    Lets be honest if anyone actually is still riding and not typing, they will have discovered this antiquated standard of '135mm offset' with these dinky 4" tyres and rave about how little drag they have with an 'all rounder' appeal they have.
    After agreeing that the 6" tyres were'nt that necessary and the 32" overall diameter limited it to riders over 6'5. They decide to make something for the masses.

    I love technology but it has to be progress (rider upgrading from a purple pugs to a preordered fatboy)

  14. #14
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,613
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    We will make our own frames at home using 3D printers that extrude a carbon nanotube/ceramic/titanium matrix suspended in a soy-based bio-resin. Tire compounds will soften/stiffen according to the terrain and will be self-healing. Rim tape will use backlit e-ink.

    And a big name manufacturer will show a prototype suspension fork at the Galactibike 2018 show, but won't actually put it into production.
    I belly laughed.

    You win, man. You win.

    EDIT - BTW the super sophisticated printing of bike frames will probably arrive some day.
    Disclaimer: I run Regular Cycles (as of 2016). As a profiteer of the bicycle industry, I am not to be taken very seriously.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    Fat bikes will hover in the future. Kind of like those hoverboards from the movie "back to the future". We will all be comparing how fat our hover is... or how we need lighter flux capacitors... or something.
    I think the prototype is already out there judging by Drevil's photos
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    On a more serious note I'd like to see:

    Large diameter through axles as standard.

    A hubgear to fit 170mm and 190 axles. Wouldn't need too many gears but a wide ratio, and a through axle would be nice.

    A frame that breaks down for easy transport (eg like a Ritchie)

    A trailing link suspension fork with the brake arm adjustable so that you can dial in the anti-dive characteristics.

    If we are to get 8' tyres, then low profile please.

    If we are to go really fat on our tyres - say 10" - then we'll need a method of transmitting drive to the back wheel that doesn't interfere with the tyre, maybe something like the Alenax?

    And for those who think really fat tyres aren't feasible, I refer you to similar recurring discussions in the history of bicycles over the last 100 years (eg 1930s when tyres the size of mtbs were proposed). It just depends on the technology used to make the carcass.

    A realisation that the bike geometry and fittings that suits an XC racing whippet aren't necessarily the best option for a somewhat less fit rider with no sponsored parts.

    A derailleur museum so the next generation can stare in wonder at the kludges once used to change gear.*



    And some retro improvements:

    A reintroduction of grease nipples and oil ports and the concept of maintenance.

    Loose balls on all bearings so no one needs to spend a fortune fixing duff bearings.

    Big drum brakes so that we never need to buy another over priced brake pad.

    Oilbath full chaincases.



    *sorry, had to get that in
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mongol777's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    716
    in 5 years I will have mint vintage super rare Moonlander for sale, limited edition, all original for sale on craigslist for just $25000

  18. #18
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,180
    In the five years the latest trend will be the 29" sized fat rims. In another 5 years the 27.5" fat tire rim will be all the rage.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Morpheous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    493
    (For Dirt trail riding, which is the future for these bikes as they take over and become the benchmark) We will see full suspension, light weight frames and rims will be the norm(alum and carbon) tires will cap at 3.8 doen to 3.3, rims down a bit to 50mm range. IG hubs will prevail, or even better be placed mid frame. High wide bars 3-4" rise, and 30-32" width will provide the leverage to handle the big tires like a regular trail bike.
    2014 SC NOMAD C Nior
    2015 Surly Instigator 2.0 26+
    2012 Diamondback Sortie 27.5+

  20. #20
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    Quote Originally Posted by mongol777 View Post
    in 5 years I will have mint vintage super rare Moonlander for sale, limited edition, all original for sale on craigslist for just $25000
    Mine is already for sale for a lot less than that.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SupremeDork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    113
    My take on all this (I'll use all-mountain in my argument because it covers most MTBing):

    A fat bike rim/tire combo shines at lower pressures. Inflated to a firmer pressure gives a 29er-like experience. If riders intend to shred them like AM bikes, they'll likely become disillusioned by frequent pinch flats at lower PSI. If running higher PSI, riders will realize the bike is just a 29er with massive tires that bounce too much, even with suspension. If running tubeless, I don't know what kind of abuse a fat wheel can take compared to the average MTB wheel. But at that point, why even have a fully AM fat bike?

    In other words, a fat bike is not the right bike for serious MTBing. Now don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in "it's the rider, not the bike", but like anything there are exceptions. A road bike wasn't the ideal equipment for offroad use, hence the MTB was born. That same logic is applicable here.

    That leads my thought experiment (and personal experience) to the conclusion that like any other bike, fat bikes will eventually settle into a few niches and stay there. Wider rims (up to 40mm I surmise) will become the norm with most MTBs, essentially following the enlightened view that fatter/wider=better because of increased traction and decreased rolling resistance/tire deflection.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Quote Originally Posted by SupremeDork View Post
    ...In other words, a fat bike is not the right bike for serious MTBing...
    Well it depends what you call serious mtbing.

    To me all the jumping and shredding etc is just play biking, a sort of offroad bmxing in circles*, and serious mtbing involves getting your bike across mountainous terrain or heading off on expeditions.

    There a long established organisation in the UK called the RSF.org.uk and the emphasis is using the bike to get places offroad, and their sort of riding is what I do.

    What we will eventually see is bikes provided for all shades of fatbiking, like the difference between a road race bike and a touring bike, and lots of stuff in between.


    *There's probably a better way to put that, it's not intended to sound like I'm knocking that sort of riding, it's fun.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,099
    Can we quickly settle on a definition of "serious"?
    I only ask because I'm heading out for a ride on my clown bike soon, and I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea...

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SupremeDork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Well it depends what you call serious mtbing.

    To me all the jumping and shredding etc is just play biking, a sort of offroad bmxing in circles*, and serious mtbing involves getting your bike across mountainous terrain or heading off on expeditions.

    There a long established organisation in the UK called the RSF.org.uk and the emphasis is using the bike to get places offroad, and their sort of riding is what I do.

    What we will eventually see is bikes provided for all shades of fatbiking, like the difference between a road race bike and a touring bike, and lots of stuff in between.


    *There's probably a better way to put that, it's not intended to sound like I'm knocking that sort of riding, it's fun.
    I hear ya! I'm not a big-hit rider, but I love to go fast. All is well on the fat bike until the terrain gets excessively bumpy.

    We all buy/build bikes for our intended use. From a mass-market perspective a fully fat bike seems improper and unnecessary when I consider my above musings. Do I want one? Hell yes, but the reality in my head is that mid-fat is where MTBs are going. I think Surly figured this out.

    I don't know what a FS fat bike would be like. Maybe the bouncy tire problem would be minimal? But, if you consider that same bike ridden into fat bike territory, crawling along, I imagine it would be too much bike and negate the whole ATB aspect.

    Also, I can see why some fat bikers have a second wheelset for trail riding.

    This is the best solution to the "can a fat bike be a MTB" dilemma!:

    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    We will make our own frames at home using 3D printers that extrude a carbon nanotube/ceramic/titanium matrix suspended in a soy-based bio-resin. Tire compounds will soften/stiffen according to the terrain and will be self-healing. Rim tape will use backlit e-ink.

    And a big name manufacturer will show a prototype suspension fork at the Galactibike 2018 show, but won't actually put it into production.
    Perfect, now give me the option to convert it full-rigid to hard tail to FS with my choice of fat or skinny hoops, all without it looking like a transformer.

    As for "serious" MTBing, we all have different ideas of that. For me it's mainly long climbs up that are a blast to bomb down, punctuated with rocky/rooty sections, if they're there.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,050

    Smile

    The old Gardener digs his vegtable plot over every Autumn with his old trusty spade - made by Spear and Jackson - English steel with a hickory wood shaft,

    He then saws some logs with a Bushman saw, years old, but does whats required,

    He sharpens his axe in a Record Vice, a proven tool that does its job,

    Then he splits the logs with a Sheffield Steel headed hickory shaft axe/ proven and depenable - a tool for the job...

    Home he pours a cider,and sits down in front of a Morso stove...

    He then goes for a cycle on his fatbike which is a tried and tested Surly Pugsley/ Allthe above and the bicycle could be replaced but they are all tools which preform the job required.

    All things that do their job...

    I will still be riding a Surly Pugsley on the coast hopefully in 7 years time. Cannot see anything improving the experiance of coastal cycling as the original Pugsley does it fine, and the bike is just part of the ride...
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Just to make it clear. I wasn't being critical of any particular cycling activity, just pointing out one man's definition does not mean the same thing to another.

    One thing for sure, there's going to be lot more fatbikes...

    Or to paraphrase CK

    The young Gardener ploughs his vegetable plot with his shiny new tractor - made by Kubota - reliable Japanese technology,

    He then shreds some logs with his Stihl chainsaw, new and fast,

    He looks at his granddad's axe hanging in the shed over a rusty Record Vice, and wonders how he could have cleared all that land with it,

    Then he takes his truck down to the hardware store and buys a ton of cut logs...

    Home he pours a beer,and sits down in his centrally heated home...

    He then goes for a cycle on his fatbike which is a full suspension Trekialized and leaps over the old codger on his ancient steel retro bike with its skinny 4" tyres.


    Meanwhile CK will still be riding a Surly Pugsley on the coast hopefully in 7 years time. Cannot see anything improving the experiance of coastal cycling as the original Pugsley does it fine, and the bike is just part of the ride...

    And he's right, a tool that does the job today, does it again tomorrow.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SupremeDork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by coastkid71 View Post
    The old Gardener digs his vegtable plot over every Autumn with his old trusty spade - made by Spear and Jackson - English steel with a hickory wood shaft,

    He then saws some logs with a Bushman saw, years old, but does whats required,

    He sharpens his axe in a Record Vice, a proven tool that does its job,

    Then he splits the logs with a Sheffield Steel headed hickory shaft axe/ proven and depenable - a tool for the job...

    Home he pours a cider,and sits down in front of a Morso stove...

    He then goes for a cycle on his fatbike which is a tried and tested Surly Pugsley/ Allthe above and the bicycle could be replaced but they are all tools which preform the job required.

    All things that do their job...

    I will still be riding a Surly Pugsley on the coast hopefully in 7 years time. Cannot see anything improving the experiance of coastal cycling as the original Pugsley does it fine, and the bike is just part of the ride...
    Awesome post!

    A "use the right tool for the job" mindset. Although, some like to improvise, some like to be anal, and some just don't care. lol

    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Just to make it clear. I wasn't being critical of any particular cycling activity, just pointing out one man's definition does not mean the same thing to another.

    One thing for sure, there's going to be lot more fatbikes...
    No such implication received on my end. I base my opinions on my local terrain, as do most others I'll assume.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    365
    I predict in 5 years there will be an even longer thread with people proclaiming fatbikes as the be-all-end-all for anything/everything.

    I love my fattie for snow/sand, but it will never replace my SS, XC, AM, road bike

  29. #29
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,340
    I do think we're already splitting into niches, just with the "3.8's are wide enough"/go fast on hardpack vs "4.8's are just starting to get there"/go anywhere thru soft surfaces.

    I do think there will be lot's of expansion in the 50-75mm rim/3-4" wide tire realm. That's the next move for the average mtb'er, still familiar, not too far out. Widens your scope of operations considerably. Suspension will be in this group, and will probably match what skinny mtbs have.

    I reeeeeeeally hope that there will be innovation in the 100mm+ rim/5"+ world, but will be happy to see expansion of Moonie equivalent bikes.


    I think it will take a drivetrain revolution to get the 6"+ level fatbike going, hard to predict that.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    I do think we're already splitting into niches...
    We're just mtbers really. Can't agree on anything except riding bikes is fun.

    Although as I say this there's probably a new sub-niche forming with a contrary view to that.....

    (In the UK they wear red socks and we call them Ramblers)
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    273
    I can see the hub wars growing, given that Trek has adopted 170mm and Specialized 190mm. Definitely need more hubs, with hole count options of both 32 and 36.

    If a 32" MTB came into existence, perhaps 29x4 will follow. But it seems to me that the fat sizes follow the MTB sizes. Unless 32" or 36" take off, we may not see the theorized Moon-Krampus.

    The more symmetrical hubs take off, the more offset hubs may seem awkward. I wonder if Surly would ever offer a symmetrical model as has been rumored. That might force them to try something else new, like 29x4 or 29x5, with rims to match.

    Though the other school of thought may be right - could see tire diameter max out around 30.5", while width grows and rims shrink. The rims are there for 24x6. The chainline debate remains. I know, Surly will offer the Mrs Whirly Double Offset Single, with one gear in place of the outer gear.

    Or maybe just shoot the moon and make a bike fat enough to float on water. Where the tires may be wider than the rider.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    157
    They will be hover fat bikes.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Quote Originally Posted by BATRG3 View Post
    ...Or maybe just shoot the moon and make a bike fat enough to float on water. Where the tires may be wider than the rider.
    A few minor adjustments to wheel width on this one, and we've got maximum flotation...

    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by BATRG3 View Post
    I can see the hub wars growing, given that Trek has adopted 170mm and Specialized 190mm. Definitely need more hubs, with hole count options of both 32 and 36.

    If a 32" MTB came into existence, perhaps 29x4 will follow. But it seems to me that the fat sizes follow the MTB sizes. Unless 32" or 36" take off, we may not see the theorized Moon-Krampus.

    The more symmetrical hubs take off, the more offset hubs may seem awkward. I wonder if Surly would ever offer a symmetrical model as has been rumored. That might force them to try something else new, like 29x4 or 29x5, with rims to match.

    Though the other school of thought may be right - could see tire diameter max out around 30.5", while width grows and rims shrink. The rims are there for 24x6. The chainline debate remains. I know, Surly will offer the Mrs Whirly Double Offset Single, with one gear in place of the outer gear.

    Or maybe just shoot the moon and make a bike fat enough to float on water. Where the tires may be wider than the rider.
    I like the way you think. Yes, there is a limit on how tall a tire can get...the limiting factor is human geometry. We still gotta fit on the bike. Tires will get wider, rims will get smaller, and chain drive will become obsolete for our super-fatties. The weight-weenies will forgo brakes altogether and just stop by bouncing off walls/fences/houses with their 24x10 equipped unobtanium-framed sub 20-pound bikes with single-wall tires and 24x3.0 tubes stretched to a micron of thickness, because they learned that tubeless has some drawbacks. We'll all point and laugh at any fattie we see with presta valves. We'll all chug down our triple imperial IPA's and reminisce about the good ol' days when 70 IBU's seemed like a lot. And if we're really lucky, builders will get off this aluminum kick and start manufacturing some steel frames. If I win the lottery I'll make a career of building them myself, and every week I'll give one away...so, wish me luck.

    Honestly, I have no idea where fatties will be in 5 years, but I hope they keep pushing the envelope. And I was serious about the frames!

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Vandy View Post
    I like the way you think. Yes, there is a limit on how tall a tire can get...the limiting factor is human geometry. We still gotta fit on the bike. Tires will get wider, rims will get smaller, and chain drive will become obsolete for our super-fatties. The weight-weenies will forgo brakes altogether and just stop by bouncing off walls/fences/houses with their 24x10 equipped unobtanium-framed sub 20-pound bikes with single-wall tires and 24x3.0 tubes stretched to a micron of thickness, because they learned that tubeless has some drawbacks. We'll all point and laugh at any fattie we see with presta valves...
    And somewhere around this point someone will realise that the best bike for hike a bike cross country routes is a really light one you can carry easily on your shoulder, and the skinny tyred cyclocross bike will be reinvented...
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    A few minor adjustments to wheel width on this one, and we've got maximum flotation...

    And a few adjustments to tread design and we have a paddle...er...peddle...whatever thingy for mikesee.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Sand Rat View Post
    And a few adjustments to tread design and we have a paddle...er...peddle...whatever thingy for mikesee.
    Hey, I keep looking at that and thinking - I can build one of those. (Got a bit of small boat building experience).

    Ideal excuse for a recumbent too...

    And it would look good with a Lug sail rig.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GnarBrahWyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,640
    I'm a fat newb. I figure I have a few years paying my dues on on my Moonlander before I upgrade to carbon something or other. I know I can use the extra work out in the winter.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    I definitely agree with the wider tire, smaller wheel crowd. It's about time for someone to come out with a 24x6" tire, and the bike to go with it. I think an abbreviated cassette with a moonlander crankset running 1x7of10 or something would work, or a wide IGH with 5-14 speeds over a wide range would be nice too, but that wouldn't be easy to get made. the wheels are already available from Weinmann, so we just need a tire and a frame that takes the width, with maybe a 20mm offset 170mm hub.

    I think full suspension fat bikes will be common, as well as suspension forks from major brands. I think that the fat tires will start to pick up steam when people in Asia start riding them, and you will see a lot of lower priced models too.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,131

    Re: Fat bikes in 5 years

    I see a lot of people saying tires will get even bigger. Perhaps a few wider tires will be released, but I think more and more people will realize that bigger ≠ better indiscriminately and will go back to lighter, better handling narrower rims for most conditions other than mud and slop.

    I've ridden lighter and better spec'd fatbikes than my Pugsley, but the ones with wider rims felt like slow pigs in comparison, despite being both lighter and stiffer than my IGH Pugs.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    Yeah, but we have to find out how big is too big by going there first.

    then we can reel it back to just right.

    The Moonlander with Bud/Lou works great and is the biggest thing going right now. And it seems that some are riding it, still thinking more would be better.

    You gotta try before you know.

    If they jump up an inch to 5.5-6" wide tires, it should be with a smaller(507mmISO) rim to keep the overall diameter reasonable, but if in use, this is found to be undesirably wide for effective performance on whatever surfaces people are trying to use them on, they could either go back to the current sizes, or even something in between. If they end up working great, I'm pretty sure someone will make one even wider.

    I, myself find a 3.8/4.0 size tire on a 65mm rim to be perfect, but I am mostly riding on rocks and hardpack. That's what most people use a 2" tire for.

    If I was riding on sloppy, soft terrain all the time, I would probably get the fattest thing I could find.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,071
    The thing is, if you have clearance for wide tyres, let's say 6", that doesn't mean that you have to fit 6" tyres. You'll still be able to fit 4" tyres.

    Just like when mtbs finally all went to enough clearance for draggy 2.35" tyres people still had the option to fit the freer rolling 1.9" tyres.

    Can you tell I'm one of those who want 6" tyres?
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GnarBrahWyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,640
    With materials getting better and lighter, I don't see why full suspension fat bikes won't be a thing in the not-too far off future.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: E6roller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    154
    With materials getting better and lighter......a FFAAATTTTT er rim and tire might not feel like a pig. ....depending on how much sidewall "scrunch" is happening.

    Sidewall scrunch is why I do not think a 24 X 6 wheel/tire is gonna happen in my world.

    Larger diameter works for terrain-approach-angle on soft stuff also.

    ...still, I'd like to ride a Hannebrink. http://gearjunkie.com/images/4685.jpg

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: E6roller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    154

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,131

    Re: Fat bikes in 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by E6roller View Post
    With materials getting better and lighter......a FFAAATTTTT er rim and tire might not feel like a pig.
    I think it has to do with tire profile rather than weight.


    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Similar Threads

  1. 2 Girls, 2 Bikes, 3 Years Around Australia in the 1940's
    By mtbxplorer in forum Bikepacking and Bike Expedition
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 07:09 PM
  2. 2 Girls, 2 Bikes, 3 Years Around Australia in the 1940's
    By mtbxplorer in forum Women's Lounge
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-15-2012, 04:09 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-01-2012, 12:16 AM
  4. Niner bikes changes through the years?
    By jabrabu in forum Niner Bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-20-2011, 08:10 AM
  5. Best Rated Bikes over the Years?
    By User1 in forum Where are the Best Deals?
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-28-2011, 02:46 PM

Posting Permissions

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