Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    57

    Good job! Mukluk 3 questions

    I have been bitten by the fat bike bug, hard. My LBS has a 19"muk3 in stock at a crazy low price because it was an alleged demo though I cannot see a speck of dirt on it and the tires have the little nips on them.

    First, I will gladly ride in the snow if we ever get some, so this bike would see more trail duty than anything else, some say a muk is perfect for this, some say a muk is not as well suited for regular trail duty. What changes should be made to make it more trail friendly if any?
    Second, on a stock muk can bud and Lou's fit? I have a tendency to put the fattest tires I can find on pretty much everything I own.
    Last, are the frame stickers removeable on the muks? I think the orange color is perfect

    Also if someone could pm me what they think is a good price on the muk 3, I don't want to break any rules posting the price here.
    Thank you
    E.P.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: edbraunbeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    334
    My Mukluk 3 has proved to be a worthy trail bike with and without snow. Upgrading the tires would be my recommendation. The Husker Du's, Knards or Nates 120 tpi are all well worth it. I'm not sure how the wider tire options would help the trail riding ability on it though.

    In terms of price, Fat Bikes are hot right now so if you can save $200-300 that would be a good deal.

  3. #3
    blood in / blood out
    Reputation: majack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by ECU-Yukon View Post
    I have been bitten by the fat bike bug, hard. My LBS has a 19"muk3 in stock at a crazy low price because it was an alleged demo though I cannot see a speck of dirt on it and the tires have the little nips on them.

    First, I will gladly ride in the snow if we ever get some, so this bike would see more trail duty than anything else, some say a muk is perfect for this, some say a muk is not as well suited for regular trail duty. What changes should be made to make it more trail friendly if any?
    Second, on a stock muk can bud and Lou's fit? I have a tendency to put the fattest tires I can find on pretty much everything I own.
    Last, are the frame stickers removeable on the muks? I think the orange color is perfect

    Also if someone could pm me what they think is a good price on the muk 3, I don't want to break any rules posting the price here.
    Thank you
    E.P.
    As for tires, you can run the BUD and LOU. You will have to slam the alternator dropouts all the way to the back of the bike to fit the LOU, but it does work. But a better option is the BUD up front and a NATE in the rear and don"t touch the dropouts.

    As for trail riding, my Muk3 works great. I have set it up just like my 26er's and it rides great.

    And now for price, if you can get a Muk 3 for close to $1400 that would be a good deal.
    RICOH for LIFE
    Chilkoot Cafe & Cyclery

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    12
    I bought a leftover '12 Muk 3 in mid-December for $1430. If you can get a '13 Demo for around that price it looks like a pretty good deal.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    19
    Sorry for the slight derail but why is it better to run a Bud front Nate rear than the Bud Lou combo? Wouldn't more float be important in the back than the front?

    To the OP's first question: As you noted opinions are split personally I find the Salsa geo to feel great both on snow and dirt. If you can get a good deal all the better! However, if possible, I would recommend you try out a few different fat bikes to see what works best for you (and don't forget to play around with different tire pressures for big changes in feel, traction and handling).

  6. #6
    29er
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    855
    a lou in the back forces you to extend the wheel base, which won't handle as well on a trail

  7. #7
    Heads up Flyboy!!
    Reputation: mountaingoatepics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,089
    I find the Mukluk to be just as awesome on dry dirt as on snow. I did a local group ride the other night. 13 miles of dry single track with 1800 ft of climbing and averaged around 9.5 miles an hour with a max speed of 29.5 mph running Husker DU's at 11 psi rear 10 psi front. I even bested one of my previous downhill times that I had on my Jet 9. Don't worry about it just get out there and ride. The fun will follow

  8. #8
    29er
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    855
    do the huskers dus clear the chain without any mods?

  9. #9
    Heads up Flyboy!!
    Reputation: mountaingoatepics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan GSR View Post
    do the huskers dus clear the chain without any mods?
    Yessir. With the FSA Isis and with a Raceface Turbine they cleared.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan GSR View Post
    a lou in the back forces you to extend the wheel base, which won't handle as well on a trail
    Understood but wouldn't the added float from the larger rear tire be a benefit that would offset the longer wheelbase?
    Honestly curious.

  11. #11
    29er
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    855
    For sand and snow the longer wheelbase will add stability. But for trail riding you want make the chain stays as short as possible. It will corner better

  12. #12
    blood in / blood out
    Reputation: majack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    103
    [QUOTE=lookiel;10088423]Sorry for the slight derail but why is it better to run a Bud front Nate rear than the Bud Lou combo? Wouldn't more float be important in the back than the front? [QUOTE]

    As Dan said, the wheel base gets larger when slamming the dropouts backwards. This is not a good trait for a trail bike to have.

    For the tire combo I told you about, I'm not looking for float from the rear tire. I want that tire to dig for traction while my front tire does the float for my steering. This is the combo I have been running for a couple of weeks now and I feel it is the best of all worlds for my type of riding and terrain that I ride. I had dual Nates before this and when my front tire would drift off the hardpack line, the front Nate would dig down to find traction and not float. This became a big work out so I went to the Bud on the front and all is well now for the front end of my bike.
    RICOH for LIFE
    Chilkoot Cafe & Cyclery

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    57
    Thanks for all the replies. I cannot get back to the shop until thur so I hope it is still there. If I can get it I am just going to ride it as is and hope and pray for at least a little snow this year. I have been riding my mariachi stock for the last year and I love it so I am hoping the muk is the same.

    Read through the FAQ thread but did not see the answer to this fat bike noob question, on tires they all have a tpi number assigned to them, what does this refer to? What is better high or low numbers?

    E. P

  14. #14
    Icebiker
    Reputation: Bugeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    427
    ^^ TPI= threads per inch. Higher TPI, more supple (and to some extent lighter) the tire. Less TPI, sidewalls will be stiffer, but will weigh more. You can also get some of the 120 TPI's with a Kevlar bead, which saves more weight. Good luck with the Muk...Love mine!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    19
    TPI id threads per inch and refers to tire casing construction.
    Higher is more supple, lighter and usually more expensive.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    57
    I was reading the description for the darrells on fatbikes.com last night and noticed that it said specifically that these wheels were not meant for ruff trail riding. Is there any truth to this? When i test rode the bike the wheels felt completly beefcake, no flex, etc... Will i be looking at a wheelset that soon if I get the muk?
    thanks
    e.p.

  17. #17
    blood in / blood out
    Reputation: majack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by ECU-Yukon View Post
    I was reading the description for the darrells on fatbikes.com last night and noticed that it said specifically that these wheels were not meant for ruff trail riding. Is there any truth to this? When i test rode the bike the wheels felt completly beefcake, no flex, etc... Will i be looking at a wheelset that soon if I get the muk?
    thanks
    e.p.
    I have put mine thru the ringer and they are just fine. Yes you can destroy this wheel if it is the right circumstance. But for what most of us will do with this wheel, it is just fine.
    RICOH for LIFE
    Chilkoot Cafe & Cyclery

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mbmattcor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    204
    Based on the conversation here, I'm gonna slam my alternators all the way forward. I have 2013 Muk3 green and it's the most fun I've had on a mtb in my 25 years of riding. It's like I've been waiting for a bike like this for many years and didn't even know it.

    Sidenote, hypothetically, do lower tpi tires' sidewalls hold up better on rocks since there is more rubber and less thread? I might want to keep running my low tpi nates for durability sake.

  19. #19
    Dirt Huffer
    Reputation: AC/BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,460
    Take off the headset spacers and slam the stem against the headset top. I'm convinced that the genius in the long head tube design is so that you donít have to run headset spacers - at least it seems to work well for me.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    6,047
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmattcor View Post
    hypothetically, do lower tpi tires sidewalls hold up better on rocks since there is more rubber and less thread? I might want to keep running my low tpi nates for durability sake.
    from a durability stance yes.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: masterofnone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,130
    To the OP, why not keep the nates on if you'll be riding more dirt (and I'm assuming mud) than snow? I could be wrong but it would seem ultimate snow flotation isn't your main goal here. I have been running the nates really low and they seemed to float pretty well when we had 7+ inches a month ago, and now that most of its gone I'm still stoked on 'em.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    13

    Good job!

    Quote Originally Posted by mbmattcor View Post
    I have 2013 Muk3 green and it's the most fun I've had on a mtb in my 25 years of riding. It's like I've been waiting for a bike like this for many years and didn't even know it.
    Man, that's exactly how I feel. I've never been stoked by a new bike like that before. Can't wait until the snow is gone to hammer it down my favorite trails...

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    161
    I bent my HRD on the first ride descending semi rough trail fast. At 8 psi the ride was great but a rock was able to compress the tire completely and impact the rim. It wasn't bad and the left/right wobble is gone but still a slight hop. I won't let the rims keep me from jumping and pushing the bike however.
    I, too, have a HuDu rear tire with the Nate up front. I don't have anything to compare the HuDu with but it seems pretty good for climbing with weight positioned pretty far back. The beauty of the combo is the way the Nate hooks up and the HuDu doesn't on the down. The rear end will come around real quick on switchbacks...fun!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3
    I really like the idea of bud up front and nate in the back. my only hesitation would be if the lou provided better traction. I'm not hearing that from anyone, however. have fun and ride.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    57
    Thanks for all of the replys! Have not purchased the bike yet, but i am still dying to get my hands on it!
    I was asking about the different tire combos because i just wanted to have the largest tire possible, its an ocd thing with me. I put the largest tires possible on everything i own.
    As for the rim strength i probably wont be running that low of a psi unless i am on snow becuase i am about 220lbs and usually err on the side of higher pressure to avoid pinch flats.
    The Husker DU is definatly in the running since it is a solid 4.0 w and seems to have a more agressive tred.
    I will update as soon as I pick it up!
    E.P

Posting Permissions

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