Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,641

    New question here. So what is the closest "Fat" frame geometry to a "XC-Mountain bike"

    You know low handlebars, "Step" head angle, long toptube, short chainstays, etc..

    If it helps I'm almost 6,2" with short legs at 33" and a really long torso...

    Ps: thanks again for answering my silly questions..

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,641
    Oh I will be great If you post pictures (or links) of each contender

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,553
    A few of us have custom fatties built w/ a more "XC" geometry. Mine with it's Maverick fork now mounted w/ the Husker Du's/LM's rides quite well on trails & Summer dirt. It also has quite a bit higher BB than snow/sand bikes. Sometimes I think a little too high, but when I get "out amongst 'em" it rips pretty good. It is a big 'ol bike compared to a 26er XC bike, after all it's basicly a 29er. Seems like the high BB gives me some kind of "command" over the big 'ol thing. It also has short chainstays and was built specific for the Maverick's A to C length. I'll dig up a pic for you if you like.

    The SandMan has always seemed to be a little more towards an XC design as well... not sure about U.S. availability though.

    Rumor has it one of the 2013 Mukluks (the white one I think) will have shorter CS's, and a higher BB specifically to give it better "dirt" abilities. Got a feeling with a Lefty mounted up that one's going to ride summer trails pretty well.

    Also, OnOne is putting a more XC oriented fat bike out soon as well. Theres a pretty long thread on here about it. It's pretty cool looking. I'd like to see it w/ a susp. fork on it as well.

    Lots of info on Lefty's on this forum, might have to search around a bit. You can still find Maverick's around but I think at this point I'd go Lefty... unless something else pops up in the near future.

    Her's a pic of mine. BTW, I LOVE this bike!!
    FILE0037
    Last edited by ward; 08-21-2012 at 11:02 PM.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    458
    Sandman HOGGAR Ti | SANDMAN

    With the fork high it is a pretty easy riding setup with a comforting enduro geometrie, with the fork low the bike becomes more eager to ride faster.

    In the current fat version on the hoggar, the change can not be made on the fly anymore, but one can ask!

    The sandman is for sale worldwide, but it 's online!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,264
    A Pugsley rides much more like a traditional XC bike than a Mukluk does, due to it shorter headtube.

  6. #6
    ejj
    ejj is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    113
    I rode both '12 and '13 Mukluks on the dirt the other day and did not notice a difference.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    873
    there's no significant difference in how my pugsley rides compared to any other xc bike I've ever ridden.

    in general, it rides like a cross between a rigid bike and a FS bike.

    at low speeds, it feels like an FS bike- the tires do the work of the suspension. At higher speeds and on fast downhills, it feels more like a rigid bike- the undamped suspension of the tires bounces you around like a rigid. (YMMV with tire pressure, tire selection, etc)

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kyttyra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by deuxdiesel View Post
    A Pugsley rides much more like a traditional XC bike than a Mukluk does, due to it shorter headtube.
    It has also shorter chainstays and slacker seat tube than a Mukluk.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drofluf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    366
    Probably depends on what your definition of a XC bike would be.

    As an exercise I compared the dimensions of my Singular Swift and a similar sized Pugsley (my Pugsley is actually the 16" because I bought second hand) using data from the respective manufacturers' websites.

    Swift (M) Pugsley (18")
    Head Angle 71.5 70.5
    Seat Angle 73 72
    Ef Top Tube 592 595
    C/Stay 450 488
    Wheelbase 1082 1082
    Standover 796 786

    To my mind they're almost too close to call and for me the difference in handling is largely down to the tyres.

    EDIT apologies for the formatting
    If you need me I'll be at the bar

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,545
    Quote Originally Posted by buckfiddious View Post
    there's no significant difference in how my pugsley rides compared to any other xc bike I've ever ridden.

    in general, it rides like a cross between a rigid bike and a FS bike.

    at low speeds, it feels like an FS bike- the tires do the work of the suspension. At higher speeds and on fast downhills, it feels more like a rigid bike- the undamped suspension of the tires bounces you around like a rigid. (YMMV with tire pressure, tire selection, etc)
    Totally agree. I upgraded from a Pugs to a Ti Twenty2. One of the reasons was they offered a frame size and geometry that was almost identical to my Pugs. Also went with the 450mm A/C fork (vs the 468) to keep the front end down.

    Here's Twenty2's website: https://www.twenty2cycles.com/bikes/fat-snow-bully

    Patineto, you can always go custom if you need to fit your unique requirements.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,641
    Thanks for all the great responses, I kind of dismiss the Pugs do to the frame been made of steel > corrosion in the snow, but I think is time to reconsider it.

    Please keep them coming.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wrkgstiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    146
    My steel Fatback handles better than my Jamis Trail X3. A lot better. The Fatback is also lighter. While I'm no expert in bike geometry, I can only state how the bike feels and it rocks any surface. It may not be for everyone, but it is for me.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drofluf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    366
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    Thanks for all the great responses, I kind of dismiss the Pugs do to the frame been made of steel > corrosion in the snow, but I think is time to reconsider it.

    Please keep them coming.
    I think you should definitely reconsider, no reason to reject the Pugs (or any other steel frame) because of the material. If you look after it a good steel frame will last a lifetime.
    If you need me I'll be at the bar

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by drofluf View Post
    I think you should definitely reconsider, no reason to reject the Pugs (or any other steel frame) because of the material. If you look after it a good steel frame will last a lifetime.
    Even if you don't look after it, a steel frame is pretty hard to break/damage/rust out.

    When was the last time you saw a crappy old huffy or schwinn that never gets taken inside rust in half?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by drofluf View Post
    I think you should definitely reconsider, no reason to reject the Pugs (or any other steel frame) because of the material. If you look after it a good steel frame will last a lifetime.
    Oh don't take me wrong, I have Fat chance's, IBIS's, kona's all made of fancy steel and I love them very much, but I do know you need to take special care of them when it comes to water and corrosion, for sure something the fatbike will be expose to..

    Does anybody know what kind of tubing is used on the Surly's..!?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DavidJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    222
    I raced and rode XC mountain bikes for years and I feel right at home on my new Moonlander.. I just changed the bars because I didn't like the wide swept back angle of stock bars and I put a slightly shorter and straighter pair on that makes it feel very much like the XC bikes that I'm so used to.

    DJ

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,545
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    Does anybody know what kind of tubing is used on the Surly's..!?
    That would be Surly 4130 CroMoly. I only know that because I looked it up here:
    Pugsley | Bikes | Surly Bikes

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    458
    Nothing wrong with steel, but if you plan to keep a frame for a decade, I would invest in Titanium.

    After 10 years you brush it and its as new!

    by the way, framesize is verry important for the bike position, I tested a size M and L for the sandman, and they handle different!

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,572
    Surly uses their proprietary 4130 Cromo steel, double butted main triangle. Nice and beefy but not as heavy as your old Schwinn Le Tour, and not as light as your old Reynolds 531 Trek.

    Steel lasts a long time, and a fresh coat of paint or powder coat a few times in its life span will still end up cheaper than Titanium. Different materials for different budgets, but both can be a life long investment.

    FWIW, I rode my 38yr old steel bike to work today.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,264
    A thorough coating of Amsoil HDMP at first build with a yearly inspection and the Pugsley is a lifetime frame. I know a lot of riders are dumping their Pugsley's for lighter and fatter (and more $$$) bikes, but it is extremely versatile. Any disadvantage my Pugs has had in a race is due to the motor, not the bike.

  21. #21
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,840
    Quote Originally Posted by drofluf View Post
    Probably depends on what your definition of a XC bike would be.

    As an exercise I compared the dimensions of my Singular Swift and a similar sized Pugsley (my Pugsley is actually the 16" because I bought second hand) using data from the respective manufacturers' websites.

    Swift (M) Pugsley (18")
    Head Angle 71.5 70.5
    Seat Angle 73 72
    Ef Top Tube 592 595
    C/Stay 450 488
    Wheelbase 1082 1082
    Standover 796 786

    To my mind they're almost too close to call and for me the difference in handling is largely down to the tyres.

    EDIT apologies for the formatting

    An inch and a half of extra chainstay and 1 degree slacker angles all around? I would say that would account for a noticeable difference in handling.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drofluf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    366
    Quote Originally Posted by sean salach View Post
    An inch and a half of extra chainstay and 1 degree slacker angles all around? I would say that would account for a noticeable difference in handling.

    Or perhaps it speaks volumes about my inability to notice the difference between the two bikes
    If you need me I'll be at the bar

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,682
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    ...Steel lasts a long time, and a fresh coat of paint or powder coat a few times in its life span will still end up cheaper than Titanium...
    True, but Titanium is shinier.

    BTW a hole in the bottom of the BB is a longstanding method of preserving the interior of the frame from rust. I've got 80 year old bikes with no interior rust other than the usual patina.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    458
    if you want a steel bike to become realy old, you'll need to take good care for it, not only preventing it from rust but also preventing it from high mechanical strain!

    In general, older USED high end steel mountainbikes used in Belgium have:

    -A really dirty shine on it as the varnish has deteriorated
    -Scratches in the paint
    -Dents at the double/ tripple butted tubes
    -Rust on the welds, in the scratches/dents
    -Internal rust
    -fatiguecracks in the material
    -a fixed deraileurhanger that nobody dares to straighten anymore
    ...

    there are some nice looking frames on the second hand market, but they are either repainted either hardly used for mountainbiking!


    The titanium frames on the other hand are in general structurable still as new, some stickers may be gone, and the patina migh have imperfections but that's it! People stop riding them because they 're bored, and other people are still willing to pay rather high amounts for an old frame!

    Livetime warranty on a steal frame? On a titanium one it's not unusual!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by Nothing's impossible View Post
    if you want a steel bike to become realy old, you'll need to take good care for it, not only preventing it from rust but also preventing it from high mechanical strain!

    In general, older USED high end steel mountainbikes used in Belgium have:

    -A really dirty shine on it as the varnish has deteriorated
    -Scratches in the paint
    -Dents at the double/ tripple butted tubes
    -Rust on the welds, in the scratches/dents
    -Internal rust
    -fatiguecracks in the material
    -a fixed deraileurhanger that nobody dares to straighten anymore
    ...

    there are some nice looking frames on the second hand market, but they are either repainted either hardly used for mountainbiking!


    The titanium frames on the other hand are in general structurable still as new, some stickers may be gone, and the patina migh have imperfections but that's it! People stop riding them because they 're bored, and other people are still willing to pay rather high amounts for an old frame!

    Livetime warranty on a steal frame? On a titanium one it's not unusual!
    I've ridden steel my whole life and I have never done much more than washing/brushing the salt off in the winter and I have never seen a frame rust out.

    As long as you take reasonably precautions (keep them inside, knock the big chunks of slush off, oil the chain every now and then) you will be fine.

    My winter commuter was an old steel trek 850 I found on the side of the road, abused and abandoned on trash day. it had not had an easy life, looked like it had spent most of it's life outside. It served me through 3 nasty Wisconsin winters, on roads that are heavily salted, through heavy snow. All I ever did was to knock the slush off it and occasionally hose down the bottom bracket area and drivetrain.

    On occasion it got small bits of rust where the paint had chipped off. But anywhere there was paint it never rusted, never even bubbled.

    Look, steel isn't that fragile. If it was, you'd never see cars made of steel and you'd definitely never see motorcycle frames made of steel.

    you don't have to baby steel.

    (caveat) really really super thin, super light steel, you have to baby. but if they put it on a MTB, it's not that kind of steel. And if it's just good ol' 4130, as long as you don't store it IN a lake, you are probably good for a looooooong time to come.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 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
  •