Results 1 to 38 of 38
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    3

    Undecided on brands and a couple questions

    Hello,undecided between specialized Fatboy,Cannondale fatt cadd 2, trek Farley 5.
    Researching alot of forums and reviews I still don't know much being a noobie and just looking to get into bike riding again.
    Main purpose of bike is for trail,dirt road,camping/hunting set up.never will race and push hard on trails cause I am not into that kind of effort.length of trips will usually be 3-12 miles for hunting and trapping in the winter season.
    Which of the three factory bikes would I have the least problems with.

  2. #2
    because GIANT
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,217
    Trek knows how to make a badass fatbike. I cannot upset my Farley.

    Trek all the way, IMHO. I want one bike that lasts, no fuss ? Trek. easy.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,230
    There's a lot more good brands than bad brands. If you're having a shop do your maintenance, go with whatever they sell.

    I'd get a used Pugsley or Moonlander. They have lots of braze ons for hunting/camping and will be nearly half the price of the bikes you listed.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,117
    https://www.specialized.com/us/en/me...omp-fat/118334

    If you don't want to work and you'll be spending most of your time hauling gear and riding on dirt roads.

    Don't hate me, but really, that's what they're for... otherwise I'd get a far=t bike that has lots of mounting points and has decent handling, like a Surly ICT.

  5. #5
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,333
    Trek hands down.
    It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    224
    I can't say enough good about my Pivot Les Fat. I put a 120mm Bluto on it. Great bike. 4.8" Bud /Lou in the winter. 29" x 3.00 Chupacabras in the summer.

  7. #7
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,350
    9 Zero 7.
    I like turtles

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    165

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    237
    IMHO they are all good bikes. Go for the best deal you can negotiate. There are plenty of similar options, not much different, perhaps a touch cheaper as they aren't from as big a name companies

  10. #10
    CS2
    CS2 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CS2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,779
    No Surly love? Considering they invented Fat and + bikes they deserve a nod.
    A garage full of steel frames means happiness.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Whatever you decide you need at least a short test ride before you buy. After my first 3 test rides (Surley/Specialized/Charge) I came to the conclusion I didn't really want a Fatbike. Luckily someone talked me into trying a Salsa. No more lawn tractor like handling, steered like a regular bike which is how I planned to use it.
    Mole

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    Whatever you decide you need at least a short test ride before you buy. After my first 3 test rides (Surley/Specialized/Charge) I came to the conclusion I didn't really want a Fatbike. Luckily someone talked me into trying a Salsa. No more lawn tractor like handling, steered like a regular bike which is how I planned to use it.
    Mole
    Are you going to use it over snow in the winter? That is the justification for a fat bike. Even then you can go with a 29 x 3.00 or 2.8 in the summer.

  13. #13
    IH, HYHT.
    Reputation: Forster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    3,154
    I'm in partial agreement with endo alley, although I can justify a fat bike without considering winter, it weighed heavily on my choice. For hunting/camping/hauling you'll want to look at the Surly Wednesday and perhaps the Krampus and Karate Monkey 27.5+. Lots of rack options on all three.
    The most expensive bike in the world is still cheaper than the cheapest open heart surgery.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Quote Originally Posted by endo_alley View Post
    Are you going to use it over snow in the winter? That is the justification for a fat bike. Even then you can go with a 29 x 3.00 or 2.8 in the summer.
    Fatbike is a mountainbike to me. I live the Phoenix Arizona area so would have to drive a bit to get any snow (pretty much hate the cold anyway). I also have a plus bike and several 29er's but ride the fatty's most (almost 6000mi. last yr. just on the 2 fatbikes) because I enjoy them more. I'll admit the other bikes may be more appropriate for my typical terrain but I ride for fun and health plus I have very bad eyes so it helps to be able to just bomb through things and not worry about the perfect line (that's my justification). As far as comments for OP just relating my experence on how different a fatbike can handle/feel/steer compared to a regular bike (or between different fat-bikes) and encouraging him to at least take a small test to see if the bike is to his liking. I've noticed lately a lot more fatbikes a using trail oriented geometry I assume because they aren't just used on snow anymore.
    Mole
    Last edited by MRMOLE; 1 Week Ago at 07:34 AM.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    224
    " I've noticed lately a lot more fatbikes a using trail oriented geometry I assume because they aren't just used on snow anymore." I replaced my headset with an angleset to slacken the head angle from 69d to 68d. I like it better.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,117
    The OP is new to fat bikes, and because there are so many choices, he's overwhelmed and having buyers constipation.

    To the OP: You can't go wrong if you buy a bike that is designed for your range of uses.

    If you are you going to carry gear, you need tons of mounts, fork, frame, triangle.

    Frame material is not important.
    Suspension is optional... You can add it later.

    Keep in mind that pricing is similar across larger brands based on the parts group. Decide on the level of parts you want, then look at the bike offerings with that group.

    Buying last year's model in the summer will net some savings, but buying used will save you upwards of 50% over new.

    This is you first fat bike, you're just getting back into bikes, I'd pick a bike, then find it used on Pinkbike. A very nice Surly could be had for $1000-1500.

  17. #17
    because GIANT
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,217
    Quote Originally Posted by CS2 View Post
    No Surly love? Considering they invented Fat and + bikes they deserve a nod.
    yeah fat bikes that ride like dead whales, sure.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,117
    No, trail oriented geometry in fat bikes is a reflection of what is going on in all bike categories; fat bikes are just a little slower to evolve.

    Slack and snow works quite well, in fact I think it works better for keeping the front wheel floating.

    Same can be said for short chainstays, nothing gets the power to the ground better or makes it easier to loft the front end than a short chainstay.

    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    Fatbike is a mountainbike to me. I live the Phoenix Arizona area so would have to drive a bit to get any snow (pretty much hate the cold anyway). I also have a plus bike and several 29er's but ride the fatty's most (almost 6000mi. last yr. just on the 2 fatbikes) because I enjoy them more. I'll admit the other bikes may be more appropriate for my typical terrain but I ride for fun and health plus I have very bad eyes so it helps to be able to just bomb through things and not worry about the perfect line (that's my justification). As far as comments for OP just relating my experence on how different a fatbike can handle/feel/steer compared to a regular bike and encouraging him to at least take a small test to see if the bike is to his liking. I've noticed lately a lot more fatbikes a using trail oriented geometry I assume because they aren't just used on snow anymore.
    Mole

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    There's a lot more good brands than bad brands. If you're having a shop do your maintenance, go with whatever they sell.

    I'd get a used Pugsley or Moonlander. They have lots of braze ons for hunting/camping and will be nearly half the price of the bikes you listed.
    My first fatbike was a Pug. It also serves as my first MTB in over 20 years. I loved it. I sold it and bought his sister, Wednesday. No regrets.

    Test ride everything you can. Support your LBS. Pick a bike you like.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  20. #20
    Fat Is Where It's At Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,507
    OP, have you checked the Growler MBS? If you're looking into alloy and fit between S and L you should check them out. They are like bikes direct but your bike is the result of picking up the options (including color) you want, www.growlerbikes.com They also have a carbon frame but all sold out.

    Started with a Framed Minn 2 and very happy with my MBS.

  21. #21
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,258
    Quote Originally Posted by madcatter View Post
    Hello,undecided between specialized Fatboy,Cannondale fatt cadd 2, trek Farley 5.
    Researching alot of forums and reviews I still don't know much being a noobie and just looking to get into bike riding again.
    Main purpose of bike is for trail,dirt road,camping/hunting set up.never will race and push hard on trails cause I am not into that kind of effort.length of trips will usually be 3-12 miles for hunting and trapping in the winter season.
    Which of the three factory bikes would I have the least problems with.

    A lil sound advice... Get out and test ride many. Being a sizable purchase, you owe it to yourself to find the one that turns that "my new bike" light on.
    Reviews are wonderful but do not replace your own experience with any given bike. The companies mentioned all offer a good, reliable product.
    Test em out!
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by BansheeRune View Post
    A lil sound advice... Get out and test ride many. Being a sizable purchase, you owe it to yourself to find the one that turns that "my new bike" light on.
    Reviews are wonderful but do not replace your own experience with any given bike. The companies mentioned all offer a good, reliable product.
    Test em out!
    I have to agree with that.

    I ride nearly 100% on the street in urban/suburban settings. I wanted a 'bike with fat tires' because I prefer how they feel in handling, I like the ride they give, and I am not much enamored of suspension on bicycles for various reasons. I ride a pedelectric to accommodate my now-replaced hip and repaired knee: it gives me a level of assistance that I need to keep riding past my human-power-only limitations.

    The type of tires you fit to whatever bike you buy are a huge part of the feel and handling. I had my bike fitted with Surley Black Floyd smooth road tires before I took it home. No 'tractor like steering' or knobby noise from them ... Inflated to the right range (20-25 psi) they turn in fast, present fantastic grip, excellent braking, and give me a superb ride over the most screwed up pavement. AND they work great on gravel and dirt, across a field, too.

    My bike is a 2017 iZip E3 Sumo. I took it home on April 6. The previous bike was a more roadie standard ebike that I bought last December. It's a good bike, I just didn't like riding it much... The Sumo I can barely stay away from, I've put over 500 miles on it already.

    So read, look, listen to what others say ... But do test rides and listen to what your body and head have to say over any of them. Find a good dealer whom you can work with ... that's probably one of the most important things.

    G

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    No, trail oriented geometry in fat bikes is a reflection of what is going on in all bike categories; fat bikes are just a little slower to evolve.

    Slack and snow works quite well, in fact I think it works better for keeping the front wheel floating.

    Same can be said for short chainstays, nothing gets the power to the ground better or makes it easier to loft the front end than a short chainstay.







    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post

    Fatbike is a mountainbike to me. I live the Phoenix Arizona area so would have to drive a bit to get any snow (pretty much hate the cold anyway). I also have a plus bike and several 29er's but ride the fatty's most (almost 6000mi. last yr. just on the 2 fatbikes) because I enjoy them more. I'll admit the other bikes may be more appropriate for my typical terrain but I ride for fun and health plus I have very bad eyes so it helps to be able to just bomb through things and not worry about the perfect line (that's my justification). As far as comments for OP just relating my experence on how different a fatbike can handle/feel/steer compared to a regular bike and encouraging him to at least take a small test to see if the bike is to his liking. I've noticed lately a lot more fatbikes a using trail oriented geometry I assume because they aren't just used on snow anymore.
    Mole
    I get the trend towards slacker geometry (which I prefer). Even though I'm getting close to 15,000mi. on my Fat's I'm still a noob in typical Fatbike riding because of my total lack of snow experience (why I chose the word assume in my statement) and am wondering if there's any advantage to more traditional fatbike geometry (70+ degree head angles/longish chainstays)? My assumption on slacker geo because of different trail condition usage was based largely on company's like Surly who brought out new trail oriented frames with the slacker geo yet retained their snow oriented frames (Moonlander/Pugsley). I'd like to know for knowledge sake but pros/cons of both trail/snow geo would be advantageous to OP also in picking out what would be best for him. Thanks for the help.
    Mole

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,117
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    I get the trend towards slacker geometry (which I prefer). Even though I'm getting close to 15,000mi. on my Fat's I'm still a noob in typical Fatbike riding because of my total lack of snow experience (why I chose the word assume in my statement) and am wondering if there's any advantage to more traditional fatbike geometry (70+ degree head angles/longish chainstays)? My assumption on slacker geo because of different trail condition usage was based largely on company's like Surly who brought out new trail oriented frames with the slacker geo yet retained their snow oriented frames (Moonlander/Pugsley). I'd like to know for knowledge sake but pros/cons of both trail/snow geo would be advantageous to OP also in picking out what would be best for him. Thanks for the help.
    Mole
    No advantage in snow or dirt, possibly an advantage when touring, mostly it's a holdover from old school geo. It'll take a couple years to change; fat bikes are stubborn.

  25. #25
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    No advantage in snow or dirt, possibly an advantage when touring, mostly it's a holdover from old school geo. It'll take a couple years to change; fat bikes are stubborn.
    More like an altered commuter. Thus custom was on the table not too long ago.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    No advantage in snow or dirt, possibly an advantage when touring, mostly it's a holdover from old school geo. It'll take a couple years to change; fat bikes are stubborn.
    Thanks!
    Mole

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    No advantage in snow or dirt, possibly an advantage when touring, mostly it's a holdover from old school geo. It'll take a couple years to change; fat bikes are stubborn.
    Sorry, but there ARE advantages to steeper headtube angles in certain circumstances. On the tight, twisty trails I ride on here on the east coast, it's significantly easier to carry speed through the many sharp, narrow turns and/or thread your way through rock gardens. The handling is noticeably more nimble. If that's not your thing, fine, but to use pejorative labels like "old school" to describe frames with this kind of design is simply ill-informed or close-minded. Like all aspects of bike design, no frame geometry is the best everywhere as you insinuate.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,117
    I think it would be beneficial for folks to have demo opportunities to ride fat bikes, plus bikes, ect.. that have new gen geo (long and slack, short chainstays) that way they could see that the wives tails about slack bikes "pushing snow" and short chainstays making bikes "wheelie" are not accurate.

    I am not a super agro rider, over fifty, biggest airs are 3-4', no tricks, no armor, just a regular guy riding bikes. A few years back I went with new gen geo at the advice of a shop after I returned to biking from Muni after a five year hiatus. I started with a Kona Honzo and it was love at first sight. That was a few years ago, back when a 68deg HTA was considered slack and a 17" chainstays were considered short.

    Five + years later I consider anything over 67deg to be relatively steep and I want chainstays as short as technically possible (16-16.5).

    My new Fatillac build is what I would consider to be the top of the heap in terms of fat bike geo, with a standard hta of 67 and chainstays of 16.5". I'll probably slack it out further depending on how the geo feels with a Mastodon 150mm travel fork.

    I hail from a twenty year run on the East Coast, TN/NC/, I have ridden gnarly trails in BC, I regularly road trip to Moab/Fruita, and I have yet to find a place where a steep hta has any benefit other than in trials or BMX trick riding. As to long chainstays, all I can say is why would anyone want to make it hard to manual a mountain bike? If you want a touring bike, then get a touring bike, but don't call it a mountain bike.

    Quote Originally Posted by BansheeRune View Post
    More like an altered commuter. Thus custom was on the table not too long ago.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by FitmanNJ View Post
    Sorry, but there ARE advantages to steeper headtube angles in certain circumstances. On the tight, twisty trails I ride on here on the east coast, it's significantly easier to carry speed through the many sharp, narrow turns and/or thread your way through rock gardens. The handling is noticeably more nimble. If that's not your thing, fine, but to use pejorative labels like "old school" to describe frames with this kind of design is simply ill-informed or close-minded. Like all aspects of bike design, no frame geometry is the best everywhere as you insinuate.
    "it's significantly easier to carry speed through the many sharp, narrow turns and/or thread your way through rock gardens." Carrying speed, and riding over rocks, imho, is where steep HA is a hindrance. With a steep HA, the rocks tend to push you all over the trail, when riding at speed. And it seems like steep HA prefers slower speeds while cornering.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,117
    Exactly!

    Steep HTA are old school, no one is going back to those designs because they don't work.

    And yes, steep hta does favor slower riding styles, which is why it persists with some fat bikers, BMX, and trials.

    All I'd add is that having coming from steep HTA, followed by a big drank of the koolaid, my riding improved and I can't see any reason to go backwards.

    Make the investment in time and effort to learn how to ride a slack geo bike, it'll pay off in big dividends.

    Quote Originally Posted by endo_alley View Post
    "it's significantly easier to carry speed through the many sharp, narrow turns and/or thread your way through rock gardens." Carrying speed, and riding over rocks, imho, is where steep HA is a hindrance. With a steep HA, the rocks tend to push you all over the trail, when riding at speed. And it seems like steep HA prefers slower speeds while cornering.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    224
    One good way of looking at it is what do enduro riders use? They seem to make it around corners of all types, narrow radius, longer radius, in sloped, flat, etc, on a slack bike, just fine.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1
    I'm partial due to my love for grassroots local companies, but I really think Borealis makes a MEAN and light bike at the lowest price point.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    3
    Well,I eliminated the specialed and Cannondale from my decisions.added surley and salsa to the possibilities,problem is no one around here has one in stock to demo ride.also may look into Rocky MTNreasons to dump specialized-( again all info is from internet research which I don't take to much from unless there is a repeating consensus)wheel hubs and brakes.
    Reason to dump Cannondale is not enough info on there own crank.

  34. #34
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,258
    Quote Originally Posted by madcatter View Post
    Well,I eliminated the specialed and Cannondale from my decisions.added surley and salsa to the possibilities,problem is no one around here has one in stock to demo ride.also may look into Rocky MTNreasons to dump specialized-( again all info is from internet research which I don't take to much from unless there is a repeating consensus)wheel hubs and brakes.
    Reason to dump Cannondale is not enough info on there own crank.
    C'dale's a boat anchor. RSD Mayor? 15% off at the moment. Shipping is included in the price.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    3
    Not in my budget.my limit is $2200-$2450.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    237
    Nothing wrong with Cannondale cranks. Though the bike is expensive for a rigid, and the rest of the components are a bit dated (X5/X7) and low end for a rigid at that price point

  37. #37
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,258
    Quote Originally Posted by madcatter View Post
    Not in my budget.my limit is $2200-$2450.
    Build 1 is 1700 US with a 15% discount 1450 US, not too shabby!

    Thru axle, carbon fork are standard. The ability to run 5.05's if ya desire.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mschafer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    45
    I think for your purpose a lot of fat bikes will do. I would look at the lightest frame possible that allows you to ride the widest tires for your purpose and go from there. Always considering budget and needs you could built a nice carbon frame with simple components. I think especially with fat bikes in any terrain you want to be as light as possible and the frame is the center of it all...I like Borealis...but that was expensive...

Similar Threads

  1. Making my first bike purchase and I'm undecided.
    By BoogieMane in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-16-2016, 07:31 AM
  2. Couple of hours to go: Still undecided
    By Trufont in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-12-2015, 08:50 AM
  3. airborne vs. other brands (and a couple other Q's)
    By bear99 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-18-2013, 05:19 PM
  4. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-18-2011, 05:06 PM
  5. Very undecided. HD size help. S or M ??
    By playu72 in forum Ibis
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-15-2011, 12:36 PM

Members who have read this thread: 133

Posting Permissions

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