Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26

    Surly Troll with 2.7" Tires or Pugsley with 3.8" Tires: How Fat to be Legit?

    I'm looking to upgrade from my 1993 Bridgestone MB-3. I love my rigid bike and I'm not interested in going to a suspension bike. I do want to play around with higher volume tires. I have rims of adequate width and all other components to transfer to a Troll today. I would need only to buy the frame and bigger tires. While this is a decently economical issues, I'm intrigued by the 3.8" width of the Pugsley and would like to hear from fat bike enthusiasts about the following concerns:

    Are 2.7" wide tires fat enough to enjoy some of the benefits of a fat bike, or would I be increasing the weight and rolling resistance only to have a slightly beefier bike? In other words, at 2.7" width, am I getting more of the cons of fatter tires than I am the benefits?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,318
    Plus sized tires have enough volume to be worth using and they are quite different from 4" and 5" tires.

    Which one you will enjoy most nobody can say, but you. It will depend entirely on how and where you ride as well as your preferences.

    If you get a Pugs you can try 4" tires and as well as 29+ with the same frame.

    I had a Pugs and then tried 29+. After a year or so of riding the 29+ I sold the Pugs and have been happily rolling 29+. YMMV.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,996
    Pugs can do either, as vikb said. See if you can find a test ride.
    I think a used pug might be right up your alley, though.

  4. #4
    Poodle Lover
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    28
    I am not sure about the price points of the two bikes you ask about, but let me say that I love my Specialized Fatboy, it was $1800.
    I would give it a demo before making up your mind.
    -Rob

  5. #5
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,587
    If you want to mostly ride on snow or sand, go full fatbike. If you mostly want to ride on dirt, tossup, but you should try a few of each persuasion before you buy. Some folks love fatbikes on dry trails, some hate them.

    Don't sweat the weight, it isn't much in the grand scheme of things either way. Rolling resistance can be pretty low (as I discovered recently) on plus tires, and presumably (though I haven't really tried it) on full fat but it'll depend on the terrain and specific tire/pressure.

    -Walt

  6. #6
    Poodle Lover
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    28

    Disagree

    I respectfully disagree with Walt I have ridden mine daily on dirt since January, it is amazing.

    If you have not put the miles down you don't know.

    This is a goat, plain and simple, it will climb anything. Whatever super steep section is on your favorite trail, you will go up it, period.

    It is a blast.

    -Rob

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,496
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmoxide View Post
    I respectfully disagree with Walt I have ridden mine daily on dirt since January, it is amazing.

    If you have not put the miles down you don't know.

    This is a goat, plain and simple, it will climb anything. Whatever super steep section is on your favorite trail, you will go up it, period.

    It is a blast.

    -Rob
    How is that disagreeing with Walt??? He didn't say if you are riding dirt 2.7 is plenty. Here is what he said so you can read it again:

    "If you want to mostly ride on snow or sand, go full fatbike. If you mostly want to ride on dirt, tossup, but you should try a few of each persuasion before you buy. Some folks love fatbikes on dry trails, some hate them."

    You are obviously one of the people that love it!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: backcountryeti's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    608
    I have had both, and if you are leaning towards a fat bike just save yourself the time and money and buy the fat bike. I have been in that same boat before, and started off with the Troll. I had all the parts to swap over to the new frame as well. But, I wanted a fat bike. Anyway, ran the Troll in a variety of ways, and the 2.7's were fun, but in the snow they were not ideal. Sure it was better than "normal" size tires, but still not ideal. I usually found myself walking.

    IMO, I really feel that the Troll is superb running skinny tires. It was the most fun running Kenda 1.8's. Not that you asked, but I think it should be noted.

    Long story somewhat short, I ran the Troll for a couple years, then bought a Pugs. Worlds of difference. The Troll is cool, but is not a real fat bike. To your question though, I feel that 2.7's just give you the beefier tires without much benefit. They just made me want a fat bike more.

  9. #9
    Poodle Lover
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    28
    I am not here to fight, just offer my experience, and in my experience the fat bike is not just for snow and sand, that is what I disagree with in Walt's comment.
    -Rob

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,496
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmoxide View Post
    I am not here to fight, just offer my experience, and in my experience the fat bike is not just for snow and sand, that is what I disagree with in Walt's comment.
    -Rob
    That's great, but Walt never said fat bikes are just for snow and sand. Confused...

  11. #11
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20,640
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmoxide View Post
    I am not here to fight, just offer my experience, and in my experience the fat bike is not just for snow and sand, that is what I disagree with in Walt's comment.
    -Rob
    that's not what Walt said. Your reading comprehension needs some work.

    If snow or sand is the terrain in question, that's what fatbikes were built for and it's what they do best.

    I ride mine everywhere, all year. That doesn't change the fact that it is best on loose, irregular surfaces. Yesterday I was riding through an area with some logging activity after the loggers went home for the day. Ground was SUPER soft. Fatbike motored through like it was a groomed trail. On actual groomed trails, the benefits of the big tires aren't so clear. It depends on your goals for riding. Fat tires work with my goals and motivations for riding mountain bikes. But they don't work for everyone all the time.

    You can say you disagree all you want. But if you say you do, you're just being a fool by essentially saying that EVERYBODY needs to be riding a Specialized Fatboy because it's the bike you ride and love.

  12. #12
    Poodle Lover
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    28
    I am out.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    120
    I have both a Troll and a Pugs and love both bikes. That being said the Troll is a fun, versatile and capable bike but it will never be a fatbike. I can and have rode my Troll on the trail but prefer the Pugs on dirt. Both are great bikes and both can handle the same terrain...just in a different manner. I did ride my Pugs with Black Floyds for a hilly 340 mile charity ride also but the Troll was WAY easier the year before. The Troll pic is from a bikepacking ride with some singletrack.Surly Troll with 2.7" Tires or Pugsley with 3.8" Tires: How Fat to be Legit?-1966939_776818452351752_4570804456250258069_n-1-.jpgSurly Troll with 2.7" Tires or Pugsley with 3.8" Tires: How Fat to be Legit?-11218464_1054418047925123_2322479827963873163_n-1-.jpg

  14. #14
    Black Horse
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    14
    wow a great bike I want a troll but cant afford it but I may sell my truck then trade my trek mtb in on a troll cause the 26 inch tires are ez to find and I believe stronger just my opinion

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-14-2014, 06:40 PM
  2. 5" Front Fatbike tires on a Pugsley?
    By amckimmey in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-25-2013, 09:59 PM
  3. "Semi Fat": 47mm/50mm rims with 2.5"-3" tires
    By juansevo in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-08-2012, 09:41 AM
  4. More 4.8" Tires form Surly!!
    By FTMN in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-22-2012, 03:05 PM
  5. another surly fatbike??? "TROLL"
    By cozz in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-27-2011, 02:21 PM

Members who have read this thread: 5

Posting Permissions

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