Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    194

    Figuring out a new bike decision...

    Hi everyone - it's been a wile since I was here. I need some general guidance/opinion about getting a new fatbike.

    First - had a 2012 Mukluk 3, rode it really hard the first fall/winter/spring, then last year a little less. Lots of groomed snow trails, some snowmobiling trails, rocky/rooty singletrack during the non-snow months. Liked the bike, but wanted to upgrade, so I sold it recently.

    Now I'm looking, and when the new bikes show up here, one usually doesn't have a lot of time to act before they're gone for the season. My choices are:

    1. 2014 Salsa Mukluk 2 - available right now, walk in and buy it, $2400
    2. 2014 907 build, w/190 rear, probably will be around $2800 or so, can get it within a week or two.
    3. wait for a Specialized Fatboy Expert until Dec. and hope that it's a winner and not prone to Version 1 issues

    I'm trying to make sense of the rear spacing issue - I don't mind running 82mm HRD rims, a 4.8 up front might be nice, either a 3.8 or 4.8 in back would be nice depending on what I want to do.

    Not sure what the new Mukluk 2 will accommodate in the back, but was told that a Surly Lou on the 82mm rim would work. True?

    Should I spend the extra and get the new 907 build? Not sure how much better it might be over the Muk 2.

    This will be used a lot in the snow, groomed snowbike trails, etc., and for general use in the summer. I weight about 200. As you can see, I'm sort of floundering a bit on this decision - thanks for any thoughts/direction.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    446
    I am a bit biased but I would go for 9:zero:7 with a couple of sets of fat tires as well as a second set of 29+ wheels!

    Whatever you get you will love it!!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    194
    FWIW, I emailed Salsa, and was told that a Surly Lou on an 82mm rim just won't fit in the Salsa 2 frame - period. The suggestion was to run a 100mm rim in the back with a Nate.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    17
    Nate on 100mm rim is a low volume tire. At your weight you might get a lot of pinch flats.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lancelot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    932
    I've used a Nate on a 100mm for around a year and only pinched flatted once. Tire was pretty low on pressure and riding pretty sharp rocky terrain. Oh yeah I usually weigh around 235. You should be fine.
    The LPG

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    194
    FWIW, my LBS has told me that there is no problem running a Lou or a BFL in the back with an 82mm rim on the Muk 2. I think the Salsa guy was telling me that the Lou with a Clown Shoe wouldn't fit the Muk 2, which makes sense.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    194
    Update -

    So from what I'm reading now, it looks like I can fit a BFL or a Lou on an 82mm RD rim in the rear of a new 2014 Mukluk 2, but that I might have to fiddle with removing a cog or two, adding a spacer(s), maybe even a slight bit of wheel dishing, and the clearance between the Lou and the chain/seat stays might be kind of close but functionally doable. The stock crankset and chainline will probably be OK.

    Or maybe I could end up with the new Specialized Ground Control, 26x4.6" tires and I'd get a tad bit more clearance...

    Does that seem to reflect the reality of things? Thanks for any thoughts you have...

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,551
    The Ground Controls, Fatback Sterlings, Vee Showshoe, or Vee H-Billie. There's a whole new crop of "in between" tires coming soon. All of these options are likely to be cheaper than the Surly tires. Waiting sucks, I know.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    46
    You could get away with it, but if you're really looking for a bike that takes a 4.8, why buy a bike built for a 3.8 that takes tinkering and compromise to run a bigger tire and won't tolerate a 100 mm rim? You will never regret the 9:zero:7. You may kick yourself for the muk orthe spesh (especially since you'll be contributing to the selloutedness of fat biking )

    Keep in mind, I ride a Moonie and scoff at skinny tires, so this is just my 2 cents! Have fun!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    194
    Good points! I do like the 907.

    The Moonie - there's some irony here for me in that until yesterday I never paid any attention to the Moonlander or the Necromancer. Then I wandered into my LBS and started gawking - first at a beautiful black Necro, and then a 2013 Moonlander (discounted) and it's disconcerting offset fork, rear triangle and wheels. I can't explain it, but I started to question the whole Mukluk 2 / 907 / Fatboy thing. That Moonie offset fork really makes my head hurt. :-)

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    46
    I have a 2012, non-offset front (I believe the 2014 is non-offset again) and it rides very nicely. Haven't heard any complaints from guys that ride the offset, it just looks odd but rides fine.

    You can always run narrower rims and tires on a bike that will take 4.8, but it doesn't work the other way around. Everybody wanted Bud and Lou last year, and many folks tried to squeeze them in, but the loss of gearing and inability to run very low pressures makes it kind of a moot point to me.

    Speaking of which, Moots is going to make a double run this year, half of their Frost Ti run will take 4.8. Drool.

  12. #12
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,378

    Re: Figuring out a new bike decision...

    If you can get a moonlander discounted you could always get a symmetrical front fork too... or a Carver carbon which lightens Mooney up by almost a pound and a half. Either way... no problems with offset and handling... the tires are all symmetrical to the bike frame anyway.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    If you can get a moonlander discounted you could always get a symmetrical front fork too... or a Carver carbon which lightens Mooney up by almost a pound and a half. Either way... no problems with offset and handling... the tires are all symmetrical to the bike frame anyway.
    I've seen the symmetrical Moonie forks now - about a hundred bucks or so I think. Carver = $300. If I were to replace the offset fork with a standard fork that at some point, then I'd also need to redo the front wheel and lace it differently in the normal fashion, right? But I guess if there is no functional disadvantage to the offset, I might keep it as is.

Similar Threads

  1. Next Bike Decision...
    By ridonkulus in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-20-2013, 02:38 PM
  2. Need help figuring out what fork will fit my bike
    By gregers05 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-11-2013, 11:57 AM
  3. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 10-16-2012, 04:27 PM
  4. Decision on used bike
    By mrnowak in forum Trek
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-29-2012, 05:41 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-21-2012, 09:32 AM

Posting Permissions

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