The Salsa Fargo Thread

Printable View

  • 10-21-2016
    grizzler
    taowave, the fargo does have shorter reach because of the drop bars.

    I'm 6'2" with a wingspan of 6'4" and I ride a large fargo with 100mm stem and large woodchippers. I also ride a large Pony Rustler with a 50mm stem and 800mm bars (reach is 11mm shorter than a timberjack). Both fit perfectly for my taste and match the style of riding I do with each bike.

    Best input I can give is to see if there is one in town you can check the fit on.
  • 10-21-2016
    taowave
    Hi Grizzler,
    That makes total sense. The reach has to be shorter to compensate for the drop bar effect. and to maintain a mountain bike "fit". makes sense why the reach is shorter with dropbars..

    I just measured my reach for he first time.At 6'3.5",I have a 6'5" wingspan.I did manage to find a L Deadwood in town,and that felt pretty good without any adjustments from the store.Probably going with the XL Fargo 29 er.Any thoughts on wood chipper vs cowtipper?



    Quote:

    Originally Posted by grizzler View Post
    taowave, the fargo does have shorter reach because of the drop bars.

    I'm 6'2" with a wingspan of 6'4" and I ride a large fargo with 100mm stem and large woodchippers. I also ride a large Pony Rustler with a 50mm stem and 800mm bars (reach is 11mm shorter than a timberjack). Both fit perfectly for my taste and match the style of riding I do with each bike.

    Best input I can give is to see if there is one in town you can check the fit on.

  • 10-21-2016
    grizzler
    I love my woodchippers, which seems to be a less popular opinion. I haven't tried the cowchippers (or tippers heh) but the less severe flare is appealing for commuting/tame trails. I found myself on the end of the flare for tough climbs. If I were building one today I would be the cowchippers simply out curiousity... you're going to have an awesome bike either way!
  • 10-21-2016
    GreenMason
    The woodchippers took some getting used to but once I did the bike only got better - If that is possible.
  • 10-21-2016
    taowave
    You should think about getting a gig at Salsa:)


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GreenMason View Post
    The woodchippers took some getting used to but once I did the bike only got better - If that is possible.

  • 10-26-2016
    misternicholas
    I pre-ordered a Fargo about a month ago. Has anyone heard any update on when they will start shipping? Last I heard was mid November.

    Also, do the alternators to swap the wheels come with the complete bike or are they sold separately? I ordered a 27.5" but plan to build some a set of 29" wheels for bikepacking.

    Thanks!
  • 10-26-2016
    Erik_A
    My original comment. You can look at the stack and reach for various drop-bar "monstercross" type bikes. My XL 2015 Fargo was just too short in the reach for my comfort level. I felt way too upright. So I sold it and built a 60cm SOMA Wolverine which has a longer reach: Wolverine | SOMA Fabrications - Then for 2017 Salsa extended the reach on the XL Fargo: FARGO GX 2X10 | Bikes | Salsa Cycles - if you compare the 2 two geometry tables both bikes now have a similar reach, but the Fargo's stack is 45mm taller than the Soma.

    The Fargo is best for folks with long legs and short torso and arms (in my opinion). I prefer a bit lower stack, but y main bike is a cyclocross - so that maybe why.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by taowave View Post
    Hi,new to Mountain Bikes,and am looking at the Fargo,Jamis Dragonslayer,marin PM1 and the Krampus with the fargo as my #1 choice.As I am 6'4",I was concerned a bit with your comment regarding the Fargo reach possibly being too short.

    What I don't get is since the Fargo has drop bars that appear to extend way beyond where a mountain bike handlebar does,doesnt that effectively extend the reach?

    Am I missing something?

    Any input greatly appreciated

  • 10-26-2016
    Erik_A
    My original comment. You can compare the stack and reach for various drop-bar "monstercross" type bikes.

    My XL 2015 Fargo was just too short in the reach for my comfort level. I felt way too upright. I always felt like I needed to move the seat back (even with a set-back seatpost). So I sold it and built a 60cm SOMA Wolverine which has a longer reach: Wolverine | SOMA Fabrications

    Then for 2017 Salsa extended the reach on the XL Fargo: FARGO GX 2X10 | Bikes | Salsa Cycles - if you compare the 2 two geometry tables both bikes now have a similar reach, but the Fargo's stack is 45mm taller than the Soma.

    The Fargo is best for folks with long legs and short torso and arms (in my opinion). I prefer a bit lower stack, but y main bike is a cyclocross - so that maybe why.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by taowave View Post
    Hi,new to Mountain Bikes,and am looking at the Fargo,Jamis Dragonslayer,marin PM1 and the Krampus with the fargo as my #1 choice.As I am 6'4",I was concerned a bit with your comment regarding the Fargo reach possibly being too short.

    What I don't get is since the Fargo has drop bars that appear to extend way beyond where a mountain bike handlebar does,doesnt that effectively extend the reach?

    Am I missing something?

    Any input greatly appreciated

  • 10-26-2016
    Erik_A
    My original comment. You can compare the stack and reach for various drop-bar "monstercross" type bikes.

    My XL 2015 Fargo was just too short in the reach for my comfort level. I felt way too upright. I always felt like I needed to move the seat back (even with a set-back seatpost). So I sold it and built a 60cm SOMA Wolverine which has a longer reach: Wolverine | SOMA Fabrications

    Then for 2017 Salsa extended the reach on the XL Fargo: FARGO GX 2X10 | Bikes | Salsa Cycles - if you compare the 2 two geometry tables both bikes now have a similar reach, but the Fargo's stack is 45mm taller than the Soma.

    The Fargo is best for folks with long legs and short torso and arms (in my opinion). I prefer a bit lower stack, but y main bike is a cyclocross - so that maybe why.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by taowave View Post
    Hi,new to Mountain Bikes,and am looking at the Fargo,Jamis Dragonslayer,marin PM1 and the Krampus with the fargo as my #1 choice.As I am 6'4",I was concerned a bit with your comment regarding the Fargo reach possibly being too short.

    What I don't get is since the Fargo has drop bars that appear to extend way beyond where a mountain bike handlebar does,doesnt that effectively extend the reach?

    Am I missing something?

    Any input greatly appreciated

  • 10-28-2016
    misternicholas
    2017 Fargo just showed up in the Fargo FB group:
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/sals...target&fref=nf

    Hoping this means mine will be arriving soon! :)
  • 11-02-2016
    bigoz5
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Erik_A View Post
    Unless you want carbon; I would look at the new Salsa Timberjack 27.5+ in Medium (the defacto replacement for the steel El Mariachi). TIMBERJACK 27.5+ X1 | Bikes | Salsa Cycles Great deal for $1400; even if you decide to upgrade to drop-bars. In my opinion the Fargo's reach is way too short for someone with long arms.

    Med. Timberjack (27.5 +) = Reach: 430mm / Standover: 29.5"
    Med. Fargo (27.5 +) = Reach: 368mm / Standover: 30.6"

    I've been thinking through this idea since you posted this a month back.

    I had always just assumed putting drop bars on something designed for flat bars would just mess things up too much. However, with an ape index of ~2in and a long torso (my wife and I have the same inseam, though she is 4 inches shorter) this isn't exactly the case for me.

    I've been playing around with Stack and reach calculator (a GREAT tool for figuring out bike fit). It shows that throwing drop bars, a normal stem, and a few spacers on a medium El Mar would give me pretty much the same fit as a medium Fargo with the long stem I would need to make things comfortable. Then I wouldn't have to jump up to the large Fargo (standover issues) and would have plenty of room to add a longer stem in the future (I couldn't see myself ever needing to go shorter). This particularly works given my use case...about 90% commuting with about 10% dirt/gravel/singletrack.

    As a plus, I feel like there are 10x as many used El Mars up for grabs as there are used Fargos, and they go for much cheaper. Only downside with the El Mar/Timberjack route...lack of braze-ons. Though with a firestarter fork, a tap and die for the rear alternators, and a few other tricks, I should be able to squeeze on some fenders and racks.
  • 11-14-2016
    ciquta
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bigoz5 View Post
    I've been playing around with Stack and reach calculator (a GREAT tool for figuring out bike fit). It shows that throwing drop bars, a normal stem, and a few spacers on a medium El Mar would give me pretty much the same fit as a medium Fargo with the long stem I would need to make things comfortable.

    a El Mar it's a total different bike

    The stack is way too low to be comfortable with drop bars (unless you want to stay in the hoods for most time).
    A shorter stem means less cornering precision, and with a shorter reach and low stack you dont really have a rest position.
    And last but not least the BB drop: 10mm difference is HUGE.

    There's a reason why Fargo is 10 times less likely to be found on used market
  • 11-14-2016
    bigoz5
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ciquta View Post
    a El Mar it's a total different bike
    ...
    There's a reason why Fargo is 10 times less likely to be found on used market

    Yeah, since originally posting that bit about the El Mar, I've kind of come full circle. A drop bar El Mar would just have too many trade-offs I'm not willing to make. So, back to looking for a decent Fargo.

    Fortunately, I recently picked one up for my wife...a crazy-good deal came up locally on a Fargo in her size. She loves it...rides it every day. So once our finances recover a bit, it SHOULD be easier to get her consent on picking one up in my size, right?
  • 11-23-2016
    Crowley
    1 Attachment(s)
    Attachment 1106928
    Scary monster after my Fargo.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 11-25-2016
    cackalacky
    3 Attachment(s)
    Suspension
    I wanted to use the Fargo as my main MTB this winter, so I threw my old Reba Race on it. I also finally converted the WTB Asym wheels to tubeless with a new set of Maxxis Forekasters. I moved my levers down so I could reach them in the drops, but need to adjust them a bit more and replace the bar tape.

  • 11-25-2016
    Forster
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cackalacky View Post
    I wanted to use the Fargo as my main MTB this winter, so I threw my old Reba Race on it. I also finally converted the WTB Asym wheels to tubeless with a new set of Maxxis Forekasters. I moved my levers down so I could reach them in the drops, but need to adjust them a bit more and replace the bar tape.


    Have you run them in snow or ice yet? How grippy is that rubber?
  • 11-25-2016
    cackalacky
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Forster View Post
    Have you run them in snow or ice yet? How grippy is that rubber?

    I've only ridden them around my yard, so really can't say. Won't have snow for a couple of months here. The knobs are big and soft, so they should be pretty grippy. Have you seen the Forekaster thread? http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/...r-1008764.html

    I will say they mounted up super easy with just a JoeBlow "fat" floor pump.
  • 11-26-2016
    Crowley
    Post ride in Bishop California



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 11-26-2016
    renegade44
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by renegade44 View Post
    Wouldn't mind trying these on my Gen 1 Fargo. With the low tread, I'm guessing these will be close to a 2.4 tire that the Gen 1 Fargo was rated for.

    Tires | Parts and Accessories | Surly Bikes

    While the Surly ET 29er tires are not available yet, I did pick up a lightly used pair of Schwalbe Big One 29x2.3 tires. These tires are so much fun! Super quick on pavement, and plenty of cushion for light singletrack.

    Fast and and fat by jon_baler, on Flickr
  • 11-27-2016
    farleybob

    Salsa #5 Frame bag for sale off my XL 2014 Fargo. Like new if someone needs one. $125 shipped in conus.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 11-28-2016
    patrickevers
    3 Attachment(s)
    Two pics from september 2016. The Torino-Nice rally.
    Introducing the Torino-Nice Rally

    Great trip, 680KM, 19000 meters elevation gain. On my trusted fargo. Left my bikepacking setup at home and used panniers, which I regretted on day 1.

    Attachment 1107572

    Attachment 1107573

    Attachment 1107575
  • 11-28-2016
    patrickevers
    I know the fargo (model 2015) is designed for max 2.3 inch tires. I tried the panaracers FatBNimble 29+ (about 2.8 inch) a few months ago, but they just didn't have enough clearance in the rear.

    For the winter I want to have some more width. Will the new Schwalbe Nobby Nic Evolution SnakeSkin 29+ (29x2.60) fit my 2015 fargo?
  • 12-01-2016
    ipaulog
    New Fargo Owner
    First post having read most of the thread and various other places like Guitar Ted's blog.
    I'm putting together a Fargo having picked up a 2 year old (I think) frame that had been stored and never built up.
    I'm sure there are other things that I will probably ask but for now I need to buy a front derailleur. I'm using Shimano XT as I have parts already stored away. The Salsa page for my frame states high direct mount front derailleur (problem solvers clamp included). Is there a reason an XT clamp type won't do the job?

    Thanks for any help,
    Paul.
  • 12-02-2016
    Guitar Ted
    Welcome! (And thanks for checking out the blog)

    No reason at all that a band clamp front derailleur wouldn't work, but you may want to be aware of the location of the lower seat tube mounted water bottle boss. It may interfere with your clamp depending upon your front chain ring size for the big ring. If things align just right, you may see interference with a high clamp style and you may have to seek out a low clamp style to make things work.
  • 12-02-2016
    ipaulog
    Just the kind of help I was after - off to do some measuring. I'll be running 40-28 at the front.
    Much appreciated,
    Paul

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Guitar Ted View Post
    Welcome! (And thanks for checking out the blog)

    No reason at all that a band clamp front derailleur wouldn't work, but you may want to be aware of the location of the lower seat tube mounted water bottle boss. It may interfere with your clamp depending upon your front chain ring size for the big ring. If things align just right, you may see interference with a high clamp style and you may have to seek out a low clamp style to make things work.

  • 12-07-2016
    PeterJM
    I have a Salsa Fargo 2 (2015). For an upcoming bikepacking trip, I am thinking of running Maxxis Ikon 2.35 tires in the back on a WTB Asym i29 rim (29mm internal diameter). Would that work (in terms of clearance)? Or would a 25mm internal diameter rim be a better/safer option? Thanks for your help! :)
  • 12-07-2016
    big_papa_nuts
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PeterJM View Post
    I have a Salsa Fargo 2 (2015). For an upcoming bikepacking trip, I am thinking of running Maxxis Ikon 2.35 tires in the back on a WTB Asym i29 rim (29mm internal diameter). Would that work (in terms of clearance)? Or would a 25mm internal diameter rim be a better/safer option? Thanks for your help! :)

    I29 is too wide for a 2.35". You will gain nothing but sidewall exposure and sketchy cornering, I25 will be much better.
  • 12-07-2016
    ironacct
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PeterJM View Post
    I have a Salsa Fargo 2 (2015). For an upcoming bikepacking trip, I am thinking of running Maxxis Ikon 2.35 tires in the back on a WTB Asym i29 rim (29mm internal diameter). Would that work (in terms of clearance)? Or would a 25mm internal diameter rim be a better/safer option? Thanks for your help! :)

    FWIW, with my Fargo I ran Maxxis Ardent 2.4 tubeless on Velocity Blunt 35 rims (inner width 30mm) on a trip through the high Rockies last summer. Lots of gravel, rocks, more rocks, etc., especially above treeline. Traction and comfort was excellent at around 22psi. Sidewall exposure for me was not an issue...rim width is only half the tire width. I have also run 25mm internal width rims with these tires and that should work fine, but if it was me I'd go with the 29mm.
  • 12-08-2016
    ciquta
    I see on the specs the Fargo has a straight headtube but the firestarter carbon is tapered... does it use a headset adapter?!?

    I sold my Fargo and I'm in the process of building a custom Ti frame stealing a lot of hints from this bike, so I wonder if that is a proper setup or I'd better get a tapered headtube.
  • 12-08-2016
    ironacct
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ciquta View Post
    I see on the specs the Fargo has a straight headtube but the firestarter carbon is tapered... does it use a headset adapter?!?
    headtube.

    It's a 44mm straight headtube, which is a larger diameter than the straight 1 1/8" headtube found on pre-2013 Fargo models. Accordingly, it uses a headset with the larger outer diameter, but with bearings of different inner diameters for the upper and lower cups to accommodate the tapered fork.
  • 12-08-2016
    ironacct
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PeterJM View Post
    I have a Salsa Fargo 2 (2015). For an upcoming bikepacking trip, I am thinking of running Maxxis Ikon 2.35 tires in the back on a WTB Asym i29 rim (29mm internal diameter). Would that work (in terms of clearance)? Or would a 25mm internal diameter rim be a better/safer option? Thanks for your help! :)

    It occurred to me this morning that I have a 2.35 Ikon mounted to an i25 rim on another bike. The width at 25psi is a true 2.35". The 2.4 Ardent on my 2008 Fargo measures 2.39" at 22psi on a 30mm inner width rim with plenty of clearance. So, to your specific question, the Ikon 2.35 will fit the Fargo just fine. I also thought a bit more about your rim choice. I don't think you can go wrong with either rim choice for tires that wide, but one thing to consider is whether you'll ever want to run narrower tires in the future, perhaps for gravel/road riding. If so, maybe i25 is the better choice--more options.
  • 12-08-2016
    PeterJM
    Fantastic - thanks so much for the great feedback!

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ironacct View Post
    It occurred to me this morning that I have a 2.35 Ikon mounted to an i25 rim on another bike. The width at 25psi is a true 2.35". The 2.4 Ardent on my 2008 Fargo measures 2.39" at 22psi on a 30mm inner width rim with plenty of clearance. So, to your specific question, the Ikon 2.35 will fit the Fargo just fine. I also thought a bit more about your rim choice. I don't think you can go wrong with either rim choice for tires that wide, but one thing to consider is whether you'll ever want to run narrower tires in the future, perhaps for gravel/road riding. If so, maybe i25 is the better choice--more options.