Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 76
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801

    Shortening a Surly fatbike seat tube.

    The looks of my Moonlander frame is bothering me. I feel that the seat tube is too long and the extra reinforcement bit is superfluous.

    I'm thinking of cutting it shorter and removing the extra reinforcement piece of tubing at the front. While I'm at it, I'd cut the slot for clamping on the front side to protect it against dirt flying from the rear tire.

    I'm a bit over 71 kg (156 lbs) and seat post insertion after shortening would still be 9 cm, so durability should not be a concern. There would be a slight weight saving from removing steel, but my primary motivation is vain aesthetics.

    Has anyone done this? Any comments?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    279
    I would shy away - the tubes are probably butted and/or not designed for the crimping force down lower.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    186
    Your best bet is to go into a horse supply shop and buy a set of blinders, blocking your view of the offending part of bike.
    2015 Scott Foil Team Issue
    2015 Kona Process 111
    2015 Salsa Mukluk 2


    I am employed by a bike shop.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    391
    Op, I agree completely, those braced frames are ****ing heinous. Glad I have my first gen. pug!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vallengrach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    11
    rälläkkää vaan, kyl se kestää

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by gregclimbs View Post
    I would shy away - the tubes are probably butted and/or not designed for the crimping force down lower.
    Very good point - the frame is constructed of butted steel. I assume the top part of the seat tube is not butted, because the seat post should fit snugly into the tube for a certain length. I'll measure the inner diameter at the point I intend to cut and a few cm below it.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,131
    Sounds like a good idea to me.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    Very good point - the frame is constructed of butted steel. I assume the top part of the seat tube is not butted, because the seat post should fit snugly into the tube for a certain length. I'll measure the inner diameter at the point I intend to cut and a few cm below it.
    For the amount you want to take off, I doubt the butting will cause any problems.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mijstrat72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    58
    I'm doing this!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    253
    A bunch of the Pugsleys have had issues with cracks at the seatstay/seattube junction; there are numerous threads on this forum discussing this. By most accounts, Salsa has been very good at providing replacement frames under warranty. They have also revised the frame design a bit.

    Why on earth would you want to weaken your Moonie frame in the same area that the Pugs is breaking? And you will be invalidating the warranty, as well. I can't see this ending well!

    If it looks that bad to you, then you should have bought a different frame, a custom one if need be...

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bprsnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeG View Post
    A bunch of the Pugsleys have had issues with cracks at the seatstay/seattube junction; there are numerous threads on this forum discussing this. By most accounts, Salsa has been very good at providing replacement frames under warranty. They have also revised the frame design a bit.

    Why on earth would you want to weaken your Moonie frame in the same area that the Pugs is breaking? And you will be invalidating the warranty, as well. I can't see this ending well!

    If it looks that bad to you, then you should have bought a different frame, a custom one if need be...

    Exactly voids warranty.
    Moonlander's
    Sandman Hogger Ti

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeG View Post
    A bunch of the Pugsleys have had issues with cracks at the seatstay/seattube junction; there are numerous threads on this forum discussing this. By most accounts, Salsa has been very good at providing replacement frames under warranty. They have also revised the frame design a bit.

    Why on earth would you want to weaken your Moonie frame in the same area that the Pugs is breaking? And you will be invalidating the warranty, as well. I can't see this ending well!

    If it looks that bad to you, then you should have bought a different frame, a custom one if need be...
    What he's talking about doing shouldn't weaken the frame in any meaningful way, if done correctly. Shortening the seat tube extension slightly might possibly even lessen the chances of cracks in the seatstay junction area, as there will be slightly less leverage on that area. Probably not any sort of meaningful difference, but worth noting.

    But yes, it will void the warranty.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    870
    Saul

    While I agree with Andy that what you have planned should not hurt anything, why buy any future trouble? There is a small chance that by removing the small support tube more stress will be transfered to the junction of the seat and top tube.

    Wait until the three year warranty runs out, play it safe for a while longer.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,131
    Come on guys, this is a terrible idea.

    Hacking off parts of a butted steel frame, around an area of weakness (seat tube cracking)? And only because you don't like the way the gussett tube looks? Worst idea ever.

    Solution: Sell or trade your moonie for an earlier Pugsley without the gusset tube. Or just ride your bike without cutting parts of the frame off.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Thanks for the heads-up about cracked Pugsley frames! I'm looking into it and here's what I found so far:



    Seems like the cracks you mention are not affected by the gusset between the seat tube and top tube. The problem lies elsewhere.

    I am well aware that modifications like this will void warranty and affect possible resale value. I'm not rushing into this head first, otherwise I would have broken out a hacksaw without posting this thread. Good input for the most part, but please let me make my own choices. Valuable insight is appreciated.

  16. #16
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,718
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    Come on guys, this is a terrible idea.

    Hacking off parts of a butted steel frame, around an area of weakness (seat tube cracking)? And only because you don't like the way the gussett tube looks? Worst idea ever.

    Solution: Sell or trade your moonie for an earlier Pugsley without the gusset tube. Or just ride your bike without cutting parts of the frame off.
    this.

  17. #17
    MaverickMotoMedia.com
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    this.
    the gusset was added because of the cracks at the seat tube. Horrible idea to remove it. If you're so offended by it, get a different bike, one that you can pose better on.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    Valuable insight is appreciated.
    But valuable insight can come in many different forms. Like in all those old movies where in the middle of some catastrophe one guy would be freaking out, saying "we're all going to die", scaring all the women and children. At that point the calm, cool, collected leading man would walk over, take him by the shirt collar, give him a good smack across the face and say "Get ahold of yourself man!" The guy that was freaking out would immediately calm down, thank the leading man for slapping him and not cut his seat post, er... I mean not cause any more problems for the rest of the movie.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brknspk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    109
    Ask a few frame builders for their opinion. I'd post this question on the Frame Builder forum and see what some people with relevant experience think of your idea.

  20. #20
    Nemophilist
    Reputation: TrailMaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,873
    Hey;

    Frame guy talk - A seat post puts a lot of stress into the top area of the ST, especially if that post is short on insertion. The general rule of thumb is to not have more than 2" of unsupported ST above the TT. One means of reducing this stress is to sleeve the top of the ST. Another is with a brace like this. In order to get good standover height for a snow bike, the TT was dropped a bit, leaving more ST unsupported. The ST brace used on these frames would lessen the forces acting on the busy TT/ST/SS tube junction.

    This instance sort of validates my thinking on the ST/SS cracking issue. I did not think the cracking was seat post related. My theory is that it is caused by compression forces acting on the SS's. Because of the side positioning of the SS's where they weld to the ST, and the wide angle from which they approach this junction, this compression bows the stays outward a bit, causing the material of the ST between the SS's to be stretched. The point just outside the weld is the weakest area of any weld joint, and that is where you see the cracks. It's also possible that they have missed the thicker end of the butted tube. There... how's that?

    Under no circumstances would I increase the stress at the TT/ST/SS junction by removing the brace and shortening the ST. Get your frame either warrantied or welded, but leave the design alone. Even those who "know what they are doing" don't always get it right.
    Most people ply the Well Trodden Path. A few seek a different way, and leave a Trail behind.
    - John Hajny, a.k.a. TrailMaker

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    the gusset was added because of the cracks at the seat tube. Horrible idea to remove it. If you're so offended by it, get a different bike, one that you can pose better on.
    Please look at the picture I posted: cracked seat stay welds and a gusset. If the gusset was added to stop cracks, it's doing a horrible job at it. Doesn't sound like Surly to first make a frame that cracks, then revise the design and still have it crack at the same spot.

    TrailMaker: In the pic I posted (which is not my bike) it seems that you hit the nail on the head when it comes to the cause of cracking: the seat stays do approach the seat tube from very wide angles. The gusset seems to have done absolutely nothing to stop the cracking. On my Moonlander the seat stay tops are straight and meet the seat tube at a far smaller angle.

    Here's what my frame looks like:



    TM, your explanation reg. the purpose of the gusset is more in line with information from Surly: the top tube was lowered to provide a lower standover height, and the gusset was added to support the seat tube, which now extends higher above the seat stays and top tube.

    Smithcreek, I like your analogy. But it seems to me that a few other people here are the panicing ones, while I'm carefully considering whether or not to do this, asking and weighing opinions. So far I've gotten great comments about some things I overlooked, but also poorly founded fear-mongering.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    253
    The short tube that you want to remove almost certainly reduces the stress on the seatstay/toptube junction.

    With a saddle in a normal position, the rider's weight will cause the seatpost to want to bend to the rear. That bending stress puts the gusset tube under tension and transfers the force to the top tube and away from the seatstay/toptube junction. The gusset tube is there for a reason.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    From the Pugsley frame failure thread:



    Looks like Surly has addressed the issue by reducing the angle of approach, so the compression forces don't tear the welds apart. A quote from a fatbike aficionado regarding the picture:
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    the C stay tubes on both sides are attached to the sides of the seat tube as opposed to behind it AND with support from the TT.
    The gusset tube is there to support the exposed seat tube, but does not seem to have anything to do with the seat stay cracks. The reason not to shorten the seat tube and omit the gusset from the factory could be as simple as not wanting to change the frame size nomenclature (a 20" frame must have a 20" seat tube), or to allow people to use a wider selection of short seat posts instead of requiring a really long one.

    JoeG, your observation of the gusset tube is 100% correct. However, it does not address compression loads from weight on the pedals, transfered via the rear wheel into the seat stays. I'm willing to bet the pre-2013 Pugsley seat stays would crack no matter how stiff the front triangle is made.

  24. #24
    Nemophilist
    Reputation: TrailMaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,873
    Hey;

    SS bridges exist to decrease the amount of unsupported/un-triangulated stay length, and to mount brakes or fenders. In this case, they would also help with the torsional load being entered into the ST-to-SS welds. You can clearly see in the first pic that the triangle formed by the bridge and stays is very short from peak (at ST) to the base (bridge). The angle the SSs approach the ST from is also pretty wide.

    The revised frame begins the SS bend toward the ST far earlier, sending the compression forces into the ST in a more linear (straight line) fashion. Also, the bridge being farther back likely creates more triangulation and stiffness. The SSs running more directly into the TT also takes stress away from the ST.

    All in all, a very subtle, but likely very effective redesign. Who knew that those fat tires could transfer that much force through the frame? Maybe we fat riders better push ourselves away from the table more often?!
    Most people ply the Well Trodden Path. A few seek a different way, and leave a Trail behind.
    - John Hajny, a.k.a. TrailMaker

  25. #25
    Nemophilist
    Reputation: TrailMaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,873
    For reference;

    This is the SS/ST junction of my first Fatbike.



    Most people ply the Well Trodden Path. A few seek a different way, and leave a Trail behind.
    - John Hajny, a.k.a. TrailMaker

  26. #26
    Vagician
    Reputation: EPcycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    295
    Personally, I'd say cutting that tube out is a bad idea, but if you want to take the risk then go for it. It's your bike. You may get lucky and never have a problem.

  27. #27
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712
    I did read somewhere that Surly put those on the frame just to annoy people and get them all surly... there's no other purpose for them

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    88
    I know very little about frame building and design, but I do know this for an absolute fact. While your modification may or may not cause your frame to fail; if it does cause it to fail, it will do so at the very worst possible time. This you can be sure of.

  29. #29
    Laramie, Wyoming
    Reputation: alphazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,949
    I say cut it off and provide us with pictures.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by hikernks View Post
    I know very little about frame building and design, but I do know this for an absolute fact. While your modification may or may not cause your frame to fail; if it does cause it to fail, it will do so at the very worst possible time. This you can be sure of.
    The majority of cracked Pugsleys have only alerted the owners by a clicking sound, or have shown no symptoms at all and the owner only noticed it by looking carefully. I'm quite sure this modification would not cause a catastrophic failure at the worst possible time.

    The world is full of MTB frames with a regular twin triangle construction, where the seat tube ends about an inch above the top tube (no further extension or gusset) and those frames seem to be holding on fine. The amount of cracked Moonlander frames in the area we're discussing is zero, and it has a different design compared to the Pugsleys that cracked - gusseted or old type. I honestly believe Surly just wanted to lower the standover height but retain the seat tube length, so the longer exposed part is supported with a gusset. I may have exaggerated calling it superfluous, but it should have no effect on the seat stays.

    I took off the seat post and looked into the gusset tube through the vent hole. There's another hole in the top tube, so removing the gusset that bothers me would leave me with another aesthetic problem to deal with. I'll have to give this some more thought.

    If I decide to go through with it, you can count on pictures in this thread.
    Last edited by Saul Lumikko; 01-24-2013 at 01:43 PM.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19

    ... and if we just ... BAD Idea

    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    The majority of cracked Pugsleys have only alerted the owners by a clicking sound, or have shown no symptoms at all and the owner only noticed it by looking carefully. I'm quite sure this modification would not cause a catastrophic failure at the worst possible time.

    The world is full of MTB frames with a regular twin triangle construction, where the seat tube ends about an inch above the top tube (no further extension or gusset) and those frames seem to be holding on fine. The amount of cracked Moonlander frames in the area we're discussing is zero, and it has a different design compared to the Pugsleys that cracked - gusseted or old type. I honestly believe Surly just wanted to lower the standover height but retain the seat tube length, so the longer exposed part is supported with a gusset. I may have exaggerated calling it superfluous, but it should have no effect on the seat stays.

    I took off the seat post and looked into the gusset tube through the vent hole. There's another hole in the top tube, so removing the gusset that bothers me would leave me with another aesthetic problem to deal with. I'll have to give this some more thought.

    If I decide to go through with it, you can count on pictures in this thread.
    Bro... the idea of cutting off the seat tube and the brace is seriously messed up. If you think it looks ugly now...just imagine how much WORSE it will look when you have a gaping hole in your top tube after your cut and file off the brace tube! There is a VENT HOLE that goes through the top tube and into the small brace tube! Why did you buy the frame if you thought it "looked" so bad in the first place? That's like choosing a wife as a mate... then asking her to get a face lift AFTER you are married because you don't like her looks! LOL!

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,031
    It's now several months since Saul posted - the question is: Did he chop the frame?

    If so pics.

    At least it's steel. If it breaks, weld it.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    It's now several months since Saul posted - the question is: Did he chop the frame?

    If so pics.

    At least it's steel. If it breaks, weld it.
    Saul... so did you hack the frame yet or not? If so... please show us all the results in the form of photos.

  34. #34
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712

    Re: Shortening a Surly fatbike seat tube.

    How the hell did you dig this post back up and did you read the previous posts?
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    How the hell did you dig this post back up and did you read the previous posts?
    We dug up the post to wake it up from it's dirt nap...... using a simple garden spade and a little elbow grease.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    Come on guys, this is a terrible idea.

    Hacking off parts of a butted steel frame, around an area of weakness (seat tube cracking)? And only because you don't like the way the gussett tube looks? Worst idea ever.

    Solution: Sell or trade your moonie for an earlier Pugsley without the gusset tube. Or just ride your bike without cutting parts of the frame off.
    +1.. What he said^^^^ Cutting off the seat tube and gusset brace for "aesthetic" reasons on your Pugsley , is like cutting off the pinky fingers on your hands because you don't like an ODD number of digits on your hand. Or maybe another analogy for you: Both Michael Jackson, and gold medalist decathlete Bruce Jenner both had their noses nearly hacked off their faces because they didn't think they were "aesthetically pleasing". And we all can agree that the results were nothing less than disasterous.

    Taking a hack saw to an otherwise perfectly good frame is nothing short of insanity... and it's shocking to see the number of people here actually endorsing and encouraging the OP to go ahead with it. It kind of reminds me of situations where a suicidal person is teetering at the top of a bridge threatening to jump to his death, while a crowd gathers below and shouts to him : "JUMP, JUMP, JUMP!!!!"

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    I did read somewhere that Surly put those on the frame just to annoy people and get them all surly... there's no other purpose for them
    LMAO!!! What he said ^^^^^^.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    478
    maybe the dude's independently wealthy and enjoys dickin around! Hope you cut the frame. May we all live vicariously through your photos

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by boogman View Post
    maybe the dude's independently wealthy and enjoys dickin around! Hope you cut the frame. May we all live vicariously through your photos
    Cut it ! Cut it ! Cut it !!!!!!

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Lots of new posts! Some good points were made earlier, it made me reconsider the whole thing and I put it on hold. A few comments:

    - As I said before, I'm well aware of the vent hole. It's only a matter of how you go about it.
    - Comparisons to a significant other or body parts is quite extreme even for a bike forum. I'm sure you guys don't actually feel that way, but use the exaggeration for lack of better points to make.
    - Make no mistake: the Moonlander was the right frame for me and I've been happy riding it. The small piece of tubing and long seat tube are a minor flaw in the looks, but it is far outweighed by all the other reasons I chose it.

    Since my previous post I've started to take a new approach to things in life: instead of making a list of all the things I can never do, I focus on things I can do. Much more positive that way. If I set a goal, I list things that help me accomplish it instead of all the possible ways that I could fail. Focus should be on solutions instead of problems.

    My goal is to have a bike I like to ride and look at. The seat tube gusset can be painted with a different color to make it less obvious, I can put side plates over the triangular holes and put a sticker to it to make it look cool, or learn to accept the looks. Or cut it somehow and make sure it doesn't end up looking worse. These are solutions and each one has some challenges to them.

    I started this topic to hear if anyone else has done it before so they could offer advice. It seems no-one has, so if I go for the hack-job, I'll be pioneering it. At that point I'll be making my own path and will pay little attention to people behind me saying it can't be done.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    Lots of new posts! Some good points were made earlier, it made me reconsider the whole thing and I put it on hold. A few comments:

    - As I said before, I'm well aware of the vent hole. It's only a matter of how you go about it.
    - Comparisons to a significant other or body parts is quite extreme even for a bike forum. I'm sure you guys don't actually feel that way, but use the exaggeration for lack of better points to make.
    - Make no mistake: the Moonlander was the right frame for me and I've been happy riding it. The small piece of tubing and long seat tube are a minor flaw in the looks, but it is far outweighed by all the other reasons I chose it.

    Since my previous post I've started to take a new approach to things in life: instead of making a list of all the things I can never do, I focus on things I can do. Much more positive that way. If I set a goal, I list things that help me accomplish it instead of all the possible ways that I could fail. Focus should be on solutions instead of problems.

    My goal is to have a bike I like to ride and look at. The seat tube gusset can be painted with a different color to make it less obvious, I can put side plates over the triangular holes and put a sticker to it to make it look cool, or learn to accept the looks. Or cut it somehow and make sure it doesn't end up looking worse. These are solutions and each one has some challenges to them.

    I started this topic to hear if anyone else has done it before so they could offer advice. It seems no-one has, so if I go for the hack-job, I'll be pioneering it. At that point I'll be making my own path and will pay little attention to people behind me saying it can't be done.
    I'm glad you are taking a new perspective on life... and hopefully will see things more clearly with this new approach. I , myself, own a Pugsley frame with the identical triangular seat tube brace on it, and I've yet to have anyone point at it and giggle. The first thing EVERYONE sees on this bike is the huge tires..... and that's what they comment on. I highly doubt anyone will notice the triangular brace on your bike and ridicule you for it. You really should stop obssessing over it.. and just ride your bike and have FUN!

  42. #42
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712

    Re: Shortening a Surly fatbike seat tube.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bikermeister View Post
    You really should stop obssessing over it.. and just ride your bike and have FUN!
    He was never really obsessing over it and was done talking about it until you dug an old thread back up.
    Last edited by duggus; 08-29-2013 at 12:13 PM.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    He was never really obsessing over it and was done talking about it until you dug an old thread back up. :screwy:
    You really should allow the OP to speak for himself on this.... but the thread was started back in January of 2013... and it's August now. The OP just posted again TODAY to report that he is still trying to figure out a solution to the "problem" of having the traingular brace on his bike. Today he proposed that the triangular brace be covered up by, you guessed it, two MORE triangular pieces of sheet metal on either side of the brace to "cover it up"... followed by a few decals over that to finish off the job. His second idea was to paint the brace a different color to make it less noticeable. Can you sit there with a straight face and tell me this is not being obsssessive?

    Excuse me for being too blunt... but in my book, and just about anyone else with a clear mind's book, would consider that to be obssessive. I mean 7 months have gone by, and he's still thinking about how to cover up a 3 inch area of the bike. For crying out loud.. the bike was desgined to be like that for a reason. It wasn't put there to be pretty... in fact, the whole concept of a Fat Bike is not intended to be pretty. It's a utilitarian bike designed to ride through sand and snow with more ease. it's not supposed to look like a graceful ballerina. So in the grand scheme of things... obsessing over a triangular brace on an otheriwse porky and wallowing beast of a bike, is pretty silly at best.

    And before you get too preachy about all of this.... your previous post about Surly wanting to make people "SURLY" about the brace, was an obvious poke in the side to the OP trying to make him seem foolish. Now you are doing a 180 degree turnaround and trying to defend him. Don't think others didn't notice your tactics as well. Thanks, and have a nice day.

  44. #44
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712

    Re: Shortening a Surly fatbike seat tube.

    It sounds like you are obsessing over it. You just wrote 3 giant paragraphs. Over-analyze much?
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    It sounds like you are obsessing over it. You just wrote 3 giant paragraphs. Over-analyze much?
    Sorry... but distraction techniques won't work with me. You respond with a 1 sentence reply, that has nothing to do with what I wrote...AND you didn't address the issue of you doing a 180 degree "turnaround"... going from the person who was poking fun at the OP, to the person who is now defending him. Try addressing that issue in your next reply.... if you can formulate one intelligent enough.

  46. #46
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,712
    Poking fun at someone lightheartedly – and coming out of the woodwork with 16 posts since 2009, opening up a dead thread, and then obsessing over it like a Miley-Cyrus-twirking-at-the-vmas DOUCHE... are two completely different things. (hint... talking about you). See... poking fun. Weeeeeee

    Gomez... think you can shut this thread down now


    <img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yRp2ZIuA3os/UhrpT5ye76I/AAAAAAAAx7g/olwvkWRrt-g/s640/Miley+Cyrus2.jpg" width="400">
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    Bikermeister, the thing I care about is how the bike looks to me. I don't care if someone else thinks it's fine the way it is and that I shouldn't change the looks.

    Funny how my idea of side plates and a sticker turned to "pieces of sheet metal" and "a few decals" as you tried to downplay it.

    I put the whole thing on hold back in January and I've been happy riding the bike. I wrote so earlier. To you this is "obsessing"?

    When others see an opportunity, you only think of failure. Where others see different solutions, you see obsession. I'd give you negrep for your demeaning posts, but to be honest I only hope that you'll start looking at things in a positive light for your own sake. Negativity is a disease of the brain like alcoholism.

    Post a reply if you will, but if you think there's anything to win here, move on.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    Bikermeister, the thing I care about is how the bike looks to me. I don't care if someone else thinks it's fine the way it is and that I shouldn't change the looks.

    Funny how my idea of side plates and a sticker turned to "pieces of sheet metal" and "a few decals" as you tried to downplay it.

    I put the whole thing on hold back in January and I've been happy riding the bike. I wrote so earlier. To you this is "obsessing"?

    When others see an opportunity, you only think of failure. Where others see different solutions, you see obsession. I'd give you negrep for your demeaning posts, but to be honest I only hope that you'll start looking at things in a positive light for your own sake. Negativity is a disease of the brain like alcoholism.

    Post a reply if you will, but if you think there's anything to win here, move on.
    Saul,

    Please just let me kindly remind you that you started this thread, asking for other people's opinions on if it is a good idea to cut the seat tube or not. If you didn't want to get feedback from other's, both pro and con,... then you would never have posted your idea on a PUBLIC forum. You could have just privately contemplated your ideas of hack sawing the frame, and no one would have been the wiser. But since you decided to throw the idea out on a public forum... you have to expect to get a bit of flack for your proposal. Sorry if we offended you in any way.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikermeister View Post
    Sorry if we offended you in any way.
    Being one of the people that made a lighthearted attempt at humor in this thread, I don't thing he was offended by anything anyone posted since no one up until recently was an asshat about it.

  50. #50
    Titanium junkie
    Reputation: Loudviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,422
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    Poking fun at someone lightheartedly – and coming out of the woodwork with 16 posts since 2009, opening up a dead thread, and then obsessing over it like a Miley-Cyrus-twirking-at-the-vmas DOUCHE... are two completely different things. (hint... talking about you). See... poking fun. Weeeeeee

    Gomez... think you can shut this thread down now


    <img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yRp2ZIuA3os/UhrpT5ye76I/AAAAAAAAx7g/olwvkWRrt-g/s640/Miley+Cyrus2.jpg" width="400">

    The most disgusting and irritating thing about this thread is that picture!
    What the hell is that, someone put it out of it's misery!
    Climb into the sky, never wonder why - Tailgunner
    You're a Tailgunner

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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