Results 1 to 83 of 83
  1. #1
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16

    Full Suspension Fatbike - Please help me choose.

    Hi
    I just posted this thread because I'm honestly curious at what options there are for full suspension fatbikes and if I'm missing any that I might consider. Many seem to have left no internet footprint and so it's hard to find any reviews or information to inform a decision.

    I'm trying to decide what might be the best option for me up here in Vancouver, and hope you can help me choose.

    For whatever reason, we (BC and especially Van) seem to be very late to the fatbike party, and I've only encountered a handful of rigid or front suspension bikes, and essentially zero FS ones.

    NSMB just finally got around to testing a Bucksaw, but putting together opinions, this would seem be capable, but less suitable than other options.

    So, considering the options available, I'm leaning toward the Fatillac. Chatting on FB with the guy from Growler, their intention seems to be to build something similarly capable with their Double Stout (but ?? if that pans out), and the Farley EX9.8 ditto.

    I'm not from Van, and for the last few years have been distracted by trail running, and before that, road and velodrome racing mostly, so my bike quiver is missing anything capable in a North Shore sense, and I'd like to get something capable of basically anything (I want the bike to be way more capable than I am, basically).

    Any thoughts on a 'clearly best' bike for the job? (if there is one)
    Thanks

  2. #2
    Banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    445
    delete
    Last edited by ak-rider; 1 Week Ago at 10:08 PM.

  3. #3
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,133
    Heard rumors of a new Mutz with a little different geo as well, might just be vaperware tho?? Not promoting just giving options, really no clue what a Mutz is like.

  4. #4
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Hard to beat the Fatillac at tech riding. Proper rim width and tire pressure will help you get the most out of it, for the conditions and trails you like to ride.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Full Suspension Fatbike - Please help me choose.-8a3a4133.jpg  

    Full Suspension Fatbike - Please help me choose.-8a3a4140.jpg  

    Full Suspension Fatbike - Please help me choose.-8a3a4137.jpg  


  5. #5
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,328
    I rode a bucksaw for two years, it's a good bike but remember it's only 110mm travel, for BC riding I have a feeling you will be flying through the travel pretty quick.

    I've been on a lenz fatillac since the fall, is absolutely great. Handle and rides better then the BS in all terrain. The only thing the BS wins at is weight and fits a slightly larger tire on the rear.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    445
    delete
    Last edited by ak-rider; 1 Week Ago at 10:08 PM.

  7. #7
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    Full suspension fat bikes are in their infancy so its kinda like going back to the 90's, early '00 tech for what will work on the Shore. I can see the possibility of a whole new niche market opening up with real suspension technology being introduced that could take advantage of the improved grip of fat bike tires.
    I guess part of my question also hinges around 'are FS fatbikes sufficiently evolved that NS riding would benefit from them' ... Given that so much NS riding is significantly traction limited (wet wood/rocks especially) there would be an obvious benefit so long as the suspension was sufficiently 'there' to be beneficial.

    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    They are slower on the flat but can be surprising fast in more gnarly terrain.
    The decision itself really hinges around what % of riding is in the gnarly territory and would benefit from the traction while also having good enough suspension to also be beneficial. I don't have any doubts that I'd also build a set of 29er or 27.5 (or both) wheels for when there would be a clear benefit to a faster tire.

  8. #8
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Shark View Post
    I rode a bucksaw for two years, it's a good bike but remember it's only 110mm travel, for BC riding I have a feeling you will be flying through the travel pretty quick.
    This is my worry ... I don't want to get something and immediately have it at its limits (which I'm worried about with Bucksaw, or other similar frames).

  9. #9
    Banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    445
    delete
    Last edited by ak-rider; 1 Week Ago at 10:09 PM.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    129
    Waltworks
    Trek
    Salsa
    Lenz
    Proudfoot
    Foes
    Carver
    LaMere

    I know thereís more out there....

    Iíd recommend riding as many ďplusĒ bikes and full sus ďfat bikesĒ to see what really suits you. Determine which tire size works best for you -plus vs fat-

    Your options more than triple when you go to look for full sus plus bikes.

    However you can always run a plus wheelset on a full sus fatbike as an option.

    Speaking of wet, does anyone know if running studded tires in wet:rooty stuff will be of benefit?

  11. #11
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    Waltworks
    Trek
    Salsa
    Lenz
    Proudfoot
    Foes
    Carver
    LaMere

    I know thereís more out there....
    Thanks, you've added a couple I didn't know about.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    Iíd recommend riding as many ďplusĒ bikes and full sus ďfat bikesĒ to see what really suits you. Determine which tire size works best for you -plus vs fat-

    Your options more than triple when you go to look for full sus plus bikes.
    Haven't seen that many plus bikes out here yet either to try ... but good idea - I should look more carefully to get an indication of what a full-fat might be capable of (if only in the future).

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    However you can always run a plus wheelset on a full sus fatbike as an option.
    This would be my plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    Speaking of wet, does anyone know if running studded tires in wet:rooty stuff will be of benefit?
    I know I've used spiked trail running shoes for exactly this reason - and they turn deadly wet (and even slightly icy) woodwork into entirely runnable woodwork ... lots or orienteering racers do this for exactly this reason, to get more traction when off-trail ... so it would stand to reason that the same should hold for a bike tire also. Woud be fun to experiment with certainly.

  12. #12
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    I donít think the current FS fatbikes are anywhere close to that level.
    This is my suspicion ... any purchase may have to be with that in mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    Like Shark mentioned, the travel is limited. I donít think they are Shore worthy but thatís not to say a guy couldnít have fun, theyíd just likely have to dial things back. The FS fatbikes are more for trail riding than anything else.

    I donít keep up with the state of plus tired bikes but I suspect there would be better, more capable options available in that category.
    My background is trail riding also, so my skills in that category also, as is my chutzpah.

    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    Another problem is right now there arenít any long travel dual crown forks available for fatbikes, or stiff, long travel single crown forks. The Mastidon only has 34mm stanchions and with an option of 150mm of travel, it will be flexy. The Bluto is worse with 32mm stanchions.
    The Dorado here seems to be the closest to a North Shore setup that I've seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    Fat tires are also bouncy compared to smaller tires so they have their pros and cons. This video is a pretty good comparison to give you the idea of the advantages and disadvantages to fat tires.
    One would think this is related more to pressures used than anything else ... I remember the same being said about XC tires wider than 2.25" at one time also, then about plus tires ... I can't think there was much of a fundamental change to affect bounciness other than people finding whatever pressure actually worked for the tire size ... I might be wrong though that there is a 'point of no return' where a tire will be inherently bouncy, but I have a feeling it is more related to finding the right pressure(???). But if indeed bounce is unavoidable, dialing back to plus tires always possible.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    Hate to be a "that guy". But I have enjoyed riding one of these. Fat suspension frame new SN04 - Shenzhen ICAN Sports Equipment Co., Ltd.
    Might be some push back against direct sale frames. But now you know "the rest of the story."

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    This is my worry ... I don't want to get something and immediately have it at its limits (which I'm worried about with Bucksaw, or other similar frames).
    I'm happy with my Bucksaw here on the Canadian East coast, works great on my local trails and suits my type of riding but I think you'd quickly find it's limits out on the West coast. The Trek might be worth a look as it has 120mm sus vs 100mm on the Bucksaw, it's running the larger 27.5 fat wheels as well I believe.

    Lots of great threads here on the Fatillac with nothing but great reviews, worth a look as well.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Full Suspension Fatbike - Please help me choose.-july-17-bluff2.jpg  

    '07 Spec Enduro
    '14 Salsa Mukluk 2
    '16 Salsa Bucksaw GX1

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laurenlex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    580
    I've had a Bucksaw for about 5 months now. It replaced a '08 Giant Reign (150mm travel). I live and ride in the Wyoming Rocky Mountains and have no regrets, (I bought it without ever riding a fat bike). The bike is more fun, faster, and more capable than my old one in almost every situation. Some of this is the wheels, some is the modern geometry.

    Technical climbing: Grade: A The Bucksaw scatters up anything. I never notice the rear suspension (good trait). If you have the leg strength and skills, it will clean the climb. I was amazed the first time I went up a very steep blown-out trail filled with loose baseball rocks; it just chugged to the top, a route I rarely clean on the Giant. Traction for days, does not get hung up on stuff.

    Smooth climbing: Grade B Better than I thought. Does not feel heavy at all, just like a normal bike with big tires. My Strava times are just as fast on these "boring" climbs.

    Technical descending: Grade: B+ This bike shreds loose, nasty, rock-strewn trails. I think putting a Mastadon on the front would make this an A. The big tires seem to make up for the short suspension travel. It's fun just bombing through the wrong line and surviving. I feel much more confident catching air, as the big tires make the landing feel safer and more controlled. I do NOT catch big air, too old.

    Fast descending: Grade: B- Very stable but a "normal" bike might be better here. Screaming down fast, smooth, hardpack singletrack is no problem, but not the strong suit of the Bucksaw. The fear of pedal strikes here might slow me down.

    If your trails are smooth, fast, buffed and loamy, the Bucksaw might not be the best tool. example: Park City. My trails are rocky, loose, blown out, dusty, bumpy, with not much flow, the Bucksaw kicks @ss in this situation. I cant' wait to take it to Moab.

    Other thoughts, the bottom bracket feels LOW. My cranks and pedals look 5 years old after 5 months. This might be new geometry and not bucksaw specific. I had zero pedaling issues with the wider Q factor.

    I love my Bucksaw, but ride in an area with terrain that suits Fat.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    445
    delete
    Last edited by ak-rider; 1 Week Ago at 10:09 PM.

  17. #17
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,754
    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    Hi
    I just posted this thread because I'm honestly curious at what options there are for full suspension fatbikes and if I'm missing any that I might consider. Many seem to have left no internet footprint and so it's hard to find any reviews or information to inform a decision.

    I'm trying to decide what might be the best option for me up here in Vancouver, and hope you can help me choose.

    For whatever reason, we (BC and especially Van) seem to be very late to the fatbike party, and I've only encountered a handful of rigid or front suspension bikes, and essentially zero FS ones.

    I'm not from Van, and for the last few years have been distracted by trail running, and before that, road and velodrome racing mostly, so my bike quiver is missing anything capable in a North Shore sense, and I'd like to get something capable of basically anything (I want the bike to be way more capable than I am, basically).
    I would not, in any way, want to ride a fatbike on the terrain up and around there. I am familiar with it and while it will work just fine on some stuff, stunts like gaps, drops, jumps and so on, require a certain amount of speed to clear. Flat out, the fatbike won't clear a lot of stuff that you are used to and could result in some spectacular casings/crashes. Even moving up to a 29er enduro bike changes those dynamics, but going to a fatbike? No way. There are a lot of smaller trail features that have less consequences that I will easily overshoot in the summer that I can't even make in the winter or even in the summer on the fatbike, due to how slowly accelerating they are and how they don't want to change direction. IMO, this is a recipe for disaster.

    Now, don't read into that too far, something like a Mutz with some skinnier wheels would probably do pretty well, as long as the geometry isn't too funky, but the fatbikes usually make some pretty radical sacrifices to allow them to be ridden on snow, which is generally at slower speeds without a bunch of travel.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    North Shore means different things to different people, big features, technical, wet and rooty, yeah. So I rode a lot of BC stuff on a Mutz, it was a great bike, really only felt itís limits due to fork issues (Wren, Bluto) and when I needed a bit more nimbleness; long chainstays.

    Now that the Mastodon is here, fat bikes have a fork on par with a Pike; no one but a serious downhiller would call the Mastodon flexy.

    To the OP, if youíre not already going big on the North Shore, you can probably ride anything you want as you build your skilz.

    I kinda question your need for a FS fat bike, North Shore riding is mostly the purvey of 2.5 tires on medium to long travel bikes. If you want fatter tires for traction, plus tires are a fine choice, but fat tires could be counterproductive.

    BTW, I rode 27.5 x 3 and 29 x 3 on the Mutz most of the time, I never used 26 x 4Ē tires for BC riding on the Mutz, but with the Fatillac Iíd consider 27.4 x 3.8, though 27.5 x 3 would probably be more effective and more fun.

    If you must have an FS fat bike, the Fatillac is far and away the best choice: agile, moderate travel, good geo, burly construction. I ride mine as an all mountain bike, big drops, gnarly terrain, big climbs, big descents, itís a beast.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sml-2727's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,440
    I also own a bucksaw and the only changes I made to it was put on a shorter stem and change the tires to Jumbo Jims...the bike rolls very fast and stable. I only have two complaints with this bike, I get a lot of pedal strikes and the Bluto fork that came on the bike just plain sucks.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    Iíd sooner take a decent hardtail to the BC than a Bucksaw, too fragile, sorry.

    Riding the technical terrain in the BC is really edgy, by the seat of your pants stuff, through wet, steep, rugged terrain, back in the woods, east coast riding on itís head, not the smooth flowy big feature stuff like you see at all the televised events. If you want a park bike like in the Crankworks videos, thatís a different bike than I think the OP is looking for.

    Lots of BC riders roll on aggressive hard tails like Chromag, Bros, and Transition, long, low and slack with long travel forks. My buddy rides a Rootdown or a Riot, other folks bring whatever they have, one rippin girl I rode with had a Devinci Atlas; so itís not always about the bike..

    I donít know that you need a lot of travel, but it certainly doesnít hurt.

    I think the key element for that sort of riding is a compact geometry and big wheels, which is why short chainstay 29ers are popular. The OP might want to look through posts on MTBR from people riding BC, Iím sure theyíd give you plenty of bike suggestions.

    If the OP wants a do it all bike and must have fat, a Mutz or a Fatillac with two wheel sets would be a good choice. Keep in mind that this bike set up is good for most everything, but not great for anything.

    Personally Iíd looked at bike from Transition, Canfield Bros, maybe Evil.

  21. #21
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    I think @Nurse Ben you get my question perfectly ... if I wanted to go park I'd rent something and let the shop repair whatever inevitably breaks.

    I've ridden the kind of hardtail you describe, and can 'get through' trails but don't have fun on them ... there is never an inspiring level of confidence in traction like I keep seeing people describe when they ride with fat tires (and to a slightly lesser extent plus tires) ... and I'm quite curious to see if that would apply for trails here also.

    The caveat of course is that if the bike had other inherent limitations which prevented that traction from being enjoyable, that is to be avoided ... the Bucksaw, for instance, seems to be more in this latter category.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    If the OP wants a do it all bike and must have fat
    ... I'm not entirely sure it it 'must be' but I'm really quite curious at the possibilities of Fat, but living in Vancouver, I'm immediately putting said Fat somepace it hasn't been taken (much) and for which it may or may not be totally suited.

    If the chassis was sufficiently capable, and the Fat wheels didn't provide sufficient benefit, then there'd be little penalty to running Plus instead. Its just a matter of finding chassis sufficient with which to make that determination.

  22. #22
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,328
    I'd go lenz fatillac with a good rear shock, beefy fork like the Mastodon 140, dropper, and a set of Nate's. Have fun

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    The only big hit full suspension fatbikes are the Mutz and Fatillac. All the others are far less capable due to limited travel and less burly design.

    I run a Mastodon Pro STD 150 and a Cane Creek IL Coil shock, 6Ē of travel on both ends, I run 27.5 x 3 most of the time, switching to 27.5 x 3.8 for chunk and wet weather.

    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    I think @Nurse Ben you get my question perfectly ... if I wanted to go park I'd rent something and let the shop repair whatever inevitably breaks.

    I've ridden the kind of hardtail you describe, and can 'get through' trails but don't have fun on them ... there is never an inspiring level of confidence in traction like I keep seeing people describe when they ride with fat tires (and to a slightly lesser extent plus tires) ... and I'm quite curious to see if that would apply for trails here also.

    The caveat of course is that if the bike had other inherent limitations which prevented that traction from being enjoyable, that is to be avoided ... the Bucksaw, for instance, seems to be more in this latter category.

    ... I'm not entirely sure it it 'must be' but I'm really quite curious at the possibilities of Fat, but living in Vancouver, I'm immediately putting said Fat somepace it hasn't been taken (much) and for which it may or may not be totally suited.

    If the chassis was sufficiently capable, and the Fat wheels didn't provide sufficient benefit, then there'd be little penalty to running Plus instead. Its just a matter of finding chassis sufficient with which to make that determination.

  24. #24
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    You need to include a disclaimer that you have a relationship with Lentz. It is disingenuous otherwise.

    Nice spelling.

    I helped design a few of the Lenz frames. I love riding them. There.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    445
    delete
    Last edited by ak-rider; 1 Week Ago at 10:10 PM.

  26. #26
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by ak-rider View Post
    Was that so hard? It should be listed in your signature. Otherwise you are being an industry shill by pushing a product you benefit from the sale of.

    I would benefit from the sale of them *if I sold them*. Since I don't, there's no reason for me to disclaim anything.

    I'm sorry you don't have anything better to do than play sphincter police. Really.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I would benefit from the sale of them *if I sold them*. Since I don't, there's no reason for me to disclaim anything.

    I'm sorry you don't have anything better to do than play sphincter police. Really.
    If you helped designed the bike as you claimed than you have some type of relationship that should be disclosed. Whether or not the bike in question is the best thing ever made or not, your opinion is biased and you posted about it on a public forum like you were just an average guy providing an innocent recommendation. To me itís no different that a car forum where youíve got s salesman for some OEM promoting their products under the guise of a regular user.

    And enough with the arguing! Iím sick of reading it.

  28. #28
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    I run a Mastodon Pro STD 150 ... 6Ē of travel on both ends, I run 27.5 x 3 most of the time, switching to 27.5 x 3.8 for chunk and wet weather.
    This is basically what may likely be the most frequent setup for me also (tirewise) ... the 150 Mastodon is OEM only, right?

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,062
    Mike has always been open about the design processess he went through with many of his bikes and gear, working with several different manufacturers. If he had to do a disclaimer about everything he has worked on half of each post would be a disclaimer. I sometimes disagree with his conclusions and delivery style but they are always well thought out and he is almost always clear that his opinions are what work for him and your milage may vary.
    Latitude 61

  30. #30
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I helped design a few of the Lenz frames. I love riding them.
    Are you finding the Mastodon sufficient, or would think that something more akin to that Dorado still have any benefit (were it to be hypothetically wider)?

  31. #31
    Fat Is Where It's At Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,629
    Check this one out.

  32. #32
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Marsh View Post
    If you helped designed the bike as you claimed than you have some type of relationship that should be disclosed.

    I've done design/testing work for RockShox, Manitou, and Fox over the past 2 decades.

    I've had my hand in the development of literally dozens of rims from companies you've never heard of to (probably) the very rims on your current bike(s).

    Likewise with a handful of current frames from other companies.

    I've also designed and tested tires for WTB, Surly, Maxxis, and Kenda.

    I actually sell most of the above on a daily or at least weekly basis. Should I disclose those too?

    The question is rhetorical. Forum rules state that I need to provide a disclosure that I'm in the industry, and I've done that with my lacemine29 link below.

  33. #33
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    Are you finding the Mastodon sufficient, or would think that something more akin to that Dorado still have any benefit (were it to be hypothetically wider)?

    I just don't ride that aggressively anymore that I need the Dorado. I certainly loved the tunability of the damper.

    Mastodon is a great fork, and so much simpler to install, tune, and use for 95% of us.

  34. #34
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,466
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Marsh View Post
    If you helped designed the bike as you claimed than you have some type of relationship that should be disclosed.
    Says guy with 1 post.... So who exactly are YOU? Disclose please. Mike's rep here and transparency is clear to anyone with time spent on this board.

  35. #35
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I just don't ride that aggressively anymore that I need the Dorado. I certainly loved the tunability of the damper.

    Mastodon is a great fork, and so much simpler to install, tune, and use for 95% of us.
    Great feedback, thanks ... it's great to get advice from those who have experience with all the different options. Hypothetical opinions abound, but actual advice is rare.

  36. #36
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by DiRt DeViL View Post
    Check this one out.
    Per comment here ... how is the Growler different fundamentally from the Bucksaw clone Chinese frames? I've spoken to them on FB and they say the frames are different, but looking at geometry and frame sketch, I'm not sure how that is the case. They may, indeed, be, but ???

    I initially had them classified in my 'who and what' thread as more farley/fattilac-like based on that conversation, but then re-classified as more bucksaw-like after looking closer at the geometry.

  37. #37
    RAKC Industries
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,333
    Mike has always been: " Ive tried "this" and "that", this was great for "x" conditions, that was great for "y" conditions. However since I deal with both x and y continuously, the latest bike I built does both better for me since the trade offs dont matter. "

    He has always been clear who his is, doesnt hide it. He doesnt make money off of said brand, he just rides some of their stuff and is so respected and knowledgeable that said brands ask for his input.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Last edited by RAKC Ind; 1 Week Ago at 03:03 PM.
    Life on a bike doesn't begin till the sun goes down.

    US partner for Ravemen:
    www.rakclighting.com

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    It's a shame that certain threads and certain posters always get personal.

    It really is a downer and sadly I think it pushes the most insightful folks away from the forum.

    I'm gonna use Mikesee as an example: I met Mike, rode with him, my impression is that Mike is a good guy, who has a wealth of experience, and he practices what he preaches. As a result, Mike is successfull, respected, and industry types look to him for insights. Mike tells it like he sees it, he doesn't play favorites. He's also a really good rider.

    Why the hell would you want this guy ^ to become alienated from MTBR?

    Honestly, the way Mike is treated on MTBR, I'm suprised he posts here at all; I get the feeling that his posts are becoming fewer and farther between.

    I post less and come to MTBR less often because of this garbage. Maybe that makes some people happy...

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    It's a shame that certain threads and certain posters always get personal.

    It really is a downer and sadly I think it pushes the most insightful folks away from the forum.
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Nurse Ben again."
    '07 Spec Enduro
    '14 Salsa Mukluk 2
    '16 Salsa Bucksaw GX1

  40. #40
    one sick puppy
    Reputation: YetiBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    329
    I'll give Ben and Mike some love.
    Saddle up, Effendi. We ride.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by YetiBear View Post
    I'll give Ben and Mike some love.
    Agreed, the douche tone seems to be sign of the times....

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    Per comment here ... how is the Growler different fundamentally from the Bucksaw clone Chinese frames? I've spoken to them on FB and they say the frames are different, but looking at geometry and frame sketch, I'm not sure how that is the case. They may, indeed, be, but ???

    I initially had them classified in my 'who and what' thread as more farley/fattilac-like based on that conversation, but then re-classified as more bucksaw-like after looking closer at the geometry.
    That looks to be the exact same Chinese carbon frame as is the Ican and Imust Sno4. Bucksaw is 100mm front and rear suspension. And accepts a 26" x 4.00" fat tire /wheels. Or 29" x 2.5" tire/ wheels. This bike has similar split pivot suspension. But with 120mm travel. And this bike accepts up to 26" x 5.00" tires/wheels. Or 29" x 3.00 tires/ wheels. All carbon fiber frame for the Chinese bike. So there are considerable differences between Bucksaw and this frame. But no obvious, apparent differences between the Growler and the Ican Sno4.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    The Mastodon is plenty fork for anyone but a serious enduro rider, ie think of it on par with a Pike, Fox 34, etc...

    The Dorado is a dual crown DH fork, it's an overkill for anything but an enduro or DH bike. I believe Mike was using the Dorado because he had one already, it looked friggin cool, and because the Mastodon hadn't been released. Mike also used a Fox 34 and he suggested that it was comparable to the Mastodon.

    I have two Mastodon STD Pro, my son has a Mastodon STD Comp, and I previously owned an EXT Pro version. This is a great fork, nothing else in a fat fork can compare until Fox makes a fat specific Float 34 or a RS makes a fat specific Pike.

    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    Are you finding the Mastodon sufficient, or would think that something more akin to that Dorado still have any benefit (were it to be hypothetically wider)?

  44. #44
    Fat Is Where It's At Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,629
    Quote Originally Posted by endo_alley View Post
    That looks to be the exact same Chinese carbon frame as is the Ican and Imust Sno4. Bucksaw is 100mm front and rear suspension. And accepts a 26" x 4.00" fat tire /wheels. Or 29" x 2.5" tire/ wheels. This bike has similar split pivot suspension. But with 120mm travel. And this bike accepts up to 26" x 5.00" tires/wheels. Or 29" x 3.00 tires/ wheels. All carbon fiber frame for the Chinese bike. So there are considerable differences between Bucksaw and this frame. But no obvious, apparent differences between the Growler and the Ican Sno4.
    Don't know if it's the same frame or not, saw it @ Growler recently and took it for a demo ride. While loading it in the car noticed that the rear axle was broken so returned it, was bummed not to demo that sweet looking ride. Wheels told me that it could run 26 fat, 27.5+ and 29+ but don't quote me on that, all I know is that if I had the coin one will be waiting for me at home.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    I have the Imust version which looks just like the Growler. Everybody who tries it has a ball. I don't know if it would be good to use as my only bike. I have some Nextie wheels for the summer 29 x 50mm with 3" chupacabras. And 26 x 90mm 4.8" Maxis DH tires for the winter. I put some Race Face Next cranks so that I could put a 26t chain ring on the bike. Not nearly as heavy as it looks,.

  46. #46
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by IWR View Post
    Great feedback, thanks ... it's great to get advice from those who have experience with all the different options. Hypothetical opinions abound, but actual advice is rare.

    Also just stumbled onto this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTGVC8X1_YY


    He's far more skilled and ballsy than I, plus he lives/rides in an entirely different environment, but my experience matches his across the board.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    The dude has skilz! Killer video, in my next life I want to ride like that!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Also just stumbled onto this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTGVC8X1_YY


    He's far more skilled and ballsy than I, plus he lives/rides in an entirely different environment, but my experience matches his across the board.

  48. #48
    Ambassador of Chub
    Reputation: Smithhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Also just stumbled onto this:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTGVC8X1_YY


    He's far more skilled and ballsy than I, plus he lives/rides in an entirely different environment, but my experience matches his across the board.
    Smage is off the hook. Dude can huck a chub like nobody's bidness.
    "The only way we can truly control the outcome of a ride is not going on it, which is a choice I'm unwilling to make." -K.B.

  49. #49
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    wow that riding is impressive

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Mega View Post
    Says guy with 1 post.... So who exactly are YOU? Disclose please. Mike's rep here and transparency is clear to anyone with time spent on this board.
    Iím new to this board but not fat bikes. If somebody is going to be promoting a company or product they have an affiation with beyond that of a regular customer then it needs to be disclosed. For me to now have received negitive feedback for pointing that out in my one and only first posts tells me that something isnít quite right with this forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    It's a shame that certain threads and certain posters always get personal.

    It really is a downer and sadly I think it pushes the most insightful folks away from the forum.

    I'm gonna use Mikesee as an example: I met Mike, rode with him, my impression is that Mike is a good guy, who has a wealth of experience, and he practices what he preaches. As a result, Mike is successfull, respected, and industry types look to him for insights. Mike tells it like he sees it, he doesn't play favorites. He's also a really good rider.

    Why the hell would you want this guy ^ to become alienated from MTBR?

    Honestly, the way Mike is treated on MTBR, I'm suprised he posts here at all; I get the feeling that his posts are becoming fewer and farther between.

    I post less and come to MTBR less often because of this garbage. Maybe that makes some people happy...
    Long, low and slack is the direction modern bikes are being designed and constructed. The Fatillac is none of those so. So spin the comments that donít agree with yours and the small clique however you like but users have a right to be made aware that some of the information being presented is for the benefit of added sales to certain companies. Thatís unfortunate as one would have thought this board was made up of regular guys posting about bikes. Iím thinking the regular people moved on to Facebook, Instagram, etc and whatís left behind are industry people promoting products from their workplace. I hope Iím wrong.

  51. #51
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    274
    Question for you Fatillac guys:
    Have any of you ran fast (30mph+) downhill trails with jumps? The only videos I've seen are guys doing slower speed technical stuff and rock drops. I just want to make sure this is the right bike for me.
    Nurse Ben called it a "enduro bike on steroids" and that's exactly what I'm looking for.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,062
    And on his second post he calls everyone here industry shills.....not exactly how to win friends or influence people.

    The Fattillac wheelbase is 2" longer and it has a 2 degree shallower head tube angle than any of my old fat bikes, if that isn't at least trending toward "newer" geometry I guess I need to move over to the Vintage and Retro forum.

    As others have suggested Randy you should read a bit more of this forum before you come out guns blazing.
    Latitude 61

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Question for you Fatillac guys:
    Have any of you ran fast (30mph+) downhill trails with jumps? The only videos I've seen are guys doing slower speed technical stuff and rock drops. I just want to make sure this is the right bike for me.
    Nurse Ben called it a "enduro bike on steroids" and that's exactly what I'm looking for.
    I have not attempted any downhill on my Fatillac. While the bike can handle a lot of technical situations, I am not sure that any fat bike is the best choice for that kind of riding. If you really want a downhill fat bike, the Foes is probably a better fit. The trade off is that the handling is not as playful and climbing efficiency is much worse vs the Fatillac.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  54. #54
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Question for you Fatillac guys:
    Have any of you ran fast (30mph+) downhill trails with jumps? The only videos I've seen are guys doing slower speed technical stuff and rock drops. I just want to make sure this is the right bike for me.
    Nurse Ben called it a "enduro bike on steroids" and that's exactly what I'm looking for.

    I sure haven't.

    I've ridden Whistler (I can only assume it's in your sights, given where you live) many times, and love spending time on the big jump lines like A-Line, Dirt Merchant, Freight Train, etc... which meet the description in your question.

    But I was doing all of that on 29 x 2.5" wheels/tires.

    Could a fatbike do the same? I don't know. Probably. What comes to mind is that with all of that undamped rubber out at the perimeter of your wheels, it's probably going to be a handful at speed. Maybe not, but I'd think it would be.

    The solution to this is two wheelsets for your bike. Ride the fatty fat fats on the Shore where slow speeds and big traction are mandatory. Swap to 29 x 2.5" wheels/tires for park days.

    Just my $.02.

  55. #55
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,466
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Marsh View Post
    For me to now have received negitive feedback for pointing that out in my one and only first posts tells me that something isnít quite right with this forum.
    No "negitive" feedback from me but I do think you are a sock puppet or have an axe to grind. 1st post - slams well known contributor, 2nd post - slams everyone else. Reminds me of some rider from AK or something. Welcome aboard! Maybe it's not the forum that isn't quite right.

  56. #56
    IWR
    IWR is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    The solution to this is two wheelsets for your bike. Ride the fatty fat fats on the Shore where slow speeds and big traction are mandatory. Swap to 29 x 2.5" wheels/tires for park days.
    I think this is where my plan is heading ... likely starting in 27.5Fat land and seeing where those limits lie.

  57. #57
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Mega View Post
    No "negitive" feedback from me but I do think you are a sock puppet or have an axe to grind. 1st post - slams well known contributor, 2nd post - slams everyone else. Reminds me of some rider from AK or something. Welcome aboard! Maybe it's not the forum that isn't quite right.
    First thing that came to my mind after reading the first post.

  58. #58
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I sure haven't.

    I've ridden Whistler (I can only assume it's in your sights, given where you live) many times, and love spending time on the big jump lines like A-Line, Dirt Merchant, Freight Train, etc... which meet the description in your question.

    But I was doing all of that on 29 x 2.5" wheels/tires.

    Could a fatbike do the same? I don't know. Probably. What comes to mind is that with all of that undamped rubber out at the perimeter of your wheels, it's probably going to be a handful at speed. Maybe not, but I'd think it would be.

    The solution to this is two wheelsets for your bike. Ride the fatty fat fats on the Shore where slow speeds and big traction are mandatory. Swap to 29 x 2.5" wheels/tires for park days.

    Just my $.02.
    This kind of riding is what I'm currently trying to do with my RSD Mayor hardtail running 26" fat. However with a hardtail it beats me up, and I'm concerned about the longevity of my frame and rear wheel. Also I wish the head tube was a little bit slacker. So with either the Fatillac or the Mutz it fixed the 2 issues I have.
    As far as tires go, yes they used to be a little sketchy when running 10 psi or so. Once I got them up to 14+ psi the tires feel great and I have no desire to go any smaller. I've ridden my buddy's 29'er a few times and I don't like it at all.. I test rode a KTM Lycan and the bike itself felt great, but even with 2.6 Nobby Nics it just didn't feel right.
    Maybe I'm crazy but the fat tires feel the best for traction and stability for me.

    I do appreciate everyone's insight.

    Exhibit A:

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    Hey Neal, ainít we talked about this enough already?

    I rode my Mutz for everything, park, all mountain, XC, snow, used three wheelsets and had a blast. The only thing that held me back was finding a decent fork.

    I wanted a Fatillac from the day Mike posted pics, but I was holding out for a decent fork. I ordered a Fatillac after the Mastodon was released.

    The Fatillac is everything the Mutz is plus a higher B.B., better suspension, and much shorter chainstays. The Mutz and Fatillac are priced similarly.

    The only thing I wish the Fatillac had was more insertion for a dropper; I can only run a 125mm dropper. The Mutz does have wider chainstays, so donít get s Fatillac with the plan to run 4Ē plus tires, cuz they wonít fit.

    Youíre suffering from buyerís constipation

    Edit:

    So Neal, I watched your video ... ummm, donít take it personal but that ainít downhill, thatís a flow trail with a couple berms and some rollers. Downhill is rugged, unpredictable, blind, often ugly, some must make moves, not a lot of ride arounds. The Fatillac is more thanenough bike for that kind of riding you're doing in the video, so if youíre looking to step up then the Fatillac is a good tool.

    Iíd suggest some plus wheels for the flow as theyíll handle better and roll faster. The b fat wheels are for ugly tech stuff, loose, rocky, not to say they wonít work for flow itís just that a Swiss Army knife approach is better.

    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Question for you Fatillac guys:
    Have any of you ran fast (30mph+) downhill trails with jumps? The only videos I've seen are guys doing slower speed technical stuff and rock drops. I just want to make sure this is the right bike for me.
    Nurse Ben called it a "enduro bike on steroids" and that's exactly what I'm looking for.
    Last edited by Nurse Ben; 6 Days Ago at 12:20 PM.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    The Mutz is not any more capable at speed than the Fatillac, but the Fatillac is far more agile, way easier to manual, and the Fatillac suspension works better under hard braking.

    Get do 27.5 x 3 for your Fatillac and go fast!

    Quote Originally Posted by Stu Pidassle View Post
    I have not attempted any downhill on my Fatillac. While the bike can handle a lot of technical situations, I am not sure that any fat bike is the best choice for that kind of riding. If you really want a downhill fat bike, the Foes is probably a better fit. The trade off is that the handling is not as playful and climbing efficiency is much worse vs the Fatillac.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  61. #61
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,754
    Having taken my fatbike during the summer on some of the big epic summer rides here (when I first moved up), it's not something I care to re-create any time soon. When moving real fast, the bike simply doesn't want to change lines, especially with sharp turns. You can make it turn if you slow down, but everything about it at speed is sluggish and it rides up the outside of berms if you enter too fast for the wheels/tires. There are a few people that can climb faster or roll over rocky stuff better on a fatbike, but for most of us, it's not even close when we are climbing on a good FS bike or descending on the same. And of course, as I mentioned above, there's the acceleration issue, trying to get up to speed for obstacles and the such. I'd consider an FS fatbike for the winter, although long after I buy a bunch of other things, but never for the summer. Too much rotational weight.

    The "one bike" thing where you can put skinnier wheels/tires on in the summer is a cool idea though I think. Hard to get the geometry just right for both, but a carbon Turner King Kahn would have been a cool idea IMO. Make it light enough to ride/race in the summer and hit the trails in the winter.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    I think weíre talking about different kinds of bikes. A fat bike and a full suspension b fat bike. A hardtail run of the mill fat bike running 26 x 4 is a very different beast from a bike like the Fatillac or the Mutz.

    I ride my b fat bikes year round, epics with many thousands of feet of climbing, and rarely do I wish for a different bike. There are times when I wish Iíd brought a different wheel set (fatter or skinnier), suspension or no suspension, or brought armor, but the bikes themselves are not an issue.

    Jayem, if you ever get the chance to ride a Fatillac, it will be a life changer; even a Wozo would blow your mind. It really is amazing what good geo can do for fat tires

    My brother is a solid rider, heís in school so heís adopted my Devinci Hendrix, DW 125 travel, cc inline + 130 Pike, 2.8 tires, great all mountain ride. We were over in Truckee on some flowy single track Interspersed with rugged steeps and tech. We get to the bottom, weíre messing around, and I tell him to hop on the Fatillac and go for a spin. He comes back and says ďI want one!Ē.

    Itís just like that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Having taken my fatbike during the summer on some of the big epic summer rides here (when I first moved up), it's not something I care to re-create any time soon. When moving real fast, the bike simply doesn't want to change lines, especially with sharp turns. You can make it turn if you slow down, but everything about it at speed is sluggish and it rides up the outside of berms if you enter too fast for the wheels/tires. There are a few people that can climb faster or roll over rocky stuff better on a fatbike, but for most of us, it's not even close when we are climbing on a good FS bike or descending on the same. And of course, as I mentioned above, there's the acceleration issue, trying to get up to speed for obstacles and the such. I'd consider an FS fatbike for the winter, although long after I buy a bunch of other things, but never for the summer. Too much rotational weight.

    The "one bike" thing where you can put skinnier wheels/tires on in the summer is a cool idea though I think. Hard to get the geometry just right for both, but a carbon Turner King Kahn would have been a cool idea IMO. Make it light enough to ride/race in the summer and hit the trails in the winter.

  63. #63
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,754
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Jayem, if you ever get the chance to ride a Fatillac, it will be a life changer; even a Wozo would blow your mind. It really is amazing what good geo can do for fat tires
    I don't want to go slower. I don't see anyone in our races going faster on those kind of bikes, whether it's DH, enduro, XC or XC endurance. For winter fun-riding I would consider it, but it's of such narrow use that it would be a monumental waste of my $$.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    I don't want to go slower. I don't see anyone in our races going faster on those kind of bikes, whether it's DH, enduro, XC or XC endurance. For winter fun-riding I would consider it, but it's of such narrow use that it would be a monumental waste of my $$.
    Easy there, this thread is no place for balance or reason...

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    I don't want to go slower. I don't see anyone in our races going faster on those kind of bikes, whether it's DH, enduro, XC or XC endurance. For winter fun-riding I would consider it, but it's of such narrow use that it would be a monumental waste of my $$.
    Hmm... I haven't tried the Fatillac. But my (Ican) Chinese Bucksaw knockoff is a bunch of fun. 29" X 3.00 tires fro the summer. 4.8" for the winter. Everybody who tries it seems to want one. The problem is, it is really just a bike to get if you already have the summer bike (or preferably two) that suits you most of the time. I wouldn't want this style of bike for my only bike. But it's a great addition to the quiver if, like me, you have hoarding tendencies.

  66. #66
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,133
    Quote Originally Posted by endo_alley View Post
    Hmm... I haven't tried the Fatillac. But my (Ican) Chinese Bucksaw knockoff is a bunch of fun. 29" X 3.00 tires fro the summer. 4.8" for the winter. Everybody who tries it seems to want one. The problem is, it is really just a bike to get if you already have the summer bike (or preferably two) that suits you most of the time. I wouldn't want this style of bike for my only bike. But it's a great addition to the quiver if, like me, you have hoarding tendencies.
    So am I reading this wrong or are you somewhat echoing what Jayem was saying??

  67. #67
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Hey Neal, ainít we talked about this enough already?
    ......
    Youíre suffering from buyerís constipation
    Sorry, yes, and yes... OCD Engineer syndrome...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    So Neal, I watched your video ... ummm, donít take it personal but that ainít downhill, thatís a flow trail with a couple berms and some rollers. Downhill is rugged, unpredictable, blind, often ugly, some must make moves, not a lot of ride arounds.
    No you're right. I didn't mean to infer that was a "downhill" trail. I just grabbed a video with some speed and jumps to show what I'm hitting now with the hardtail and 26x4.0 tires..
    Last edited by KTMNealio; 1 Week Ago at 09:59 PM.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    So am I reading this wrong or are you somewhat echoing what Jayem was saying?? ... it's of such narrow use that it would be a monumental waste of my $$.
    Er ...Not exactly. All my bikes are narrow use bikes. But could be used for lots of things if I chose so. I don't take a short travel 29er to Moab for a week. Or a 160mm travel bike necessarily on a 35 mile singletrack ride high in the Rockies. Or either when there is snow on the ground. The FFS WITH 4.8" Bud/ Lou setup is good for packed snow. With 29" Chupacabras (for me) it's fun for maybe up to 10-12 mile singletrack jaunts. It isn't what you would ever call flickable. More like a bull in a China shop. If that's what Jayem was saying then I agree. The difference is, I did part with some $$ to buy the bike.

  69. #69
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,754
    Quote Originally Posted by endo_alley View Post
    I don't take a short travel 29er to Moab for a week. Or a 160mm travel bike necessarily on a 35 mile singletrack ride high in the Rockies.
    I do the latter, all the time. Why? Because if you are reasonably fit, you can ride it all day long and maximize your enjoyment on the downhills. 35 miles, 50 miles, more, no problem. Now, that's just me, I live for the downhills, despite my XC racing success, where I also enjoy the downhills. I'll only travel with the 100mm XC bike if I'm going to an XC race (not tame) or the midwest or other similar tame terrain. For everything else, the 160mm bike is the most versatile to me. If I could only have one bike, it'd probably be a 120-130mm travel 29er, instead of my XC FS 29er and my AM 27.5 bike, but 90% of the time in the summer, I take the 160mm travel AM bike. I like to be able to air/jump off of anything with no consequences, basically "do what I want". To some extent, an FS bike will let you do this, even a plus bike, but it's a lot slower. I don't want to be held back by the bike either. I find uphill traction much more a function of wheel size and skills/pedaling than tire size. I went through the "big tire phase" back when we were doing DH on 3.0s. I settled on the most efficient size that hits the widest range of conditions. If you can only have one bike for winter AND summer, maybe a fat-bike kind of fills that, but IMO, you'd have be doing a good amount of winter fat-riding. Otherwise, there are people that like tooling around on fat-bikes in the summer, some that feel it's more stable for them or that gives them a little more cush than a rigid bike and they don't take it fast enough to overcome the tire-damping or they don't push them hard enough to have to fight the bike riding up and over the outside of the berm, not wanting to turn, not being able to change lines, etc. When it comes to stuff like the North Shore, stuff in Washington State (that I just rode a few months ago), a fat-FS bike is very low on the list of bikes I'd want. With the 160mm AM, I did big epics, then would turn around the next day and put on the DH helmet and hit some legit DH runs. For some of that stuff, you have to be on your game and commit to lines and speed. Some of which, I wouldn't want to risk on a fat-bike, having to get it up to speed and not being able to take the right line. Even on a 29er AM bike with heavier (minions DHF 2.5s) tires, I notice this effect, not as pronounced as I've felt on my fatbike in the summer.

    I have to agree that my short travel XC race 29er wasn't as much fun in Sedona, when I was in AZ for the Whiskey Off Road last year, but it wasn't bad considering I did the Circle Trail and many more miles of riding around Prescott where I was able to ride just fine. But then, that bike literally flies when you push a bit on the pedals. Seems you can pull it up from a dig in any gear. That in of itself is pretty fun sometimes.

    Getting to my main point, what is "fun" to some people is not to others. The OP might have fun on the North Shore on this type of bike, but I would caution that some of the inherent characteristics are at odds with some of that riding and we have a tendency to "sugarcoat" many of the negatives, either not acknowledging them or significantly downplaying them. The great thing about a fat-bike is that you CAN ride it in the summer. Unlike a snowboard where if you go out and stand on it on a slope in the summer, you can't go down because of dirt, bushes, rocks, etc. That is worth it to some people. For others, I cringe when I see how hard they are working to pedal some 40lb fatbike on the singletrack in the summer.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    "I cringe when I see how hard they are working to pedal some 40lb fatbike on the singletrack in the summer. " ... I think my FSFB comes in at under 30 lbs with 3.0 Chupas. Fairly light build. And actually, I make it look a lot harder to pedal uphill than it really is. As I said, for me it's a specialty item that I only keep in the garage because I have hoarding tendencies. I would say that if you are looking specifically for a fat bike, then a FSFB is a plausible option.

  71. #71
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Mega View Post
    No "negitive" feedback from me but I do think you are a sock puppet or have an axe to grind. 1st post - slams well known contributor, 2nd post - slams everyone else. Reminds me of some rider from AK or something. Welcome aboard! Maybe it's not the forum that isn't quite right.
    He making friends all over the place!
    Hopefully someone bans him for the comment he left me.Full Suspension Fatbike - Please help me choose.-img_20180115_083757.jpg

  72. #72
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    274
    I"m still trying to figure out why Jayem is on this thread??

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    Yeah, I figured you knew, but the video was very different than what you were talking about wanting to ride.

    That trail looks like fun, at speed I bet it's bumpy on a hardtail, so yeah any suspended bike will be more fun and be easier and more comfortable to ride.

    The thing about a fully suspended fatbike, really any fat bike with suspension, is the use of suspension on snow is less "necessary" unless you are really get on it like tech single track at speed with features, air time, etc...

    I only ride an FS fat bike because I don't want to on N + 1 bikes.

    I feel like the B Fat/Plus set up is about as close as you can get to a one quiver bike. Yeah, it's not the lightest, if geared for climbing it won't be the fastest, and it's got some extra weight. The Fatillac with plus wheels is not all that different from a shortchainstay mid travel plus bike.

    Geometry wise, I don't feel like slack geo and short chainstays are a negative for most riding. Obviously, there are going to be situations where there are better tools and if you subscribe to N + 1 bikes, then a half dozen bikes will certainly be a better tool kit than one bike and two wheelsets.

    If I never rode snow, I'd have a plus bike with 140-160mm suspension and a hardtail bikepackers. I could honestly do that now, but I use the B Fat for gnarly BC riding where I'm rolling untracked babyheads and sheer ugliness that would be less safe on narrower tires.

    Where do you live? It'd be ideal if you could try a Fatillac and a Mutz before buying.

    I'm in Nevada.

    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Sorry, yes, and yes... OCD Engineer syndrome...


    No you're right. I didn't mean to infer that was a "downhill" trail. I just grabbed a video with some speed and jumps to show what I'm hitting now with the hardtail and 26x4.0 tires..

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    Cuz he wants to particapte

    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    I"m still trying to figure out why Jayem is on this thread??

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    I"m still trying to figure out why Jayem is on this thread??
    Wow. Tough crowd on this forum.

  76. #76
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Where do you live? It'd be ideal if you could try a Fatillac and a Mutz before buying.

    I'm in Nevada.
    Yeah up here in Boise, Idaho. I was hoping Shark might come down here at some point and let me test his out..
    I almost had a test ride on a Mutz last fall, but unfortunately I couldn't make it to the guys house until the weekend and by that time he had sold it.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    Well, we go to SLC a fair amount. We used to drive by Boise every couple months when we lived in Wenatchee, just missed you

    We're heading to Moab in March, we can meet up then if you have time.

    I'm sure you'd like the Mutz, it's a super capable bike, esp for going fast downhill. I used the Mutz for everything at Stevens Pass Bike Park.

    The Mutz was my go to bike for epics like Mt St Helens Plains of Abraham loop, all the Seattle area riding, high Cascades, BC, Moab, St George, etc...

    I rode St George and did a bunch of BC riding with a mixxer set up (29+/27+) and a 150mm Wren.

    Comparing the Mutz to the Fatillac:
    The Fatillac has more ground clearance, better suspension design, shorter chainstays, and it's a bit lighter.
    The Mutz has a lower bb, more seat post insertion, a bit more tire capacity (height and width) and perhaps lower standover (large vs large).
    Prices are comparable.
    I wouldn't say one is toughter than the other, they are both overbuilt.
    Both frames have two position travel (5' or 6"); the Fatillac requires a rocker change, the Mutz is a single bolt reposition.

    Why you might want a 4" tire: Loose soils, snow, mud, rock crawling with nasty baby heads and loose rock.

    Why you probably don't want 4" tires: Jumping, riding fast on smooth terrain; think undampened rubber. So for the video you posted I would have been riding 27+. B Fat would be rideable on that trail, but it'd be more work, not more helpful, and probbaly not as fun.

    If you don't "need" a 4" tire, I'd suggest a 27 plus bike, 140-160mm travel, something like the Pivot Switchblade.

    If you want an FS fat bike, I'd go with a double wheelset: B Fat wheelset and a 27+.

    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Yeah up here in Boise, Idaho. I was hoping Shark might come down here at some point and let me test his out..
    I almost had a test ride on a Mutz last fall, but unfortunately I couldn't make it to the guys house until the weekend and by that time he had sold it.

  78. #78
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,328
    I agree, going to B+ for the good summer dirt was one of the best things I've done since full suspension fatty years ago.

  79. #79
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    274
    My current plan is to run 27.5x50mm wheels on the new FS bike. That way I can try B+ and if I don't like it, I can switch to B fat without having to build a new wheel.

    Nurse Ben: Thanks for the more detailed comparison. That's great info.

  80. #80
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    355
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Question for you Fatillac guys:
    Have any of you ran fast (30mph+) downhill trails with jumps?
    30mph+ is FAST! just checked my strava from Sunday's ride, and i touched 20mph a few times on some downhill jump runs, but 30mph is much faster than typical downhill around here.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    That'll work.

    I have the Hodags on a 50mm and the Purgatory on a 40mm. The Purgs could easilly work on a 50mm.

    I've got some Jackalopes that I was hoping to mount with Gnarwall 3.8, but I'm waiting on Mikesee to tell me how wide that'll make the tires; they may not fit the Fatillac.

    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    My current plan is to run 27.5x50mm wheels on the new FS bike. That way I can try B+ and if I don't like it, I can switch to B fat without having to build a new wheel.

    Nurse Ben: Thanks for the more detailed comparison. That's great info.

  82. #82
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That'll work.

    I have the Hodags on a 50mm and the Purgatory on a 40mm. The Purgs could easilly work on a 50mm.

    I've got some Jackalopes that I was hoping to mount with Gnarwall 3.8, but I'm waiting on Mikesee to tell me how wide that'll make the tires; they may not fit the Fatillac.

    I answered you 3 days ago: Well-stretched Gnar 3.8" on B Fat Jacka = 95.25mm. That's widest part of edge knob to edge knob.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,885
    Sorry, didnít see the message.

    I guess that means itís time to order some tires

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I answered you 3 days ago: Well-stretched Gnar 3.8" on B Fat Jacka = 95.25mm. That's widest part of edge knob to edge knob.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-15-2016, 08:29 PM
  2. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 08-29-2016, 04:39 AM
  3. Replies: 75
    Last Post: 03-17-2014, 09:48 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-06-2011, 05:12 AM

Members who have read this thread: 217

Posting Permissions

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