Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709

    getting fatter and taller

    I know someone will eventually come out with tires wider than 4.8".

    they are already getting hard to manage the diameter at 30" for a Bud.

    Wouldn't it be logical to go to a smaller 24"(507mm bsd) rim for even the 4.8" tires?

    Of course, they could even come out with a new size rim in between, and make everyone buy the wheels and tires together.

    It would be nice to be able to swap out between 2" wide tires(29x2.XX), 4" wide tires(26x3.8-4.0), 5" wide tires(25[~530mmbsd]x4.8-5.x), and 6" wide tires(24[507bsd]x6.0) all on the same frame, without changing BB height, gearing, standover height and trail.

    Or, why not make the tires with a lower aspect ratio, so that a 26(559)x4,5,and 6" all have the same outside diameter on a 26" rim?

    I'm pretty sure it is possible to make a tire that is 6" in width, but only as tall as a 4" tire. They've been doing it for a while on motorcycles now. Maybe it would add weight?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,856
    Quote Originally Posted by autodoctor911 View Post
    ...Or, why not make the tires with a lower aspect ratio, so that a 26(559)x4,5,and 6" all have the same outside diameter on a 26" rim?

    I'm pretty sure it is possible to make a tire that is 6" in width, but only as tall as a 4" tire...
    That's the way it needs to go IMO, otherwise the bounce in a 6" tyre is going to make high speeds too exciting.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,292
    If I was QBP and I had the desire for bigger tires than the current 5" rubber options I would make it as incompatible with other companies' bikes as possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    That's the way it needs to go IMO, otherwise the bounce in a 6" tyre is going to make high speeds too exciting.
    Presumably the reason for going down the 6" tires route would be for ultra soft conditions and for street cred when cruising to get a latte - both would be slow speed missions.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Desert Walker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    364
    Time will tell. When did the first pugsley with endos arrive on the market? If its not too late the ten year anniversary would be a great time to release a 6 inch "Super Pug."

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6,292
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone Desert Walker View Post
    Time will tell. When did the first pugsley with endos arrive on the market? If its not too late the ten year anniversary would be a great time to release a 6 inch "Super Pug."
    I've had my Pug 5yrs and I want to say they came out around 3yrs before I got mine.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  6. #6
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,259
    Extremely rough non-scientific calculation for fat tire weights, assuming same carcass composition as Surly Bud:

    Surly Bud = 1630g (26 x 4.8 x 3.14 x 4.15 = 1626) 3.6 pounds

    Surly Larry = 1370g (26 x 4 x 3.14 x 4.15 = 1360) 3 pounds

    Imaginary 24x6 tire = (24 x 6 x 3.14 x 4.15 = 1876) 4.13 pounds!

    Imaginary 26x5 tire = (26 x 5 x 3.14 x 4.15 = 1694) 3.73 pounds


    The law of diminishing returns has to kick in at some point right?
    When the chicks at school see how gay we are, they're gonna be all over us.

  7. #7
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,991
    Yeah, pug was released 2005 i read somewhere.

    To make a tyre shape 6 wide and 4 high means extra weight to make it hold its shape, radial wires shaping the carcas or other similar technologies and also more reinforcing rubber are needed to stop the tyre taking its natural balloon shape.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,856
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    If I was QBP and I had the desire for bigger tires than the current 5" rubber options I would make it as incompatible with other companies' bikes as possible.



    Presumably the reason for going down the 6" tires route would be for ultra soft conditions and for street cred when cruising to get a latte - both would be slow speed missions.
    I never worry about top speed. Strangely my Nates come out faster over distance than Racing Ralphs on my 29er even though they feel slower.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  9. #9
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,503
    I really don't understand why you guys want bigger tires. 4.8" seems more than enough to me; I rather prefer the 3.8 standard to be honest.
    Maverick Moto Media Motorcycles, Mountain Biking & Social Media Mgt
    Facebook Twitter Instagram

  10. #10
    Nuts
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    I really don't understand why you guys want bigger tires. 4.8" seems more than enough to me; I rather prefer the 3.8 standard to be honest.
    Cuz it looks and rides fricking amazing!! Or maybe we all are just overcompensating for something
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails getting fatter and taller-imag0421-1.jpg  

    And I love beer!!

  11. #11
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,259

    getting fatter and taller

    I'm with stupid on this one. Nate 3.8 was more than enough float and traction for me.
    When the chicks at school see how gay we are, they're gonna be all over us.

  12. #12
    Nuts
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,204
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    I'm with stupid on this one. Nate 3.8 was more than enough float and traction for me.
    I really am as well but would still love to see an aggressive light 4.25.
    And I love beer!!

  13. #13
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    I really am as well but would still love to see an aggressive light 4.25.
    ok.
    Maverick Moto Media Motorcycles, Mountain Biking & Social Media Mgt
    Facebook Twitter Instagram

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    203

    Re: getting fatter and taller

    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    I really am as well but would still love to see an aggressive light 4.25.
    me too something in between

    Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Yeah, pug was released 2005 i read somewhere.

    To make a tyre shape 6 wide and 4 high means extra weight to make it hold its shape, radial wires shaping the carcas or other similar technologies and also more reinforcing rubber are needed to stop the tyre taking its natural balloon shape.
    I think this could be bypassed by simply using a rim that is wider than the tyre. Ex. back in the days when Endomorph (94mm) was only tyre people where running it on a 100 rims, making it articially wider and flatter.

    However the same could be done with a wider tyre as well. Ex. if we would like to use the same ratio for our imaginary tyre, we could form two equations:
    (1) EndoFlatteningRatio = EndomorphWidth / EndoRimWidth
    (2) ImgTyreRatio = ImaginaryTyreWidth / ImaginaryRimWidth

    And set eq's (1) and (2) equal, therefore coming into:
    EndomorphWidth / EndoRimWidth = ImaginaryTyreWidth / ImaginaryRimWidth

    And make ImaginaryRimWidth as a function of ImaginaryTyreWidth:
    ImaginaryRimWidth = ImaginaryTyreWidth*EndoRimWidth / EndomorphWidth

    Ex. use 94mm (3.7"), 100mm and 152.4mm (6") to find out that ImaginaryRimWidth for an imaginary 6" tyre would be around 162mm.

    This model is of course inaccurate and non-scientific because it doesn't include geometry or material deformation, but didn't want to use whole day and make this not understandable for those not familiar with mathematics.
    One car less.

  16. #16
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,259
    Ok so what kind of rear spacing are we looking at with 6 inch wide rims? BB width? What would the Q-factor/stance width be like? Those cranks have to clear the chainstays somehow...
    When the chicks at school see how gay we are, they're gonna be all over us.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    25

    Re: getting fatter and taller

    Quote Originally Posted by autodoctor911 View Post

    Wouldn't it be logical to go to a smaller 24"(507mm bsd) rim for even the 4.8" tires?
    Agree, I've been looking for 24" or even 20" fat tires too.

  18. #18
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    Ok so what kind of rear spacing are we looking at with 6 inch wide rims? BB width? What would the Q-factor/stance width be like? Those cranks have to clear the chainstays somehow...
    I rode a bike with a ClownShoe/Bud/Lou combo today. I stand by my preference for 4 inch tires; I don't understand why anyone would want anything wider than 5"... you reach a point of diminishing returns, going beyond 5", the weight detracts from any benefit of flotation.
    Maverick Moto Media Motorcycles, Mountain Biking & Social Media Mgt
    Facebook Twitter Instagram

  19. #19
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    I rode a bike with a ClownShoe/Bud/Lou combo today. I stand by my preference for 4 inch tires; I don't understand why anyone would want anything wider than 5"... you reach a point of diminishing returns, going beyond 5", the weight detracts from any benefit of flotation.
    Did you ride the bike across a sand dune, or through 6" deep unpacked snow? Did you also notice how all the young, good looking women flock to the guy with the fattest tires?
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  20. #20
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by crashtestdummy View Post
    Did you ride the bike across a sand dune, or through 6" deep unpacked snow? Did you also notice how all the young, good looking women flock to the guy with the fattest tires?
    Are you implying Bud/Lou on Clown Shoes is still not enough float for those situations? Because he didn't say that it was too wide, he said he didn't see any need to go wider than that. And while that may be 'to each his own', it still doesn't answer the engineering issues in getting a bike with wider than 5" tires to fit a rider comfortably. I guess if you guys don't mind Walgoose-type chainstays, because I'm sure that is what it will take to get 6" wide tires on a bike. Of course someone will say "But that is what they said about 4" tires and alas they were wrong!". Well a 100mm BB isn't that much of a jump from 68/73mm, but the jump to 152mm from 100mm is probably more than most people can handle.
    When the chicks at school see how gay we are, they're gonna be all over us.

  21. #21
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,116
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    Are you implying Bud/Lou on Clown Shoes is still not enough float for those situations? Because he didn't say that it was too wide, he said he didn't see any need to go wider than that. And while that may be 'to each his own', it still doesn't answer the engineering issues in getting a bike with wider than 5" tires to fit a rider comfortably. I guess if you guys don't mind Walgoose-type chainstays, because I'm sure that is what it will take to get 6" wide tires on a bike. Of course someone will say "But that is what they said about 4" tires and alas they were wrong!". Well a 100mm BB isn't that much of a jump from 68/73mm, but the jump to 152mm from 100mm is probably more than most people can handle.
    He said that he prefered 4" tires, BFL's and Bud and Lou are 4.7" and 4.8", therefore larger than 4".

    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    I rode a bike with a ClownShoe/Bud/Lou combo today. I stand by my preference for 4 inch tires;

    Besides, when people start verbally masturbating over "what if", I like to stir things up.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    I'm with stupid on this one. Nate 3.8 was more than enough float and traction for me.
    I often found myself dreaming of a bud/lou/clown combo this winter, as even at 4-5psi on RD's I needed more float. MORE...MORE...MORE.

    I would love to have a bike the could have two wheelsets. RD/hudu/knard for everything but winter time, Clown/BUD/LOU for winter.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,856
    Quote Originally Posted by jonshonda View Post
    ...I would love to have a bike the could have two wheelsets. RD/hudu/knard for everything but winter time, Clown/BUD/LOU for winter.
    I'm with you. I can't see the point (for me) of 29er wheels on a fatbike because I'm still happy to ride fat in summer. So a set of 4" on 80mm rims for summer gives enough float for most things and much fatter set for winter.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  24. #24
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by crashtestdummy View Post
    Did you ride the bike across a sand dune, or through 6" deep unpacked snow? Did you also notice how all the young, good looking women flock to the guy with the fattest tires?
    It was mostly the middle-aged women with the inane questions and sagging faces flocking to the guy with the biggest tires. "What's those fat tires for?" gets irritating after a while...
    Maverick Moto Media Motorcycles, Mountain Biking & Social Media Mgt
    Facebook Twitter Instagram

  25. #25
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,991
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    It was mostly the middle-aged men with the inane questions and sagging faces flocking to the guy with the biggest tires. "What's those fat tires for?" gets irritating after a while...
    Fixed it for you
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Fatter than Moonlander?
    By Murphy1976 in forum Fat Bikes
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 08-11-2013, 03:58 PM
  2. get our fattys fatter in uk
    By stesteste in forum Fat Bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-13-2013, 05:22 AM
  3. Sandman gets fatter
    By Andy FitzGibbon in forum Fat Bikes
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-28-2012, 12:35 PM
  4. Fatter still - Moonie beater!
    By druidh in forum Fat Bikes
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-24-2012, 07:14 AM
  5. Why is my Tallboy fatter than most????
    By dapozer in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 05-20-2011, 12:55 PM

Posting Permissions

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