Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 80
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    582

    Is there still some reason to choose a Pugsley over a Moonlander?

    I've spent some time reading this section and viewing some really nice vids on youtube (there still are not enough) with regards these fatbikes (Surly's in particular). I'm almost wishing I had a reason...any to justify owning one, but living in a rather concreted suburb on the outskirts of a major city and no epic snow/ice you can depend on means for now I just look on in awe and jealousy at you folks that truly can utilize and enjoy what these bikes can do.

    What I was curious and couldnt figure clearly in my mind is; now with Surly having the Moonlander, (assuming there is little to no interest in speed and the additonal extra $500 purchase price and maintenance cost can be managed or else isnt a deciding factor also no bike ever plans to be deliberately slogged thru muddy trails), what reason would one now still prefer to choose a pugsley over the moonlander? What is it a pug does that still makes it a better choice than the moonlander?

    Am I correct in my thoughts that the neckromancer fits between the pug and the moonlander..moonlander frame but not wheels/tires..but bigger rubber than ther pug? (I mean basically, I know about the larger fork and MWOD crank and 2x9) I dont see much excited chatter about the neckromancer so is it just that the moonlander's extras are so good that it explains why it seems all the talk and excitement seems focussed on it? If so, why would one choose the Neckromancer and not the Moonlander?

    Gosh, it looks like such fun (and comfort) and superb for winter snow, summer sand and all year rocks,gravel and dirt.

    Sorry, I've spent all morning when I should be giving my employer all my energies and attention all spent reading thread after thread here. Plainly it's all new to me so I'm sure the questions running about my head are noobish so please forgive.

    Even tho I've posted this, I'm still reading trying to better understand these rigs.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SteveRice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    112
    It is my understanding that the Necromancer Pug is a Pugsley frame and not a Moonlander frame. The complete Necromancer does come with the non-offset Moonlander fork. As far as why one would pick the Pug over the Moonlander, I'm sure that the $500 may be a factor for some. Others may be concerned with the even greater wheel offset to clear the BFL on a CS. If I had to do it over and was forced to pick between the two, I would take the Moonlander.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BoogieMang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    286
    I guess the only reason to get a Pug at this point is if you want to run a triple crankset.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brassnipples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    385
    I own a pugsley and recently had a chance to ride a moonlander. IMO, the moonlander is the way to go if you will be riding on soft stuff exclusively but the pugsly is a more versatile bike. I've toured and ridden several dirt centuries on a pugsley, I don't think I'd choose to do that on a moonlander. Surely the moonlander is a capable bike in the dry but it really feels more trucklike than the pugs.

  5. #5
    Geordie biker
    Reputation: saltyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,376
    Yeah, im looking forward to comparing my ML to the pug, but it's true the pugsley is tried and tested and will do 99% what a moony will do anyways.
    2014 milage so far - 2,485
    www.ukfatbikes.co.uk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Surlynot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    67
    the pugsly is a more versatile bike
    ^ +1
    Leave nothing but footprints & take nothing but photographs.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BoogieMang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    286
    Quote Originally Posted by brassnipples View Post
    the pugsly is a more versatile bike.
    Shouldn't that be the other way around? The Moonlander could run clown shoes and BFL's or large marges and larry's/endomorphs, while the Pugs can only run the latter. It seems intuitive to me that the ML is more versatile, other than the fact that you can't run a triple up front.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    271
    Is the Pugs more versatile? How so? Honestly curious as I'm picking up a ML tonight. I started a thread already asking about the differences between these two bikes and haven't really heard anything about how the ML's extra tire width/volume can be a negative. Is the steering significantly slower or hindered by the extra volume when on hardpack/singletrack conditions?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bprsnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by brassnipples View Post
    Surely the moonlander is a capable bike in the dry but it really feels more trucklike than the pugs.
    I disagree on the comparison.
    If you are running too low of air pressure on either or any Fatbike it can feel trucklike.
    If the air pressure is setup correctly for the conditions the bikes handle great.
    Moonlander's
    Sandman Hogger Ti

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brassnipples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    385
    Hmm, I guess I hadn't thought of it beyond the stock configuration, but I wouldn't want to drag the stock moonlander tires around during the summer. I've not made any significant changes to my pugs and it's been pretty good at the wide variety of places and conditions I've taken it. It would be interesting to see how the ML felt with the 'narrow' Larry's, but on my first impression it felt like a longer and less nimble bike, but that could have been the tires, i've not bothered to look at the geometry.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brassnipples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by bprsnt View Post
    If you are running too low of air pressure on either or any Fatbike it can feel trucklike.
    If the air pressure is setup correctly for the conditions the bikes handle great.
    I am very familiar with the importance of air pressure on these bikes and that's not what I meant by 'truck like'. I was pleasantly surprised with how nimble the ML felt but compared to the Pug it really felt like you sit on top of it rather than in it. It's far from terrible but the Pugsley just feels like a more well rounded ride.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    271
    I thought they were essentially the same geometry with tweaks made to allow for more chain clearance in the rear?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brassnipples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by jn35646 View Post
    I thought they were essentially the same geometry with tweaks made to allow for more chain clearance in the rear?
    A quick glance at the specs confirms that, the ML is only about 10mm longer, and the rest of the measurements are really close with only the chainstay and seat tube angle potentially contributing to the lengthy feel. So maybe it is just the rimes/tires that change the feel, it would be really interesting to do a side-by-side with a Pug using the same wheels.

    Still, I'd say that off the shelf the Pugsley is the better all rounder.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    80
    Getting hot...

    I am wondering the SAME thing. I fear the Moonlander is the new benchmark--therefore a pugs or smaller footprint is already obsolete.

    But of course, all bikes fit their niche and they really cannot be obsolete.

    I am leaning pugsley because I mainly want it to ride places where my 29ers won't...namely sand and rocky beaches...low tide excursions. Snow would be fun, but it is rare for me.

    Reading all the posts around here, it also sounds like I will get the "all the time" bug and ride the pugsley on single track and maybe even race it. Therefore, a pugs with drilled rolling daryls seems to fit my need more than the moonlander. I read a great deal about the "sand and snow only" ratings for the clown shoe and other 100mm rims--don't know if that's legit or just CYA lines from the manufacturers.

    I kinda want a moonlander frame and run nates on it.

    Pulling the trigger on two frames soon.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by jn35646 View Post
    Is the Pugs more versatile? How so? Honestly curious as I'm picking up a ML tonight. I started a thread already asking about the differences between these two bikes and haven't really heard anything about how the ML's extra tire width/volume can be a negative. Is the steering significantly slower or hindered by the extra volume when on hardpack/singletrack conditions?
    Many people (but certianly not all) ride narrower rims on their bikes in the summer for hardpack and singletrack. They are lighter and some of us think the rounder tire section handles singletrack better. My current choice in the summer is 47mm trials rims with Larry's front and rear. I would like to try the Marge lights as they might be a better compromise between weight, tire shape and float. I am riding a 165 symmetric bike so don't have issues with offset on the narrower rims. You could certainly find 44 to 47 mm rims that would work with a Pugs offset, might be harder on the moonlander. I bet Marge lites would work on the Moonlander with no problem.
    Latitude 61

  16. #16
    AJT
    AJT is offline
    I like bicycles
    Reputation: AJT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    130
    Have you read this? it talks about kinda funny steering.Moonlander compared to pugs, our review.
    Adventures off the beaten path
    www.backcountrybiking.co.uk

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bprsnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by brassnipples View Post
    I am very familiar with the importance of air pressure on these bikes and that's not what I meant by 'truck like'. I was pleasantly surprised with how nimble the ML felt but compared to the Pug it really felt like you sit on top of it rather than in it. It's far from terrible but the Pugsley just feels like a more well rounded ride.
    Well aaallllrightyyy then
    Moonlander's
    Sandman Hogger Ti

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    582
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveRice View Post
    It is my understanding that the Necromancer Pug is a Pugsley frame and not a Moonlander frame. The complete Necromancer does come with the non-offset Moonlander fork. As far as why one would pick the Pug over the Moonlander, I'm sure that the $500 may be a factor for some. Others may be concerned with the even greater wheel offset to clear the BFL on a CS. If I had to do it over and was forced to pick between the two, I would take the Moonlander.
    Oh yes..I see that now..."neck romancer 'pug'", sorry initial information overload had me muddled.

    One thing that somewhat stuck out to me was thinking if a felllow is not totally a hardcore snow, sand, open-field kind of rider but just by geographic circumstances more constrained to tended/maintained trails and engineered pathways (gravel, mups, streets, etc) then perhaps the moonlander might be too much and the standard pug with an option such as the 'black floyd' tires does more suitably broaden the pugs appeal and versatility to make it more ideal not quite at the edges of the spectrum where the moonlander shines more brightly...or am I simply trying to sweet-talk myself into a sound and reasonably justification to make this a reality?

    Could one imagine bombing about the city "floatin' caddilac" style, riding at a modest and enjoyable pace for a time then taking a foray into some hardpack, gravel or fire- road? I'm thinking somewhat like we from time to time have in the NorthEast or mid-atlantic, the occasional heavy snowfall that in reality is perhaps around for a few days at best where it either starts melting or liquified by rain that commonly follows a snow storm a few days after, turning the trails into a muddy, boggy swamp at which point I'd never ride it anyhow, else the temperature drops and its more a slick sheet of ice rather than crusty snow and then spiked tires are the better option.

    This is one of the number of vid's I came across today and I thought perhaps repesented the range of tasks I think seems would be the reality to a fellow like myself. You see a few instances where a moonlanders bigger shoes would be ideal but for the most part the regular pug seemed to fit the bill and not look out of place at all. Would the moonlander been the better choice? Hmm..maybe no besides riding the beach and the moors of which I have neither..
    <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/u2gi1UA8u6M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

    Again...just thinking out loud..

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,128
    Quote Originally Posted by brassnipples View Post
    A quick glance at the specs confirms that, the ML is only about 10mm longer, and the rest of the measurements are really close with only the chainstay and seat tube angle potentially contributing to the lengthy feel. So maybe it is just the rimes/tires that change the feel, it would be really interesting to do a side-by-side with a Pug using the same wheels.

    Still, I'd say that off the shelf the Pugsley is the better all rounder.
    Assuming the front end geo is the same between the Pugs and the ML a larger tire [Larry vs. BFL] will have more pneumatic trail and also more gyroscopic stability which will affect the feeling of how it handles - as will extra wheelbase length.

    I like the ability to swap wheels back to front in the Pugs. The Pugs 17.5mm offset also plays nicer with narrower double walled rims like the Large Marge for summer use.

    Having said that if you gave me a Moonlander I'd ride it...

    If there really is no reason to choose a Pugs over a ML Surly could save a bunch of $$$ by simply offer the ML in two different trim levels and dropping the Pugsley entirely. It would simplify their product line and inventory. If every Surly fatbike sold was a ML the cost would come down through greater sales volume.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  20. #20
    I'm how far behind?
    Reputation: Soloracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    571

    I see no reason to

    I briefly looked at the pugs to save some coin. To me the benefits of the bigger footprint far out weigh the any perceived disadvantages of the offset. I bought it to be a snow bike, nothing less, nothing more. It is my second snow bike, (the first being a Moots that I'm hoping to sell off) so I know what to expect. Zero interest in making it a summer ride, I already have a nice fs and ss. Bought it for the 6-8 months that I look outside my window and see snow. It is hard to beat for a purpose built dedicated snow bike. Looked at the 9 zero 7s and the mukluk, they just didn't do anything for me.

    For me float is king and the ml offers the most. The pugs is a good ride, great value but the xtra mms were worth the $ to me. I doubt the pugs is going anywhere judging by the number I see going out the door of my lbs.
    Fatter than most.

  21. #21
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Soloracer View Post
    I briefly looked at the pugs to save some coin. To me the benefits of the bigger footprint far out weigh the any perceived disadvantages of the offset. I bought it to be a snow bike, nothing less, nothing more. It is my second snow bike, (the first being a Moots that I'm hoping to sell off) so I know what to expect. Zero interest in making it a summer ride, I already have a nice fs and ss. Bought it for the 6-8 months that I look outside my window and see snow. It is hard to beat for a purpose built dedicated snow bike. Looked at the 9 zero 7s and the mukluk, they just didn't do anything for me.

    For me float is king and the ml offers the most. The pugs is a good ride, great value but the xtra mms were worth the $ to me. I doubt the pugs is going anywhere judging by the number I see going out the door of my lbs.
    Jim-

    Drop me a line when you get a minute--curious what you're looking to sell (frame only? Whole bike?), how much, etc...

    info@lacemine29.com

    Cheers,

    MC

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    23
    My .002 - I am new to the Fat Bike experience and with that I choose the Moonlander. Why, it is the new kid on the block. Bigger, fatter, slower, but I have a huge smile on my face when I am riding it. At the time of purchase I chose the Moonlander over the Pug because it weights less and has more floatation/suspension. Do I need more floatation? I am not sure on this. Why you ask, I live in San Diego, CA. No snow in sight and the single track out my backdoor has over 1000' of elevation gain in 6 miles. You might say that this is the wrong bike, but the unbelievable traction that these tires give you enables me to just ride right up those loose trails. Heck I am having such a good time on this bike that I am installing racks so that I can run errands on it. Speed is not my thing. Another reason why I chose to by a Fat Bike. I was tired of everyone trying to race me to the top of the hill. Now they see the bike and most yell "Fat Bike!!" and all is fun again! What is really scary is, I am starting to catch people going up those hills. Where their spinning out I just ride on thru. All I can say is buy a Fat Bike you will be glad you did.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    41
    I was a spectator at the Frosty Bottom this year and the pug was very well represented. There were many fatbacks, 9:zero:7's and muks but the pugs outnumbered them all I think.
    Winds at the start were gusting up to 15 out of the nw, putting the windchill well below the 0 mark. We've had nearly 80" of snow but the trail conditions were superb. Tires of choice were the Larry in front and endo in the rear.
    I have a 2012, 907 with the above tire combo and this works for me. Anything bigger is for extreme conditions is my understanding.
    Hope this helps and doesn't confuse the issue.

  24. #24
    Moon Child
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by crh911s View Post
    I was a spectator at the Frosty Bottom this year and the pug was very well represented. There were many fatbacks, 9:zero:7's and muks but the pugs outnumbered them all I think.
    Winds at the start were gusting up to 15 out of the nw, putting the windchill well below the 0 mark. We've had nearly 80" of snow but the trail conditions were superb. Tires of choice were the Larry in front and endo in the rear.
    I have a 2012, 907 with the above tire combo and this works for me. Anything bigger is for extreme conditions is my understanding.
    Hope this helps and doesn't confuse the issue.
    Ride the ML so you see how superior the floation is. BFLs are not for extreme conditions, they for snow where more floation allows more speed, less resistence.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,043
    Only real disadvantage of the increased Moonlander offset is that it would make lacing a set of 29er wheels difficult. Moonlander has a slightly wider Q factor than the Pugsley, but it's not much.

  26. #26
    i heart singletrack
    Reputation: mgersib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,551
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Many people (but certianly not all) ride narrower rims on their bikes in the summer for hardpack and singletrack. They are lighter and some of us think the rounder tire section handles singletrack better. My current choice in the summer is 47mm trials rims with Larry's front and rear. I would like to try the Marge lights as they might be a better compromise between weight, tire shape and float. I am riding a 165 symmetric bike so don't have issues with offset on the narrower rims. You could certainly find 44 to 47 mm rims that would work with a Pugs offset, might be harder on the moonlander. I bet Marge lites would work on the Moonlander with no problem.
    Yeah... I'd hesitate to run anything narrower than the Marge Lites on the Moonlander, but set up with them, I think it'd transform into a sweet summer roller, with really no downsides vs. the Pug (other than a little extra clearance, which to me is never a bad thing).

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    41
    Ride the ML so you see how superior the floation is. BFLs are not for extreme conditions, they for snow where more floation allows more speed, less resistence...Moon Child
    There's no doubt in my mind that there are certain snow conditions where the BFL's would prevail before anything else.
    I live in arctic environment and have a pretty good idea what works and what doesn't. I can see the benefit of BFL's on 4" of fresh snow on an 80" base; it's helps that the local nordic association grooms most of the trails in the Anchorage bowl area. On trail set by snow machines in the outer less populated areas to the north of me the BFL should prevail but off the the trail everyone pushes.
    The question is the selection of a pug or the ML and I think one has to decide what/where most of the riding will be done. Lighter and less rolling resistence is always better, there is no exception to this. The window for the BFL, like the Nate and Husker Du is narrow and I think this is something that one might want to consider.
    My comments here do not reflect any experience related to sand. I think riding on the beach, close to the water would be fun.
    And one other thing, since owning a fatbike I've learned just how important a pound or two of air in the tires can affect effort and performance. Or even shifting one's weight to the rear of the seat an inch or two. These are things to explore in an effort to get the best performance out of the Larry's and Endo's.
    Fatbikes aren't 29'rs I'm just not in this camp.

  28. #28
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Fresno View Post
    Ride the ML so you see how superior the floation is. BFLs are not for extreme conditions, they for snow where more floation allows more speed, less resistence.
    Anchorage is an anomaly when it comes to snow riding conditions. Really far north, low levels of sunlight, which means it gets heaps of cold, dry snow, requiring massive flotation, right?!?

    Wrong. It's a big city, sitting right on top of an ocean, so you get a good amount of very wet snow, and heaps and tons of traffic (groomers, skiers, riders, dog walkers, meese, even snowshoers) to keep it packed down. BFL's aren't needed more than .01% of the time on the trails in the bowl--in fact it's one of the rare places I've ridden where Endo's are actually effective. 50 to 70mm rims are all that you need 99.8% of the time there.

    But, as the saying goes, the good thing about Anchorage is that it's so close to Alaska. Get out away from 'the bowl' and into the bush and conditions change as you leave the maritime influence. Colder, drier, less traffic. In other words, what works in Anchorage has little in common with what works as you get into the interior, into the mountains, or up north.

    Back on topic, I think the best reason to choose a Pugs is to show that you're into neo-retro snow bikes.



    MC

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    the best reason to choose a Pugs is to show that you're into neo-retro snow bikes.



    MC
    Clearly

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    41
    I chose a pug as i am new to this fat biking game and think it will do everything i want it to.

    and it also looks cool, i am picking it up in the morning



    stubbster

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    749

    ML versus Fatback

    I have ridden the Pug, Moonlander and the Fatback. I own a 2012 Fatback with Umma's (90) and my best bud rides a new Moonlander with BFL's. Yesterday we rde in the perfect terrain for these bikes and swaped for a while so I can give you a very direct comparison. The ML is a fine bike but it has a major flaw IMO. It is using standard parts meant for smaller bikes, and same goes for the rear spacing. You can make the rear tire rub at will, and whoever described the ML as "truck like" is spot on. The M/L is a 1 ton 4X4, with a 4'' lift kit. Not exactly nimble. When I hopped back on my Fatback with the 90mm wide Ummas and Larry/Edno, the difference was HUGE. The Fatback is sooo much more performace oriented they aren't even cclose. Way more fun to ride, lighter, faster, everything about them is better. Yes the M/L has BFL's which I cannot run on the rear of my Fatback, but I will take the 170 rear end of the Fatback over the 135mm rear end of the ML anyday, and the 5lb weight savings is very noticable as well. The bikes are not comparable IMO. Now having said that, the M/L is a very capable bike and I had a great time riding it, but when we switched back there was less than zero doubt I had bought the right bike. If you can afford 2 fatbikes, having a M/L would be my second one, but it would be ridden substancially less. The lighter faster better handling bike would come off the hook way more. But they are also 2 different bikes so the comparison isn't really fair. The Fatback is a real mountain bike, the M/L is a big bike with fat tires on it, but it was a blast to ride like all fatire bikes. My buddy with the M/L, as well as my other buddy who was riding his Pug, both rode the Fatback, and they are both going to buy one, very very soon. They both loved riding it that much more than their Pug and M/L. No joke.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DavidJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    224
    I stewed over this same question for quite a while before deciding on the Moonlander.. I picked it up just a couple of days ago after doing a sup down-winder and because I did a vid of my down wind run I added a bit of vid from when I picked up my new Moonlander and for those interested you can see it at the end of this vid..

    I think I made the right choice.

    DJ


  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sylus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    65
    Not having either..yet..I found this thread very helpfull.

    I did have a moonlander on order but my move to the states meant all funds were needed till funds could be ensured for those annoying other things like bills. Now things are mellowing it's time to look again.

    I am interested in peoples opinions on the black ops/necro pug

    I was aware when the moonlander came out I got a bit carried away similar to the iphone fanboys who had to have the 4s over the 4 and so suddenly the pugs was rubbish and the moon was the only one on the radar. Then when the hormones calmed down I looked more and more at both.

    Now I'm in a position to actually buy I'm looking at prices and the difference between the two could be an internal hub on a pugs rather for the same cost, a standard moon.

    I hadn't thought of other options but reading this thread I might start looking

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by sylus View Post
    Not having either..yet..I found this thread very helpfull.

    I did have a moonlander on order but my move to the states meant all funds were needed till funds could be ensured for those annoying other things like bills. Now things are mellowing it's time to look again.

    I am interested in peoples opinions on the black ops/necro pug

    I was aware when the moonlander came out I got a bit carried away similar to the iphone fanboys who had to have the 4s over the 4 and so suddenly the pugs was rubbish and the moon was the only one on the radar. Then when the hormones calmed down I looked more and more at both.

    Now I'm in a position to actually buy I'm looking at prices and the difference between the two could be an internal hub on a pugs rather for the same cost, a standard moon.

    I hadn't thought of other options but reading this thread I might start looking
    I can not say a bad thing about the Moonlander, but I can say I am very happy with my Necro pug. I planed on the Necro to be my winter bike and now I find myself riding it more than my scott scale. Funny but I almost feel guilty doing so.

  35. #35
    Fail again. Fail better.
    Reputation: Dusza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    123
    Got the fat-fever myself and really couldn't decide but just found a video that got me sold on the Moonie:

    SURLY PUGSLEY & MOONLANDER ...

    Mind you I'm planning to use it rather as a seasonal bike for when it's wet and mushy or full of snow on ungroomed trails.

    Looking at that video I think they should ban hikers on muddy trails, they make them erode to fast!

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    48
    I live up in Fairbanks, AK and have been riding off trail for several miles (8-10 inches of uneven tundra-y moss) on my Moonlander and having a blast. I don't know that you could actually do that with any other bike and have it still be fun as hell.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,068
    I ride both and have drawn a few conclusions of both - i do not ride snow (UK) but trails and coastline...

    Moonie is mission specific = extra soft stuff, also great for slow speed rocks on the coast with more traction ,float and grip,

    Would i like to ride the moonie 5 miles each way on tarmac to the coast? nope

    Would i like to ride the pug 5 miles each way on tarmac to the coast? i do it often as it is a lot less work...

    Pugsley has way less drag on the road and is also a lot better on regular xc trails, it can be ridden along with normal xc bikes on group rides and keeps up no probs as long as there is not huge climbs, but if they are loose surfaces then shoes on the pugs foot with its grip...

    Horses for courses with the two tyre sizes , but you really need to justify a moonlander, not a pugsley though, i think about the black pug with 80mm rims as a half way house is a good choice for most people esp if they ride a bit sand

    I love it when folk talk down pugsley on here in favour of fatbacks etc... but hey you have to justify something when it costs a lot more eh? but that is not the discussion of this thread... pugsley is a damn fine bike capable of anything you can throw at it...
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

  38. #38
    Titanium junkie
    Reputation: Loudviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,420
    I can't really weigh in on the subject, but I can honestly
    say that the Pug, in the day I have had it, doesn't stop for nothing,
    and once on the bike, the weight isn't an issue.
    Glad I got a fatbike, and happy I got the Pugsley.
    Climb into the sky, never wonder why - Tailgunner
    You're a Tailgunner

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,068
    Pugsley probably is the best fatbike ever made Loudviking
    Even though other makes made since are lighter, more sexy looking or faster handling...
    but the pugsley probably has from its intro and still today with the most new sales with its popularity has put the most smiles on faces

    Oh why is your signiture `tail gunner?` just my friends dad was a RAF Lancaster Bomber tail gunner - tail end charlie in WW2 and he has written an amazing blog from his fathers diary of his experiances i can link you if you would like to read it
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

  40. #40
    Titanium junkie
    Reputation: Loudviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,420
    Quote Originally Posted by coastkid71 View Post
    Pugsley probably is the best fatbike ever made Loudviking
    Even though other makes made since are lighter, more sexy looking or faster handling...
    but the pugsley probably has from its intro and still today with the most new sales with its popularity has put the most smiles on faces

    Oh why is your signiture `tail gunner?` just my friends dad was a RAF Lancaster Bomber tail gunner - tail end charlie in WW2 and he has written an amazing blog from his fathers diary of his experiances i can link you if you would like to read it

    Cause my other machine is a Airborne Lucky Strike, and i like Iron Maiden
    so the song fits the bike. My Grandfather piloted a P-38 Lightning during WW2.
    Climb into the sky, never wonder why - Tailgunner
    You're a Tailgunner

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,068
    Cool, cheers!, i just blogged about a P38 found a few years ago on a remote beach
    coastrider: Lost in the sands of time...
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

  42. #42
    Fail again. Fail better.
    Reputation: Dusza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by coastkid71 View Post
    Would i like to ride the moonie 5 miles each way on tarmac to the coast? nope
    Playing around with tire pressure doesn't improve things? I was heavily torn between the necropugs and moonie. Went with the moonie but you just got me thinking. I do think I'll use it in "special" places, though sometimes you need to link them which might involve longer tarmac sections Really wanted to have a winter specific weekend-adventure bike and something you could also tour on while loaded, so the extra floatation seemed justified. I really like being in certain places but walking up to them is to time costly when the day is short - moonlander looked like the perfect riding-when-you'd-be-normaly-pushing type of bike

    Btw. good effort with the P-38!

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    70
    Tire pressure absolutely matters....

    I once testdrove a Pugs with (too) low pressure. Quite a drag on tarmac. Was very hesitant to go the fatbike route because of that experience. Still wanting a fatbike so ordered a ML. First test with the Moonlander on tarmac with proper tirepressure makes me smile from ear to ear. With approx 18psi I can sustain a speed of 30 km/h fairly easy in a group of riders. I'm also amazed how well the bike responds.

    I choose an 18" ML while I could easily handle a 20". A longer stem and a more racy position on the bike (handlebar much lower than the saddle) makes it more nimble as I'd expected it to be according to some posts I've read over here.

    So tirepressure and geometry/position on the bike are important factors.

  44. #44
    Geordie biker
    Reputation: saltyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,376
    Tire pressures are key yes, people riding mine smile and have fun, but unless you take them in serious areas and see what they can do in the right set up, that's where fatbikes are a league of there own.

    As for pug V moony, had both, and would live with either. Pugsley is the old faithful though, and now cracking value for money.
    2014 milage so far - 2,485
    www.ukfatbikes.co.uk

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    235
    Tire pressures are crucial on my Moonlander. Anything above about 12.5 is great on hard surfaces, in the desert sand down around 5. I notice as it starts to heat up and the pressure in the tire increases and the float starts to go. Pump em up when you hit the road to skip back to the car or home

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,068
    Ritchie you also proved a moonie can do a massive day out with climbs when we were at the UKfat2 meet in the Lake District


    FatBike Gathering 2 South Lakes 008 by coastkid71, on Flickr

    Post up the stats!
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

  47. #47
    Geordie biker
    Reputation: saltyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,376
    Certainly can, 32 miles in the mountains over taking suspension bikes and the like, it climbs and descends like a pro, certainly the most versatile bike I have owned.

    You can be on the beach one day, mountains and rocks the next and it's still at home taking me around the city in perfect comfort.....
    2014 milage so far - 2,485
    www.ukfatbikes.co.uk

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    235
    I guess if your going to use it as a general purpose bike you just need to change your mind set a bit. I used to have a VW T2 campervan which was awesome. But it wasnt quick. Long journeys just required a different approach. It was cool to rest your arms on the steering wheel and take in where you were.

    Of course a lighter bike will be faster up the hills and accelerate quicker but it wont cope with soft or low traction ground any where near as well. also with 4.7 inch tyres (front and back of course) there is plenty to smooth out the trail without any expensive to service suspension.

    But you've got to get the tyre pressures right, something I didnt manage to do on my one trip to the single track so far

  49. #49
    Fail again. Fail better.
    Reputation: Dusza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by saltyman View Post
    Certainly can, 32 miles in the mountains over taking suspension bikes and the like, it climbs and descends like a pro, certainly the most versatile bike I have owned.

    You can be on the beach one day, mountains and rocks the next and it's still at home taking me around the city in perfect comfort.....
    I was a bit worried that all this would be a drag with the moolander bit it looks like you're having a blast with everything you throw at it saltyman
    Can't wait for mine to arrive.

  50. #50
    Geordie biker
    Reputation: saltyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,376
    i use mine for everything.....commuting, and cardio mainly, but then its also ready for the beach or a day out in the forest tracks and mountains!

    its the most handy thing i have ever bought.
    2014 milage so far - 2,485
    www.ukfatbikes.co.uk

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The first year with the Surly Pugsley
    By Outsider in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-19-2013, 06:36 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-10-2011, 03:30 PM
  3. The first year with the Surly Pugsley
    By Outsider in forum Passion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 10-31-2011, 06:57 PM
  4. Non-offset forks on a Pugsley - why?
    By vikb in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-13-2010, 06:43 PM
  5. Need Pugsley / snow bike set up help
    By Bob the Wheelbuilder in forum Alaska
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 11-25-2005, 07:08 PM

Posting Permissions

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