Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 60
  1. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    40
    I am in the same boat, I am leaning towards the Necro, for the all year round and $$$$. I am not the guy who bunny hops off of pick nick tables but I do like the small pump track jumps and and rolling hills, stairs, urban assault riding. I have been told that the Pug is more durable than the Moonie in that retrospect too. But what I hear is that diff of 82mm vs 100mm rims. In inches that is a difference of 1/4 inch abouts. Is that 1/4 inch worth that little flotation. Or am I completely wrong? Also does anyone have anything to say about the frame strengths of the moony vs pug?

  2. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    110
    18mm = almost 3/4". How much flotatation one "needs" varies by rider weight. I'm a clyde, therefore I opted for all the help I could get with flotation /traction (Moonlander w/Bud&Lou). It is proving to be a very fun bike. I was very suprised how capable a trail bike they are. Just my .02 Good Luck/Have Fun. It sounds like a good problem to have.

  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pbasinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    715
    The Moonlander has a slightly taller head tube. Big plus in my opinion. If you're main purpose is riding in snow I'd go with the Moonlander since it alows the bigger rim and tire options. Little heavier, but big deal, it will make you stronger and you won't have to have to walk when all your friends are able to ride on their Moonlanders.

  4. #29
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,365
    Quote Originally Posted by SupremeDork View Post
    I just finished assembling my Moonlander last night. It's so effing RAD!

    I went with the Moonlander because I already have a Giant Reign X1 all-mountain rig and a Surly Troll for [insert build here], so I needed a bike that would be a world apart from the other two. That's really all it boiled down to.

    I realize the Neck Romancer is almost a Moonlander, but it's still not a Moonlander.

    Go big or go home!

    I really hate that saying. lol
    I'll second that! Just got my Moonlander build finished Friday and got back from riding the river a few minutes ago. The floatation in sand and muck is unreal! I kept thinking I was gonna sink in but never happened. Very happy with my Moonlander.

  5. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DubzOxford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    30
    I went with the Necro after doing weeks of research on the same subject. Switched out the stock Nate and Larry tire, the stock tubes, switched the saddle to a Devo, swapped stem and post with a Thomson and got it down to 33lbs. This is now my full time ride from here on out. Dropped the sub 20lb 29er Single speed to go Fat! Good luck with your choice, either bike you will enjoy.
    Disclaimer: I own a bike shop

    Dubz bikes and boards
    Oxford, Michigan
    248-969-5986


    www.dubzbikesandboards.com

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Houndog45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    266
    What is the $ difference between the 2??

  7. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    28
    I would use a Pugsley!

    The Moonlander is more than I need. I am using the pug for winter commuting and need more flexibility that the pugs steering gives (in my humble thinking). I will be going on some trails and in hotter weather flying down some single track for fun. I think the Moonlander is only good for snow and too sluggish for regular cycling. The Necro has the Moonlander fork and bigger wheel so I consider it a Moonlander of sorts. So if money was no object I would by the Krampus.

    This is just the way my drive chain works.

  8. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,040
    I was facing the same decision: Neck Romancer or Moonlander? I was building from parts so the price difference wasn't going to be big.

    I figured I could use RD + BFL in the rear but that would be the max for NM. Forks are the same so no difference there. Pretty much the only benefit of the Moonlander was the ability to use a Clown Shoe and BFL or even Lou in the rear.

    Flexibility to anything smaller was not a consideration, because I already have other mountain bikes for fast riding on easier trails. The fat one was going to be fat and nothing else.

    I ended up with the Moonlander. I figured that there will be a point where anything smaller would stop, but the ML would reach a bit further and allow me to go where other fat bikes can't. The only downside is that it's a bit heavier and slower on easier trails, but I won't be bothered to think about it. It's not a race and it would take a clock to tell the difference.

    If you want versatility to use smaller rims and tires and plan to cover a lot of distance instead of seeking the most difficult terrain you can, then the Neck Romancer will probably be better. You can still ride it on and through probably 95% of the same stuff as a Moonlander.

  9. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lancelot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    917
    Moonlander FTW! The Pugsley is a skinnybike nowadays
    The LPG

  10. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Houndog45 View Post
    What is the $ difference between the 2??
    Well I can chalk up another one I converted. what's up houndog

    Moonlander all the way especially since you have other bikes. I can't believe how nice my moonlander is.

  11. #36
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,365
    Quote Originally Posted by pastorgarret View Post
    I think the Moonlander is only good for snow and too sluggish for regular cycling.
    You think or you've actually test ridden? Sorry, I don't agree with this. I rode my Moonlander on some groomed singletrack and it was just as easy as riding my 29er. Either bike will be great for you. You can run the huge 4.8 tires on the moonlander and you can run 3.8's in the summer if you want as well. Both bikes are good looking machines.

  12. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    You think or you've actually test ridden? Sorry, I don't agree with this. I rode my Moonlander on some groomed singletrack and it was just as easy as riding my 29er. Either bike will be great for you. You can run the huge 4.8 tires on the moonlander and you can run 3.8's in the summer if you want as well. Both bikes are good looking machines.
    Yes I did ride a Moonlander for about 8 hours. I really liked the bike, but found that it's stirring for me was stiffer than the Pug, not as responsive. It is a nice bike and I was going to buy this bike until I got to ride a Pug for two weeks to work and back, in the snow and found the Pug a little quicker and more responsive. I don't own a Moonlander and that could be the difference. Owning a bike and trying one for a few hours is very different. So I respect what you are saying; you would know way more than me. Plus I am just starting out in the Fat Bike arena. My experience is in touring and commuting.

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,386
    Quote Originally Posted by lancelot View Post
    Moonlander FTW! The Pugsley is a skinnybike nowadays

  14. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    532
    Moonie for dedicated fatbike, Pugs for versatility.

  15. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    Moonie for dedicated fatbike, Pugs for versatility.
    I would agree with this statement.

    But don't push me out of the Fat Bike arena it just got into the Fat Bike thing. :-(

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,358
    A moonie is best left for the fat bikers that know what they are getting Into. 100mm/bud lou for life!

  17. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    268
    I have owned both. Fell in love with the Nec, so I thought the Lander would be even better. It was in a few ways (beach riding, taking on small obstacles). Got in a financial pinch & sold the Lander. Got a Nec on order. It is simply more versatile, much faster in XC, & costs much less. IMO, Surly has the Lander overpriced because it really has no competition in that exact platform. Both bikes are awesome tho, can't go wrong with either. Also, it is/was my only bike, so if I had multiply bikes I might feel differently. Lastly, I eventually plan to try Rabbit Holes on it once there is enough evidence that they do indeed fit & handle well. Here's the kicker for me, I have a chance to buy a like new 907 frame for a good price. Do I leave well enough alone & stay Nec, or gamble once again? Be nice to loose a few lbs. when riding XC with good riders on 29ers.

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,358
    907.

  19. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    221
    If money was no option probably something completely different like 907's new 186mm bike. but Since money was an option and realistically I'll never see snow (Its 80 degrees today, I'm in short sleeves) I went with the Necro Pug. you can go as fat as you want up front but you are a little limited in the rear...

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit View Post
    A moonie is best left for the fat bikers that know what they are getting Into. 100mm/bud lou for life!
    I have been biking for 35 years and done it all, so I know what I am getting into. The Fat Bike trend is fun though and I haven't had a smile on my face when bike for a long time. Now when I get on my Pug I just can't stop grinning. Some one asked me just the other day. "what's got you so happy," I said cause I am Fat! Then drove off. lol

    Now when I drive home I look for the difficult way home.

  21. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vaultbrad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    755
    Money is a consideration, but i would have made the same decision. Placed an order for a necro less than an hour ago at the shop. Psyched.

  22. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Houndog45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit View Post
    Well I can chalk up another one I converted. what's up houndog

    Moonlander all the way especially since you have other bikes. I can't believe how nice my moonlander is.
    Hey Big guy!!!!! I'll probably get a pugs...I'm not likely to ride too much mud..
    If my plans work out,I will mostly ride on the street...
    I could spend the $800 or so difference on racks,bags and nice lights...
    And some Floyds...

  23. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    70
    The Moonie is the fatter fat bike

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    870
    I just went fat front, as I didn't want to throw too much money at something I'd never ridden or even seen (folks suggest finding a demo, but none happen near me).

    Now I'm thinking about the frame. Surly says that you can run a knard on rabbit hole (29+) in a pugsley, but the offset of the moonlander is too much. I'm a bit skeptical that you couldn't make it work, but this is the main reason I'm shying away from a moonlander.

    I figure that flotation is great, but the loss of power from the rear flexing suggests 29+ on the rear and 26fat on the front would be a great and fun cx machine. If I buy puglsey now, I still have the option to run just about any setup. In a couple of years I'm sure we'll hear of people running 29+ on their moonlanders with some rim that's wider than the rabbit hole.

  25. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    12
    Like you I was between a Necro and a Moon and also like you it had to come from QBP. I went with the Necro because I felt like the bigger wheels and tires on the Moon made it a bit less flexable of a bike and a bit more dedicated of a snow bike. I felt the Necro was a better all a rounder. Being my first fat bike I had nothing solid to base my opinion on but after spending time on my bike I feel like I made the right choice.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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