Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 142 of 142
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    964

    Re: Help Me Build My Bucksaw.

    Quote Originally Posted by spovegas View Post
    I hate to use the word porn on Christmas day, so I won't.
    First, you just did use the word porn.

    Second, don't worry about it. There's nothing wrong with porn in Christmas. I'm a big fan.

    Third, great pictures! Thanks!

    Fourth, any ride impressions? What you like most? and least?

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by matto6 View Post
    First, you just did use the word porn.

    Second, don't worry about it. There's nothing wrong with porn in Christmas. I'm a big fan.

    Third, great pictures! Thanks!

    Now next, any ride impressions? What you like most? and least?
    Today was play day. Over the next three days it gets serious. Let me get back to you . . .

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,107
    Looks good, Spove!

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: letitsnow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    196
    Nice!

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,831
    Quote Originally Posted by matto6 View Post
    First, you just did use the word porn.
    +1 - Yup you did.

    I had to go have a shower after your dirty post.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  6. #106
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086
    had to laugh when I saw the Blackspire Bruiser installed on yours, too

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Aceldama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    321
    Nice build Spove, it looks really good.

  8. #108
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    Looks great!

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Thanks, guys. Nate, yeah, shamelessly copied your bruiser idea, couldn't help myself.

    I got out for my first real ride today. I met up with a couple of buddies on Pugsleys. I intentionally picked some trails for this first ride that are on the smooth, flow side, with a bit of bermage in spots, very cross-countryish. It was about 25 degrees out, so ground frozen solid.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_2030.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_2034.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_2035.jpg

    Holy. Living. Hell. The bike is so freaking compliant. The pugsleys were bouncing around pretty good and the guys were playing with tire pressure to compensate and try to find the sweet spot. My tires were just glued to the trail, and the bike was absorbing everything, and the grip was unbelievable. I was running 11 psi rear, 10 front.

    Cornering was a little weird. I'm still trying to figure out what exactly it's doing that is not what I am expecting, but I think my mind is expecting that it will react to my input the same way as my 'normal' FS bike, which is a '12 Fuel EX 8 26er. The BS is acting different. As a result, I'm having a hard time holding the line I want through the corners. Feels kinda twitchy. I don't think it's a geometry thing. I think it might have to do with the bigger tire contact patch and how it pulls and reacts a little differently to a given input at the handlebars. The other thing that I suspect might be playing into it is the bars themselves. They have a different sweep/shape to them than what I'm used to running on any of my other bikes and I'll probably do some experimenting with some other bars I have around over time. For now though, I need leave it alone and just need to spend a bunch of time riding it all different kinds of trails, and getting used to it. By the time I get out for my next ride tomorrow morning, we'll have snow on the ground, so that will be a whole nother thing.

    All up, my first impression is that it's a super fun bike that wants to be ridden fast and it's gonna be a blast getting to know it.

  10. #110
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    It took me three or four rides to start to get used to cornering on my local xc trail with some berms and it definitely wants speed everywhere. I do best riding fast and really leaning the bike.

    I agree, just ride it a lot before changing anything. Oh, I may have to copy both of you with the bruiser.

    edit to add:

    it it is comical what it absorbs; I am riding over giant roots with such ease that I have to laugh.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Farbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    99
    The Bucksaw is ruddy fantastic! Well balanced, and climbs until your legs give out. I've only ridden mine in quite difficult conditions, and it probably will be even better after some tuning.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-10852992_307273222795604_40267859_n.jpg
    Instagram

    Mostly stock, apart from a KS LEV Integra dropper post, Selle Italia SLR XC saddle, 2013 Dillinger tyres and ODI Rogue grips. Will try a tubeless setup with Vanhelgas come spring.

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by rmb View Post
    It took me three or four rides to start to get used to cornering on my local xc trail with some berms and it definitely wants speed everywhere. I do best riding fast and really leaning the bike.
    rmb, thanks. Good to hear.

    Farbar, that is a sweet pic, man.

  13. #113
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,150
    I wanted to be the only guy with a bruiser on the bucksaw lol

  14. #114
    The Dog.
    Reputation: Dogdude222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    961
    Quote Originally Posted by spovegas View Post
    Cornering was a little weird. I'm still trying to figure out what exactly it's doing that is not what I am expecting, but I think my mind is expecting that it will react to my input the same way as my 'normal' FS bike, which is a '12 Fuel EX 8 26er. The BS is acting different. As a result, I'm having a hard time holding the line I want through the corners. Feels kinda twitchy. I don't think it's a geometry thing. I think it might have to do with the bigger tire contact patch and how it pulls and reacts a little differently to a given input at the handlebars. The other thing that I suspect might be playing into it is the bars themselves. They have a different sweep/shape to them than what I'm used to running on any of my other bikes and I'll probably do some experimenting with some other bars I have around over time. For now though, I need leave it alone and just need to spend a bunch of time riding it all different kinds of trails, and getting used to it. By the time I get out for my next ride tomorrow morning, we'll have snow on the ground, so that will be a whole nother thing.
    What you are describing is self-steer, though this is somewhat unusual with a marge lite and a Nate. I never used to get self-steer with my large marge's and nates. When I got my beargrease with 80mm rims and dillingers, I couldn't figure out what was going on, just like you. At first I thought it was the geometry of the bike, then I thought it was the stem length.

    Try playing with the tire pressure. This should solve your issue, as the Nate is plenty round in profile on a 67mm rim. That is why Salsa spec'd that rim/tire combo according to rep I spoke with at a demo day.

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Dogdude, thanks for the feedback. I will definitely try playing with the tire pressure.

    As a general observation, I do think the term "self steer" is not well defined and gets mis-used quite a bit. Sure, there are those situations where your tire pressure is not dialed and the bike is gonna pull all the hell over everywhere. I have a pair of Black Floyds, the original edition, and I have played with pressures in them a ton, trying to figure out where "self steer" stops on pavement, and it is quite a big number, for example.

    But the pressure variable aside, and assuming you have everything dialed in properly, fatbikes are still going to have a lotta rubber on the road and there is just gonna be some pull, inherently. I think that the large contact patch of the fat tire on this bike in combination with the unique bite characteristics of the Nate has a lot to do with what I am experiencing. Maybe the unique grip does more to point out the flaws in my bike handling skills and techniques. I notice that I have to use a lot more body motion (hips especially) with this bike to keep it pointed in the right direction. I don't see that as a bad thing. The interface between the bike and the ground is just so much "stickier", that you have to compensate with your body. It's a pretty wild sensation.

    Today I rode with a group of ten - nine fats and one skinny. There was an inch of snow on the ground and that effectively "lubed" the contact between the tire and ground. Either that, or I am just getting more used to the bike, but the steering was much less wonky and the bike felt that much more comfortable.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0469.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0476.jpg

    This ride was still very much cross country in nature, but it had a lot more in the way of rocks and roots. I have spent a good amount of time riding rigid fat and I knew what my compadres were thinking and feeling as they were picking and bouncing their way through the slippery rock gardens, but I am already getting so confident in the ability of this bike to comply with the surface and the traction that this provides, that I just wanted to blast through these sections. Unfortunately, I was in the middle of the pack most times and couldn't.

    We did hit a couple of fairly technical downhill sections and the story was the same here - I was watching everyone else being tentative and I just wanted to bomb it. It almost feels like an unfair advantage. (Shhhh, don't tell anyone! ) Damnit, this bike wants to go fast downhill and over obstacles!

  16. #116
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by spovegas View Post
    rmb, thanks. Good to hear.

    Farbar, that is a sweet pic, man.
    No problem. That pice is like a postcard, love it!

  17. #117
    The Dog.
    Reputation: Dogdude222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    961
    Quote Originally Posted by spovegas View Post
    Dogdude, thanks for the feedback. I will definitely try playing with the tire pressure.

    As a general observation, I do think the term "self steer" is not well defined and gets mis-used quite a bit. Sure, there are those situations where your tire pressure is not dialed and the bike is gonna pull all the hell over everywhere. I have a pair of Black Floyds, the original edition, and I have played with pressures in them a ton, trying to figure out where "self steer" stops on pavement, and it is quite a big number, for example.

    But the pressure variable aside, and assuming you have everything dialed in properly, fatbikes are still going to have a lotta rubber on the road and there is just gonna be some pull, inherently. I think that the large contact patch of the fat tire on this bike in combination with the unique bite characteristics of the Nate has a lot to do with what I am experiencing. Maybe the unique grip does more to point out the flaws in my bike handling skills and techniques. I notice that I have to use a lot more body motion (hips especially) with this bike to keep it pointed in the right direction. I don't see that as a bad thing. The interface between the bike and the ground is just so much "stickier", that you have to compensate with your body. It's a pretty wild sensation.

    Today I rode with a group of ten - nine fats and one skinny. There was an inch of snow on the ground and that effectively "lubed" the contact between the tire and ground. Either that, or I am just getting more used to the bike, but the steering was much less wonky and the bike felt that much more comfortable.
    Good to hear that the bike felt better. I strongly suspect that it was the inch of snow for the tire to dig into, rather than it having to deform.

    I agree that the term is thrown around quite a bit without true understanding of its cause, but I do think that the cause can be clearly defined. Yes a fatbike will take more muscle to control, but I rode my pugsley year round for three years before even experiencing "self-steer." With large marge's and Nates, that bike gave the impression of being absolutely bulletproof even on the most technical trails or pavement, for that matter. The first time I rode the beargrease home from the bike shop, my mind was blown.

    FWIW, I believe that it is directly related to how round the front tire is in cross section. It is also affected by how supported or stiff the sidewalls are due to the tire carcass, tire pressure, and the width of the rim (which also affects how round the tire is in cross section). Self-steer is a feeling of being pulled into a turn. It can feel like you are fighting the tire to maintain a line because you are right on that threshold of being pulled in. This is because for a big fat tire that is rather square in profile, there is a certain point at which the lean angle causes you to "fall" off the top of the square and beyond the side knobs. On a "normal" bike, the tire is so round, even on the sidewall, that this effect is not felt. I have found that the more a fat tire resembles the normal round profile of a standard MTB tire, the less this effect is experienced. This is part of the reason why a krampus does not have self steer at all. That big tire is very, very round on a 50mm rim, so the transitions into turns are quite natural. That is also why this effect is not felt on a motorcycle, which often times has tires that are much larger and stiffer than a fatbike. Motorcycle tires are very, very round in profile though, whether they be knobbies or slicks, and I have to assume that it is for this very reason. There are other considerations when it comes to making fat tires, namely limited power and traction. The more tread that can be put in contact with the ground, particularly on snow, the better. This is, in my opinion, why the dillinger, a rather low tread tire, is actually quite good on snow. It is also why it has a lot of self steer.

    Anyway, I am rambling. You have a beautiful new bike. Congrats and enjoy!

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Great description of self steer, Dogdude. I have my spent my entire fatbike like on 80mm rims up to this point and I have definitely experienced self steer many times, so I didn't mean to suggest that it's not a real thing or to minimize its effects. This being my first time on a 65mm rim and the much rounder profile you are talking about is a new and fun learning experience. Part of the learning curve is trusting myself to lean into a corner at speed and use that round profile. Coupled with suspension, the wheel/tire shape is a whole different world. Your suggestion to play with tire pressures is good one, I believe, so I will be doing that. Thanks again for your comments.

  19. #119
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086
    Frankly, I don't think the Bucksaw is prone to self steer at pressures even close to the suggested range. I've gone down to 8psi and not felt it. And I've felt self steer and can distinguish it between the unique handling of the BS.

    What the BS does at low speeds is tire flop due to the slack head angle. It is exaggerated some by the bigger tires, but is mitigated some with lighter wheels on mine as compared to the stock build (I have ridden a stock build with Marge Lites/Nates so have a basis for comparison). I have also noticed that turning this bike well involves more leaning and less turning of the handlebars when possible. Pretty much like any other long wheelbase bike with a slack head angle.

    I agree that this thing eats chunk for breakfast. I've had it out on several local trails, which are all very xc-ish, but some with more rough terrain than others. This thing floats over the rough. My last ride was out on some multiuse trails that are heavily used by horses in marginal conditions. Most of the trails were in great shape, but where were several areas where horses chewed up the trail and left standing water amid churned up clay soil that was in various stages of dryness. Some super sloppy and others fairly firm. A typical MTB would have been in rough shape through that stuff. I cleared all but one without trouble, and primarily because I was using Husker Dus and would have benefited from more aggressive tread on the sloppy one that caught me. I was floating fine over the mud, but was spinning out in the loose spots. People on regular mtb's avoid those trails this time of year because getting caught in the wet horse bogs sucks. I handled them perfectly fine on the BS.

    I'm planning to travel out to some rockier stuff early in 2015. Can't wait.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    What the BS does at low speeds is tire flop due to the slack head angle. It is exaggerated some by the bigger tires, but is mitigated some with lighter wheels on mine as compared to the stock build (I have ridden a stock build with Marge Lites/Nates so have a basis for comparison).
    ^^^Yes, this! I was just experiencing/thinking about this on yesterday's ride. Thanks for putting that into words.

  21. #121
    The Dog.
    Reputation: Dogdude222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    961
    Quote Originally Posted by spovegas View Post
    Great description of self steer, Dogdude. I have my spent my entire fatbike like on 80mm rims up to this point and I have definitely experienced self steer many times, so I didn't mean to suggest that it's not a real thing or to minimize its effects. This being my first time on a 65mm rim and the much rounder profile you are talking about is a new and fun learning experience. Part of the learning curve is trusting myself to lean into a corner at speed and use that round profile. Coupled with suspension, the wheel/tire shape is a whole different world. Your suggestion to play with tire pressures is good one, I believe, so I will be doing that. Thanks again for your comments.
    No problem. Sorry to derail your thread a bit. Having ridden a spearfish, but not a bucksaw, I think that NateHawk's comment rings true. I loved the spearfish, but it did feel "different" due to the slack head tube angle for an XC rig. The Bucksaw is even more slack with similar offset.

    Bottom line: new bikes take some getting used to. Your bike is awesome. May the bicycle Gods spare you the new bike crash. I have one every damn time!

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497

    Raceface Next SL Setup For My Bucksaw

    I wasn't completely happy with the initial setup of the Next SL crankset on my BS, and then Nate had this failure, after which I decided I needed to take mine back apart and see if I could get it dialed in a little more to my liking. There's quite a good discussion over on his thread, but I'll put this one here, since his is Tubine-specific and mine is Next SL-specific.

    Before getting into the spacers, I'll post up something about how the self-extraction hardware works, since I couldn't find anything online when I was trying to figure it out. Here is the cap on the DS crank arm. It takes a 16mm (5/8") hex bit to loosen it:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_01.jpg

    Once that's removed, you can see the actual nut that holds the arm to the spindle. It takes an 8mm hex bit to loosen it. See the large diameter flat surface that sits outside the hex opening? Hold that thought:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_02.jpg

    What you do is loosen the nut and back it out a little ways, and then re-install the cap, which has this nylon washer on the inside that bears against the flat spot that you are holding in your thoughts:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_03.jpg

    Then you just tighten the cap against the nut until the arm pops off. It's slicker than snot.

    So when I initially set up my crankset, I had these 2 spacers on the NDS. They came with the crankset, and they're both 1.5mm thick:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_04.jpg

    On the drive side, I had 2 spacers as well, that I had to go find at an LBS. They're both 2.5mm thick, which was all I could find:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_05.jpg

    When you have the correct number/thickness of spacers installed, and the crankset put together and torqued to spec, you're supposed to have a little lateral play left that you then remove by threading the take-up nut away from the NDS crankarm and towards the BB to take up the slack and remove the play. However, with the spacers I had installed, there was no play in the setup, and nothing to take up with the nut, so I was right on the edge of being too tight and putting undo pressure on the bearings. In fact, it didn't quite spin as freely as I would have liked.

    After I took everything apart, I wanted to know how much play could be removed by the take-up nut and I did some measurements with calipers. From seated tight against the crankarm to just before it disengaged with the threads was about 3.6mm. You'd want to maintain a certain amount of thread engagement, say 2mm to be safe, so that would allow 1.5mm of play that could be taken up. So that meant I could remove one of the 1.5mm spacers. While I was at it, I wanted to shift my chainline, which originally came out at 69mm, to 68mm, since that's what the Raceface & Salsa literature was suggesting it should be. So what I ended up with was a single 2.5mm spacer on the NDS . . .

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_06.jpg

    . . . and one 1.5mm spacer and one 2.5mm spacer on the DS:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_07.jpg

    With the crankarm installed and torqued, this left a small amount of play (~1.5mm) that I was able to remove with the take-up nut. Notice the small gap between the take-up nut and the crankarm after removing the play:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-20150109_08.jpg

    Once the take-up nut is where you want it, there's a small clamp screw on it that you tighten to keep it in place. Now I have no perceptible lateral play and the crank arms spin super freely. Word.

    Now that I understand it better, I really dig the Raceface hardware. The engineering and fabrication seems to me to be top-flite. Unfortunately, the literature is really poor and it took me a lot of head scratching and trial and error to get it right. Maybe a slight bump in the company's technical writing budget is in order for 2015. But what do I know.

    I hope that maybe this helps someone else doing the same installation to avoid some of the frustration.
    Last edited by spovegas; 01-10-2015 at 12:03 AM.

  23. #123
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086
    Great explanation!

  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497

    Bucksaw Salsa/Revelate Frame Bag

    I picked up a Salsa/Revelate frame bag for my BS a coupla weeks ago. I'll be using it for bikepacking, as soon as I find the world's smallest sleeping bag and tent.

    Seriously, I'll be using it along with my Revelate Harness, Viscacha and 36 liter Osprey backpack, in a setup similar to this one.

    Bikepacking season is still about 3 months away for me, but I wanted to start getting a feel for the frame bag and yesterday's ride seemed ideal, since it was going to be a slow speed hike-a-bike slog, more of an adventure than a ride. As much money as I've spent on this bike and keeping it light, I don't know how crazy I am about adding weight to the bike for fast trail riding; I think I'd prefer to keep the weight on my back and the bike light and nimble.

    For adventuring, though, I thought it might be pretty great to be able to ditch the pack, especially for rides where you're getting on and off the bike frequently. This turned out to be the case yesterday and l thought the frame pack pretty much ruled in this respect.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0519.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0513.jpg

    The fit of the pack is not super overwhelming, but not bad, either, considering that this bag is designed to fit both L and XL frames (mine is a L). I think the fit at the top end is pretty sweet:

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0514.jpg

    The attachment at the shock location strikes me as a little wonky. The Bedrock bag on Quitou's bike simple looped over the shock, which makes sense to me - the body of the shock is not going to move that much. On the Salsa/Revelate bag, the placement of the velcro won't allow mounting to the shock, so you have to go up and over the frame, and for this, it almost seems too short. But I did get it attached and it seems to be holding okay, so I will see over time if it's a problem. The bag does make it pretty much impossible to reach down while riding and change your shock tuning lever, but this just goes with the territory and is not the fault of the bag.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0515.jpg

    The fitment seems like it could be a little better on the bottom end, as it looks like there's some additional volume that could be had. I assume it would be even more pronounced on an XL frame. Not a super huge deal, at any rate.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0516.jpg

    Basic tools, a Q-Lite tube, small pump and 34 oz of water fit fine. I was out for 3 pretty strenuous hours and the water held up just fine. In warmer weather, it'll be good for shorter rides, naturally. For longer rides I will be back to a bladder on my back. In addition to the stuff shown, I could probably also find room for a gauge. My Lezyne high-volume morph pump didn't wanna fit on the first try, but I might try again.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_0517.jpg

    All in all, I think it's gonna be a great piece of gear that will find it's way onto my bike for a number of different ride types.

  25. #125
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086
    I have been wondering if that bag would be big enough to be useful. Not bad. I may think about one for bikepacking. I do plan on sewing my own seat bag and handlebar bag

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    I have been wondering if that bag would be big enough to be useful. Not bad. I may think about one for bikepacking. I do plan on sewing my own seat bag and handlebar bag
    I think the way I will use it when bikepacking is to try and load some of my heaviest items in there, since it is the lowest storage location I will have on the bike. Tools, spare parts, small bottles of liquid, stuff like that.

  27. #127
    western NC
    Reputation: HPIguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,615
    I dig the frame bag. If you used an ENO hammock system, you wouldn't need a tent. You could also do a bivy rather than a tent and they're fairly small packed size also. And sleeping bags get really small, if you're wallet is deep enough. My Marmot packs down about the size of a volleyball, and is rated for 32 degrees, add in a liner (which is tiny) to add 10-15 degrees to that. It's about middle of the road price wise.


  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,831
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    I have been wondering if that bag would be big enough to be useful. Not bad. I may think about one for bikepacking. I do plan on sewing my own seat bag and handlebar bag
    Load it up with the highest density stuff you need to carry.

    You can attach a water bottle cage on the underside of the DT for more carrying capacity.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  29. #129
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086

    Help Me Build My Bucksaw.

    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Load it up with the highest density stuff you need to carry.

    You can attach a water bottle cage on the underside of the DT for more carrying capacity.
    No bosses on the underside of the dt on the bucksaw

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,831
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    No bosses on the underside of the dt on the bucksaw


    I know. Buy 2 hose clamps. 100% secure on rough terrain. Quickly removable when you get home. Cost $0.50 and if you wrap some tape around your frame zero damage to paint.

    That's a 1.5L bottle in the photo. Depending on fork travel you may need to use something smaller.



    Same thing on the stem. Love this bottle. I drink from this one and refill from lower bottle when necessary. Add $0.05 of thin bungee from cage over nipple of bottle if you are going to hammer downhill so it stays in place.

    Both setups have been battle tested and are 100%.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  31. #131
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086
    meh. no thanks. I'd rather put a downtube fender on.

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by HPIguy View Post
    I dig the frame bag. If you used an ENO hammock system, you wouldn't need a tent. You could also do a bivy rather than a tent and they're fairly small packed size also. And sleeping bags get really small, if you're wallet is deep enough. My Marmot packs down about the size of a volleyball, and is rated for 32 degrees, add in a liner (which is tiny) to add 10-15 degrees to that. It's about middle of the road price wise.

    I've tried the hammock gig (Hennessey) but it just wasn't to my liking. I've decided I belong on the ground. Plus, some of my most favorite bikepacking terrain here doesn't have much in the way of trees. The tent that I've been bikepacking with for the last 3 years is a 3+ pound REI Quarter Dome and I like it a lot. I haven't tried a bivvy yet, but intend to try one out this year. I could save a good 1-1.5 lbs, but there are still times when I will want to take my tent, I think, just because the little bit of extra space is downright luxurious, especially if you get pinned down by bad weather. I have a 30 degree Montbell down sleeping bag that I dropped a few bills on a couple of years ago that packs down to nothing in a compression bag. Gear nerdery is half the fun of bikepacking, for sure.

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post


    I know. Buy 2 hose clamps. 100% secure on rough terrain. Quickly removable when you get home. Cost $0.50 and if you wrap some tape around your frame zero damage to paint.

    That's a 1.5L bottle in the photo. Depending on fork travel you may need to use something smaller.



    Same thing on the stem. Love this bottle. I drink from this one and refill from lower bottle when necessary. Add $0.05 of thin bungee from cage over nipple of bottle if you are going to hammer downhill so it stays in place.

    Both setups have been battle tested and are 100%.
    My backpack has 100 oz bladder, so that's where I will be packing most of my water. I have always wanted to try the stem mount bottle, though. I took a trip with a guy who had one on his bike and it just looked way convenient.

  34. #134
    western NC
    Reputation: HPIguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,615
    Quote Originally Posted by spovegas View Post
    I've tried the hammock gig (Hennessey) but it just wasn't to my liking. I've decided I belong on the ground. Plus, some of my most favorite bikepacking terrain here doesn't have much in the way of trees. The tent that I've been bikepacking with for the last 3 years is a 3+ pound REI Quarter Dome and I like it a lot. I haven't tried a bivvy yet, but intend to try one out this year. I could save a good 1-1.5 lbs, but there are still times when I will want to take my tent, I think, just because the little bit of extra space is downright luxurious, especially if you get pinned down by bad weather. I have a 30 degree Montbell down sleeping bag that I dropped a few bills on a couple of years ago that packs down to nothing in a compression bag. Gear nerdery is half the fun of bikepacking, for sure.
    Gotcha, sounds like you have your setup all dialed in then. I won't be doing any bikepacking, but I can't wait for camping trips in the heart of the good stuff here this season.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by HPIguy View Post
    Gotcha, sounds like you have your setup all dialed in then. I won't be doing any bikepacking, but I can't wait for camping trips in the heart of the good stuff here this season.
    Never gets completely dialed in, always room for refinement, a continual work in progress . . .

    Yeah, planning/scheming camping trips for the upcoming season is a great winter pastime. My first trip of the season will be in April, hopefully.

  36. #136
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,086
    A tarptent is a great way to maximize enclosed space with the least weight possible. I alternate between one of those and a hammock depending on available sites. I prefer the hammock when I can use it though.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497

  38. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,578
    Interesting, the sleeve is integral with the pressed-in cup. And one side nests in the other.

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497
    Just posting up some pics I took back when I swapped out the stock crankset for the Next SL, for reference.

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_1818.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_1832.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_1833.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_1834.jpg

    Help Me Build My  Bucksaw.-img_1838.jpg

    So around 860 g for the stock crankset vs around 550 g for the Next SL. (I actually ended up with a slightly different spacer configuration on the Next SL than what's shown on the scale, but it would only affect the overall weight by a few grams.)

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spovegas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    497

    Wink

    I've been pondering and ruminating and looking forward to lightening up my tires/tubes for the summer riding season, and at the same time moving into something with a lot less rolling resistance. The stock Nates and Surly fat tubes (which are WAY lighter than their standard fatbike tube of just a coupla years ago) have been a great combo over the winter and early Spring. Gobs of traction, and I've actually been surprised at how well the Nates roll on hard-ish surfaces, relative to my expectations.

    So I could roll on these for a while longer, for sure, but it's April here in the PNW, and we're actually a few weeks ahead of schedule, both temperature and ground moisture-wise, and my antsy-meter is not yet pegged but riding on the high end of the scale, so it's time.

    I've been really excited about the 26 x 4.0 JJ, because of it's low weight and b/c I like Schwalbe tires, and I've had a standing order in with Bike24 in Germany for the past I-don't-know-how-many-months. I'm a fairly patient dude, but when a company (Schwalbe) can't even provide one single iota of info on when the tire might be available after all this time since the announcement, then I am sorry, but they don't deserve to have me standing in line. I cancelled my order tonight.

    The other tire that has everyone excited, weight-wise, is the Juggernaut. But same deal there: No news is bad news. If it ever comes out, I might loosen the purse-strings, but until then, there's nothing to talk about.

    So I've turned my stare to what is currently AVAILABLE, that has the potential to meet my criteria, and it's a short list - the Maxxis Mammoth and the Panaracer FBN.

    At first, I thought the MM was the ticket, but after absorbing copious amounts of high quality i-net opinionation and then trying to read between the lines , I've changed my mind and have come to the conclusion that the FBN is the sweet spot in terms of both cost, weight and performance.

    Thanks to whoever on this forum (can't remember who or what thread, but it was posted up just today) directed me to the link on ebay. As a result, I scored 2 FBNs for just under $154, including shipping. Damn, that's rad. I've fairly recently paid almost that much for a single fat tire.

    Looking forward to setting these up tubeless on the OEM marge lites, via the clownshoe rim stip method. I weighed one of these rim strips a coupla nights ago and it came in at 100 g. Sweet.

    Still undecided on which sealant, that's kind of a tough one. I can't stand the rapid evaporation and drying out part of the whole deal. TBD.

    Aesthetically speaking, I stopped by Hobby Lobby tonight to find the right ribbon to put on the rim (under the rim strips) to show through the cutouts. It took a very long time, as I am way out of my element in HL. But I eventually scored.

    Speaking of scoring, I am way too old and married to act on the opportunity, but for you younger and singler fellas, Hobby Lobby is filled with, shall we say, hot prospects. Nothing beats a puppy in the park, but that's a fair weather only opportunity. Hobby Lobby is year-around, just sayin'. I am glad to provide this PSA, and if it works out for you and you want to show your appreciation, a set of Juggernauts showing up on my porch would be the appropriate expression of gratitude.

  41. #141
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,532
    I just got some clownshoe rimstrips yesterday, going to try the FBNs tubeless today. I only have about an hour to get it done before my ride. It's a terrible decision to do it before the ride, but I'm riding a place with lots of rock faces today and I don't like the Nates on rock like that.

  42. #142
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,532
    1 for 2, I still like the integrated stem that comes with a split tube set up and I really don't think it's any heavier than these rim strips.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Salsa Cycles BUCKSAW FS Fat Bike
    By Yoreskillz in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 286
    Last Post: 2 Days Ago, 07:25 AM
  2. Parts piling up for bucksaw build
    By Shark in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-31-2014, 08:36 PM
  3. Bucksaw frame?
    By letitsnow in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-20-2014, 08:41 AM
  4. Bucksaw FS Fat Bike
    By ATBScott in forum Salsa
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-10-2014, 08:12 PM
  5. 1996 Dirt Research Kobuk Build (Updated build pics!)
    By fallenleafs in forum Vintage, Retro, Classic
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-18-2011, 03:28 AM

Members who have read this thread: 5

Posting Permissions

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