Results 1 to 77 of 77
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    Fatbike frame comparisons

    So now we have a dedicated thread where we can find links to the handful of fatbike frame manufacturers out there...but I have yet to see any analysis of how those frames compare. What are the characteristics of the fatbikes frames available?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    Frames

    Excellent post IPA Rider (I'm an IPA fan too)...let's see if I can help.

    Fatbike frames, issues, and characteristics (from what I can tell from websites available):

    Surly Pugsley - http://www.surlybikes.com/pugsley.html
    - Cost: $575 - $600
    - Frame: chromo; 5.66lbs (18")
    - Fork: 2.52 lbs uncut; 135mm spacing
    - Wheel issues: 135mm hub spacing front and back; funky 17.5mm offset
    - BB: 100mm
    - Dropouts – horizontal
    - Made in:
    - Warranty:
    - Ride: I don't know, never been on one


    Fatback from Speedway - http://speedwaycyclesak.com/pages/fatback.html
    - Cost: it says $1500 for frames; custom forks starting at $400 (is that on top of the 1.5K? I'm stoopid)
    - Frame: sweet Ti, custom available with lots of fork options; 3.5lbs (18”)
    - Fork:
    - Wheel issues: 165mm rear spacing; no offset
    - BB: 100mm
    - Dropouts:
    - Made in:
    - Warranty: 3 yrs
    - Ride: I don't know, never been on one


    Wildfire Fatbike - http://www.wildfirecycles.com/fatbikes.html
    - Cost: $995
    - Frame: Chromo; 4.5lbs (19”); custom options
    - Fork: 2.5lbs; spacing?
    - Wheel issues: 160mm rear hub spacing; no offset
    - BB:
    - Dropouts:
    - Made in:
    - Warranty:
    - Ride: I don't know, never been on one


    Chain Reaction 9:Zero:7 - http://www.chainreactioncycles.us/907.html
    - Cost: $1899
    - Frame: Ti; 3.3lbs (17”)
    - Fork:
    - Wheel issues: 160mm rear spacing; offset?
    - BB: 100mm
    - Dropouts:
    - Made in: USA
    - Warranty: Lifetime
    - Ride: I don't know, never been on one


    Jones
    - Not sure…in development?

    As you can see, I’m pretty worthless regarding how these things ride (and don't have that much info to share on the rest), but this is a start on comparing the options. Perhaps others will EDIT AND ADD TO this…

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    here is my take on the lack of replies. most people are on their first snow bike at this time. think about it. a pugsley at 550. for a frameset is a deal. there is not much you can do on a pug that you can do better on a high end snow bike.

  4. #4
    FatBike Fiend
    Reputation: Wildfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    961

    Wildfire Specs

    Can't speak for the other guys, but here's the missing info for Wildfire FatBikes:

    Wildfire FatBike - http://www.wildfirecycles.com/fatbikes.html
    - Cost: $995
    - Frame: Chromo; 4.6lbs (19”); custom options.
    - Fork: 2.5lbs; spacing 100 mm
    - Wheel issues: 160mm rear hub spacing; no offset.
    - BB: 100 mm
    - Dropouts: Vertical disc.
    - Made in: USA
    - Warranty: 5 years
    - Ride: Priceless
    Last edited by Wildfire; 03-25-2009 at 09:16 AM.
    Owner, Trailwerx Trails Contracting
    Palmer, Alaska
    www.trailwerx.com

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    my mistake. you are looking for side by side specs. i thought you wanted side by side riding impressions.

  6. #6
    Fatback
    Reputation: thirstywork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit
    here is my take on the lack of replies. most people are on their first snow bike at this time. think about it. a pugsley at 550. for a frameset is a deal. there is not much you can do on a pug that you can do better on a high end snow bike.



    Mostly the lack of reply is a show of respect to the other designers. All of us believe we have the best product, so what can you do. I can tell you why I think the Fatback is the best design, but I'm not going to do it here. Looks like most things got listed though. I will say the ride characteristics are much different on a Fatback than on a Pugs-no disrespect to the Pugs, just two different animals. Maybe that matters to you, maybe it doesn't.
    Speedway Cycles owner http://fatbackbikes.com

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    after years of riding a pug i am ready to move up.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    67

    Smile

    I think thirstywork pretty much spelled it out. There are several nice frames to choose from, and each of them reflects the designer's ideas and philosophy on snow biking. Your best bet is to do some research, ride the different bikes if you can, and decide on your own.

    Here is some additional information regarding the 9:ZERO:7:

    Chain Reaction 9:Zero:7 - http://www.chainreactioncycles.us/907.html
    - Cost: $1899
    - Frame: Ti; 3.3lbs (17Ē)
    - Fork: Built around a 450mm A-C, The Pugs 100mm fork will work. We also stock Black Sheep Ti and Desalvo forks to match.
    - Wheel issues: 160mm rear spacing, non-offset
    - BB: 100mm
    - Dropouts: Vertical.
    - Made in: USA
    - Warranty: Lifetime
    - Ride: Indisputably the best (This is an inside joke, so don't hammer me on this - I say it tongue in cheek).

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    no bad talk...

    Quote Originally Posted by thirstywork


    Mostly the lack of reply is a show of respect to the other designers.
    I almost made a similar speculation in the original post...and the fact that no one talks in such terms on this forum raises the posted question.

    I don't want to stir things up in what seems to be a very positive group, but after reading the descriptions of the 9:zero:7 on their website, it got me thinking about how different they really ride, and what difference its features make.

    It wouldn't be bad to get the design concept out there and what people think about the ride (without dissing others). Perhaps this isn't possible to do well (?)

    I was looking for ride characteristics, but specs is all I could (begin to) come up with...thought they might help for folks looking to make a decision.

  10. #10
    No, that's not phonetic
    Reputation: tscheezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,363
    I just got the chance to spend a couple of hours on Thirstywork's own personal Fatback, and it did certainly ride quite differently than my Pugs. Then again it was fully rigid and my Pugs has a Mav SC32 fork and a Thudbuster post. My pugs probably weighs a solid 4 or 5 pounds more to boot. All this makes a real comparison difficult because the parts play a pretty dramatic role in how the bikes feel. I will say that both cruise the flats similarly, though the Fatback did accelerate and handle generally with a lighter feel. The steering was superb with absolute no-input-required tracking and neutral handling. My Pugs seems to wander a bit and the steering feels heavy. That may be a head angle issue due to the fork resulting in wheel flop. I hit the pedals on some snow chunk with the Fatback so the bb felt lower: again probably the forks. When standing to climb, the Fatback's overall light feel and superb handling stayed exactly the same while my Pugs feels like I'm doing the tango with a 200 pound octopus. This was the most obvious difference. I'll post up some pics soon.

    If I find a sack of cash washed up on the beach I'll pick up a Fatback for me and Barny.
    My video techniques can be found in this thread.

  11. #11
    plasma donor
    Reputation: Barkleyfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    754
    tscheezy, I appreciate the review. While I understand, and admire manufacturers/vendors showing the class to remain neutral in the conversation, it's difficult to drop as much on an unfinnished bicycle as my cousin dropped on a fully functional Kawasaki ZX6 a couple months ago, without having some real-world impressions.

    I've been researching fat bikes for a little while now. The idea appeals to me alot. I've even called Sram about a Hammerschmidt with a 100mm BB compatability. They were less than enthusiastic with the idea. Shame, because a 2X system while keeping a clean chainline seems ideal.

    Like others, I've dropped what I considered big money on new technologies and been disappointed. My Proflex 856 was a prime example. And it's not like I can just hop over to my LBS in Iowa to testride the newest fatbike. For some reason, fatbikes are not a regularly stocked item at my LBS. I've seen a few reviews online, but comparisons are difficult to come by.

  12. #12
    No, that's not phonetic
    Reputation: tscheezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,363
    Here's a short video clip I threw together of riding the Fatback on the Coastal Trail in Anchorage:

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GobQaXQawoI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GobQaXQawoI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

    BTW- If you click on the HD button in the youtube window and watch it full screen, it looks better.
    Last edited by tscheezy; 03-28-2009 at 07:43 PM.
    My video techniques can be found in this thread.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Just tried out, should be on the market within 4-6 weeks:

    - Cost: depending on tubing and finish between 500 & 800 $
    - Weight: depending on tubing and finish choice between 4.2 and 3.75 lbs
    - Frame: aluminium
    - Wheel issues: 165mm rear spacing, no offset
    - BB: 100mm
    - Dropouts: vertical
    - Made in: Belgium
    - Warranty: 2 yrs
    - Ride: pretty darn good, for my first try on a fatbike. Could do anything my 120mm fully can and much, much more.
    - Package deals: can be sold with 70mm, 2 lbs pre-drilled rims, own 165mm Shimano type adjustable bearing rear hub with grease guard and likewise 100mm BB.

    Plenty of space for wider rims and 3x9 speed. See pictures below with one of the prototypes I had the chance to try: 70mm rims, 3x9 and the usual Endomorphs. This one still had an Isis BB and a QR modified DT rear hub.
    Sweet ride.







  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    old school skin walls. where did you get them.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  15. #15
    No, that's not phonetic
    Reputation: tscheezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,363
    Finally. An alu snowbike. Me likee.
    My video techniques can be found in this thread.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit
    old school skin walls. where did you get them.
    Ebay of all places, if you know of any other source for those skinwalls, let me know - I want a pair for my own fat bike to be. Much nicer than the black walled version if you want my opinion.

    I just ordered their top of the line anodised, hydroformed XL frame with a steel fork and with all their special hubs and BB.
    I think I'll give the Maverick fork a pass, I'm pretty big and could feel the fork twist sideways when braking (Avid Code's with 180mm disks mounted). I forgot after a while but it didn't inspire too much confidence...
    They promised me I would have the frame in about 4 weeks time - will keep you posted how it turns out. I'm gonna go to try to mount it with full gears but "light" as an XC and sand rig, for the moment

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    426

    Contact Info?

    Quote Originally Posted by caminoloco
    Ebay of all places, if you know of any other source for those skinwalls, let me know - I want a pair for my own fat bike to be. Much nicer than the black walled version if you want my opinion.

    I just ordered their top of the line anodised, hydroformed XL frame with a steel fork and with all their special hubs and BB.
    I think I'll give the Maverick fork a pass, I'm pretty big and could feel the fork twist sideways when braking (Avid Code's with 180mm disks mounted). I forgot after a while but it didn't inspire too much confidence...
    They promised me I would have the frame in about 4 weeks time - will keep you posted how it turns out. I'm gonna go to try to mount it with full gears but "light" as an XC and sand rig, for the moment
    That frame looks nice! Do you have contact info for the manufacturer? If so, please post. Thx.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by Stroganof
    That frame looks nice! Do you have contact info for the manufacturer? If so, please post. Thx.
    Will do as soon as I can and they let me, they want to come out with the finished products (choice of tubing, forks, hubs and BB) and the options (like anodising, integrated or normal headset, horizontal or vertical dropouts, 70mm rims) all at the same time.

    They promised me mine (hydroformed tubing, anodised, their rigid fork, hubs and BB, vertical dropout, normal headset, gear rack attachments and two water bottle fittings) will be the first "client" one, ready in about a month. By then their website pages will be up and running, if not earlier.
    They won't sell the prototypes (the medium one on the pictures was non-butted, plain tubing and painted with a spray can ). They told me once they've everything in place for production an order would be honoured in summertime within two weeks tops, in winter a bit longer because they've got too much work building other (cyclocross and track) frames.
    Which reminds me, they can also do steel frames - no titanium.
    I'm pretty curious to see their hubs which will have adjustable bearings, like Shimano hubs. With a kind of grease guard. In my point of view a huge advantage over industrial bearings, especially for this application (general use of this type of bike, expedition reliability...).
    The BB will be a 100mm one with external bearings, haven't seen one of those either. I'll certainly post something here when I show my new stead on the pictures thread , or sooner when their fat bike site is up.

    PS I also ordered a pair of their 70mm rims, but I'm wondering about something: are similar rims that "loose" ? Meaning the tire almost drops off when not inflated ? Once inflated they stay put, even at very low pressures. But I had one tire slowly deflate with a tiny puncture when on a car rack and after a while the wind blew the tire off the rim. I had to stop because the tube was flapping in the air.
    Makes it almost too easy to change tubes, the tire keeps slipping off the rim like five times when inflating with a handpump.
    Until the tube expands a bit and seats the tire against the rim sides. I think I read something about similar rims being a pain when trying to get a tire off or on ?

  19. #19
    MTB aficionado
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,020

    Go for it!!!

    I've been winter biking for 20 years now and I'm happy report I've finally joined the fat tire club!! I've been winter biking for a long time on SnowCats and big tires, but the new dedicated snow bike offerings have now surpassed my expectations by a mile. They just work and work well. To be clear, I have limited amounts of time on fat bikes, but all I can say is they make the marginal snow conditions a blast to ride. I would typically go XC skiing in those conditions, but the snow bike makes the riding possible if not more fun than XC skiing. I dropped some coin on a Ti frameset and it should be ready for next winter. I haven't been this excited about a new bike for a long time.

    Like you, I was unwilling to get into the market early on because I recognized the technology and designs were far too fluid. I first saw a pugsly about 5-6 years ago and thought "there's an interesting idea", but was unwilling to commit give how new it was. But, standards are now being set and the bar has been set with creation the original Fatback a couple of year ago and now the new 907; 100mm BB, 160 mm rear hubs (symmetrical rear ends), 135mm front hubs (Pauls and Phil Woods), Cranks with X-type BB (Surly), 80-mm single wall rims, slacker headtube angles, longer chainstays, and compact geometries for a more up-right riding position. It's all come together this past season and it makes sense to me to jump in. Plus, AK seems to be the nexsus for this new development and Iím glad to be apart of it.

    I predict the popularity curve will accelerate with a production AL fat bike version with these new standards. I hope to see as many fat bikers as skiers in the next few years here in Anchorage!!

    Regards,

    EndUser
    My advice and $3 will buy you nothing more than a tunafish sandwich

  20. #20
    Saving lives with knives.
    Reputation: frank daleview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    939
    I think my phatty phrame search has just eneded
    Formerly known as iceaxe

  21. #21
    plasma donor
    Reputation: Barkleyfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    754
    Quote Originally Posted by EndUser
    I've been winter biking for 20 years now and I'm happy report I've finally joined the fat tire club!! I've been winter biking for a long time on SnowCats and big tires, but the new dedicated snow bike offerings have now surpassed my expectations by a mile. They just work and work well. To be clear, I have limited amounts of time on fat bikes, but all I can say is they make the marginal snow conditions a blast to ride. I would typically go XC skiing in those conditions, but the snow bike makes the riding possible if not more fun than XC skiing. I dropped some coin on a Ti frameset and it should be ready for next winter. I haven't been this excited about a new bike for a long time.

    Like you, I was unwilling to get into the market early on because I recognized the technology and designs were far too fluid. I first saw a pugsly about 5-6 years ago and thought "there's an interesting idea", but was unwilling to commit give how new it was. But, standards are now being set and the bar has been set with creation the original Fatback a couple of year ago and now the new 907; 100mm BB, 160 mm rear hubs (symmetrical rear ends), 135mm front hubs (Pauls and Phil Woods), Cranks with X-type BB (Surly), 80-mm single wall rims, slacker headtube angles, longer chainstays, and compact geometries for a more up-right riding position. It's all come together this past season and it makes sense to me to jump in. Plus, AK seems to be the nexsus for this new development and Iím glad to be apart of it.

    I predict the popularity curve will accelerate with a production AL fat bike version with these new standards. I hope to see as many fat bikers as skiers in the next few years here in Anchorage!!

    Regards,

    EndUser
    Aluminum isn't my favorite frame material, but for a winter bike here in the salt belt, it makes more sense than steel. Ti seems like the best investment with all the salt around here in the winter. Dunno, I suppose it will be a matter of how the economy treats me.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: UN-COG-KNEE-TOE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    159
    Nice looking Terrain Camino - where was this Bike Test Ridden and photo taken?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by UN-COG-KNEE-TOE
    Nice looking Terrain Camino - where was this Bike Test Ridden and photo taken?
    The designers knew I was going to the Hoggar desert (south rim of the Sahara, Algeria) to prepare a mtb raid and asked to take the prototype along and give it a beating - which I did

    Good thinking of them, because I ordered one my size afterwards (the prototype they gave me was a M size and I'm like 6' 5"). Hence the really long seat tube and the stack of spacers below the stem.

    I tested it on a variety of terrains, from soft sand in the washes to rock gardens where it was really difficult to even walk.
    I had read enough (here for instance) about fat bikes to expect their good performance on soft stuff: Even on very soft sand it was perfectly possible to keep on riding. I didn't even once bog down (fully laden with water and gear my total weight was about 265 lbs, not counting the bike). Not even in the real fine stuff. Amazing.

    But what made me decide to order one was its stunning performance over rough terrain. I own a Marin Mount Vision which I decked out with 2.4 tires. Very happy with the bike. But it gets relegated to second place over really rough terrain like some of those rock gardens I had to cross, go up and rocky singletracks with sharp turns. Opens up whole new possibilities for me to go biking.

    I posted some pictures on the appropriate thread, I hope you enjoy them:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.ph...33#post5537833

  24. #24
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,602
    another frame with 165 rear spacing can only be good news for fatback owners. especially being on the other side of the world. more demand for 165 hubs might translate into wider availability and possibly lower prices for hubs of that size.

    two of the italian cyclists in the iditarod were riding one off aluminum snowbikes, made custom just for them. they were both offset as far as i could tell though.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    Al fatbikes

    I understand EndUser's enthusiasm, but I do still get the feeling that this niche has a a lot of room for development. Lot's of nice options out there that are REALLY tempting, but I get paralyzed by the classic dilemma of when to jump into the technology stream (it took me forever to get an HDTV). Given that the winter riding season is about closed here, I'll be waiting and watching until late this fall. But next winter I WILL be fatbiking (regardless of what the Family Financial Officer says)!

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    stop thinking that fat bikes are only for winter. once you let go of that thought you will enjoy fat tire freedom year around.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  27. #27
    MTB aficionado
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,020

    I believe the standards......

    I believe the foundational standards are set. Beyond this we can expect evolution to proceed normally. Specifically, what are you concerned about?? Standards and/or price??

    What this market needs now are lower cost 165mm symmetrical rear AL frames in mass production. This will then drive additional component manufactures into producing more and cheaper fat bike specific parts. More choices around BBs, Cranks, hubs, rims, tires, forks and front derailleurs would be very nice. Right now we are paying premium for these parts.... but as early adopters we should expect this.

    Regards,

    EndUser
    My advice and $3 will buy you nothing more than a tunafish sandwich

  28. #28
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by EndUser
    I believe the foundational standards are set. Beyond this we can expect evolution to proceed normally. Specifically, what are you concerned about?? Standards and/or price??

    What this market needs now are lower cost 165mm symmetrical rear AL frames in mass production. This will then drive additional component manufactures into producing more and cheaper fat bike specific parts. More choices around BBs, Cranks, hubs, rims, tires, forks and front derailleurs would be very nice. Right now we are paying premium for these parts.... but as early adopters we should expect this.

    Regards,

    EndUser

    to run a 2x7 on 9 speed spacing with hundies, you need the cassette 21mm to the right of where it is on a 135 spaced frame. I think we need 180mm rear spacing.....

  29. #29
    MTB aficionado
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,020

    If you're referring to...

    Quote Originally Posted by rocwandrer
    to run a 2x7 on 9 speed spacing with hundies, you need the cassette 21mm to the right of where it is on a 135 spaced frame. I think we need 180mm rear spacing.....
    100 mm rims, the solution on 165mm rears (with 100 mm BB) has been to space out a 9-sp cassette away from the hub flange then drop the two (or three) smallest cogs. This will grant the proper chain clearance regarding tire rub and doesn't affect the Q-factor.

    So, if 180 mm is a rear standard..... what happens to the Q-factor? Do, BB widths also need to get wider and/or do spindle lengths get wider effectively widening q-factor??

    It's hard to de-couple Q-factor and width of the rear.... they have to move in lock step or chain lines start to get out of whack quick. Wider q-factors might be fine for some the smaller riders will certainly suffer.

    Anyhow... here in AK, 70-80 mm rims seem to be the norm. Only those that are racing seem to run the biggest rims.

    Regards,

    EndUser
    My advice and $3 will buy you nothing more than a tunafish sandwich

  30. #30
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by EndUser
    100 mm rims, the solution on 165mm rears (with 100 mm BB) has been to space out a 9-sp cassette away from the hub flange then drop the two (or three) smallest cogs. This will grant the proper chain clearance regarding tire rub and doesn't affect the Q-factor.

    So, if 180 mm is a rear standard..... what happens to the Q-factor? Do, BB widths also need to get wider and/or do spindle lengths get wider effectively widening q-factor??

    It's hard to de-couple Q-factor and width of the rear.... they have to move in lock step or chain lines start to get out of whack quick. Wider q-factors might be fine for some the smaller riders will certainly suffer.

    Anyhow... here in AK, 70-80 mm rims seem to be the norm. Only those that are racing seem to run the biggest rims.

    Regards,

    EndUser
    My rear hub is offset 20.5mm to the drive side. I can clear only 7 of the 9 speed-spaced sprockets. With a 165mm centered hub, that is effectively the same as 15mm of offset on 135. By my calculations, that means i could only fit 5 sprockets in the rear and still have the chain clear the tire. How are others getting away with more gears? Longer chainstays? just letting it rub occasionally?

    On my 20.5mm-offset 135mm-spaced (functionally the same as 176mm width non offset) frame, the chainline is actually pretty good. I think it is better than on my standard chainline MTB, in that the frequently used gears line up pretty well. The q-factor is the same as just about any other 100mm bb, and I see no reason for it to need to get wider unless tires get bigger than 4.3"

  31. #31
    MTB aficionado
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,020

    What frame are you riding?

    Quote Originally Posted by rocwandrer
    My rear hub is offset 20.5mm to the drive side. I can clear only 7 of the 9 speed-spaced sprockets. With a 165mm centered hub, that is effectively the same as 15mm of offset on 135. By my calculations, that means i could only fit 5 sprockets in the rear and still have the chain clear the tire. How are others getting away with more gears? Longer chainstays? just letting it rub occasionally?

    On my 20.5mm-offset 135mm-spaced (functionally the same as 176mm width non offset) frame, the chainline is actually pretty good. I think it is better than on my standard chainline MTB, in that the frequently used gears line up pretty well. The q-factor is the same as just about any other 100mm bb, and I see no reason for it to need to get wider unless tires get bigger than 4.3"
    What frame are you riding?

    The Fatbacks and the 907s (both have 165mm symetrical rears with 100mm BB) can be ridden with a fully equiped tripple chainring set-up and run a full 9-sp complement with 80mm rims without chain rub. I demo'd a 907 with this set-up and it worked like a dream.

    I don't know about the Fatback, but the 907 does use longer chainstays.

    Follow the link to see the 907.

    http://akspokes.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1195&page=3

    Regards,

    EndUser
    Last edited by EndUser; 04-13-2009 at 03:51 PM.
    My advice and $3 will buy you nothing more than a tunafish sandwich

  32. #32
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by EndUser
    What frame are you riding?

    The Fatbacks and the 907s (both have 165mm symetrical rears with 100mm BB) can be ridden with a fully equiped tripple chainring set-up and run a full 9-sp complement with 80mm rims without chain rub. I demo'd a 907 with this set-up and it worked like a dream.

    I don't know about the Fatback, but the 907 does use longer chainstays.

    Follow the link to see the 907.

    http://akspokes.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1195&page=3

    Regards,

    EndUser
    My frame: Juggernaut lives!

    wow... the chainstays on that 907 look to be about 2" longer than mine.... The endo on the 100mm rims measures out at 4.29" (at 15 psi) on my calipers. It sort of makes sense that it doesn't take much difference in overall width to open up the possibility of more gears.... then the long stays on top of that have to help a bit. I was considering going with a narrower rim next time around to give the rim more protection from rocks, but so far it hasn't been a problem at all. maybe I will still go with narrower rims on the basis of gearing...

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    16
    I am having trouble viewing this thread on my tiny laptop, so I may be asking a dumb question, but did caminoloco ever give the frame manufacturer's name?

  34. #34
    Compressorman
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    163
    Hey Caminoloco, any more news on the Belgium frames?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by oasismfg
    Hey Caminoloco, any more news on the Belgium frames?
    Yep, I just got a call from the builder that he'll deliver the 3 frames and forks (two of my friends also ordered one) next wednesday.
    I'll post pictures of all: two hydroformed, triple butted alu ones and a triple butted steel frame with oversized tubing. All steel forks, one with all the braze ons for panniers.

    Can't wait

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    20
    That is awesome!

    I'm from Belgium and didn't know anything about a belgian framebuilder/company designing a fatbike.
    And I recently (last weekend, during the world cup in Houffalize) put this probably enormous stupid idea in my head to buy myself a rigid fatbike and race it next year in Houffa.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    118
    how not switch to rohlofts insted of 3x9? your hub doesn't have to be super wide then.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Just took some pictures of our 3 brand new fatbike frames "in the nude". Tomorrow they're going off to various directions to be powdercoated and shotblasted but I coudn't wait and intercepted them

    The first one is the steel frame, nice oversized tubing with the top tube ovalized: wide from above, narrow seen from the sides. Weighs in at 2250 grams, medium size.



    This is the steel frame seen from above. We all want to install continuous cable housing for the shifters. The 3 cable guides in a row lengthwise are for that, to keep all cable and hose lines clean & straight without resorting to straps.



    This is the steel fork, weighs 1140 grams. This one has all possible pannier braze-ons.



    The hydroformed aluminium frames (a medium for another friend and an XL for myself). Pretty impressive and "something else" than what's on the market now - I love the looks and can't wait to have it assembled. The medium weighs 1740 gr and the XL 1890 grams.

    Nice welds !







    In a few weeks time the fatbike population of Belgium will boom

    The guy said he will have his website/webshop up and running by the end of next week or beginning of the week afterwards. He's starting with the 3 frame options (straight alu, hydroform alu, oversized steel) and the steel fork. The geometry on all bikes is the same and things like integrated or not headset, type and number of cable guides and pannier braze-ons can be specified when ordering. Pretty cool.

    Weightwise I saw this on my scale, for medium sized frames with pannier braze-ons:
    - non-butted alu 1920 gr
    - butted & hydroformed alu 1740 gr
    - butted oversized steel 2250 gr
    - steel fork with all the braze-ons 1140 gr

    From ordering to sending he told me it should take between one and two weeks for untreated frames. He'll have powdercoated and shotblasted (satin) finish options which would add another two weeks.

    I'll post the URL when it's up.

    I'm going to have mine shotblasted to a satin finish and then a clear powdercoat over it, I like the look of unpainted metal.

  39. #39
    Compressorman
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    163
    Awesome. This just might be my next bike. $500 to $800 you say - is that the landed cost? With fork?

    JW

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    682
    Hey Caminoloco and Hydrus, I'm from Belgium too! Fatbikes seem incredibly interesting to me, even though we don't get that much snow, do we? Any chance where I could try out a fatbike in our 'low' country? I live in Geraardsbergen, by the way. I bet it would be fun to ride up and down 'De Muur' on a fatbike, especially taking the steps :P And I've got some other places in mind to test fat tires around here...

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    20
    Dag Orkje

    Snow is obviously one good use for fatbikes but roots and rock gardens are too!
    I like the ability of high volume tyres (and I'm talking about 2.3-2.4 max, havn't ridden anything bigger) to absorb the terrain.

    I don't like gears, I don't like suspension.
    I found a way to solve the 'wrong gear' problem: walk when the gear is too high or get my feet of the pedals (fixed gear) when the gear is too low. And I think I now found the way to solve the suspension problem. (I've ridden many forks, Fatty's, Lefty's, Reba's, SID, Fox but none does what I want it to do)

    I'm really looking forward to testriding a fatbike to see if I like it as much as I think I would

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by Orkje
    Hey Caminoloco and Hydrus, I'm from Belgium too! Fatbikes seem incredibly interesting to me, even though we don't get that much snow, do we? Any chance where I could try out a fatbike in our 'low' country? I live in Geraardsbergen, by the way. I bet it would be fun to ride up and down 'De Muur' on a fatbike, especially taking the steps :P And I've got some other places in mind to test fat tires around here...
    Hey, I didn't know there are so many fat tire lovers in little Belgium !

    PM me (in het "Vloms" mag ). I'm from the middle of the country. You're welcome to give my bike a spin once it's finished, it's an XL and it'll be a "rough terrain" steed - with a Maverick fork and a Gravity Dropper seatpost.

    The rest of these bikes are medium sized ones, the other "hydroform" guy wants his bike as high end as possible (XTR or XO), built for speed on sand and the other one will build his steel one up for expedition use.
    It will be interesting to see what they end up like and how the parts will influence the ride, considering they all have the same geometry.
    I'm pretty sure they'll let you try out their bikes as well if you want to.

    Tip: lure your biking friends to the gnarliest stretches of cobblestones you can find. To a fatbike it's like tarmac

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    168
    This is so great, a European builder of fatties, who would have thunk it! I will tell all my my buddies (several) that want the fat that theres a easier way than even the Pugsley avaliable now. Keep that flame burning now!
    Rip the bring!

  44. #44
    Compressorman
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    163
    Hey Camino, did you ever get a website address for us?

    Thanks,
    JW

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    20
    Yeah, would be nice to see who's making these beasts.

  46. #46
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    1+ on the need for more info please
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Just got back from two weeks abroad without internet (yes, those places still exist ). Tomorrow I'll go get my and my mates' frames, which should be finished by now. And check on the progress of his webshop.
    I do hope my frame is ready, because I'm going to participate in a "Enduro" race next saturday. 4 timed downhill runs over rough terrain (no freeriding), linked together with non-timed stretches. Normally it's done with fullies with 6" travel front and rear. But after trying the fat bike out in the rough stuff of southern Algeria I'm pretty certain I can do it with on those fat tires as well. Should be mayor fun, if only for the looks on the faces of my fellow competitors

    I've got all components ready and will take the bike on it's maiden trip there - expect some pictures next week monday... if I survive... I'd better get a full-faced helmet, just in case

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rasidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    39
    hi caminoloco

    any news on the website? i want to order the hydroformed alu frame and would like to start communication with the builder immediately.

    all the best in your event.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    At last, "habemus papam"... white smoke I just got my Sandman Gobi frame. It looks stunning: glassblasted aluminium with a clear powdercoat.

    Too busy now to take pictures, I still have to make a bike out of it and race it in the French Ardennes tomorrow morning !!
    I'll post pictures when/if I survive next week when I get back.

    The guy is still working on the webshop but at least he's got the initial page up with his email for all enquiries: www.sandmanbikes.com

    I'd like to take credit for the name, but not quite. When asked for possible names I remembered a post somewhere on this forum (can't find it right away, will do next week) where someone presented his fat bike with the title "Enter Sandman". That stuck and apparently the builder liked it too

  50. #50
    bored ex-shop rat
    Reputation: velopax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    375

    New question here.

    @ caminoloco

    Have you some more details on the Sandman frames like:
    rear hub and front hub spacing
    BB shell size
    offset or non-offset wheels

    would be nice

    THX
    Life is like a ten speed bicycle. Most of us have gears we never use. Charles M. Schulz (1922 - 2000)

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by velopax
    @ caminoloco

    Have you some more details on the Sandman frames like:
    rear hub and front hub spacing
    BB shell size
    offset or non-offset wheels

    would be nice

    THX
    Rear hub is 165mm (but I hear they're probably going to offer a 155mm option). Front forks will be standard and 135mm options. BB 100mm. Non-offset wheels (for the 165mm at least).

    I got my Sandman Gobi finished at 3 am (together with half a crate of beer...) , to bed around 4, rose at 7 and started in a enduro (between all-mountain and freeride) race with it at 10 am... without having ridden it for more than 100 yards. My first run was a disaster - just too much nerves, my second runs' time put me in the better half of the 100-participants field
    The race took all day with two more runs in the late afternoon, but those I had to forfeit due to family obligations. But I left a very happy fat-tired biker !
    Those big tires are no subsitute for 6" of suspension, but I had a blast and got incredulous looks from everyone who saw me coming

    The bike is real, real good, everything I expected from it and more (it isn't too heavy and climbs real well). I felt immediately right at home on it, it fits me like a glove, very stable as expected, high BB so I can keep on pedalling in the rough stuff. Heaps of rear tire clearance: with a 70mm rim I think there's still about an inch of space on either side of the Endomorph. And, last but not least, it looks stunning, the curves of the frame give it a special, elegant look in combination with those huge tires. The frame is glass-blasted with a clear powdercoat finish.

    Here are some pictures, I hope there will be some action shots from during the race on the organisers website because in all the rush I forgot my camera... these were taken afterwards around the campfire - finishing off the other half-a-crate




  52. #52
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    That looks the `mutts nuts` my friend

    Any chance of some tyre clearence shots on the rear triangle?

    Like the glass blasted finish too.

    I think Sandman will have no problems selling these frames at all.

    Glad you had fun at the race; it`s always funny the effect the Endos have on people.

    Cheers,
    Dr FG
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Here's a shot (I took a bunch from every possible angle !) of the rear triangle. It almost makes the tire look skinny...
    It's on a 70mm rim, so the tire is wider than on a Surly rim, it only just fits the Maverick fork (you can get an idea on one of the campfire pictures).

    In case anyone's wondering, I had zero problems hitting the rear triangle with my shoes (I got a size 13).


  54. #54
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    Holy schmoley!

    Now that IS impressive tyre clearence !!!

    Looks like a 70mm front/100mm rear combo may well be the one to run with a Mav up front.

    I see you decided to keep your Maverick as you did say you were thinking about a rigid fork earlier. What made you change your mind as a matter of interest?

    P.S:- I wouldn`t swap back to rigid, I love my Mav
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Feelygood !
    I see you decided to keep your Maverick as you did say you were thinking about a rigid fork earlier. What made you change your mind as a matter of interest?
    P.S:- I wouldn`t swap back to rigid, I love my Mav
    That's because I discovered the lock-out knob on the prototype's Maverick fork... after trying that for about 20 yards I decided not to go entirely rigid
    Not for the use I'm putting it through anyway (a gravity dropper seatpost is on its way), but I did order a normal-hub rigid fork. If I go ride on the beach I'll swap the Maverick for that one.

    What I like about the Maverick is its decent suspension action. Not world class, but decent. But it flexes like hell (I'm a big guy) and it's a pain to install the front wheel.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,700
    Quote Originally Posted by caminoloco
    Here's a shot (I took a bunch from every possible angle !) of the rear triangle. It almost makes the tire look skinny...
    It's on a 70mm rim, so the tire is wider than on a Surly rim, it only just fits the Maverick fork (you can get an idea on one of the campfire pictures).

    In case anyone's wondering, I had zero problems hitting the rear triangle with my shoes (I got a size 13).

    Wow great looking bike... Mind if I repost these pics on my blog with credit and a link back here?

    Any website with more info on these frames/bikes?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  57. #57
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by caminoloco
    That's because I discovered the lock-out knob on the prototype's Maverick fork... after trying that for about 20 yards I decided not to go entirely rigid
    Not for the use I'm putting it through anyway (a gravity dropper seatpost is on its way), but I did order a normal-hub rigid fork. If I go ride on the beach I'll swap the Maverick for that one.

    What I like about the Maverick is its decent suspension action. Not world class, but decent. But it flexes like hell (I'm a big guy) and it's a pain to install the front wheel.
    I`m 260 LBs and whilst I would say the Mav is not the most rigid fork it does do all that I ask it too.

    I ride on the beach with my Mav and have to say it`s much better than riding with a rigid front. All the corragations in the sand are damped down beautifully.
    The fork guards keep most of the sand off the sliders too.
    It`s a very easy fork to work on as well.

    |Cheers,
    Dr FG
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    31
    I'm wondering when the sandman website become's "active"
    I would love just to see more pictures of the three diferent frame's and the fork options etc..

    guido

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    Sandman

    Quote Originally Posted by Mopper_smurf
    I'm wondering when the sandman website become's "active"
    I would love just to see more pictures of the three diferent frame's and the fork options etc..

    guido
    +1

    I just got official clearance from the family financial officer to buy a fatbike (acting like a four year old crying "I wanna fatbike, I wanna fatbike" for the last year and a half finally paid off (FWIW - I believe the key here is integrating the whine with arm flapping and foot stomping so as to not simply annoy, but effectively convey the depth of one's true longing for and commitment to having a fatbike).

    So come fall it will be decision time. If I can swing the budget, I'm leaning toward a Fatback...if not, the budget option is obviously a Pug. It would be nice to have something intermediate in price that doesn't weigh a ton. I'm also hoping for some better fork options (price and weight wise). In any case--WOO-HOO! Thanks Sweetie!

  60. #60
    Super Genius...
    Reputation: leadphinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    34

    Ladies and Gentlemen...

    I present for your approval, the budget fatbike.

    http://www.ezbeachattachments.com/to...d-medium-large

  61. #61
    Candlestick Maker
    Reputation: baker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,567
    Quote Originally Posted by leadphinger
    I present for your approval, the budget fatbike.

    http://www.ezbeachattachments.com/to...d-medium-large
    Cheap and actually would fulfill many people's needs/desires. Someone buy one and do a review for us!
    baker

  62. #62
    Super Genius...
    Reputation: leadphinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    34
    I'm working with the seller to build one to spec. I will report back on my findings.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    Caminoloco...

    ...how about an update on Sandman Bikes. I've tried emailing them a while ago but didn't get a reply. Can we get them to give us a substantive update on this thread? What do you hear?

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    31

    Bonking ... not feelin' well

    +1
    I've tried asking for information all over the net, and everybody said mail them on sales@sandmanbikes.com.. So I did and still no reaction.
    Maybe the economical crisis got to them to?

    Guido

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by Mopper_smurf
    +1
    I've tried asking for information all over the net, and everybody said mail them on sales@sandmanbikes.com.. So I did and still no reaction.
    Maybe the economical crisis got to them to?

    Guido
    Nothing bad happened, I spoke to him today (he has my fixed fork for normal hubs ready, I'll post a picture of it when I get it).
    He does have trouble getting the "special parts" together. The Taiwanese contacts he has for BB' and rear hubs are incredibly slow to respond and he wants that figured out before he starts selling his frames.
    He said "...no use me selling frames if people have trouble assembling them into complete bikes...". He did promise to answer his mails, didn't get to it because he was quite busy building road frames (thanks to the Tour de France cycling madness ).

  66. #66
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    Here`s a suggestion for a european hub supplier

    http://www.mountainbikecomponents.co...Draco+Rear+Hub
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Feelygood !
    Here`s a suggestion for a european hub supplier

    http://www.mountainbikecomponents.co...Draco+Rear+Hub

    I had already forwarded him that supplier, he said that he had mailed them about an order for 20 hubs but had not received any answer yet...

    It's supposed to be crisis but nobody wants to do business

  68. #68
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    That`s a shame .

    Sometimes it`s best to ring and talk in person though.

    Hope he has some luck soon
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    31
    I'm getting my mail back when I send it to sales@sandmanbikes.com?!?!

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FredBMOC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    103
    IPARider,
    we need to bump up this thread and update the frames available such as the New Fatback and 907 Aluminum frames...

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    344

    yep

    agreed, there is a good project to do now...perhaps after Speedway has the numbers on the new Al frames posted...

    although I've made my choice (and my motivation was primarily selfish in trying to get the data together, to inform that choice).

    If we could get a good summary together, we could make it a STICKY...

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: webby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5
    if i get one of these bikes im moving father up north!

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dmx1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    424
    I'm waiting a bit longer to buy ,have some other projects to finish ('Doggy 8, On One SS) but I hope by next winter to have my fatbike ready as well. Then load up the van and go looking for some snow

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,023

    Crank Q factor

    Quote Originally Posted by EndUser
    100 mm rims, the solution on 165mm rears (with 100 mm BB) has been to space out a 9-sp cassette away from the hub flange then drop the two (or three) smallest cogs. This will grant the proper chain clearance regarding tire rub and doesn't affect the Q-factor.

    So, if 180 mm is a rear standard..... what happens to the Q-factor? Do, BB widths also need to get wider and/or do spindle lengths get wider effectively widening q-factor??

    It's hard to de-couple Q-factor and width of the rear.... they have to move in lock step or chain lines start to get out of whack quick. Wider q-factors might be fine for some the smaller riders will certainly suffer.

    Anyhow... here in AK, 70-80 mm rims seem to be the norm. Only those that are racing seem to run the biggest rims.

    Regards,

    EndUser

    What is the lowest possible Q-factor available given the requirements for 100 mm BB? Are std. MTB ISIS cranks compatible and do the provide enough clearance given the current 120 mm chainstay standard?

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,023
    Quote Originally Posted by EndUser
    I believe the foundational standards are set. Beyond this we can expect evolution to proceed normally. Specifically, what are you concerned about?? Standards and/or price??

    What this market needs now are lower cost 165mm symmetrical rear AL frames in mass production. This will then drive additional component manufactures into producing more and cheaper fat bike specific parts. More choices around BBs, Cranks, hubs, rims, tires, forks and front derailleurs would be very nice. Right now we are paying premium for these parts.... but as early adopters we should expect this.

    Regards,

    EndUser
    What are the differences in the chainstay lengths between the new 9:zero:7 and Fatbikes, Pugsley and Salsa? Also, by accommodating a 120 mm wide chainstay width does the Q factor suffer even more?

  76. #76
    Race Promoter - St Fattys
    Reputation: Caseybuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8

    Good job!

    616 out of W Michigan.

Members who have read this thread: 3

Posting Permissions

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