Results 1 to 96 of 96
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    71

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    With the new Specialized Fatboy on the horizon there are two fat bikes with 5" tires. If you were buying a FB with 5" tires . . . which one would you choose? The tried and true Moonie with steel frame or new Fatboy with aluminium frame and carbon fork?

    I'm facing that issue.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,091
    New duh!

    /thread

  3. #3
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,078
    Mate, theres a load of fatbike that take a 4.8" tyre.... more specific a Bud or Lou. The tried and tested Moonie is and was a game changer and still an awesome bike.... the only down point is the weight. The Spech has not been released yet but should be a really nice bike.

    There's a load of other bikes that take a bud or lou, do a bit of searching or even reading here, all will become clear.
    Evil Following
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    FM190 Fatty
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  4. #4
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,027
    Weight can be fiddled with. My Moonlander is at 30.6 lbs right now. I think a huge part of light Fatboy weight is the 800g rims instead of clown shoes.

  5. #5
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,078
    No doubt Volsung, im in no way bagging the awesome moonie at all. Just pointing out that he has picked the first bike to take the big tyres and there's a bucket load of others now without waiting on one that's not released.

    BTW OP, the difference between Margelites (65mm) and clownshoes (100mm) rims, running the tyres at ~9psi is only about 5mm in tyre width. This is going on info collected here YMMV.
    Evil Following
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    FM190 Fatty
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  6. #6
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,360
    I like turtles

  7. #7
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by NYrr496 View Post
    Wow... that is a great price for complete! I love the raw finish too... I've seen the polished ones in person which are also good looking... but raw is... RAW!

    On the Moony... I love mine and rarely notice the weight over riding my 28lb FS 29er. Different bikes, different feel, etc. Except I can ride my moony anywhere and over any dang thing I want... and by then I have long forgotten or give 2 turds about weight... too busy smiling.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  8. #8
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Not bagging on the Moonie either but for the price I would really consider the Spesh. Yeah you can lower the weight of the Moonie with a fistfull of $$$$ but why and yes weight on a fat bike can be argued that's it's no big deal but give someone the choice between lighter and heavier for the same cost and most will pick the lighter. I feel the only reason to go with the Surly is if steel is really important to you and to some it is. Of course this is all a guessing game because the Spesh is still off the grid.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Yeah, that 907 is pretty awesome...but I really like the specs on the nome.


    "You're like a Ferrari engine driving a dump truck"

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by NLSpruce3 View Post
    With the new Specialized Fatboy on the horizon there are two fat bikes with 5" tires. If you were buying a FB with 5" tires . . . which one would you choose? The tried and true Moonie with steel frame or new Fatboy with aluminium frame and carbon fork?

    I'm facing that issue.
    I was going to ask the same question on the other thread. I planned to get a Moonlander, but I changed my mind to the Fatboy at the last second for two reasons. One of the reasons is rational. The other reason is completely irrational.

    The first reason is the aluminum frame of the Fatboy. I plan to ride on Florida beaches, and my assumption is the aluminum frame would be better than a steel frame.

    The second reason is the new color of the Moonlander. Personally, I hate it. Although I haven't seen it in person, I saw some photos and it looks like that champagne-colored iPhone that Apple will announce next week. According to the media, champagne has become a popular color for new products, but I don't think fatbikes are a good match. Admittedly, paint color is a dumb reason to reject a bike, but I really think Surly should have kept the original color for the Moonlander. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,811
    Quote Originally Posted by NLSpruce3 View Post
    If you were buying a FB with 5" tires . . . which one would you choose? The tried and true Moonie with steel frame or new Fatboy with aluminium frame and carbon fork?
    I wouldn't buy or ride a Special Ed so that's an easy choice for me.

    Even if I would consider a Fatboy I'd wait until the initial run has hit the street and we get reviews from real people. If you scan around the MTBR forums the tales of terror from owners of brand new bike models are not uncommon. Special Ed has never made a fatbike before so I'd let them work out their beta test program on someone else and get in on the next generation.

    My friend rides a Ti Muk with Bud/Lous and Clown Shoes and the 907 is a quality product so you have options if the Moonlander doesn't tickle your fancy.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    893
    How about you wait until the bike is actually released to see if it's any good before you decide that it's the perfect bike?

    Seriously, just wait until it comes out. It may be awesome. It may be flawed beyond repair. It may be better than the moonlander, it may be worse. Right now, no one knows. No one has ridden it. It may have serious drivetrain issues. It's a fatbike with 5" tires, therefore, drivetrain issues are a distinct possibility.

    As for paint color, I totally get what you mean- I hate hate hate hate hate the generic white paint on my Pugsley, but then again, it's well under $200 to have a bike stripped and re-powdercoated.

    Just relax, have a beer and wait. You live in Florida for god's sake- it's not like the weather is gonna change on you.

  13. #13
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,078
    Steel is real !

    Steel is the best material for a MTB frame (IMO) its compliant and bump absorbing, its always going to be a bit heavier but if you ride a fully rigid steel bike the weight saving is going to go somewhat part of the way towards the stand off with a carbon frame with a susp fork.... all my bikes are fully rigid so im biased.

    Theres no doubt that a well built steelie is worth the weight penalty IMO, the comfort over a long enduro race/ride is definately worth the extra 200-300g when you have a good choice of bling to compliment.
    Evil Following
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    FM190 Fatty
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by buckfiddious View Post
    How about you wait until the bike is actually released to see if it's any good before you decide that it's the perfect bike?

    Seriously, just wait until it comes out. It may be awesome. It may be flawed beyond repair. It may be better than the moonlander, it may be worse. Right now, no one knows. No one has ridden it. It may have serious drivetrain issues. It's a fatbike with 5" tires, therefore, drivetrain issues are a distinct possibility.

    As for paint color, I totally get what you mean- I hate hate hate hate hate the generic white paint on my Pugsley, but then again, it's well under $200 to have a bike stripped and re-powdercoated.

    Just relax, have a beer and wait. You live in Florida for god's sake- it's not like the weather is gonna change on you.
    I definitely haven't decided it's the perfect bike. That's why I keep asking questions.

    And I realize there are risks to any "first generation" product. I am still psychologically scarred from a first generation jet ski I bought many years ago.

    There really aren't any dealers for Surly and Salsa here. However, there is a huge Specialized dealer with a longstanding reputation. That was a third reason for taking a chance on a Fatboy pre-order.

    I thought about the stripping and powdercoating option, but I assumed it might be difficult to duplicate the original Moonlander color. Probably better to just hunt down a 2013 Moonlander.

    In the end, the aluminum frame was the deciding factor. But I am interested in opinions about whether or not aluminum is better for beach riding. I really don't know - that's why I keep asking questions.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: anvil_den's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    953
    If the bike is a keeper-- steel is a better bet for rigid and hardtails imo.

    Digressing... Just wondering if we will ever see a good steel like an 853 or 953 lugged fattie Probably expensive and limited run by some custom builder if ever, especially no lug I believe has ever been made for this category of bike...

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Spock View Post
    In the end, the aluminum frame was the deciding factor. But I am interested in opinions about whether or not aluminum is better for beach riding. I really don't know - that's why I keep asking questions.
    My Pugsley has survived months of camping at the beach [like in a tent where I could toss a frisbee into the ocean], 2 Canadian winters and lots of moisture living on the BC coast.

    I'm 5yrs into owning my Pugsley with no real issues. After 3yrs or so I decided to re-powder coat to deal with some surface rust in a few spots. That could have been avoided if I had bothered to wipe down the bike at all.

    My drivetrain and brakes rusted, my BB bearings got contaminated and one of the two Pugsleys I had has disintegrating AL spoke nipples due to salt corrosion [the other is brass].

    Aluminum will oxidize, but it's less of an issue than with a steel bike. You'll still want to remove and lube parts so they don't corrode into place permanently on your AL bike.

    Having said that care of the frame is a tiny % of the care needed to keep the bike rolling at the beach and regardless of frame material fatbikes share the same parts.

    I live and play in high corrosion environments. I tried an AL MTB because I thought it would be easier to take care of. I ended up only keeping it for a year and replacing it with a steel frame [just swappped the parts across]. The steel bike has a nicer ride and is in practice no more effort to maintain.

    FWIW - for low beach riding maintenance the best thing I could suggest would be to run an IGH. Keeping gears protected from sand and salt means a lot less wrenching compared to the riding.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,231
    Another consideration is hubs. Pugs/Moonie uses cheap (and great!) 135mm hubs, whereas the 190mm hubs are very limited and expensive. So if you're planning spare wheelsets, or touring, etc, the 135mm hub is still a huge benefit when comparing the bikes.

  18. #18
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,078
    As far as fatties are concerned, the tyre susp will rule out "most" of the steel frame advantage..... but as asthetics are concerned, theres nothing looks better than a skinny steel frame with mothafukken fat wheels, im talking 2.4's.... nevermind 4'8's.
    Evil Following
    Trek 9.9 Superfly SL
    Indy Fab Deluxe 29
    FM190 Fatty
    Pivot Vault CX
    Cervelo R3 Disc

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    I love mine and rarely notice the weight over riding my 28lb FS 29er. Different bikes, different feel, etc. Except I can ride my moony anywhere and over any dang thing I want... and by then I have long forgotten or give 2 turds about weight... too busy smiling.
    This...but on a Pug "Ops"...green machine.

  20. #20
    mtbr noob
    Reputation: roxo56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by Armyballer View Post
    This...but on a Pug "Ops"...green machine.
    Please give us more of a ride report about the ops. There's actually very little thread info or discussion about the new ops...
    roxo56
    Surly Troll
    SC Butcher

  21. #21
    mtbr noob
    Reputation: roxo56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    104
    Or , start a new thread about it ?
    roxo56
    Surly Troll
    SC Butcher

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    381
    30lb moonie

    specs and pic on scales ?


    My Ti carver with marge lites and top end kit is that weight!!!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    The pugs ops is the same as the necromancer. I don't think we need another thread for a green version....am I alone here?


    "You're like a Ferrari engine driving a dump truck"

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    My very basic Moonlander is 33 lbs. I'm sure it could be brought to 30.6 lbs with ease. Just a carbon fork would make about half of the difference. I have Juicy 7's on mine so there's a possibility to reduce weight, carbon bars and foam grips would drop it also, and my hubs are boat-anchor level (Surly and Shimano XT). Switching spokes to Revolutions would have some effect and my Shimano Saints aren't the lightest of pedals.

    A sub-30 lbs Moonlander is barely a challenge, it requires just some choices regarding parts and a bit of cash on the barrel head.

  25. #25
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    My very basic Moonlander is 33 lbs. I'm sure it could be brought to 30.6 lbs with ease. Just a carbon fork would make about half of the difference. I have Juicy 7's on mine so there's a possibility to reduce weight, carbon bars and foam grips would drop it also, and my hubs are boat-anchor level (Surly and Shimano XT). Switching spokes to Revolutions would have some effect and my Shimano Saints aren't the lightest of pedals.


    A sub-30 lbs Moonlander is barely a challenge, it requires just some choices regarding parts and a bit of cash on the barrel head.
    Not wanting to be argumentative but to buy both bikes at about the same retail then have to stick $1000 into one to make it about the same weight doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense. Please don't get me wrong I have had 2 Pugs (loved them) and still have one but really what is there to gain from one choosing that route?

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Not wanting to be argumentative but to buy both bikes at about the same retail then have to stick $1000 into one to make it about the same weight doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense. Please don't get me wrong I have had 2 Pugs (loved them) and still have one but really what is there to gain from one choosing that route?
    If one were to have a passionate hate for Specialized, then that's your answer. Not that anyone in this forum does, just thinking out loud ;-)

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    .... but as asthetics are concerned, theres nothing looks better than a skinny steel frame with mothafukken fat wheels, im talking 2.4's.... nevermind 4'8's.
    As an owner of a skinny tubed steel bike with 2.4's on it....I concur.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    My moony is all about my comfort and weight be damned. I can ride faster and over more than I did on any of my fatbikes. The moonlander just feels right. If you care about weight it's not the bike for you.

    Sure I could save weight but my parts are chosen for my comfort. Where is the real difference? 2-3 lbs heavier in the frame?

    And hay build a moonlander from the frame up like I did. This way you get exactly what you want.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  29. #29
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Schott View Post
    If one were to have a passionate hate for Specialized, then that's your answer. Not that anyone in this forum does, just thinking out loud ;-)
    So very wise you are!! A person could substitute 907 or Fatback for the ML and could come up with the same results.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,811
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Not wanting to be argumentative but to buy both bikes at about the same retail then have to stick $1000 into one to make it about the same weight doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense. Please don't get me wrong I have had 2 Pugs (loved them) and still have one but really what is there to gain from one choosing that route?
    Not buying Specialized and I wouldn't spend $1K extra on a Moonlander. I would just ride it.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Not wanting to be argumentative but to buy both bikes at about the same retail then have to stick $1000 into one to make it about the same weight doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense. Please don't get me wrong I have had 2 Pugs (loved them) and still have one but really what is there to gain from one choosing that route?
    Oh, I was actually getting a bit off-topic because I didn't even think of comparison between the two. Volsung made a claim and cozz questioned it, so I figured that I'd shed some light on the subject of Moonlander and weight.

    If you want a light bike, indeed the Specialized is much more cost-effective.

    A reasonably light Moonlander could be built from parts for less than a complete + upgrades afterwards, so the cost or weight should not be exaggerated. But in this department it has the shorter straw against Specialized.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    So very wise you are!! A person could substitute 907 or Fatback for the ML and could come up with the same results.
    I really really want a 907.


    "You're like a Ferrari engine driving a dump truck"

  33. #33
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by cozz View Post
    30lb moonie

    specs and pic on scales ?


    My Ti carver with marge lites and top end kit is that weight!!!
    Bike specs with pics

    i can take pics later, ufc right now though. that link's got some old specs. my free crime scene tape blew up on the first hot day of the year and i put my commuter bike's saddle on.

    glover texiera's a beast btw.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Beard of Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    80
    After reading this thread I got curious about my bike's weight and weighed my Moonlander.

    For the sake of this discussion and as a point of reference, my Moonie weighs in at 30.14 lbs with at least a few grams of dirt, mud, slime, and grime from a weekend of beach, woods, and alpine single track.
    Specs:
    Wire bead 120 tpi BFLs, Clownshoes nylon rim ribbon, Specialized HD downhill tubes, Salsa Front hub, X9 rear hub, X9 RD, 11-34 XT cassette, Surly MWOD, ebay nylon (plastic) BMX pedals, stock Andel BB cups with Phil Wood bearings, Surly seatpost clamp, Origin8 carbon seatpost, old tiTec saddle, cane creek S3 headset, Ahrens headset spacer bottle opener, carbon headset spacers, Ritchey stem, carbon Answer 20/20 bars (720mm uncut), cork grips, Carver o'beast fork (uncut), X9 grip shifts, Formula R1 rear brake, No front brake. 2 King Cage ti water bottle cages. Not too bad considering the heavy ass Surly crank and steel frame.
    Moonlander vs Fatboy-image.jpg
    Last edited by Beard of Power; 09-09-2013 at 10:33 PM.
    __________________________________________________ __
    Bike is the New Black

  35. #35
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Beard of Power View Post
    After reading this thread I got curious about my bike's weight and weighed my Moonlander.

    For the sake of this discussion and as a point of reference, my Moonie weighs in at 30.14 lbs
    Is that an 18" frame? I think the big weight loss tool is the Carver carbon fork, correct? I'd love to get my Moonlander down some... I was at 36 lbs last I checked... but running stock fork, heavy surly toobs, and 203 front rotor that isn't exactly light.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Beard of Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    Is that an 18" frame? I think the big weight loss tool is the Carver carbon fork, correct?
    Yup, 18" frame, full of frame saver. The lack of Avid BB7's is a big weight savings, in addition to all the carbon bits. With Steel fork, front R1 brake, and Bud-Lou rubber, the Moonie weighed 32.32 lbs. Bike Is the New Black: Spring Weightless Plan for Moonlander

    Swapping forks resulting in a loss of 558 grams or (1.23 lbs) assuming you don't cut your steer-tube. Stock Moonlander fork weight is published as 1150 grams (2.535 lbs), my Carver fork weighed in at 592 grams (1.305 lbs), 14 g. over Carver's published weight of 578 grams. Inconsistency in the surface of post mounts on the Carver fork prevented me from mounting my front brake, the pads were impossible to get parallel to the rotor. Also the Carver fork changed the geometry of the Moonlander, due to longer A-C.

    So getting back to the Fatboy vs. Moonlander question; if having a lightish 4.8" tire fatbike is your goal, the Fatboy is 'less grams for the $$$' straight out of the box, with the advantage of a complete bike with all parts designed from the ground up to function well together (and possibly better quality control). Personally, I like working on bikes, testing, tinkering, and swapping parts around, changing the mannerisms and performance of the bike. With the Moonlander, I will likely be throwing the steel fork back on and adding an Alfine 8 within the next year, which will bring it back up to the neighborhood of 40 lbs.
    __________________________________________________ __
    Bike is the New Black

  37. #37
    mtbr noob
    Reputation: roxo56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    Is that an 18" frame? I think the big weight loss tool is the Carver carbon fork, correct? I'd love to get my Moonlander down some... I was at 36 lbs last I checked... but running stock fork, heavy surly toobs, and 203 front rotor that isn't exactly light.
    A 203mm on a moonie ? Could you post a pic of that setup on the carver fork ?
    Did it work on the ML fork ?
    roxo56
    Surly Troll
    SC Butcher

  38. #38
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by roxo56 View Post
    A 203mm on a moonie ? Could you post a pic of that setup on the carver fork ?
    Did it work on the ML fork ?
    I just have the stock steel fork. I don't think you are supposed to go that big on a Carver though.

    Moonlander vs Fatboy-camerazoom-20130325180957346.jpg
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  39. #39
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    I just have the stock steel fork. I don't think you are supposed to go that big on a Carver though.
    I don't think that you need A brake that big.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gizzard75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by crashtestdummy View Post
    I don't think that you need A brake that big.
    For doin' killer endos, man.

  41. #41
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by Gizzard75 View Post
    For doin' killer endos, man.
    Not for the skilled, I think that you need 2 brakes that big.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    111
    Love the fact that I have found this tread as I am on my way to my local dealer on friday who sells Spesh and Surly. I am in the exact same boat. Moonlander or a Fatboy expert.
    My Question is to all the Moonlander owners is this. What is the Weight of a stock complete?
    Spesh is claiming 30lbs without pedals I have heard a stock Moonlander is 40lbs.
    This is going to be a wet coast bike on Vancouver Island and used as a winter fun bike and a camping dad bike with my girls in the summer. Most of my riding will be under two hours in the winter time and limited snow due to very mild winters.
    Any Advice?
    A stock fatboy expert and a stock Moonlander are about the same price.
    Do I roll the dice on a first gen Fatboy having never seen one with 4.6 tires
    or
    Do I roll the dice on a Moonlander having never seen one (rare breed)with 4.8 tires.
    If it helps I am 190lbs and just a normal run of the mill joe average BC trail rider.
    Thanks in Advance

  43. #43
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    My XL Moonlander was around 36 lbs. with the Surly build kit. You can loose 2 pounds just by removing all of the button head screws from the bottle and rack mounts (not really 2 pounds).
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Beard of Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    80
    Complete Stock Fat Bike Weights

    16" Moonlander = 35.54
    18" Moonlander = 35.76
    20" Moonlander = 35.88
    22" Moonlander = 36.30

    weight is not the only issue in comparing these bikes.
    Consider: frame geometry, steel vs. alum/carbon, rack compatibility, Surly can be run single-speed or IGH down the road if desired...
    __________________________________________________ __
    Bike is the New Black

  45. #45
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Quote Originally Posted by stinkyto View Post
    Love the fact that I have found this tread as I am on my way to my local dealer on friday who sells Spesh and Surly. I am in the exact same boat. Moonlander or a Fatboy expert.
    My Question is to all the Moonlander owners is this. What is the Weight of a stock complete?
    Spesh is claiming 30lbs without pedals I have heard a stock Moonlander is 40lbs.
    This is going to be a wet coast bike on Vancouver Island and used as a winter fun bike and a camping dad bike with my girls in the summer. Most of my riding will be under two hours in the winter time and limited snow due to very mild winters.
    Any Advice?
    A stock fatboy expert and a stock Moonlander are about the same price.
    Do I roll the dice on a first gen Fatboy having never seen one with 4.6 tires
    or
    Do I roll the dice on a Moonlander having never seen one (rare breed)with 4.8 tires.
    If it helps I am 190lbs and just a normal run of the mill joe average BC trail rider.
    Thanks in Advance
    In the end ultimately only you can make that decision but I would not hesitate to buy a first year run from Spesh especially an aluminum HT. It's a tough call but if it was me I would look towards the Spesh.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    My weighs 37 with no fenders and rear pack. I have 8" discs front and rear. bud and Lou tires with stock tubes. I also added straight line pedals. Stock post cranks, bb and hubs.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  47. #47
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit View Post
    My weighs 37 with no fenders and rear pack. I have 8" discs front and rear. bud and Lou tires with stock tubes. I also added straight line pedals. Stock post cranks, bb and hubs.
    How much does all that mud weigh? And I think you could take more weight off if you used carbon fiber mud or tubeless mud.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Moonlander vs Fatboy-imageuploadedbytapatalk1379014648.834243.jpg I did put it on a mud diet but the strength to weight ratio was off :-o
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  49. #49
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,027
    The worst part of a Moonlander is it's really hard to see if the rear rotor is true because of the offset.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,811
    Quote Originally Posted by stinkyto View Post
    Love the fact that I have found this tread as I am on my way to my local dealer on friday who sells Spesh and Surly. I am in the exact same boat. Moonlander or a Fatboy expert.
    My Question is to all the Moonlander owners is this. What is the Weight of a stock complete?
    Spesh is claiming 30lbs without pedals I have heard a stock Moonlander is 40lbs.
    This is going to be a wet coast bike on Vancouver Island and used as a winter fun bike and a camping dad bike with my girls in the summer. Most of my riding will be under two hours in the winter time and limited snow due to very mild winters.
    Any Advice?
    A stock fatboy expert and a stock Moonlander are about the same price.
    Do I roll the dice on a first gen Fatboy having never seen one with 4.6 tires
    or
    Do I roll the dice on a Moonlander having never seen one (rare breed)with 4.8 tires.
    If it helps I am 190lbs and just a normal run of the mill joe average BC trail rider.
    Thanks in Advance
    Where are you on Van Isle? You are welcome to come by and check out my Pugs in Victoria and discuss island fat biking options. It's rolling on Big Fat Larrys and 82mm rims.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by Volsung View Post
    The worst part of a Moonlander is it's really hard to see if the rear rotor is true because of the offset.
    That is a pain.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GnarBrahWyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Volsung View Post
    Weight can be fiddled with. My Moonlander is at 30.6 lbs right now. I think a huge part of light Fatboy weight is the 800g rims instead of clown shoes.
    How in tarnations did you get your Moonie to 30.6 lbs? Mine is almost hitting 37 lbs stock.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    63
    Do we have a confirmed weight yet? I know around 30lbs, but the tires weren't final. I'm not sure the tires are final now, but I thought someone on here might know.

  54. #54
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by GnarBrahWyo View Post
    How in tarnations did you get your Moonie to 30.6 lbs? Mine is almost hitting 37 lbs stock.
    I have a tare button on my scale and I can weight the scale at 10 lbs and hit tare to zero it out. Then my bike only weighs 29 lbs and I feel really good about it's weight.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GnarBrahWyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,677
    Very skeptical of any 30 lb Moonie that still looks like a Moonie.

  56. #56
    CS2
    CS2 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CS2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,778
    Quote Originally Posted by GnarBrahWyo View Post
    Very skeptical of any 30 lb Moonie that still looks like a Moonie.
    He posted pics of the bike.
    A garage full of steel frames means happiness.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    60
    Bighit - Have to agree with you. I've had my Moonie for 2 years now. I got it because I wanted a better workout in a shorter period of time. The bonus is that it is so much fun, it's hard to stop riding and it's now the only bike I ride. If weight matters, look elsewhere. Most of the weight is the rider, not the bike, anyway. Lose a few........most people need to.

  58. #58
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Quote Originally Posted by rgurney View Post
    Bighit - If weight matters, look elsewhere. Most of the weight is the rider, not the bike, anyway. Lose a few........most people need to.
    I can guarantee a 210 pound dude will enjoy riding a 25# fat bike more than a 200# guy will enjoy a 35# bike especially if a lot of the loss in in rotational weight.

  59. #59
    NMBP
    Reputation: crashtestdummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by rgurney View Post
    Bighit - Have to agree with you. I've had my Moonie for 2 years now. I got it because I wanted a better workout in a shorter period of time. The bonus is that it is so much fun, it's hard to stop riding and it's now the only bike I ride. If weight matters, look elsewhere. Most of the weight is the rider, not the bike, anyway. Lose a few........most people need to.
    A year and a half on my Moonie, and with all the frame, bar, stem and fork bags, plus all the crap in them, it keeps gaining weight. I've lost a few pounds myself, and my pack is lighter. It's still more fun than a guy my age should be allowed to have.
    Riding Fat and still just as fast as I never was.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    876

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    I can guarantee a 210 pound dude will enjoy riding a 25# fat bike more than a 200# guy will enjoy a 35# bike especially if a lot of the loss in in rotational weight.
    Well, that depends. If the 25 lb bike is 6 grand and the 35 lb bike is 2 grand ,I'd say I don 't know. Maybe.


    Pedaling

  61. #61
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Quote Originally Posted by rjedoaks View Post
    Well, that depends. If the 25 lb bike is 6 grand and the 35 lb bike is 2 grand ,I'd say I don 't know. Maybe.


    Pedaling
    This doesn't make any sense.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    876

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    LOL, I was in traffic . Point being, such a small # of 25 lb fat bikes in circulation , that that doesn't make much sense.


    Pedaling
    Last edited by rjedoaks; 06-11-2014 at 04:32 PM.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jaret1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    59
    Which one did you buy?

  64. #64
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Stupid me

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    876
    I edited my post.
    Never said anything about body weight.

  66. #66
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,890
    Edited: I was talking to 2 different people with almost the same name oops.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    8
    Ron, I love riding my Pugs. Used it for a recovery ride Monday on the WOD and it was a normal workout. Down from 234 to 215 as of yesterday.
    Love cycling!
    MakeYourOwnBonus.com
    Don't confuse activity with accomplishment!

  68. #68
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    It wouldn't matter if one was 150 or 250 pounds, a lighter bike will be more fun to ride. I had a Moonlander and changed out a lot of parts, but I never came close to 30 pounds. It was easier to buy a Borealis and jump right past the 30 pound mark to 23 pounds with carbon wheels.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GnarBrahWyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,677
    Quote Originally Posted by alphazz View Post
    It wouldn't matter if one was 150 or 250 pounds, a lighter bike will be more fun to ride. I had a Moonlander and changed out a lot of parts, but I never came close to 30 pounds. It was easier to buy a Borealis and jump right past the 30 pound mark to 23 pounds with carbon wheels.
    Alphazz,
    I think if most people are considering these two bikes, it's because a Borealis is not in their price range. I'd love a Borealis if I could afford it, but the Moonlander will have to suffice for me. I am not a fan of Specialized any more as a company, but the Fat Boy is a great value when you consider weight and parts.

  70. #70
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    My point Gnar, was that one can put a lot of money into a Moonlander and still not have a 30 pound bike. For the money that I put into my Moonlander, I could have bought a Borealis. Shifters, pedals, bottom bracket, headset, stem, bars, grips, and tires equaled much more than an entry level Borealis. I was responding to the two different comments above. One was someone saying that their Moonlander was 30 pounds and as someone else mentioned, if your Moonlander is 30 pounds, it is no longer a Moonlander. The other was that a lighter bike will be enjoyed by most.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134

    Re: Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by alphazz View Post
    The other was that a lighter bike will be enjoyed by most.
    I beg to differ on this. Light bikes are nice, but its not the end all, be all. This is my road bike:






    Is it light? No way, not for a road bike. Is it a nicer bike than many other "light" road bikes out there? Yes, in my opinion, by a mile.

    Some people have different priorities when it comes to bikes. Weight weenie-ism isn't the highest ideal for everyone. Some people prefer steel frames for a number of reasons, and some people like Surly bikes for a number of reasons. For those folks, they would likely enjoy a Moonlander more than a Fatboy or Borealis, and some away from it all with more $$$ left in their pocket.

  72. #72
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    Whatever. It would be rare for someone to choose a bike from two similar bikes just because it was 10 pounds heavier.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    ^ That must be why Surly is barely hanging on and has trouble moving product.

  74. #74
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    ^ That must be why Surly is barely hanging on and has trouble moving product.
    I'm curious what has happened to their sales this past year and what will happen in the coming years. If I were looking to purchase a new fat bike, no way would I buy a Surly.

  75. #75
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,987
    Quote Originally Posted by alphazz View Post
    I'm curious what has happened to their sales this past year and what will happen in the coming years. If I were looking to purchase a new fat bike, no way would I buy a Surly.
    +1. They've been resting on their laurels as the originators of production fatbikes, selling product that is under-engineered and overpriced for too long. The Ice Cream Truck is certainly a step in the right direction, but it's hardly a game changer. Fortunately for Surly, they're not selling bikes as much as they are selling an attitude and a lifestyle, with bikes to go along with it. On that note, they're not unlike Harley Davidson and there is no shortage of lemmings who are lining up to pay too much for what they're selling.

  76. #76
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    A bike is a bike. For many of us, we throw a leg over a bike like a surly, we smile, while we crush those that payed way too much for a lightweight plastic "wonder" machine. And then the carbon koolaid kids lay the plastic toy down on a rock the wrong way and crack/shatter it. Surly wins

    rog

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    I've got no comment on Harley Davidson, but obviously Surly is doing something right. Simplicity, durability, value and versatility appeal to many including me. That has always been their target.

    You guys do realize they've been making bikes long before the Pugsley, right? The vast majority of which are still in production. Road bikes, cross bikes, trail bikes, cargo bikes, touring bikes, single speed/fixed gear bikes, you name it. Gee I wonder what will happen when there are some other bikes in those categories to compete with Surly. What will they do?

    I'll tell you what, you guys can keep wringing out your wallets every other season to be on the latest and greatest that the bike industry so generously bestows upon you, and I'll keep happily pedaling along on my bought and paid for Surly (by choice) for the next 5 years like the lemming that I am. 135mm hubs kicks ass, by the way.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    535

    Re: Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    A bike is a bike. For many of us, we throw a leg over a bike like a surly, we smile, while we crush those that payed way too much for a lightweight plastic "wonder" machine. And then the carbon koolaid kids lay the plastic toy down on a rock the wrong way and crack/shatter it. Surly wins

    rog
    Yah. Carbon fractures and shatters easily, and is super weak.




    Its funny that rog is trolling here after tucking his tail and pouting about tgr.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    ^ There was a member here a couple months ago that literally shattered one of the chainstays on his carbon fatbike with his FOOT while riding.

    You should see all of the gashes from rocks on my Pugsley frame and fork. Just adds character. If I was riding expensive carbon, I'd be shitting bricks after every scrape. Let's not talk about rim strikes.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    535

    Re: Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    ^ There was a member here a couple months ago that literally shattered one of the chainstays on his carbon fatbike with his FOOT while riding.

    You should see all of the gashes from rocks on my Pugsley frame and fork. Just adds character. If I was riding expensive carbon, I'd be shitting bricks after every scrape. Let's not talk about rim strikes.
    A yes. The n=1 argument. Well that proves everything.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by iscariot View Post
    A yes. The n=1 argument. Well that proves everything.
    You're right. It doesn't prove anything. But when I had to chose a bike to beat the piss out of on the trail for 5+ years, I go with metal over carbon. Carbon is lighter and stronger, but not tougher or more safe.

  82. #82
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by iscariot View Post
    Yah. Carbon fractures and shatters easily, and is super weak.




    Its funny that rog is trolling here after tucking his tail and pouting about tgr.
    Who's tucking tail jongboy? They banned me for busting balls on one of the biggest ball busting forums out there. They can give it but sure can't take it.

    Pouting, get a clue (rolls eyes).

    Carbon and rock don't mix. I know from experience.

    rog

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    535

    Re: Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    Who's tucking tail jongboy? They banned me for busting balls on one of the biggest ball busting forums out there. They can give it but sure can't take it.

    Pouting, get a clue (rolls eyes).

    Carbon and rock don't mix. I know from experience.

    rog
    Ha! How demonstrative of your "legend in your own mind" status. You can go back to tgr anytime. You weren't banned permenantly. You just haven't gone back because you're too busy pouting. Congrats on your new home for trolling; you may continue now.

    Carbon and rock do just as well, or better than, aluminum and rock, and on measured stress and impact tests.

  84. #84
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    ..I'll tell you what, you guys can keep wringing out your wallets every other season to be on the latest and greatest that the bike industry so generously bestows upon you, and I'll keep happily pedaling along on my bought and paid for Surly...
    What does "bought and paid for" have to do with anything? My XX1 Borealis with carbon rims is "bought and paid for".

    As for newmarketrog who is crushing the lightweight plastic machines with his heavy Surly, good luck with that opinion. I don't think I saw much or any of that happening this past winter in fat bike races. Carbon was crossing the finish lines at the front pretty consistently.

  85. #85
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807

    Cool-blue Rhythm

    Quote Originally Posted by iscariot View Post
    Ha! How demonstrative of your "legend in your own mind" status. You can go back to tgr anytime. You weren't banned permenantly. You just haven't gone back because you're too busy pouting. Congrats on your new home for trolling; you may continue now.

    Carbon and rock do just as well, or better than, aluminum and rock, and on measured stress and impact tests.
    Was here before tgr.

    Aluminum? How does aluminum play into this discussion?

    No I cannot go back to tgr. Can't log in. Banned for life. Dunfee's mentioned it quite a few times. You obviously aren't very observant. Thanx for playing tho.

    rog

  86. #86
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by alphazz View Post
    What does "bought and paid for" have to do with anything? My XX1 Borealis with carbon rims is "bought and paid for".

    As for newmarketrog who is crushing the lightweight plastic machines with his heavy Surly, good luck with that opinion. I don't think I saw much or any of that happening this past winter in fat bike races. Carbon was crossing the finish lines at the front pretty consistently.
    But in the right hands in the real world.......steel crushes plastic.

    rog

  87. #87
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    ^ There was a member here a couple months ago that literally shattered one of the chainstays on his carbon fatbike with his FOOT while riding.

    You should see all of the gashes from rocks on my Pugsley frame and fork. Just adds character. If I was riding expensive carbon, I'd be shitting bricks after every scrape. Let's not talk about rim strikes.
    Word.

    rog

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    535

    Re: Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    No I cannot go back to tgr. Can't log in. Banned for life. Dunfee's mentioned it quite a few times. You obviously aren't very observant. Thanx for playing tho.

    rog
    Quote Originally Posted by newmarketrog View Post
    But in the right hands in the real world.......steel crushes plastic.

    rog
    You're only lying to yourself. Everyone knows it. A legend in your own small mind with your tail between your legs.

  89. #89
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by iscariot View Post
    You're only lying to yourself. Everyone knows it. A legend in your own small mind with your tail between your legs.
    Heh, Whatever makes you feel better poseur jongboy

    rog

  90. #90
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,027
    Stupid nerd drama like you babies are why I rarely read this forum anymore. Take it to PMs because no one else cares.

  91. #91
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Volsung View Post
    Stupid nerd drama like you babies are why I rarely read this forum anymore. Take it to PMs because no one else cares.
    Lighten up francis. You need a surly if you don't already have one. ICT ops for you. With tan sidewall nates

    rog

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134

    Re: Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by alphazz View Post
    What does "bought and paid for" have to do with anything? My XX1 Borealis with carbon rims is "bought and paid for".
    It means I'll be happily riding my Surly when you'll be jonesing to hemorrhage more money yet again when something a little lighter, stiffer, or with some newer "better" standard gets released a season or two from now. Nothing wrong with it. I just know that I'm lucky in a sense, to like steel bikes and like riding steel bikes.

  93. #93
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    There is nothing wrong with steel, bumpers on cars ought to be made with the stuff. But the Moonlander ought to come with an additional sticker, "Do not lift without the proper stance and a weight belt".

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sdsyver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    119

    Moonlander vs Fatboy

    Quote Originally Posted by crashtestdummy View Post
    A year and a half on my Moonie, and with all the frame, bar, stem and fork bags, plus all the crap in them, it keeps gaining weight. I've lost a few pounds myself, and my pack is lighter. It's still more fun than a guy my age should be allowed to have.
    I've had my Moonlander for almost a year now and it's doing the same thing as yours. Gaining weight. About to add a rear rack so family does not have to haul as much on outings this summer. Fun machines these things. The Specialized is a nice ride though. Tried one at LBS. Had me tempted. The new Rocky Mountain is calling me now though. This time next year I'll likely be still on the Moonlander having fun. If it has fat tires they are all fun.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    41
    [QUOTE=JAGI410;10654160]Another consideration is hubs. Pugs/Moonie uses cheap (and great!) 135mm hubs, whereas the 190mm hubs are very limited and expensive. So if you're planning spare wheelsets, or touring, etc, the 135mm hub is still a huge benefit when comparing the bikes.[/QUOTE

    I know this is an older post but wanted to state that the 190mm rear spacing is fast becoming a standard for many bikes coming out now so don't be deterred by its numbers because they will take over fat bikes soon...enjoy!
    hellboy

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GnarBrahWyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,677
    I almost sold my Moonlander for a Fatboy last fall. Had a buyer lined up and test rode the Fatboy and even had cash in hand. Whatever the weight difference was, was not that noticeable. The Fatboy felt less comfortable and I think tread on the tires did not grip as well. I decided to keep my Moonlander for the time being. Even though the bike is heavy, I preferred the comfort factor and how the bottom bracket felt to the Fatboy.
    I plan to ride my Moonlander a season or two more and eventually jump into a Borealis when I can afford one. I am not fast on my fatty, and I don't race. I strictly do it for winter excercise and a way to keep from falling out of shape in the winter. I have a lot of issues with Specialized's business model in the past few years and that was definitely a factor too. I don't think Surly fat bikes are gonna disappear. They have built a reputation on comfortable, utilitarian bikes that keeps them relevent. They don't need to make an aluminum or carbon fat bike to stay relevant.

Similar Threads

  1. Specialized Fatboy
    By fc in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 711
    Last Post: 04-03-2017, 09:24 PM
  2. Specialized Fatboy newest info
    By jfrbikes in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 321
    Last Post: 02-10-2014, 04:28 PM
  3. Fatboy with Ground Controls pictures :)
    By shanesbw in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 08-21-2013, 07:17 AM
  4. Specialized Fatboy
    By fc in forum Specialized
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-15-2013, 04:17 PM
  5. Fatboy Newbie!
    By jpolk34 in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-30-2011, 10:47 PM

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

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