Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 130
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    47

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    I couldn't get the complete bike, sold out immediately. So I got the frame and robbed all the parts off of my Mukluk. I must say the handling is greatly improved with the Trek frame. Stiffer and more solid feeling and I can toss it around like my Superfly Single Speed. The frame and fork are exactly 1lb lighter than the Mukluk. But I'm still at 28lb. I saw the other thread with a 24lb build geared and I'm running single speed, so I know I have lots of room for improvement. The biggest areas I see are wheels and crank.

    I've been reading post for a few days but I'm not coming up with a clear conclusion.

    Wheel suggestions? I'm willing to try the skinnier rims. No sand or snow in my regular riding area. I'm just using this as a trail bike.

    Crank? I've seen e13 and race face names tossed around...

    Thanks!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.-image.jpg  

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.-image.jpg  


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    47
    WTF with the pics? My originals were right side up till I downloaded them. Then I flipped my originals and tried again. Same thing!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nakedbabytoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    946
    Did you take them with your phone camera? Mine come up inverted if I upload from my "camera" folder. But if I use a crop & paste app, then save them unchanged to my "camera" folder on my iPad, they come up fine.
    Just a thought....
    2014 Big Dummy
    2015 Salsa Beargrease Carbon 1
    2015 Ice Cream Truck

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: marathon marke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    307
    Bikes always weight more when they're upside down.
    - Mark Ehlers
    The Prodigal Cyclist

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    47
    Ok. I think I followed you instructions...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.-image.jpg  


  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    47
    I hate technology sometimes!

  7. #7
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,422
    I think a new Marge Lite wheelset with lighter hubs/spokes would be your best bet for loosing weight, it might save you 2-2.5 lbs but that's just a guess without pounding the numbers.

  8. #8
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,856
    Loose lips sink ships!
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  9. #9
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,589
    Guys you all screwed up an ample opportunity for an Australia joke.
    Disclaimer: I run Regular Cycles (as of 2016). As a profiteer of the bicycle industry, I am not to be taken very seriously.

  10. #10
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    23,682
    MTBR sometimes flips pictures and doesn't let you rotate them. You submit them right-side-up and for some reason it thinks a different way is up. This was happening to me a few months back a lot.

    As far as where to save weight, the guy with the 24lb has a 130g Selle Italia SLR I think. You should have carbon bars around 160g most likely. No more than a 160mm rear brake and maybe look into some of the new carbon rotors out there. Stem is usually a crappy place to save weight, but since you don't have a lot of other places to go, that *might* be one.

    Much better bang for the buck:

    Carver Carbon fork.

    Eggbeaters.

    Tubeless.

    And of course it looks like the guy with that 24lb bike has skinny rims and the tires seem more like 3.8s...

    Point is, to get pretty light you make reasonable upgrades and spend a reasonable amount of money and time to do so. To get stupid light, you have to spend a stupid amount of money.
    "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.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,632
    If your going to ride more trail than soft & loose, go w/ the Marge lite's or even some 50's. And consider a Ft. susp. fork. The Farley (reportedly) has a 190mm A to C, same as my custom built for the Maverick. Short chainstay's, little steeper HT, tighter clearance... possibly not best for snow & sand, but a ripper on trails, snowy trails, sandy trails, jeep trails... I think the Trek's gonna be a trail rippin' fat bike because of it's geo let alone optional weight savings.

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/51222326@N04/6344311485/" title="FILE0037 by wardee61, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6058/6344311485_465721ea2b.jpg" width="500" height="375" alt="FILE0037"></a>

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    99
    [QUOTE=ward;10762121]If your going to ride more trail than soft & loose, go w/ the Marge lite's or even some 50's. And consider a Ft. susp. fork. The Farley (reportedly) has a 190mm A to C, same as my custom built for the Maverick. Short chainstay's, little steeper HT, tighter clearance... possibly not best for snow & sand, but a ripper on trails, snowy trails, sandy trails, jeep trails... I think the Trek's gonna be a trail rippin' fat bike because of it's geo let alone optional weight savings.


    I think from memory because the Farley is based on the Superfly which alone has awesome singletrail presence. Mine is being built as a single track weapon and also the ability for sand riding, I am no pro on the trails but I plan to use my Farley fattie to have some spirited fun and soak up some decent enduro rides.
    Last edited by hardly_stuntworthy; 01-05-2014 at 02:21 PM.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,020
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Diller View Post
    Guys you all screwed up an ample opportunity for an Australia joke.
    I thought of it, but then I realised he's inflating his tyres with helium.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  14. #14
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Diller View Post
    Guys you all screwed up an ample opportunity for an Australia joke.
    Alright down under, were getting them the right way up for once.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.-image2.jpg  

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.-image1.jpg  

    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    FM190 Fatty
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    47
    Ive always wanted to go to Australia! Hahaa. Thanks for the picture fix.

    Ive already got bontager xxx carbon bar, x light stem, super light road saddle and the seat post is pretty light. XT brakes. So I should be more specific with my question.

    What's the lightest wheel set i can build? Skinny rims are fine.

    What's the lightest crank that will fit?

    Thanks!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4
    My 24# Farley has a RaceXLite post, WCS stem, Answer carbon bars, RaceFace turbine crank and a Selle San Marco Magma saddle - all of which some pretty lightweight stuff. Also the Northpaw rims are quite easy on the scale.

    Remember every 110grams you take off is a 1/4 pound.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bacons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    479
    I wouldn't go any smaller rim than a Marge Lite... otherwise you will limit your tire selection (I can get 4.8" tires on Marges). Mate those rims to lightweight hubs like 616 or Hope. If running tubes, move to Q-Tubes Super Light.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4
    I doubt you're gonna get 4.8" tires in a Farley. Ditto on the Qtubes as a good place to save weight.

  19. #19
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by 3speed View Post
    Remember every 110grams you take off is a 1/4 pound.
    I lost 110 grams in the toilet this morning. My moonlander should probably be faster after work. I dunno though... I have a big lunch planned.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bacons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    479
    Quote Originally Posted by 3speed View Post
    I doubt you're gonna get 4.8" tires in a Farley.
    I guess I should have read up on the Farley... I'm a bit surprised they didn't design it to fit both fat (4") & big fat (5"). Or at the very least, a big fat front.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,632
    Keeping it to 3.8" clearence allows for a little shorter chain stays. Guessing they're aiming at a faster, quicker, more trail oriented purpose with the Farley.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    10
    Ditto on the Marge Lites!
    I've been doing some wheel builds for a local shop and found the Marge Lites - built up with 130/190 Borealis Hubs / DT Swiss 2.0/1.8 Double Butted weigh in at about 2300g. I've also built some for a real weight weenie - used DT 2.0/1.5 triple butted and it shaved about 140 grams. I've actually ridden the Yampa with those wheels and the bike is narrow-bike fast!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    I'm shooting for 23lbs by the end of the month. I will keep you posted.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    One suggestion that I will make is spend all of your money on a lightweight set of wheels. Rotating wait is much harder to get moving and keep moving.

    i9 hubs with Marge light rims with an uber light cassette. Convert to tubeless using Gorilla Clear Repair tape, 4 cups of Stan's and a set of light weight tires that match your riding conditions.

    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kyttyra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    174
    Lock-on grips weigh something like 90-120 g. I'd swap them to foam or silicon grips For example Lizard Skins DSP grips are quite light (mine weighed 25 g with end plugs) and feel quite comfortable:

    Name:  1382697506182-1s97zlrcef9nv-500-70.jpg
Views: 5670
Size:  19.4 KB

    ESI silicon grips and Rithchey's foam grips are also nice IMO, although they are not exactly lightweight (≈50 g).

    I would even say that in this case the lighter option, i.e. foam/silicon grips would be both more comfortable and secure than lock-on grips (as lock-on mechanism can break if the grip suddenly twists).

  26. #26
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7,231
    I agree with everything said above. I also think you should keep the Darryls and the Husker Du's. Feel like relacing them with DT Supercomps or Sapim Superspokes?
    Make a lighter rim strip and go ghetto tubeless.
    Carbon fork is awesome. My buddy just bought a Loaded stem that's silly light.
    I know I saw Ti spindles on Ebay for your Eggbeaters.
    Another thing I would take into consideration is how far out do you ride? I wouldn't want to make a fragile bike that's gonna leave you walking.
    I like turtles

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    955
    Can you confirm whether the Farley has a tapered fork steerer or straight. I know the frame has a tapered head tube but have heard rumors that the fork has a straight steerer. Wondering about the compatability of a Carver Carbon Fork on the Farley.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    Quote Originally Posted by DekerfTeamST View Post
    Can you confirm whether the Farley has a tapered fork steerer or straight. I know the frame has a tapered head tube but have heard rumors that the fork has a straight steerer. Wondering about the compatability of a Carver Carbon Fork on the Farley.
    Current Trek fork
    Straight steerer with 1 1/4" to 1 1/2" bottom race.
    1,172 grams
    490mm long
    46mm offset and stiff as all get out

    Carbon O'Beast - 465mm long

    Corvus Carbon Fork - 455mm long wont' work[/B]

    Borealis FF1 Fork - 468mm long

    Which leaves you the Salsa Beargrease Fork at 482mm long. It's the closest one that I have found.

    Salsa Makwa Beargrease Carbon Fiber Fork
    750 grams ( un cut )
    490mm long
    51 mm offset and should give some compliance
    15 x 142 Axle - You will need to convert your existing hub.
    Salsa sells the adapters.


    Fork is available

    Call Joe at 2BICI Bike Shop (708) 330.5234 in Willow Springs IL and he will take care of you.
    Last edited by Way2ManyBikes; 05-21-2015 at 05:30 AM.
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    120
    The Trek fork does in fact have a straight 1 1/8" steerer. It's a steel steerer as well. The steerer is pressed into the aluminum crown of the fork. The crown is diameter matched to the bottom end of the Farley's tapered headtube ( which uses Campy style drop in bearings). An 1 1/8" to 1 1/2" step down crown race is installed on the fork.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    I stand corrected. It in fact a straight steerer.

    But in the end you still need a 19" fork





    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    Rockland. Can you confirm that the measurements I have for the axle to crown are correct. I found specs on the Beargrease fork and it states 468mm which would open up the options and I would buy the Borealis tomorrow as it would match my other bikes




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    Rockland. Can you confirm that the measurements I have for the axle to crown are correct. I found specs on the Beargrease fork and it states 468mm which would open up the options and I would buy the Borealis tomorrow as it would match my other bikes




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    I'll try to measure one tonight.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockland View Post
    The Trek fork does in fact have a straight 1 1/8" steerer. It's a steel steerer as well. The steerer is pressed into the aluminum crown of the fork. The crown is diameter matched to the bottom end of the Farley's tapered headtube ( which uses Campy style drop in bearings). An 1 1/8" to 1 1/2" step down crown race is installed on the fork.
    So if I'm understanding this right the lower bearing in the head tube would accept a tapered steerer. It's not reduced. It's the crown race that has a reduced I.D. to fit the straight steerer. I think I may have found an option but am doing further research.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    Please share as maybe we can help each other
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    Please share as maybe we can help each other
    Will do as soon as I get further information and can confirm a few things.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by DekerfTeamST View Post
    So if I'm understanding this right the lower bearing in the head tube would accept a tapered steerer. It's not reduced. It's the crown race that has a reduced I.D. to fit the straight steerer. I think I may have found an option but am doing further research.

    Yes the lower bearing in the headtube is a 1.5". A tapered fork can be used.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockland View Post
    Yes the lower bearing in the headtube is a 1.5". A tapered fork can be used.
    Perfect. Now to find the correct crown race.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by DekerfTeamST View Post
    Perfect. Now to find the correct crown race.
    You can alway's remove the one that came on your fork.

    I can also confirm that the fork length is 490mm which Trek also confirms and so can I as I removed the fork again last night to confirm that it is in fact 490mm. At this point I may just put a shock on the bike.
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    You can alway's remove the one that came on your fork.

    I can also confirm that the fork length is 490mm which Trek also confirms and so can I as I removed the fork again last night to confirm that it is in fact 490mm. At this point I may just put a shock on the bike.
    Thought the fork was 482mm from the previous post? A quick measurement, without removing the fork, I came up with right about 482 also.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by DekerfTeamST View Post
    Thought the fork was 482mm from the previous post? A quick measurement, without removing the fork, I came up with right about 482 also.
    I once again pulled my fork off after talking with Jake at Trek in Waterloo. He told me it was 490 spot on. So I pulled the fork off so I could measure it on the bench and in fact it is 490 just like he said. So with that being said we are only talking about 8mm or just a hare above a 1/4". That ain't do do so I am still going to keep my order going for the Salsa fork and use that fork when it comes in.

    On a side note I am working with the guys from Sandman Bikes to see if they have a compatible front suspension fork for the summer.

    ps - 8mm difference isn't a big deal as you can easily do that with tire pressure and if you think about that is only 10% of the travel of the suspension fork that was designed for this frame.
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    936
    If your using a fork with a tapered steerer you will need a 1.5 crown race. Should cost you between $12.00 - $15.00. What fork did you order? The Beargrease is only 468 axel to crown.

    Name:  468.jpg
Views: 1955
Size:  20.0 KB

    Cheers,
    Steven

    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    You can alway's remove the one that came on your fork.

    I can also confirm that the fork length is 490mm which Trek also confirms and so can I as I removed the fork again last night to confirm that it is in fact 490mm. At this point I may just put a shock on the bike.
    Lucky neighbor of Maryland's Patapsco Valley State Park, 39.23,-76.76

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    The carbon fork on the beargrease is 19" or 482mm. I had one in my hand to confirm the measurement.

    Plus I talked with Ben at Salsa and he confirmed the length at 482mm for the new carbon fork

    Edit:

    If I have time on Sunday I will go measure and take pics of the Beargrease carbon fork so everyone can see it
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    936
    Cool, they call that fork the Makwa. The Beargrease fork is last years Aluminum fork as described in the diagram above. They also make a Aluminum Bearpaw fork with a 483mm axel to crown.

    Steven


    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    The carbon fork on the beargrease is 19" or 482mm. I had one in my hand to confirm the measurement.

    Plus I talked with Ben at Salsa and he confirmed the length at 482mm for the new carbon fork

    Edit:

    If I have time on Sunday I will go measure and take pics of the Beargrease carbon fork so everyone can see it
    Lucky neighbor of Maryland's Patapsco Valley State Park, 39.23,-76.76

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    So what does the bearpaw fork weigh ?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    936
    Salsa claims a weight of 720 Grams.

    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    So what does the bearpaw fork weigh ?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Lucky neighbor of Maryland's Patapsco Valley State Park, 39.23,-76.76

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    That's as light as light as the carbon fork ???


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    65
    Awesome conversation on getting a carbon fork on the Farley. I am going to research the salsa fork. On a side not here is my build of a Farley that I just love. Weight could totally be lost in a few places but I have really enjoyed this for all trail conditions. My take on a Farley

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    936
    They are listed as the same weight, some people prefer the ride of carbon and some like the durability of Aluminum. One thing to keep in my is you will need to space your brake rotor over or get a new front hub if you go with the Salsa fork. The new Salsa fork's use front disc spacing and the farley uses rear disc spacing.

    Steven

    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    That's as light as light as the carbon fork ???


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Lucky neighbor of Maryland's Patapsco Valley State Park, 39.23,-76.76

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    536

    Got my Trek Farley built, now I need some weight loss suggestions.

    The salsa carbon is 15 x 142 is that what your saying ?
    Marty
    14 Farley Black, Bluto,i9- WTB Scrappers 650B+, 3.5 Fat B Nimble
    14 Farley Blue, Bluto, i9-Hed, 4.0 Jumbo Jims

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    936
    The Salsa Makwa is 15 x 142 the Salsa Bearpaw is 9mm, they both have the brake rotor closer to the leg of the fork, i.e. front disc spacing were the Farley and older Salsa fork's have the rotor further away from the fork leg i.e. rear disc spacing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    The salsa carbon is 15 x 142 is that what your saying ?
    Lucky neighbor of Maryland's Patapsco Valley State Park, 39.23,-76.76

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. I reached my original weight loss goal weight.
    By ACLakey in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 01:00 PM
  2. 3x10 to 1x10 - weight loss to low range loss formula
    By flipsidem in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-15-2013, 08:57 PM
  3. Help with weight loss? And a dual weight loss stratgy.
    By hedonistic in forum Weight Weenies
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-09-2013, 01:32 PM
  4. Weight loss equals power loss?
    By HelmutHerr in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-16-2013, 07:12 PM
  5. Weight loss for a Trek superfly 100 al 29er
    By kawi46 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-29-2012, 03:51 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
  •