Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 250
  1. #101
    Mayor of Waterdog
    Reputation: Ol' Bromy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    391
    Have fun with it! Congrats
    “We bring Saturdays” ~ Homme

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Agreed, have fun with it.

    That being said, check your rear dropout alignment and frame alignment... I've been chatting with them about my frame and have yet to have any sort of resolution.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    What is off alignment wise with your frame dbhammercycle?

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    My rear wheel sits perfect between the stays. I am just waiting to get a bluto and new front hub before I transfer everything over

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    My rear wheel sits perfect between the stays. I am just waiting to get a bluto and new front hub before I transfer everything over
    If your rear wheel is good, don't worry about me, get out there and have some fun!

    That said, the rear dropouts are not aligned, the frame alignment tool shows that NDS is a little longer than the DS from the HT to the inside of the dropout, and the DS chainstay has a little less bend and a higher path than the NDS chainstay. I had a reputable LBS look the frame over, not me, and took pics with the alignment tools to show and communicate the issues. The mech, who I have known for years, told me that it might be possible to pull the DS over but that I would be placing extra stress on the hub bearings and axle as well as the frame. The recommendation of the LBS was to inquire about a warranty frame swap. Sent On-one the pics and had a brief conversation in which I asked them if I needed to measure something specifically, if the frame was within tolerances or if they had any other suggestions. They told me they would pick it up June 7th, their offer not my suggestion, I packed it up and took the morning off work to wait for the pickup which never happened. Since then I've had some minimal communication with them, they said they were talking to the manufacturer and that was 2 weeks ago. Honestly, I don't understand why they would need to consult the manufacturer since my assumption is that this frame was their design and they should have the schematics and tolerance allowances somewhere on hand. So, I'm in limbo as I wait to hear anything from them. Their answer could be any of the following: the frame is not aligned and we'll get you one that is and sorry for the trouble, the frame is not great but within spec so let us know if you have issues with the rear hub or if the frame cracks, or muck off you toad. I've had the frame for quite a while now and am anxious for any answer.

    That said, get out there and ride, because I would do the same.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    How did you notice it was out of alignment

  7. #107
    Why so uptite?
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    How did you notice it was out of alignment
    This is a good article to read. Many of us were mechanics when we were younger and own the tools. If you can find a 'good' shop they will have the tools, but you need to find someone that knows how to use them...

    Frame Alignment | Park Tool
    Collection of fun carbon & titanium bikes

    @tgi_cycling

    .

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    How did you notice it was out of alignment
    I noticed the difference in the chainstays when inspecting the frame after delivery and then went to the LBS to check further. If the dropouts were aligned, it would have been built by now. Just playing the waiting game atm, thankfully I have other wheels to keep me occupied.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    I guess that is good for me. I have looked it over pretty closely and it looks spot on. I building it up this weekend with the on one carbon fork

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    13

    Should I get one of these frames?

    Hi,

    I keep seeing the on-one fatty trail frames going so cheap I feel I need to get one.

    I have tried to exact info from on-one but the customer service is a bit slack (I have had numerous dealings with them they should really sort out there staff). But there are a couple things I would like to ask you guys, the actual users of this frame.

    1. Does the rear skewer keep slipping like the on-one fatty. I had a V2 I really liked the bike but slipping was very annoying. I tried al sorts of things in the end I would use a ring spanner to get it tight, but it would still loosen after 3 rides. So I gave the bike to my brother.

    2. Is the seatpost really 30.9mm? On-one staff can't seem to tell what it is.

    Thanks for your time

    Jono

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    It is really a 30.9 seatpost, but I haven't finished building it so I can't speak to the rear skewer loosening

  12. #112
    Mayor of Waterdog
    Reputation: Ol' Bromy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by LurkerJono View Post
    Hi,

    I keep seeing the on-one fatty trail frames going so cheap I feel I need to get one.

    I have tried to exact info from on-one but the customer service is a bit slack (I have had numerous dealings with them they should really sort out there staff). But there are a couple things I would like to ask you guys, the actual users of this frame.

    1. Does the rear skewer keep slipping like the on-one fatty. I had a V2 I really liked the bike but slipping was very annoying. I tried al sorts of things in the end I would use a ring spanner to get it tight, but it would still loosen after 3 rides. So I gave the bike to my brother.

    2. Is the seatpost really 30.9mm? On-one staff can't seem to tell what it is.

    Thanks for your time

    Jono
    The threaded end cap on the drive side of the V2 rear hub is what causes the rear wheel loosening. Not sure if the hubs that come on the Trail's wheelset are also made by Chosen, but if so, the end cap needs locktite to keep everything tight.
    “We bring Saturdays” ~ Homme

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    16
    I literally just picked up my Large Fatty Trail frame, I am so excited to start building it. What are you guys using for wheelsets and headset?

    So far I am going to purchase:

    Bottombracket: Truvativ GXP Team 100
    Crankset: SRAM GX1000 170mm arm length
    Rear Derailleur: SRAM GX 1x11 x-horizon
    Trigger: SRAM GX 11-speed
    Casette: SRAM XG-1150
    Fork: RockShox Bluto RL Solo Air OneLoc Fatbike Fork 120mm Tapered MaxleLite15 2016

    This is pretty much as far as I have gotten.
    Do you have any recommendations or changes?

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    I have a RF Turbine crankset, 175mm crank length for a 170mm rear wheel. RF Turbine seatpost, Promax seatpost clamp w/ guide for sus post (if I go for a hydraulic seatpost later), Nukeproof hbar, Funn Tron stem, ODI Rogue grips, FSA C-40 IS42/ IS52 headset (would prefer CC 40 but price was too good), Shimano FD, RD and shifters, Sram PG990 cassette 11-36 and chain, On-one floater tires and a carbon fork with 485mm a-c to start. I picked out some yellow housing, but the yellow doesn't quite match so I may go back to black. I have a rear wheel picked out that has a Novatec D102SB hub with a 10mm axle instead of QR. Going either 9 or 10 spd, not sure if I want to go 10 and have 9 spd parts in the bin so trying that first. The parts you picked should be good ones, the gx line is bit more affordable but should be quality, I've seen it on 2K+ builds. Have fun with your build!

    If you have a large frame, my assumption is that you would want longer crank arms... unless this will get nothing but downhill duty.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Here is my build. Finished itlast night. Ride it around the driveway. It feels great. I will get it out on the trails this weekend. It weighed in at 32 lbs 5 oz.

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    Here is my build. Finished itlast night. Ride it around the driveway. It feels great. I will get it out on the trails this weekend. It weighed in at 32 lbs 5 oz.
    I am currently working on my build for one of these also! Do you mind sharing your spec list?

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by LeAstrale View Post
    I am currently working on my build for one of these also! Do you mind sharing your spec list?
    Sure.
    Surly rolling darryl rims custom drilled
    DT Swiss competition spokes
    Sarma rear hub
    DT Swiss front hub
    Sram X5 cranks with race face 32 tooth narrow wide ring and custom spacers to correct chainline.
    Sram bb7 brakes 200mm front disk 180mm rear
    Sunrace 11-42 10 speed cassette
    On one twelfy seat post
    On one 50mm stem
    Azonic world force riser bars
    Sram X9 rear derailleur
    Sram X7 shifter
    On one lock on grips
    WTB Volt saddle
    45nrth Vanhelga tires with bontrager 2.8 tubes
    Rockshox 120mm Bluto
    FSA headset
    VP pedals

    This bike is so much fun. I have been out twice this weekend. I really like how it handles.

  18. #118
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Novatec D102SB hub with a 10mm axle instead of QR.
    Donde?

    I can only find that hub in 36h
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  19. #119
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    BTW: I just emailed Carver about these hubs...

    Bikeman Carver Bikes Fat Bike Rear Hub, 170mm Thru Axle

    Bikeman shows 170QR, 170Thru and 177x12... hopefully the 170Thru is a 10mm thru axle that simply 'sits' in the drop outs.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    The listings I've seen recently for that Novatec hub alone have been 36 hole, so the difficulty is finding the rim. There are still a couple of listings out there for a full wheel with the 32 hole. Fatback import hubs have a 170 thru axle, but I don't know about availability. Unfortunately you have to buy them as a set (170,135) but the price is good. Hope rear is possible but have to get the right endcaps and find a thru axle. Novatec axles sell as a set on Amazon, Fatback doesn't sell the axle individually afaik, both 170,135. I have seen a listing for the Novatec rear axle on alone on fleabay. Another option is to have an axle made simply, with either nuts or bolts to secure it to the frame. Supposedly, the Salsa/Formula? convertible hub is 177/12 that just replaces the endcaps for QR. So another possibility might be to drill out the QR endcaps for 10mm or cut/file down the extra 3.5mm 177 endcaps to use a 12-10mm conversion axle and use a QR skewer. I honestly wouldn't recommend the last suggestion.

    Thanks for the suggestion about Carver, hadn't considered it before.

    Good luck!
    Last edited by dbhammercycle; 08-14-2016 at 06:27 AM. Reason: spelling error
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  21. #121
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Wow, Carver responded quick! (and on a saturday)

    No dice on the 170x10 thru :/
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    3
    K


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  23. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    374
    The GEO chart for the Trail Fatty lists a BB drop of 35mm. This seems really high in comparison to most fatbikes that have drops in the range of 55mm to 65mm.

    Can someone with a Trail Fatty confirm the BB drop? I'm wondering if it is a missprint and should have been 53mm.

  24. #124
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    Here is my build. Finished itlast night. Ride it around the driveway. It feels great. I will get it out on the trails this weekend. It weighed in at 32 lbs 5 oz.
    Where'd you find the yellow rim strips? I found blue, but after seeing yours, I like the yellow flair!
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Where'd you find the yellow rim strips? I found blue, but after seeing yours, I like the yellow flair!
    They came with my motobecane Boris X9 as a spare. You might want to check with bikesdirect

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    16
    So I finally finished my fatbike build, took a few months.
    I will provide a picture once its daylight and cleaned!

    My build is like this:
    Wheels:
    Halo Tundra Fatbike rims
    Hope Pro 4 Fatsno Front Hub
    Hope Pro 2 Evo Fatsno rear hub
    DT Swiss spokes & DT Swiss brass nipples pro-lock
    Kenda Red rimtape
    Kenda Fatbike tube (proved to be a huge mistake at 580g each)
    Schwalbe 26x3.0" Freeride tube (180g each - a lot better)
    Kenda Juggernaut Pro 4" (850g each)

    Frame Accessory
    Shimano OT-SP41 shifting housing (if this is not what you're using you should consider upgrading it immediately)
    Sixpack menace 725 Riser Bar (Nugget Gold)
    Sixpack Menace Seatclamp (Nugget gold)
    Sixpack menace seatpost (nugget gold)
    Rockshox Bluto RL 120mm
    ESI Chunky grips (Blue)
    Shimano Combi SPD M324
    Token 60mm Stem (considering shorter soon)
    Hope 170mm QR (Blue - almost matches frame)

    Gear
    SRAM GX1 group:
    SRAM PC-1130 chain
    SRAM GX Casette XG-1150 10-42t
    SRAM GX Rear Derailleur 1x11 Type 2
    SRAM GX 11spd trigger

    Brakes
    SRAM DB5 calipers
    Avid HS1 discs (160mm and 180mm)
    Shimano SM-MA PM-to-PM adaptor (for 180mm front disc)

    Overall I am very satisfied with the bike even though it got more expensive than I had Initially planned. It looks sweet with the Nugget Gold colored parts, now I just need to find yellow rim strips or perhaps try a true tubeless on the Halo rims (even though internet says its really hard)

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    Here is my build. Finished itlast night. Ride it around the driveway. It feels great. I will get it out on the trails this weekend. It weighed in at 32 lbs 5 oz.
    Very nice looking! I just finished building and mine ended up on 14.2 kg but my guess is a difference in the weight of the tires.
    Any suggestions to where I can find the yellow Rim tape?

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by LeAstrale View Post
    Very nice looking! I just finished building and mine ended up on 14.2 kg but my guess is a difference in the weight of the tires.
    Any suggestions to where I can find the yellow Rim tape?
    I got mine with a motobecane Boris x9. Otherwise you can get yellow reflective ones from fatty stripper.

    http://fattystripper.com

  29. #129
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Quote Originally Posted by LeAstrale View Post
    So I finally finished my fatbike build, took a few months.
    I will provide a picture once its daylight and cleaned!
    Pics or it didn't happen!


    Quote Originally Posted by LeAstrale View Post
    Overall I am very satisfied with the bike even though it got more expensive than I had Initially planned. It looks sweet with the Nugget Gold colored parts, now I just need to find yellow rim strips or perhaps try a true tubeless on the Halo rims (even though internet says its really hard)
    Mind me asking ballpark what your build came in at, price wise? It seems you did a great job of buying high value, lower cost components.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,655
    What is the correct headset size to mate with the On One Carbon Fork?

    I just got a Fatty V2 which I think is the same headtube as a Fatty trail. I believe it is 1 1/8 upper and 1.5" lower but the steerer tube of the carbon fork is straight not tapered.

    Any recommendation of part number in a Cane Creek 40 would be appreciated.
    thanks

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blowery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinearl View Post
    What is the correct headset size to mate with the On One Carbon Fork?

    I just got a Fatty V2 which I think is the same headtube as a Fatty trail. I believe it is 1 1/8 upper and 1.5" lower but the steerer tube of the carbon fork is straight not tapered.

    Any recommendation of part number in a Cane Creek 40 would be appreciated.
    thanks
    I run a lefty and it has a 1 1/8" steerer as well. I use the Cane Creek 44ZS/49EC.

    Cane Creek 40 ZS44 EC49 Headset > Components > Headsets > Complete Headsets | Jenson USA

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    On-One Fatty trail-imag0878.jpg

    Some progress is better than no progress. I have to remove a small amount of material from the rims, there's a barb at the spot where the valve stem hole was drilled in the rim. The 10mm thru axle on the rear hub fits very tightly, kinda snaps in place and took some paint with it when I removed the rear wheel. I may sand off a little paint, maybe. The fork looks pretty good, but time will tell how much abuse the cheap carbon will handle. Hopefully as long as a MN winter, or several. I also decided that the blue seatpost clamp really didn't match so I got a black Ragley one. I was also made aware that the Funn Tron stem may or may not be ok for a carbon fork. It is chamfered so I assumed it would be fine, but my LBS guru is trying to confirm via email. I had the LBS cut the steerer and check out the fork since I have no real experience with carbon. I'm anxious to feel the difference between the Fatty T and the MN 2.2 that I rode last year. Anyway, should be a blast to ride once I can finish the build.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    276
    Looking great!!

    Are those Alex Blizzerk wheels? So these come with 10mm thru axle and should fit original Fatty if it fits Fatty trail, correct?
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3
    2016 Norco Sasquatch 6.1

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Yes, they are the Blizzerk 80 rims with the Novatec D102SB 170*10mm rear hub and a Formula 150*15mm front. I got the pinned rims instead of the welded rims to save some money for this inital build but would like to upgrade to a tubeless rim in the future. So, to answer your question the rear hub should fit the original Fatty.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    276
    There are two versions I believe, regular and PRO. Do you know by a chance if the PRO is tubeless ready or what are actually the differences between the two? I take it you have the regular then?
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3
    2016 Norco Sasquatch 6.1

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    The "regular" is a pinned rim, the Pro is a welded rim. Neither is technically a tubeless ready rim, but I'm sure that someone has done the split tube method with them. I would like to eventually get a a Mulefat or the Surly MOBD tubeless rims. I bought the wheels because I wanted the 10mm axle and because I like to run the same rim front and back. Maybe someday I'll find another 170*10 hub, but there really isn't much out there. Also, the industry is going to 177*12 or 190/197*12mm axles, so the likelihood of finding that hub or just the skewer is more and more unlikely for the future.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBLoCo29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    The "regular" is a pinned rim, the Pro is a welded rim. Neither is technically a tubeless ready rim, but I'm sure that someone has done the split tube method with them. I would like to eventually get a a Mulefat or the Surly MOBD tubeless rims. I bought the wheels because I wanted the 10mm axle and because I like to run the same rim front and back. Maybe someday I'll find another 170*10 hub, but there really isn't much out there. Also, the industry is going to 177*12 or 190/197*12mm axles, so the likelihood of finding that hub or just the skewer is more and more unlikely for the future.
    I have the Novatecs front and rear on Mulefuts. What's cool about the Novatecs is that you can swap endcaps and axles to TA. Very happy with them so far.

    On-One Fatty trail-12294711_10207196311333474_5665976584991029710_n.jpg
    On heavy rotation: Stooge 27.5+ SS, On-One Fatty, On-One 456 EVO, Surly Cross-Check, Scott CR1 (SS road)

  38. #138
    Norðwegr
    Reputation: Vegard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,584
    The complete mulefuts are actually getting good reviews: Sun Ringle Mulefüt

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBLoCo29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegard View Post
    The complete mulefuts are actually getting good reviews: Sun Ringle Mulefüt
    Had mine for over a year, no issues to report.
    On heavy rotation: Stooge 27.5+ SS, On-One Fatty, On-One 456 EVO, Surly Cross-Check, Scott CR1 (SS road)

  40. #140
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    The fork looks pretty good, but time will tell how much abuse the cheap carbon will handle. Hopefully as long as a MN winter, or several.
    Cheap, chinese carbon fork? Been looking at the ICAN 150mm 485mm a2c fork that can be found on Amazon or Fleabay
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  41. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Cheap, chinese carbon fork? Been looking at the ICAN 150mm 485mm a2c fork that can be found on Amazon or Fleabay
    Yes, carbon cycle on ebay, straight from china. They also said they would paint for 50 more, but I think I'll do that locally so I can hopefully get the best match. I got the axle from them too. It's not the most impressive axle, but it'll do. They appear to have good ebay ratings, 2 outside party testers, max weight well above my own mass, and a warranty. Tried to get a used alu RM Blizzard fork but that fell through. The options are limited and I chose the seller I had the best communication with and had good seller ratings amongst the carbon options out there. The Ican forks look reasonable as well. If you go that option I'd be interested to read your opinion.

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    276
    RSD Mayor carbon fork may work ok too for the Fatty Trail with 490mm a2c, but don't know what is the offset on this one. Alternatively, maybe even for the original Fatty, although that would be 490mm a2c vs stock 470mm a2c and maybe that is a bit much, or...?

    RSD 490mm Carbon Fork - RSD
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3
    2016 Norco Sasquatch 6.1

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Good fork, but for the cost I could have gotten the Bluto used, which I still can't afford at the moment. Need to sell some more bike parts, or a bike... Still, a very nice lookin' fork.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    276
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Good fork, but for the cost I could have gotten the Bluto used, which I still can't afford at the moment. Need to sell some more bike parts, or a bike... Still, a very nice lookin' fork.
    Thinking about one of these (take off from new bike, so under msrp)

    RSD is: 490mm a2c, 15x150 and 51mm offset. I hope it is close enough to Fatty fork to not negatively affect ride and geo. (470 a2c, 55 offset stock) I guess it would be a better fit for Trail than orig Fatty.
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3
    2016 Norco Sasquatch 6.1

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by kryten View Post
    Thinking about one of these (take off from new bike, so under msrp)

    RSD is: 490mm a2c, 15x150 and 51mm offset. I hope it is close enough to Fatty fork to not negatively affect ride and geo. (470 a2c, 55 offset stock) I guess it would be a better fit for Trail than orig Fatty.
    Those numbers are the same for the alu RMB Blizzard fork I tried to get before it fell through... after I paid for it and waited a month for delivery. Anyway, I think it would suit the Fatty Trail better than the OG Fatty, but it should only slack the head angle by a degree so it could work, the fatty trail would steepen about a degree. The 485/490mm is sus corrected for 100mm travel I believe. Also, with less offset the wheelbase may not elongate much either.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  46. #146
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Steel ICT fork or chinese carbon?

    Both are: 150mm t/a, 483-485mm a2c and around the same price all said and done

    Thoughts?
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    276
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBLoCo29 View Post
    I have the Novatecs front and rear on Mulefuts. What's cool about the Novatecs is that you can swap endcaps and axles to TA. Very happy with them so far.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	12294711_10207196311333474_5665976584991029710_n.jpg 
Views:	523 
Size:	165.2 KB 
ID:	1097073
    Interesting, curious about your setup with the Novatec hubs. Since you have Fatty carbon fork, you must be using rear spaced 135mm x 9mm hub. So is this convertible to 150mm x 15mm to support Bluto?
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3
    2016 Norco Sasquatch 6.1

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Steel ICT fork or chinese carbon?

    Both are: 150mm t/a, 483-485mm a2c and around the same price all said and done

    Thoughts?
    Well, you already know what I picked. I dismissed the ICT since it was steel, but it is certainly a nice fork. I saw a listing on ebay for a purple 907 fork that would work, but I couldn't reconcile the purple with a yellow handlebar. Yes, I recognize that I am in MN and the football team colors are purple and gold. It just didn't synch for the picture in my mind of the finished bike. Anyway, the RMB Blizzard fork would work but I don't believe they sell aftermarket. I think the 907 fork is available to be purchased separately.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by kryten View Post
    Interesting, curious about your setup with the Novatec hubs. Since you have Fatty carbon fork, you must be using rear spaced 135mm x 9mm hub. So is this convertible to 150mm x 15mm to support Bluto?
    I don't believe the hub is convertible to 150*15.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  50. #150
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Thanks for your thoughts. I went with the carbon fork.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    On-One Fatty trail-imag0892.jpg

    Waiting on cables. Tires seated nicely on the rims. All black wheels look pretty badass, I wasn't sure if I would like them as I tend to like a little color for contrast. Reach is certainly better than the MN 2.2, but there's no real surprise there considering the difference in the ETT. I'm getting anxious to throw a leg over and get it muddy before the snow.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  52. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blowery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    249
    looks good. Curious to see how your framed tires wear. Mine have worn pretty quickly and have always leaked stans through the sides. They seal up nice and hold for many months before I need to top off again, but the seeping is a little annoying.

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by blowery View Post
    looks good. Curious to see how your framed tires wear. Mine have worn pretty quickly and have always leaked stans through the sides. They seal up nice and hold for many months before I need to top off again, but the seeping is a little annoying.
    Thanks, it's been too long to sort it all out but I'm glad for the progress. I've got a couple months riding on those tires from the MN, perhaps a couple hundred miles total on the trail and snow with very little road miles and they don't have much wear as a result. That said, the rubber is grippy so I expect they would wear quickly. I have a pair of On-one white Floaters that I thought would go better with the white'n'blue MN 2.2. Part of me wants to attempt a magic gear SS and get out there, but the other wheels will sit over the winter so I'm gonna stay skinny for the moment.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  54. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMAG0892.jpg 
Views:	576 
Size:	100.7 KB 
ID:	1099055

    Waiting on cables. Tires seated nicely on the rims. All black wheels look pretty badass, I wasn't sure if I would like them as I tend to like a little color for contrast. Reach is certainly better than the MN 2.2, but there's no real surprise there considering the difference in the ETT. I'm getting anxious to throw a leg over and get it muddy before the snow.
    Looks great. Any chance you could measure the BB height with the rigid fork? I'm thinking about building a similar bike and am wondering what the shorter fork does to the GEO.

  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by BobShort View Post
    Looks great. Any chance you could measure the BB height with the rigid fork? I'm thinking about building a similar bike and am wondering what the shorter fork does to the GEO.
    Hey there Bob, I measured the BB at approximately 12.5" (317.5mm). I would have posted a pic but the garage at night has terrible light and they didn't turn out very well. I did get the cables and housing so I'll post a pic with a ruler, once I have everything put together, for you. It looks pretty tall in the pic, it's the same for my B'ed MUSS actually. I'd be curious to see what is with 650b+, probably even taller with 700c+.

    Sorry guys, I know, it's 29+. It just bugs me that we bikers can't get along and use terminology as a tool of passive aggression. Probably just my mood this morning.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    On-One Fatty trail-imag0896.jpgOn-One Fatty trail-imag0898.jpg
    Well, not the best pics, but hopefully carry the point. The ruler is in the frame for the BB height question I responded to earlier, keep in mind the driveway slants away from the garage so that needs to be taken into account when looking at the height. I measured 12.5" previously on the flat garage floor. Also, you can see there is plenty of room for a bigger tire in the fork in the 2nd pic. I promise these will be the last pics I post, unless I retake them, in which case I'll swap them out instead of posting anew.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  57. #157
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    12.5" is actually surprisingly tall for a rigid fatty

    My Surly Instigator 2.0 is ~ 12.5 before sag and that's with a 25mm longer fork (a2c) than what it was designed around
    Last edited by 06HokieMTB; 10-13-2016 at 02:03 PM.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    I agree, my b'd MUSS is the same as well. I'm certainly not worried about pedal strikes. I suppose there will be some compression of the tires at low pressure that will lower the BB a little, but not that much. Maybe I should try another ruler...
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  59. #159
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Kinda makes me wonder if we should've used 460mm a2c carbon forks (say, On one Fatty) instead of 483mm...

    Also, makes me wonder if the fatty trail was originally designed with a shorter fork and then was "over forked" for a more Trail attitude?
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  60. #160
    #THELEGEND
    Reputation: Guy.Ford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,450
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    12.5" is actually surprisingly tall for a rigid fatty

    My Surly Instigator 2.0 is ~ 12.5 before sag and that's with a 2m longer fork (a2c) than what it was designed around
    Maybe, kind of, sort of, depends, if you look at the 2017 Salsa Mukluk, Surly ICT/Wednesday or the RSD Mayor, all have a BB @ 12.5, doesnt seem that far off at all really. I guess given the 4" tires it would suggest possibly it's a little tall considering the Salsa Beargrease, also only able to fit 4" tires, has a BB @ 12" .
    #THELEGEND
    2016 RSD Mayor

  61. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Kinda makes me wonder if we should've used 460mm a2c carbon forks (say, On one Fatty) instead of 483mm...

    Also, makes me wonder if the fatty trail was originally designed with a shorter fork and then was "over forked" for a more Trail attitude?
    The bike doesn't look to me like the front end is too high. I'm not worried about it, but the proof will be in the ridin'. As far as the original design of the FT utilizing a shorter fork... who knows?
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  62. #162
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Pedal'd it yet?
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  63. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Of course!





    Oh, you probably want me to elaborate. I took it out last week for a little city riding and this past Saturday for about a 10 mile ride with a little non-maintained pump track action for another 1/2 hr maybe. It rode well but I need to remember to put a little blue locktite on the front axle. I got a couple looks followed by a thumb's up from a lovely looking lady on a cyclo-cross Scott, couldn't keep up with her though. On the pump track it's a bit long for some of the tight turns, but I think I can do a better job of anticipating the turn and start early. The bars are a little wider so I scraped up my hands a little, but some brush clearing is the answer there. I was smiling certainly. I do have some chain rub in the low-low where the chain is below the stay. I'm hoping a derailleur adjustment is all that is needed, but wonder if a traditional RD would solve it if I can't make the Shadow work. The chain clears above the stay just fine, I'm running a 2x9. I had a good time and intend on more good times.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  64. #164
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    slowly piecing the build together. I picked up a Vee Bulldozer 4.7 for the rear and a Bud 4.8 for the front. Mulefut 80SL rims. Everything I read says the Bulldozer is about the same size as a 4.6 GC and 4.6 Dunderbeist, which both have been shown to fit this frame.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  65. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    I think you will be fine as a 1x, I'm just running it with an FD since it has the block. I haven't decided if it's worth sawing off yet. ;P
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  66. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Kinda makes me wonder if we should've used 460mm a2c carbon forks (say, On one Fatty) instead of 483mm...

    Also, makes me wonder if the fatty trail was originally designed with a shorter fork and then was "over forked" for a more Trail attitude?
    I mocked mine up with the On One Fatty carbon fork. It was way too low in the front. It sits much better with the 120mm bluto. The bottom bracket height does not seem tall at all when riding. I haven't measured it though. I have had this bike built up for a while now and it rides great. I have ridden anything from easy single track to our local bike park downhill runs. Handles everything well.

  67. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    I mocked mine up with the On One Fatty carbon fork. It was way too low in the front. It sits much better with the 120mm bluto. The bottom bracket height does not seem tall at all when riding. I haven't measured it though. I have had this bike built up for a while now and it rides great. I have ridden anything from easy single track to our local bike park downhill runs. Handles everything well.
    I've been watching this thread for awhile. I have a V1 with cracked frame that I'm in the process of transferring parts over to my fatty trail frame. Anyway I have the on one carbon straight steer fork and was wondering what headset you used on your build?. Also seat post 31.6? Thanks

  68. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by dezzrat1 View Post
    I've been watching this thread for awhile. I have a V1 with cracked frame that I'm in the process of transferring parts over to my fatty trail frame. Anyway I have the on one carbon straight steer fork and was wondering what headset you used on your build?. Also seat post 31.6? Thanks
    I used a fsa c40 with 1.5 to 1.125 headset lower cup when I mocked it up. I didn't like it so I went right to the bluto. The seatpost is a 30.9.

  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    45
    Cool thanks for the reply

  70. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    374
    Built but not ridden. BB drop with 483mm fork is ~53mm. HA is 69.5 deg. STA is 74 deg. WB is 1170mm (size large). Frame weight (no headset or seat collar) is 2127 grams.

    Clearance in the rear is good enough for a Ground Control 4.6 but no bigger.

    Frame is a bit flexier in the rear compared to my old 2012 Mukluk.

    Nothing else to report until ridden.

    On-One Fatty trail-imag1894.jpg

  71. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    What is that fork? Looks good, and you have some anything cage mounts too!

    I really liked this color scheme and had originally planned for this color, picked out an orange Funn Fatboy bar too. Unfortunately, at the time I could order the frame only the blue was left. How is the paint? The blue is quite chippy and I already have cable rub marks on the head tube after only a few hours of riding.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  72. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    What is that fork? Looks good, and you have some anything cage mounts too!

    I really liked this color scheme and had originally planned for this color, picked out an orange Funn Fatboy bar too. Unfortunately, at the time I could order the frame only the blue was left. How is the paint? The blue is quite chippy and I already have cable rub marks on the head tube after only a few hours of riding.
    Fork is a Salsa bearpaw fork. I found someone with a brand new post-recall replacement they were selling cheap.

    Paint looks good but durability TBD.

  73. #173
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Just swapped the frame from a first gen. Fatty. Feels good so far, though need to tweak fit a bit. Only around the drive/yard so far. Should get it out on trail in a few days.







    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,603
    Who's bought a complete Fatty Trail in the US recently - do you get hit with any extra VAT charges - or does the cost of the bike plus shipping cover all the $$ you need to shell out to get one?

  75. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    276
    Frame is on sale for $99.38 again looks like in both colors.
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3
    2016 Norco Sasquatch 6.1

  76. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    That's lovely scrub. The blue Hopes look nice. Are those 65mm rims?

    @MMcG I'm not sure you can get a complete in the States since they closed the Cali warehouse. You may want to ask On-one directly.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  77. #177
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    That's lovely scrub. The blue Hopes look nice. Are those 65mm rims?

    @MMcG I'm not sure you can get a complete in the States since they closed the Cali warehouse. You may want to ask On-one directly.
    Yep, Marge Lites. Could go a bit wider, don't really need or want to though.

    This size/tire combo works pretty well for me. Tends to see more dirt than snow.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  78. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SundayRiverRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    153
    So, a 4.6 will fit in the rear of these? I have a Bluto 120 and another bike I could swap a bunch of parts from and put it on one of these.

    I think a set of 4.6's would work fine for most of the snow riding i do, and I could always drop down to 4's in the summer I guess.

    Thinking about ordering one of these today.

  79. #179
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Quote Originally Posted by SundayRiverRider View Post
    So, a 4.6 will fit in the rear of these? I have a Bluto 120 and another bike I could swap a bunch of parts from and put it on one of these.

    I think a set of 4.6's would work fine for most of the snow riding i do, and I could always drop down to 4's in the summer I guess.

    Thinking about ordering one of these today.
    yesnomaybe.

    Floater on a 65mm rim fits with plenty of room, but I eyeballed the front wheel Bud 4.8/Marge Lite combo on the back and it's a no-go.

    Some sort of slightly smaller combo may be OK, but idunnomantryitandsee.

    But hell, at $100 for the frame, it's a cheap experiment. I feel it's certainly an improvement over the original Fatty Anything else I guess depends on what you are coming from/comparing to. If you are wanting it for mucho snow use (up in ME) then it may not suit the best.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  80. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    I feel it's certainly an improvement over the original Fatty
    would you elaborate? i'm in the market for a fatbike but can't stand the look of the large frame. i was actually considering buying a complete and an OG fatty v2 frame, dropping the fork to 100mm of travel and swapping everything over...

  81. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blowery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    But hell, at $100 for the frame, it's a cheap experiment. I feel it's certainly an improvement over the original Fatty Anything else I guess depends on what you are coming from/comparing to. If you are wanting it for mucho snow use (up in ME) then it may not suit the best.
    Curious too as to why you feel it's an improvement over the original fatty? (thats not a snarky question, actually just curious)

  82. #182
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Quote Originally Posted by blowery View Post
    Curious too as to why you feel it's an improvement over the original fatty? (thats not a snarky question, actually just curious)
    Quote Originally Posted by boomforeal View Post
    would you elaborate? i'm in the market for a fatbike but can't stand the look of the large frame. i was actually considering buying a complete and an OG fatty v2 frame, dropping the fork to 100mm of travel and swapping everything over...
    Will get back to you two in a day or so. Have had one decent ride, want to get another in before making more sweeping statements.

    Obviously "better" is a nebulous and possibly myopic statement. YMMV.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  83. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Pics or it didn't happen!




    Mind me asking ballpark what your build came in at, price wise? It seems you did a great job of buying high value, lower cost components.
    I am sorry about the late reply but here goes
    I have only a scenic pic from when I finished putting all the parts together and then this picture from my very first ride (I have yet to start filming my rides also)On-One Fatty trail-img_20160901_225957.jpgOn-One Fatty trail-img_20160902_072934.jpg
    The build ended in approx 2500 USD but we have 25% VAT so that accounts for some of it.
    It rides very well when its dry, but the Kenda Juggernaut Pro 26x4.00 isn't worth anything in mud, so I am currently waiting for some Specialized Ground Control 26x4.00 and a set of On-One Floaters 26x4.00 so i should be set for the muddy winter in Northern Europe.

    tbh. the bike ordered completely from on-one with all components is still a lot cheaper than my build ended up being, and I am torn between options if I would have built it from frame up if I was going to do it again.

    In the meantime between building the fatbike and and researching parts I almost ended up selling my regular Trek 8500 (2011) MTB, so soon its fatbike only!

  84. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    16
    Love the yellow bar! (Couldn't find proper yellow parts to match the logo for my bike, so I went with Orange instead)

  85. #185
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Fatty Trail vs original Fatty

    Longer WB, front end, and stays. Motors along once up to speed better, IMO, due mostly to those changes. And the HTA.

    Doesn't seem to have lost much, if anything, on tight twisty or low speed tech bits.

    Same setup as on the original frame but for the different headset.

    Only thing "off" was longer front end and reach. Just a hair longer and taller on the front end than I'd really like. Solved by going to a Syntace 44mms Flatforce stem to get the bar where I really prefer. More or less same spot as my other bikes.

    Obviously these are just my preferences for where and how I ride though. Grain of salt, etc. Overall better geo for more trail oriented riding over snow I feel. Should still be ok there though.
    Highly variable I suppose depending one what sort of winters one may have. Our snow sport's sucks for riding most years, but we get lots of iced over trail and super slick leaves. Not enough to where I'd want studded tires, but will take fatties at low psi. I don't think it'll be bad in snow by any means, but that wasn't my main priority for the bike.

    Any specific questions, will try to answer. Built up nice and smoothly, no issues.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  86. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    115
    Do you think a 4.8 maxxis minion will fit that on one fatty carbon fork? Thank you

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by StevePodraza View Post
    Do you think a 4.8 maxxis minion will fit that on one fatty carbon fork? Thank you
    This question may not be answered well here considering the Fatty Trail is designed around the 120mm Bluto or a rigid fork with an A-C length of about 500. I don't think many of us have installed or tried the On-One Fatty carbon fatty fork with this frame. You may want to consider asking in the Fatty forum or doing an exhaustive google search.

    I've seen that Guitar Ted has fit the Surly Bud in the fork, perhaps start there with the search. I honestly don't know how that tire compares with the Minion, but that may be another searchable google adventure.

    Good luck!
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  88. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    230
    What size is this bike & could you tell me what the measurment of the top tube right where the stick is in the pic?

  89. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    Fatty Trail vs original Fatty

    Longer WB, front end, and stays. Motors along once up to speed better, IMO, due mostly to those changes. And the HTA.

    Doesn't seem to have lost much, if anything, on tight twisty or low speed tech bits.

    Same setup as on the original frame but for the different headset.

    Only thing "off" was longer front end and reach. Just a hair longer and taller on the front end than I'd really like. Solved by going to a Syntace 44mms Flatforce stem to get the bar where I really prefer. More or less same spot as my other bikes.

    Obviously these are just my preferences for where and how I ride though. Grain of salt, etc. Overall better geo for more trail oriented riding over snow I feel. Should still be ok there though.
    Highly variable I suppose depending one what sort of winters one may have. Our snow sport's sucks for riding most years, but we get lots of iced over trail and super slick leaves. Not enough to where I'd want studded tires, but will take fatties at low psi. I don't think it'll be bad in snow by any means, but that wasn't my main priority for the bike.

    Any specific questions, will try to answer. Built up nice and smoothly, no issues.
    thanks scrubsy. i ended up ordering both a complete trail and a v2 frame to swap the parts over to. everything you said makes me feel okay with this decision: the trails where i've recently moved are mostly of the tight and twisty variety, so the v2 should be a good fit

    i couldn't tell if the headset would swap over but it sounds like not - what kind of headset does the fatty v2 take? info on the website is hard to parse

  90. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by synnie View Post
    What size is this bike & could you tell me what the measurment of the top tube right where the stick is in the pic?
    I'm going to assume the question is directed at me. I looked at my original picture and the the yard stick is 28.25in or approximately 719mm at the top of the tube where the measuring stick is leaning. It is probably appropriate to subtract roughly 1/2 in or approximately 12.5m from those figures given the driveway slants away from the bike. If it helps further, I'm about 5'11" with about a 32" inseam from floor to crotch and the frame is a med. 18". Where I stand over the bike, in front of the bend, I still have some room in case of a hard dismount.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  91. #191
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Quote Originally Posted by boomforeal View Post
    thanks scrubsy. i ended up ordering both a complete trail and a v2 frame to swap the parts over to. everything you said makes me feel okay with this decision: the trails where i've recently moved are mostly of the tight and twisty variety, so the v2 should be a good fit

    i couldn't tell if the headset would swap over but it sounds like not - what kind of headset does the fatty v2 take? info on the website is hard to parse
    44mms upper 49mms lower.

    Bearing only, no cups. Bearings out of a Cane Creek unit I had kicking about popped right in. No issues so far.

    Wasn't sure either. Figured to order what was needed if none of my spare part box stuff would fit.

    Bearings from the stock complete v1 headset pulled from the cups *ought* to work.

    Built my v1 from frame up though. No stock headset to look at to be sure for you.

    To be fair, the v1 rides and handles pretty well. I just feel the v2 is a smidge better, particularly if meant more for general trail hoolganery than just snow.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  92. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    230
    I am about to order the On One Fatty Trail complete bike, are there any problems setting up the wheels tubeless, & any more issues or updates on the rear QR coming loose?

  93. #193
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    44mms upper 49mms lower.
    It's an Integrated stack headset. Thought it was an IS42/52?
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  94. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    It's an Integrated stack headset. Thought it was an IS42/52?
    I think he was answering a question about the original fatty V2 specs for the headset. The Fatty Trail is an FSA C-40, IS42/ IS52.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  95. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    44mms upper 49mms lower.
    thanks mang

    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    To be fair, the v1 rides and handles pretty well. I just feel the v2 is a smidge better, particularly if meant more for general trail hoolganery than just snow.
    my frame and bike just arrived. i built the fatty trail up and, as predicted, just can't handle how it looks. i'm torn between at least riding it before swapping the parts over to the fatty v2, so i have a basis to compare; and tearing it down now so i can flip the frame in its current unridden condition. your sense that there isn't a big difference between the two is pushing me towards skipping the ride test and just committing to the v2

  96. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by boomforeal View Post
    thanks mang



    my frame and bike just arrived. i built the fatty trail up and, as predicted, just can't handle how it looks. i'm torn between at least riding it before swapping the parts over to the fatty v2, so i have a basis to compare; and tearing it down now so i can flip the frame in its current unridden condition. your sense that there isn't a big difference between the two is pushing me towards skipping the ride test and just committing to the v2
    The fatty trail has a much longer top tube and reach than the V2. Top tube on a large V2 is 610 and fatty trail is 642. I personally would be very cramped with a short stem on the V2. You may want to give the fatty trail a couple of rides.

  97. #197
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,773
    Quote Originally Posted by boomforeal View Post
    thanks mang



    my frame and bike just arrived. i built the fatty trail up and, as predicted, just can't handle how it looks. i'm torn between at least riding it before swapping the parts over to the fatty v2, so i have a basis to compare; and tearing it down now so i can flip the frame in its current unridden condition. your sense that there isn't a big difference between the two is pushing me towards skipping the ride test and just committing to the v2
    agree with johnny5jz - give it a ride or two before deciding, maybe swap back and forth between the two a bit. not too terribly hard to do a quick swap.

    you won't notice when riding how the thing looks, so for sure go for whichever feels best, even if its the ugly one!
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  98. #198
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,353
    Strip the paint on the Fatty Trail?

    I've always wanted to do that on an alloy frame... I think the RAW look is awesome
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  99. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    I'm going to assume the question is directed at me. I looked at my original picture and the the yard stick is 28.25in or approximately 719mm at the top of the tube where the measuring stick is leaning. It is probably appropriate to subtract roughly 1/2 in or approximately 12.5m from those figures given the driveway slants away from the bike. If it helps further, I'm about 5'11" with about a 32" inseam from floor to crotch and the frame is a med. 18". Where I stand over the bike, in front of the bend, I still have some room in case of a hard dismount.
    Thanks I am waffling between a small & medium my inseam is 30.5, how does the fit feel for you tight, roomy?

  100. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    317

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Strip the paint on the Fatty Trail?
    i don't mind the paint at all - its the gatelike profile of the frame, the awkward gap between the top and downtubes at the headtube, and the upward swing of the top tube at the seat tube that make me cringe (on the large frame - scrub's small is a looker!)

    this:

    On-One Fatty trail-%24_86.jpg

    vs. this:

    On-One Fatty trail-930487d1413077022-one-fat-bike-frame-20141011_153524.jpg

    no contest, imo

    Quote Originally Posted by johnny5jz View Post
    The fatty trail has a much longer top tube and reach than the V2. Top tube on a large V2 is 610 and fatty trail is 642. I personally would be very cramped with a short stem on the V2. You may want to give the fatty trail a couple of rides.
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    agree with johnny5jz - give it a ride or two before deciding, maybe swap back and forth between the two a bit. not too terribly hard to do a quick swap.
    i've run the numbers, and where it counts the two aren't actually all that far off

    On-One Fatty trail-screen-shot-2016-11-15-9.55.26-pm.png

    stock geo numbers with a rigid fork on the left, adjusted for a bluto at 100mm on the right. with the bluto, reach on the v2 is less than 10mm shorter than the trail, the bb is actually a hair lower, and while the sta is identical the hta is .5* slacker

    if i was home with access to my workshop i'd definitely switch back and forth to try things out - but i'm down to a toolbox and the kitchen floor; tinkering isn't really all that appealing under the circumstances

    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    you won't notice when riding how the thing looks, so for sure go for whichever feels best, even if its the ugly one!
    i'm a vain, shallow person; it would keep me up at night, picturing that jabberwocky lurking in my shed

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Fatty Trail
    By nitrousjunky in forum On One
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-06-2016, 03:25 PM
  2. On One Fatty and Baby Fatty, complete or kit
    By eugenemtbing in forum Where are the Best Deals?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-14-2014, 10:39 AM
  3. Trail fatty post Eurobike?
    By ubergn0men in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-02-2013, 08:42 AM
  4. On-One Fatty versus Crawler for Trail Riding
    By Venturewest in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-09-2013, 09:26 AM
  5. Choosing a Fatty for trail use.
    By MidNight_Rider in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 02-01-2013, 06:10 AM

Members who have read this thread: 82

Posting Permissions

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