Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

How Long Before The Big Boys Join The Fray?

18K views 153 replies 70 participants last post by  kris7047th 
#1 ·
I've heard rumors that Specialized is working on a fat bike or two. Wouldn't be surprised if others are as well. Is the market big enough for the big bike brands to jump in, or is it still a niche market too small for them to be interested? Has anyone else heard such rumors?
 
#50 ·
This is all well & good, but answer to my original question seems elusive: does anyone have any good info on whether or not any of the big brands are working on a fat bike design? I thought someone might have some insider info.
 
#51 ·
Trek had two fat concept bikes (one with a built-in hatchet rack, complete with hatchet) on display at Trekworld 2011. Haven't heard much since.

Except...someone I know works in the Trek skunkworks and claims that he came up with something similar to the Krampus about 3 years ago. He said that upon seeing the prototype unveiled at a meeting, the product managers looked at him as if he were from Mars.
 
#54 ·
In some ways it would be great to get SRAM and Shimano in for fat-bike specific parts (forgive me if they already are) and some of the big name companies for suspension forks. Components are where the money is at.

I can't see big names like Trek join in just yet for a complete bike. Was looking in my LBS when I took my Muk in and all the new bikes look pretty boring and basic. Nothing even caught my interest.
 
#55 ·
My 2 cents of knowledge.

Trek did not jump on board the 29er movement, they pushed it through when no big player would touch them. They pushed through the first real tires and shocks to make a real 29er mountain bike.

The QBP brands are run separate, but they all answer to the same boss, and if you think they don't talk to each other than you are foolish. The big reason fatbikes are a popular as they are right now is because QBP was the biggest player to run with'em. They have HUGE distribution. You probably would not be riding a fat bike right now if they did not pick up the ball and run with it.

Surly has given credit to Evingson in their Pugsley designs. He actually helped them design the first one from what I was told by a Surly man.

No, QBP did not invent the market, they made it something from nearly nothing. Just like Trek/Fisher did with 29'ers.

Oh, and it has been like 10 years since Trek bought companies that were poorly run. It is no time to get off their backs about acquiring other companies.
 
#62 ·
As a Canuck, I'm a bit embarrassed that one of the Canadian bike companies aren't building a fat bike yet - not like we are short of snow or anything. I'd love to see a fatbike based on Banshee's Paradox 29er geometry, or something from RM, Kona or Devinci...
I think that the more companies get into it the better, more options, more development of parts and hopefully cheaper prices!
 
#66 ·
I'd bet on Kona being the next "big" brand in the fat bike market. And by "big" you can read more on that above. QBP as a whole is big as Kona. Salsa or Surly are not as big as Kona, but their parent company has gotta be on par. But add up Kona, Salsa, Surly AND all of QBP and you still aren't as big as Trek (or Specialized, or Giant....) are! And there is no value judgement to that. It's just reality, things evolve, folks jump on board, our selection and pricing gets better.
 
#75 ·
Good post Ted ! How bad can it get..... they have already made the word "standard" obsolete as far mountain bikes go :D

The few fat bike makers have 3 different rear spacings too, counting sandman's its 4.
 
#76 ·
Good post Ted ! How bad can it get..... they have already made the word "standard" obsolete as far mountain bikes go :D

The few fat bike makers have 3 different rear spacings too, counting sandman's its 4.
I've heard about 135 w 17.5 offset, 135 w 28 offset, 165, 170, and coming soon or already here 186 and 190. For a bit there were 160's too. Luckily the 165/170 and I suspect 186/190 can play together if you don't mind a little squeezing or stretching of dropouts. So yes "standard" doesn't apply but it's all fun to play with.
 
#77 ·
What rises to the surface for me here is all that's ugly in the fat bike world is really its beauty.

This is a time of innovation and frustration for fat bikes, the two are synonymous with inventors. Yup, there gonna put some weird stuff out there but keep in mind that each company making this stuff mostly comes from their own visions and not necessarily to be compatible with another, sure their are some overlaps and some are very close but not close enough to be bolt on compatible. That's OK, they were not supposed to be !

No different than mtb's, fat bike tech will probably standardize more and more as the designs mature, they will however never stop maturing, it's just the rate at which they do. Mtb's are in a leveling off design state right now, they have been around for about thirty years at this point. By comparison, fat bikes are young and innovation will be strong for some time to come. I see them as a viable growing segment of the bicycle world that will land in many channels of the buying demographic spectrum, perhaps not huge but a lot bigger than it is now.
 
#79 ·
Hey;

Regarding the OP;

Looking at the numbers is what Big Guys usually do. Based on that alone, I'm not sure that the Fatbike market would make sense for them. 650B would make a lot more sense against that standard. If they make a calculation that they can get a lot of face time and market buzz, even though they don't stand to turn big sales numbers, they might still throw in.

Perhaps the biggest factor here might be whether they realize just how good an every-day-do-it-all bike a Fatty can be. If they realize this fact, and think they can convince enough people of that, they might buy in in a bigger way.

I really don't care one way or the other. The little guys out there now will probably always have a market, if they are savvy and concentrate on high performance and quality. The noobs that would go to their LBS and come home with a Trek Fatbike likely would never have heard of Fatback or 9-0-7 anyway.

There will be good and bad in whatever happens, either way. That's how the world works.
 
#80 ·
In all fairness, (QBP) Salsa, and Surly are sponsors of the 2cnd annual Fat Bike Summit being held in Island Park, so they are putting their money back into the sport. In a huge way...without advocacy, this sport will have a hard time with access in a lot of areas.

Salsa & Surly Sponsor The 2nd Annual Fat Bike Summit | FAT-BIKE.COM
 
#97 ·
Aha, I see I'm not the only one who thought kona would build one. I waited for a couple years and it never happened. In my neck of the woods they have just started catching on, the local club forums are all abuzz with fatbikes. Just like 29ers, I believe it's a matter of time before they become more mainstream. Well maybe not to the extent of 29ers, but most shops will have one on the floor. I do enjoy their uniqueness though, and sometimes it's nice to have peace and quiet and the trails all to myself and a (albeit false) sense of remoteness, in a way I'll be saddened when I see them all over the trail.
 
#100 ·
My biggest beef and barrier of dropping $2500+ for a nice fat bike is the weight. I ride one of my buddies spare bikes on a pretty regular basis and the weight - I just can't seem to get past a 30 pound rigid bike and riding uphill just sucks.

What I see a big company entering the fray offering is the ability to create a carbon fat bike/fork combo and drop substantial weight. Lighter weight rims are also needed, and the current $100+ tires each are a joke. I've had to replace a couple of his 45N tires due to rips on rocks. It's wrong when a fat bike tire costs about the same as a really good car tire. On top of that, 45N/QBP was back ordered for over 3 months on getting a replacement earlier in the season. I think some alternative tire sources (Specialized, Bontrager, Schwalbe, Maxxis, etc) would be a good thing and drive the prices down.
 
#101 ·
My biggest beef and barrier for a nice fat bike is the weight. I just can't seem to get past a 30 pound rigid bike and riding uphill just sucks.
First, just HTFU :p

Second, you do realize your parents and or grandparents likely rode 50 lb Schwinns uphill both ways to school in blizzards all year, right? ;)

Yes, they weigh more. You seriously opposed to getting to be a stronger rider? If not, ride one regularly, and you will become stronger. :thumbsup:
 
#113 ·
What I've learned from this thread, is the line where the "big boys" come in and ruin everything is not clearly defined, but instead dependent upon what companies, standards, and versions of history one has a preference for.

This thread should possibly be stickied, as I think it is a seminal shark jump moment.

I will say that I'm certainly not an OG fatbiker- I only got involved by getting one of the first '11 Pugsley completes, and after selling it last year and then starting my search last week again for another, I've been stunned this week at how many names I don't recognize in the fat bike forum. I think that's a great thing.

I can understand the concern of the shop owners and small builders, absolutely, but those of you who just simply had a fatbike a few years before the rest of us, some of your posts make you sound like scenesters just being into fatbikes cuz nobody else had one.
 
#122 ·
GSJ1973;10063853 What I see a big company entering the fray offering is the ability to create a carbon fat bike/fork combo and drop substantial weight. Lighter weight rims are also needed said:
:confused:
You think a company like Schwalbe will drive the prices down? My 26x2.1 Nobby Nics cost $98 dollars each and my 120tpi UL Nates were $126 for a tire with twice the rubber and half the production numbers. Not to mention that if Schwalbe notices that Surly can charge $126 for one of their tires than surely people will pay $190 for a Schwalbe fat tire!

You need to decide, do you want a Corvette ZR-1 (not comfortable, meant to rip a track, fast) or do you want a Caddy cts-V (faster than a focus, but not like the vette, however way more comfortable and smooth riding)

P.S. you wouldn't find appropriate tires for either of those cars for the price of a fat tire :rolleyes:
 
#123 ·
If 1 big name tyre manufacturer came in on the fat tyres game they would probably jump on the bandwagon initially with the high pricing, what would be good to see is how QBP responds to the new kid.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top