Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 51
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6

    Krampus - will it satisfy my fat craving?

    OK, I was set on getting a Pugs until I came across aKrampus. Unfortunately, I don’t have the opportunity to test ride one, so Ihave to go by reviews, opinions, etc. in order to make my decision. I reallylike the Pugs, which I was able to test ride. A lot of fun, and different – whichis what I am looking for to go along side my 26” HT. The bike in question willbe on trails and singletrack more so than snow and sand. I know this can turninto an apples/oranges, right tool for the job argument, but here goes. I likethe “squish” that the Pugs gives, acting almost like a front suspension withproper inflation. Will the Krampus be similar in that regard? Or, will I beatmyself silly on rock gardens and curse at pinch flats? I know it’s a rigid andsome is to be expected, but to what extent? Maybe I put it this way…Will I bedisappointed in going with a Krampus over a Pugs for mainly non-snow, non-sandtrail riding? I’m just looking for the best cost-to-fun ratio bike that I canget my hands on.<o></o>

  2. #2
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    With the right wheel set the Pugs can conquer hardpacked ST type rides no problem and that was my main goal when i built mine as opposed to focusing on snow rides so yes it's very capable. I doubt you'll be disappointed with a Kramp on the same trails but it is not FAT comparatively speaking.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,068
    It's the starter drug.

    It'll keep you happy for a little while.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sasquatch rides a SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,557
    I'd also say go for a Krampus, but a Krampug may be a better choice

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    944
    The Krampus is a fat bike. Rides like one, looks like one, and performs like one. I had one, didn't hate it but found it didn't do anything spectacularly different than my Pugsley so I sold it to buy an ROS 9.

    I had my brief fling with fat bikes. They are fun but when the novelty wore off I found myself picking one of the other bikes.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    748
    As been said, A pugsley frame with 2 sets of wheels. 1 set with rolling Daryll rims and the other set with rabbit holes (Krampug).... 1 bike multi uses!

  7. #7
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Ailuropoda View Post
    The Krampus is a fat bike. Rides like one, looks like one, and performs like one. I had one, didn't hate it but found it didn't do anything spectacularly different than my Pugsley so I sold it to buy an ROS 9.
    29+ is what the kramp is so not in the truest sense until 3.8, but then guys with 4.8's may think this way about smaller sized.

  8. #8
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,736
    A Krampus is like getting a lean hamburger when you're craving juicy, marbled Kobe beef.
    Maverick Moto Media Motorcycles, Mountain Biking & Social Media Mgt
    Facebook Twitter Instagram

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6
    Thanks for the replies. Allow me to throw this question out there:

    If you were about ready to get on a hardpack trail, and could go at it with either a stock Pugs or a stock Krampus, which would you put a leg over (and why)?

  10. #10
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7,421
    For best results, get a fat bike and build a second set of 29+ wheels.
    I like turtles

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sasquatch rides a SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,557
    A Krampus is going to be like a rigid 29er with 'fat' qualities...it is in no way a true fat bike, rather, a plump 29er. I dig it.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by sasquatch rides a SS View Post
    A Krampus is going to be like a rigid 29er with 'fat' qualities...it is in no way a true fat bike, rather, a plump 29er. I dig it.
    Fat qualities, such as? I'm guessing smoother feel from the big tires?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sasquatch rides a SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,557
    Quote Originally Posted by Spence88 View Post
    Fat qualities, such as? I'm guessing smoother feel from the big tires?
    Plush ride, increased traction and increased float over a regular 29er but nowhere near as much as a fat bike.

  14. #14
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by sasquatch rides a SS View Post
    Plush ride, increased traction and increased float over a regular 29er but nowhere near as much as a fat bike.
    spot on!

    edited to remove my foot.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    65
    I think the krampus may fit your needs really well. The geometry of the krampus is very fast feeling and confidence inspiring. The 3" tire is supple riding but not as much squish as a "standard" fat. Pugsly's to me have always ride as a very stable ride with more relaxed geo. Go krampus and enjoy the mid fat life.

  16. #16
    JYB
    JYB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    213
    I have a Fatback and a Krampus. I love both. They are definitely different beasts. A true fatty will definitely be better in most snow situations. I rode my Fatback almost exclusively for over a year. A fat bike actually makes a great year round ride. There are definite advantages if the Krampus, however, if you're planning on getting a bike almost solely for singletrack. The a Krampus uses common sizes of hubs and bb. I swear that I feel a bit less beat up after a long singletrack session on the Krampus. That may just be me. With light rims and tires on a full fatty, you will get beat up less and your bike will feel much more nimble. I'm talking game changing amounts of increased nimbleness. I can only imagine how nimble the Krampus will feel with lighter rims and tires. My stock Krampus weighs in about a half pound more than my Fatback with a set of cheap Vee Mission tires on it. The stock Krampus in size medium is a hair over 33.5lb. Even though the Krampus is a porker, it rides lighter than you'd think. Sorry that my post is all over the place.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ReXTless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    290

    Krampus - will it satisfy my fat craving?

    I've ridden a Krampus and it feels like steering a big boat. Pretty long and unwieldy, compared to a fat bike.

  18. #18
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by ReXTless View Post
    I've ridden a Krampus and it feels like steering a big boat. Pretty long and unwieldy, compared to a fat bike.
    see i guess and open mouth insert foot, oh well thats why they have an 'edit' button.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    538

    Krampus - will it satisfy my fat craving?

    Quote Originally Posted by JYB View Post
    I have a Fatback and a Krampus. I love both. They are definitely different beasts. A true fatty will definitely be better in most snow situations. I rode my Fatback almost exclusively for over a year. A fat bike actually makes a great year round ride. There are definite advantages if the Krampus, however, if you're planning on getting a bike almost solely for singletrack. The a Krampus uses common sizes of hubs and bb. I swear that I feel a bit less beat up after a long singletrack session on the Krampus. That may just be me. With light rims and tires on a full fatty, you will get beat up less and your bike will feel much more nimble. I'm talking game changing amounts of increased nimbleness. I can only imagine how nimble the Krampus will feel with lighter rims and tires. My stock Krampus weighs in about a half pound more than my Fatback with a set of cheap Vee Mission tires on it. The stock Krampus in size medium is a hair over 33.5lb. Even though the Krampus is a porker, it rides lighter than you'd think. Sorry that my post is all over the place.
    Can you expand on what you mean by "light rims and tires on a full fatty"?

    What kinds of rims? What size tires, 3.8? 4.8?

    I'm between building a Krampus or Pugs SS and very interested to hear your comments in ride characteristics.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  20. #20
    JYB
    JYB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    213
    I was riding Schlick Northpaw 47mm rims with 120tpi Knards(3.8) on my Fatback this summer, and they roll pretty darn nicely.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lancelot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    992
    I have a 29+ and a "FAT" fatbike (Bud/Lou on hundreds). The fattie is my go to bike when it snows but I rarely take it out anymore when the trails are dry since I discovered 29+. For me the 29+ is just better and more fun 95% of the time I ride. I do have front suspension though so that might be part of it. Maybe when a proper fork for my fattie comes out I will get it out more in the dirt.
    The LPG

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    442
    Quote Originally Posted by Spence88 View Post

    If you were about ready to get on a hardpack trail, and could go at it with either a stock Pugs or a stock Krampus, which would you put a leg over (and why)?
    For those conditions, I'll grab my Krampus if it's above 60 degrees and my Pug if it's below 60 degrees. The Pugs is generally funner, but the Krampus is faster.

    I started with my Pugs and would recommend you go that route first. On a side note, I can't help but scratch my head at the MSRP on the complete Krampus, it ought to cost a few hundred less than a Pugs for some reason it costs a few hundred more...

  23. #23
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,611
    Quote Originally Posted by racefit View Post
    Can you expand on what you mean by "light rims and tires on a full fatty"?

    What kinds of rims? What size tires, 3.8? 4.8?

    I'm between building a Krampus or Pugs SS and very interested to hear your comments in ride characteristics.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    There are a range of weights among fat rims and tires. Their differences are dramatic compared with differences among 29er tires and rims. The expense goes way up as you try to lose a ton of weight. But, rolling weight loss (low density rims and tires) is way easier to feel than static weight loss (light weight frame and components).

    To OP: if you are truly on hardpack more often, the Krampus. Rolls quick. Doesn't have the same raunchy awesome amount of steering grip that a full fat tire has. ...Then again, the Surly Dirt Wizard tires are going to available at some point in the not too distant future, a studlier grippy version of the 29x3" wide tire size. That's what I have my eye on for this next summer.

    I used to think fat volume could replace active purpose built suspension, or at least be enough to live with. Maybe in the interim when you have a new bike on a budget, but long term I put money into front suspension, and there is the Lenz Fat Moth which is a full suspension 29+ bike.

    Either bike is going to get wild when you go plowing into rocks.

    You know, it almost sounds like I don't like fat bikes. I totally do!

    It's the grip, man. Like, Tim the Tool Man Taylor kind of grip. It is otherwise a rigid bike.
    Disclaimer: I run Regular Cycles (as of 2016). As a profiteer of the bicycle industry, I am not to be taken very seriously.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by Spence88 View Post
    Thanks for the replies. Allow me to throw this question out there:

    If you were about ready to get on a hardpack trail, and could go at it with either a stock Pugs or a stock Krampus, which would you put a leg over (and why)?
    I haven't ridden a krampus but have a pug with rabbit hole wheels that I've taken out a few times on frozen "hard pack" so take my opinion with a grain of salt. If you don't ride in sand, mud or snow and like to go fast then a fat bike may not be for you. If you have the krampus and pugsley itch then why not buy a pug frame and rabbit hole wheels to try out. You can buy the frame and wheels for around $1,100.00 (less if you can find a used frame.) Shop smart on the other parts and you can build a krampug for less than an actual pugsley or krampus. If the fatbike itch has not been scratched by the 29er+ setup, then a simple wheel switch and you are rolling a true fat bike. As much as I like the 26'' fat pug, I am looking forward to the summer months on those 29er+ wheels!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,794
    Quote Originally Posted by Spence88 View Post
    Thanks for the replies. Allow me to throw this question out there:

    If you were about ready to get on a hardpack trail, and could go at it with either a stock Pugs or a stock Krampus, which would you put a leg over (and why)?
    I have both and the answer is the Krampus. It's not a fatbike and doesn't ride like one. It's a chubby 29er.

    For hardpack riding the Krampus provides enough float and cushion for the odd loose section, but the tires + wheels are a lot lighter and the handling is much more like a normal 29er than a fat bike.

    Going the other way the Krampus' 3" tires can't compete with a fatbike in really soft conditions.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sasquatch rides a SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,557
    Quote Originally Posted by ntm1973 View Post
    I haven't ridden a krampus but have a pug with rabbit hole wheels that I've taken out a few times on frozen "hard pack" so take my opinion with a grain of salt. If you don't ride in sand, mud or snow and like to go fast then a fat bike may not be for you. If you have the krampus and pugsley itch then why not buy a pug frame and rabbit hole wheels to try out. You can buy the frame and wheels for around $1,100.00 (less if you can find a used frame.) Shop smart on the other parts and you can build a krampug for less than an actual pugsley or krampus. If the fatbike itch has not been scratched by the 29er+ setup, then a simple wheel switch and you are rolling a true fat bike. As much as I like the 26'' fat pug, I am looking forward to the summer months on those 29er+ wheels!
    This is great advice!

    A Krampug still will not handle anything like a Krampus, but you may prefer that. I kind of consider the Pugsley a "touring" geometry and the Krampus a "trail" geometry...correct me if I'm wrong, I have limited experience on a Pugsley.

    While mentioning Krampus geometry, mine f*cking rips. It's definitely a fast bike for the weight, and you don't really ever notice the weight while riding (mine is a Large frame and the bike weighs right at 31lbs).

    It's ultimately going to depend on your riding style and riding conditions and what you want to buy to suit each of those.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,794
    Quote Originally Posted by sasquatch rides a SS View Post
    This is great advice!

    A Krampug still will not handle anything like a Krampus, but you may prefer that. I kind of consider the Pugsley a "touring" geometry and the Krampus a "trail" geometry...correct me if I'm wrong, I have limited experience on a Pugsley.
    When I priced out a 29+ wheelset for my Pugsley with Hope hubs and 120tpi Knards and Rabbit Holes I was getting up near $1K. So it's a serious investment on top of buying a fatbike if you go the 2 wheelset route.
    Last edited by vikb; 01-30-2014 at 07:40 AM.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sasquatch rides a SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,557
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    When I priced out a 29+ wheelset for my Pugsley with Hope hubs and 120tpi Knards and Rabbit Holes I was getting up near $1K. So it's a serious investment on top of buy a fatbike if you go the 2 wheelset route.
    Well yeah, there's that...but it's just money, right?

    I guess you could look at it as having two bikes for the price of one bike and a second wheelset if that helps justify anything..

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,794
    Quote Originally Posted by sasquatch rides a SS View Post
    Well yeah, there's that...but it's just money, right?

    I guess you could look at it as having two bikes for the price of one bike and a second wheelset if that helps justify anything..
    It depends if you have an extra $1K to spend on the 2nd wheelset or not. It also depends if you are going to make good use of both wheelsets.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    When I priced out a 29+ wheelset for my Pugsley with Hope hubs and 120tpi Knards and Rabbit Holes I was getting up near $1K. So it's a serious investment on top of buy a fatbike if you go the 2 wheelset route.
    I agree, that is a lot to drop on a set of wheels. If I had a 170mm frame, I would go p35's and save a bunch of money on the wheel build but the RH is really the only option for the pug.

    I bought mine pre-built with shimano xt and surly hubs for around $550.00 with tires (found knards on ebay cheap.) I figured that if I get a great deal on a krampus frame I can always re-lace the wheels up for around $60.00 but I'm not sure if that would even be necessary as I like the way they ride on the pugs.

    As for geometry, if you look the krampus and pugsley, they are actually pretty close. I am sure they ride differently but I am not sure I could say that one is better than the other, just different. I have not been on a krampus but I've seen one and was a little concerned with the rear tire clearance, that isn't an issue on the pug although I did have to take a 4'' angle grinder to my front derailleur to get the knard to stop rubbing. Also, the krampug has a higher bottom bracket which I like for my riding areas but mud clearance and bottom bracket height may not be big considerations for the OP region.

    To each his own, I don't think you can really go wrong with either bike, I just think a pug is a little more versatile (although I still stalk ebay for a cheap krampus frame.)

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,013
    Quote Originally Posted by Spence88 View Post
    The bike in question willbe on trails and singletrack more so than snow and sand. I know this can turninto an apples/oranges, right tool for the job argument, but here goes. I likethe “squish” that the Pugs gives, acting almost like a front suspension withproper inflation. Will the Krampus be similar in that regard? Or, will I beatmyself silly on rock gardens and curse at pinch flats? I know it’s a rigid andsome is to be expected, but to what extent? Maybe I put it this way…Will I bedisappointed in going with a Krampus over a Pugs for mainly non-snow, non-sandtrail riding?
    I posed a similar question in this thread: 29+ 3.0" contact patch -vs- 26 inch 3.8" contact patch

    There really is no "suspension" I feel. Rigid is rigid. And "float" is not needed when riding dirt and rocky trails. It's the sheer traction due to the huge contact patch I am after - hence my question which nobody seems to know the answer.

    Ultimately for me I am done riding 30+ pound rigid bikes and don't care for the super wide q factor. My friend has a Pugs which is great on the snow days, but they are few and far between since the snow either melts or packs down so fast. And dragging a 30 pound bike uphill, well...no thanks. The Krampus stock build is a 30+ pounder so I'm thinking custom Ti.

    There are so many on the forums saying "who cares about weight" then you see the same people asking what 65mm rims will do to the tire profile in an effort to drop 300 grams of rotating weight.

    Stans is coming out with 29er x 52mm rims in the low 500-ish gram range. For those not interested in riding snow or sand full time, I see this as a game changer. Proper Stans BST rim (tubeless) + 3" 29er tire + light weight? Sign me up.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,564
    A Krampus frame is very limiting- it is a fun bike, but not as versatile as most fat bikes in my opinion. You can go smaller on the tires or wheels, but not bigger. A Pugs or most other fat bikes can use RH rims on the appropriate hubs and give you a whole different bike, using anything from CX tires, up through the largest 29er tires, and of course the Knard 3.0's in addition to the regular fat tires.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by ntm1973 View Post
    I agree, that is a lot to drop on a set of wheels. If I had a 170mm frame, I would go p35's and save a bunch of money on the wheel build but the RH is really the only option for the pug.

    I bought mine pre-built with shimano xt and surly hubs for around $550.00 with tires (found knards on ebay cheap.) I figured that if I get a great deal on a krampus frame I can always re-lace the wheels up for around $60.00 but I'm not sure if that would even be necessary as I like the way they ride on the pugs.

    As for geometry, if you look the krampus and pugsley, they are actually pretty close. I am sure they ride differently but I am not sure I could say that one is better than the other, just different. I have not been on a krampus but I've seen one and was a little concerned with the rear tire clearance, that isn't an issue on the pug although I did have to take a 4'' angle grinder to my front derailleur to get the knard to stop rubbing. Also, the krampug has a higher bottom bracket which I like for my riding areas but mud clearance and bottom bracket height may not be big considerations for the OP region.

    To each his own, I don't think you can really go wrong with either bike, I just think a pug is a little more versatile (although I still stalk ebay for a cheap krampus frame.)
    Geometry is pretty close you say? Is it safe to assume that if a medium Pugs is the right size for me, then a medium Krampus is the right size? To reiterate, I am not able to test a Krampus, but the medium pugs was spot on when I rode it.

  34. #34
    JYB
    JYB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    213
    I agree with everything that Vikb has stated.

  35. #35
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7,421
    Quote Originally Posted by sasquatch rides a SS View Post
    Well yeah, there's that...but it's just money, right?

    I guess you could look at it as having two bikes for the price of one bike and a second wheelset if that helps justify anything..
    I agree with this 100%. I just finished a 907 with Clownshoes and Bud and Lou. While I think the bike rocks, I don't see myself riding it like this year round.
    I'm building Rabbit Holes for it as soon as I recover from purchasing the bike.
    I like turtles

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,211
    I'll chime in, even though I only ride half-fat and switch from fat front to 29+ front whenever the need strikes. No snow riding. Both rims are 50mm. Personally, the type of riding I'm going to do dictates which front I use. My local trails are short punchy climbs followed by short steepish descents over rough rooted trails, which are generally wettish and slippery. Here, the fat front is better because my ride time is going to be shorter, better grip, and the extra cush of the fat tire is noticable for comfort. If I'm riding on totally dry trails, with longer climbs and longer descents, I prefer the 29+. Straight XC long rides I'd go 29+.

    This is my way of saying where you use the bike might be a factor when it comes to which bike to buy. To me, the 29+ comes much closer to a normal 29er, and I wouldn't consider it a substitute for a fat bike, at least on the front.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by GSJ1973 View Post
    I posed a similar question in this thread: 29+ 3.0" contact patch -vs- 26 inch 3.8" contact patch
    I saw that thread. I was thinking that contact patch meant the combination of length + width, which would also be dictated some by head angle, fork offset, tire choice, and whatnot--or all combined what I think of as "trail". Obviously, I'm not smart enough about this topic, but most the responders in that thread were only concerned with tire width. Unless I am mistaken, there is more to it than that. For me, switching from fat front to 29+ changes the front angle and brings the bottom bracket up. Without measuring, the 29+ "feels" like it has less length connected to the trail as well as width. That quickens the steering up quite a bit by feel. The fat front feels more stable and predictable. Course, I could be completely surprised to find out that measurements show, taking width out of the equation, that the 29+ tire has a longer contact patch than a regular fat tire.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fat_tires_are_fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    508
    If you want the qualities of a fatty, you need to buy one. If you want a 29er with wide tires a Krampus is cool. Here's the thing...with a second set if wheels, your fatty can do what a Krampus can, but the Krampus can't do what a fatty can. I am staring at 6 inches if snow and am glad I have a Pugsley
    - MOOTS Mooto X
    - Salsa Fargo
    - Surly Pugsley

  39. #39
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,570
    I owned a Pugs, Moonlander and Krampus, I just sold my Pugs, I found it redundant. I'm on the bigger side (220lbs) and when I want float I go all the way to a Moonlander, when I want a fat trail bike, I ride the Krampus. Also, the Pugs geometry is a little weird, the 72* seat tube angle and the short ett give me a cramped position with a porn star stem length.

    If I wasn't ever going to run an IGH, I'd buy a Mukluk instead of a Krampus. Same geometry as the Krampus and can take both 4"x26" fat tires and 29+.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by Slow Danger View Post
    Course, I could be completely surprised to find out that measurements show, taking width out of the equation, that the 29+ tire has a longer contact patch than a regular fat tire.
    Last time we had fresh snow, about 2-3" of light powder, I took out the Krampus and the Fatback to compare the two on a 2.5 hour single track trail ride. I started at the parking lot by simply putting the rear wheel in the snow and weighting it, for both bikes, to see who had more contact length. In theory, the 29+ should win this! but the 5psi 26" tires had about 25% more length than the 29" 10psi tires. Then factor in 3" wide vs 4" wide, and the 26" is 33% wider.

    On the trails, the Krampus was faster until you had to climb. Plus, the Krampus has a Fox 32 on the front, so it really brings the bike to life. The Knards really hold this bike back in snow. The Fatback is running Nates.

    If you don't get a lot of snow, I'd recommend the Krampus over the Pugsley, over my Fatback, or even over my friends new Beargrease. Now, toss a Lefty on one of those and it's a different story.

  41. #41
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    169
    The one I borrowed satisfied mine for a few days. With 3" tires it really wasn't much of a difference in deep snow and mud. It worked really well in sand and was extremely playful, though.

    Krampus - will it satisfy my fat craving?-krampus1.jpg

    Krampus - will it satisfy my fat craving?-krampus6.jpg

    Krampus - will it satisfy my fat craving?-krampus7.jpg

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,794
    Quote Originally Posted by onetwothree View Post
    The one I borrowed satisfied mine for a few days. With 3" tires it really wasn't much of a difference in deep snow and mud. It worked really well in sand and was extremely playful, though.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Krampus1.JPG 
Views:	209 
Size:	183.0 KB 
ID:	866692

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Krampus6.JPG 
Views:	240 
Size:	301.1 KB 
ID:	866693

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Krampus7.JPG 
Views:	238 
Size:	276.7 KB 
ID:	866694
    Nice
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  43. #43
    get down!
    Reputation: appleSSeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,183
    I was riding my Fatback as my go to bike over and over again, it was just so fun. Then when I went to my 29er Ti Hardtail (Kona Raijin) it just wasn't as fun. Skinny, beat me up, fast and light but I don't think I was any faster on it.

    THAT is where the Krampus or 29+ comes in for me. Like others have said if you don't have a full fat, do that first. Use it all the time. Get stronger. Learn the geo. Love it. Smile a lot. Be one with the fat. Then go 29+.

    I got a Krampus because I didn't want to swap wheels and I didn't want to have to use the 100mm bottom bracket all the time. It sometimes eats my ankles (moreso on the Mr. Whirlys than Raceface's) but it still happens sometimes.
    Rudy Projects look ridiculous

    visit my blog, BEATS, BIKES & LIFE

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    223
    As an experiment, I took my knard wheels for my pugsley to the trail with me last time I did a snow ride. It is a well used park with lots of packed snow. I figured it would be the best case scenario for the 29er+ setup. I ran 7psi tubeless with the knards. I also brought along my fat wheels just in case. The 29er+ ride lasted about 20 minutes and I was back at the car changing my wheels. They did fine on hard packed snow but the soon as it got a little loose in a few areas, I just didn't have any traction/float and had to walk. I am sure the dirt wizard tires will be better in the snow than the knards but there is just something about those big high volume tires on the pugsley that will be impossible to reproduce with a 29er+ wheel setup. Those 29er+ wheels did feel nice and fast on the hard pack though, I am looking forward to some all day rides mountain rides in the summer.

    I think the 29er+ concept has a lot of potential but it just doesn't have the volume to do what a fat bike does.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,013
    Quote Originally Posted by ntm1973 View Post
    As an experiment, I took my knard wheels for my pugsley to the trail with me last time I did a snow ride. It is a well used park with lots of packed snow. I figured it would be the best case scenario for the 29er+ setup. I ran 7psi tubeless with the knards. I also brought along my fat wheels just in case. The 29er+ ride lasted about 20 minutes and I was back at the car changing my wheels. They did fine on hard packed snow but the soon as it got a little loose in a few areas, I just didn't have any traction/float and had to walk. I am sure the dirt wizard tires will be better in the snow than the knards but there is just something about those big high volume tires on the pugsley that will be impossible to reproduce with a 29er+ wheel setup. Those 29er+ wheels did feel nice and fast on the hard pack though, I am looking forward to some all day rides mountain rides in the summer.

    I think the 29er+ concept has a lot of potential but it just doesn't have the volume to do what a fat bike does.
    Yeah, there is no doubt a fatter tire at low psi is going to do better in snow and sand. So will these compared to a normal vehicle. <img src="http://www.4x4offroads.com/image-files/4x4-hofsjokull-gunni-hasi.jpg">

    What I wonder (and I think the OP) is if a 29+/3.0 has the volume to ride normal dry trails, offer traction (not float) similar to a 26x3.8" but come in at a lower weight and better roll over similar to 29ers.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,794
    Quote Originally Posted by GSJ1973 View Post
    What I wonder (and I think the OP) is if

    1. a 29+/3.0 has the volume to ride normal dry trails,
    2. offer traction (not float) similar to a 26x3.8" but come in at
    3. a lower weight and
    4. better roll over similar to 29ers.
    1. = yes
    2. = yes
    3. = yes
    4. = significantly better roll over than any 29er tire or 26 x 3.8" tire I've used
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by RickyB View Post
    Last time we had fresh snow, about 2-3" of light powder, I took out the Krampus and the Fatback to compare the two on a 2.5 hour single track trail ride. I started at the parking lot by simply putting the rear wheel in the snow and weighting it, for both bikes, to see who had more contact length. In theory, the 29+ should win this! but the 5psi 26" tires had about 25% more length than the 29" 10psi tires. Then factor in 3" wide vs 4" wide, and the 26" is 33% wider.
    This is good to know. Now, for the rear wheel this means a lot where traction is concerned. However, contact patch for the front tire is really going to affect handling. Fork offset, and the other factors previously mentioned, will vary bike-to-bike as well as between different tires.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sasquatch rides a SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,557
    How's the search for a bike going?

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6
    Nice timing - just picked up a pugsley. I had an ebay deal fall through on a Krampus and then a local guy was selling a pugs. Went and rode it/checked it out and brought it home. Just ordered a set of 3.8 knards for it. Can't wait to get it on some trails. Thanks to all for the input!

  50. #50
    Chronic Underachiever
    Reputation: MauricioB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    568
    I have both a fat bike (907) and a halfbreed 29+ (GT Peace 9er multi with Schlick Northpaws, Knard front) and I have to say that I like the 29+ better on the dry stuff. For the ATV trails and double track we ride in northern Wisconsin, fully fat seems like overkill and regular 29 gets a little lost in the sand. So this is my solution:


    Time Out by Uncle Bicycle, on Flickr

    ...and it works very, very well.

    As for the performance of 29+ in the snow, all I can tell you is that the two Krampus riders in the Triple D this year, both strong guys, threw in the towel at the halfway point. Not that it was easy on a fat bike, but 29+ just isn't the same thing, apparently by quite a bit.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Krampus + Really fat?
    By Weinerts in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-30-2014, 05:50 AM
  2. My Krampus
    By Ripperme48 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-02-2013, 07:21 PM
  3. Gear ratio question, help satisfy my curiousity.
    By Harry Mackenzie in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-01-2013, 03:13 PM
  4. Krampus in CO
    By x-wing fighter in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-11-2013, 07:30 PM
  5. Who knew riding would cure my craving for sweets?
    By Red Barron in forum Passion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-23-2011, 03:35 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
  •