Page 1 of 31 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 3016
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,960

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post

    A significantly different bike, in both 29er and 27+ shoes, so a new thread seems appropriate.

    As an owner, I found last year's thread very useful and informative.

    Let the fun -- and pics -- begin!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    265
    I'm a bit worried about the reports of poor climbing ability. I know they're different beasts but the Scott Spark 120mm platform sounds interesting.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    I'm planning on selling my Scott Spark to go to the new Trek Fuel ex plus. Would love to hear more about it though.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    I'm planning on selling my Scott Spark to go to the new Trek Fuel ex plus. Would love to hear more about it though.
    What about the new Spark platform?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Hadn't even looked. Thanks. Will do now!


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Real quick, my goal is to get away from the aggressive cockpit of an xc bike. I test rode the trek today after a ride on my current Scott. I felt like I was on a beach cruiser but it felt good. I wasn't in my shoes and the seat wasn't at my ideal height, but it felt good. But I will certainly do some more homework.


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    I am interested to see what the geometry will be like. It sounds like a slight departure from last years bike. Is the 29er going to have the same numbers as the new 27.5+? I would like to know what the low and high setting will offer for numbers. At any rate I am seriously looking to sell my RIP9 this fall for a EX9. My local dealer emailed me the specs of the EX9. At any rate it looks like the ex9 will have most everything I would want. Only thing I would do is change out the grips for something with more shock absorption and maybe a carbon bar and stem swap depending on the length that comes stock.
    2017 Fuel EX 9

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105
    I decided to go with the EX 8 plus! Size 21.5; I have yet to pick the bike up, but feel free to ask any questions about it.

    Pics:




    Looks very good being one the larger sizes imo... No separation of the down tube and top tube at the head tube, head tube isn't too long, etc.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Nice, thats the one I test rode (Ex8). I was thinking of getting the 9.8 with 29, which my LBS has, but in a 19.5 frame. And then I could get a 27.5 plus wheel set later. Any thoughts? Im on a 29er now.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,012
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Nice, thats the one I test rode (Ex8). I was thinking of getting the 9.8 with 29, which my LBS has, but in a 19.5 frame. And then I could get a 27.5 plus wheel set later. Any thoughts? Im on a 29er now.
    Did the LBS switch out the 27.5+ for the 29er wheels?

    or are they starting to get the 29er's in?
    Too Many .

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Getting the 29er's in as well.


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,012
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Getting the 29er's in as well.


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    Nice.
    It can go both ways.
    get the 29er build a 27.5+ wheelset
    get the 27.5+ and build a 29er wheelset

    Too Many .

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    I just researched. Slightly different fork. 29er 130 mm performance grip. 27.5+ 140 mm performance fit 4. Or at least these are the specs I'm finding


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by brent701 View Post
    Nice.
    It can go both ways.
    get the 29er build a 27.5+ wheelset
    get the 27.5+ and build a 29er wheelset

    But yes, that's what I was thinking. Buy the 29er and build the 27.5 wheel set


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,012
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    But yes, that's what I was thinking. Buy the 29er and build the 27.5 wheel set


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    After seeing the specs with the forks between the two wheel sizes.
    I'd buy the 27.5+ and build the 29er.

    Fit4 is worth it also get the extra 10mm out of the box in travel
    Too Many .

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post

    I'm going to confirm it with my lbs tomorrow. Now that you put it that way, makes sense


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    $300 price difference too.


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by brent701 View Post
    After seeing the specs with the forks between the two wheel sizes.
    I'd buy the 27.5+ and build the 29er.

    Fit4 is worth it also get the extra 10mm out of the box in travel
    I'd look at the quality of the wheelsets, too. Depending how and where you intend ride each version of the bike, you may want the flexibility to build a custom wheelset for one use or the other.

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    My dilemma... I have a $4k budget. Preference on 29 at the moment.
    - I love the EX 9 spec, but I don't want a White bike.
    - EX 9.7 is an interesting choice and the color scheme is okay. I'd lose the Line Comp Wheels.
    - If I break budget and go to a 9.8, it specs a 2x11 which is annoying - conversion to 1x not bad, but few extra $
    - EX 8 is also a good option, in 29 I'd have to convert to 1x11 which is annoying.

    In the 9 vs 9.7, how much better would the Line Comp wheels feel?

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Horrorshow View Post
    My dilemma... I have a $4k budget. Preference on 29 at the moment.
    - I love the EX 9 spec, but I don't want a White bike.
    - EX 9.7 is an interesting choice and the color scheme is okay. I'd lose the Line Comp Wheels.
    - If I break budget and go to a 9.8, it specs a 2x11 which is annoying - conversion to 1x not bad, but few extra $
    - EX 8 is also a good option, in 29 I'd have to convert to 1x11 which is annoying.

    In the 9 vs 9.7, how much better would the Line Comp wheels feel?
    I feel much the same way, though I'm still up in the air re: 27.5+ and 29er.

    As of this morning I'm thinking the EX 8 in a 27.5+ (for the extra 10mm fork, 1x setup, and black/black/red color scheme), then take the little bit left over in my budget and build out an extra 29er wheelset, maybe with some chinese carbon for the minimal amount of racing that I do.

    My primary concern is those new Rhythm forks on the EX 8s. Any word on how they perform vs. the FIT4s?

  21. #21
    Master Gardener
    Reputation: Velokid1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,347
    The 2017 EX 9 comes with the 34 Float FIT4.

    It is Matte Silver (basically a silver/gray/titanium) with Blue graphics, not white. The white bikes you see are usually the prototypes.

    The EX 29ers come with the new Bontrager dropper post instead of the new Reverb- to me, that's a plus. I know the internals of the Reverb have been updated, but I've lost some trust now. The Bontrager post is simpler and lighter and Trek testers have been loving it as far as durability.

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_8766.jpg

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    It does say 'Matte Quicksilver' (looks so white on the site!), so that makes me feel better about it... but not excited. Hopefully I'll see one in person soon though

    I'm glad the Bonty dropper is testing well, even though I'm happy on a KS.

    I like your idea with the EX 8 27+ sciencemike. I'll have to demo those plus tires, but EX 8 spec is spot on at the price.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    The 29er comes with the fit4?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Is the 9 aluminum or carbon?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    The 29er comes with the fit4?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    Nope, neither of the EX 8s do. The EX 9s do, though. Specs for everything available here:

    Full-Suspension - Trek Bicycle Superstore

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Is the 9 aluminum or carbon?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    The 9 is Alloy / FIT4.
    The 9.7 is Carbon / Rhythm.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Horrorshow View Post
    The 9 is Alloy / FIT4.
    The 9.7 is Carbon / Rhythm.
    Got it- was just wondering if there was a model between the 9 and 9.8. Ill stick with the 9.8 if I buy. THank you for clearing things up for me.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,012
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Got it- was just wondering if there was a model between the 9 and 9.8. Ill stick with the 9.8 if I buy. THank you for clearing things up for me.
    EX8 29er Rhythm 34 grip 130mm
    EX8 27.5+ Rhythm 34 grip 140mm
    EX9 29er Fox 34 fit4 130mm
    EX9.7 29er Rhythem 34 grip 130mm
    EX9.8 29er fox 34 grip 130mm
    EX9.8 27.5+ 34 Grip 140mm

    The 9.7 and 9.8's are carbon main frames alum. stays
    Too Many .

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    770
    Quote Originally Posted by brent701 View Post
    The 9.7 and 9.8's are carbon main frames alum. stays
    I'm pretty sure the 9.8 has carbon seatstays, aluminum chainstays.

    Not sure on the 9.7.

    9.9 is probably full carbon.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by brent701 View Post
    EX8 29er Rhythm 34 grip 130mm
    EX8 27.5+ Rhythm 34 grip 140mm
    EX9 29er Fox 34 fit4 130mm
    EX9.7 29er Rhythem 34 grip 130mm
    EX9.8 29er fox 34 grip 130mm
    EX9.8 27.5+ 34 Grip 140mm

    The 9.7 and 9.8's are carbon main frames alum. stays
    Anyone know with these Fox 34 Grip forks, if you can change them from 130 to 140 by doing something internally?

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Chader09 View Post
    I'm pretty sure the 9.8 has carbon seatstays, aluminum chainstays.

    Not sure on the 9.7.

    9.9 is probably full carbon.
    Correct


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  32. #32
    A-X
    A-X is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Correct


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    Trek has a tendency to stick with aluminium chain stays with their bigger 9.9 29er frames so there is a good chance this carries on with the plus frame also catering for 29er wheels.
    Bird Aeris : Remedy 9.9 29er : Procaliber 9.8 SL

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    I think I read somewhere it will be like the current year 9.9 which would mean carbon chain stays. But we will see


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    204
    I was able to ride the 2017 Fuel EX 8 (650+) yesterday; my thoughts are below. For reference, I:

    - prioritize descending and handling performance, but I'm not willing to accept a bike that can't pedal and climb efficiently
    - like bikes with a super long reach (think Geometron or Mondraker long) and super slack head angles, though I usually have to pick a bike with only some of these characteristics
    - have recently been on several Plus bikes, including the Scott Genius 710, Santa Cruz Hightower, and Devinci Hendrix
    - am 183 cm (6') tall and rode the 21.5" size
    - currently own a Specialized Stumpjumper EVO that's been slighly lowered and slacked out with a 160 mm Lyrik

    First impression was that it feels quite "normal". Accelerates quickly, rolls quickly, steers lightly and low speeds, and pedals well. Seat position is "modern", meaning the effective seat angle is steeper than most bike in past years, though this is partially due to me riding a larger frame than intended for my height.

    At high speeds, the "fat bike" handling (highly responsive to lean, but unresponsive to steering) is present, but modest. Surprisingly, 2.8" tires rarely exhibit much of it, but the 3.0" tires on the Hendrix were terrible for it.

    Trek's RE:aktiv shock did exactly what they claim: for a given level of low-speed damping selected via the lever, the shock was significantly smoother on sharp impacts, yet remained supporting for climbing and didn't blow through the travel. It felt like a preview of a next-generation shock.

    The Fox Grip damper was surprisingly good. I haven't been a Fox fan in the past, but this left me with no complaints on my test ride, though I reserve judgement until I can take one on a truly intense descent.

    Chupacabra tires seemed to roll well and resisted lateral collapse, but traction wasn't great for a Plus tire (still far better than narrow tires, though). I would leave a Chupacabra on the rear and put a far superior Maxxis Rekon (3C) on the front.

    Pedal strikes were plentiful - and I'm used to a low bike. Still, I'd rather switch to 170 mm cranks than sabotage the handling with a higher BB.

    With the shock wide open, climbing seemed on par with the Scott and Santa Cruz: good, but not exceptional. With the shock on a firmer setting, climbing became very good, with minimal harshness and hang-up on rocks and roots. On most bikes, I climb with the shock wide open to maintain momentum over trail roughness; on this bike, the firmer settings did more good than harm.

    Picking up the bike, the front is light, suggesting a very light frame, but the rear seemed heavy. Unsure whether it's just heavy relative to a light front or whether the rear wheel and cassette were excessively heavy. My suspicion is that the carbon [correction: it's aluminum] frame is very expensive and its weight benefits are negated by the component sacrifices required to hit a price point (i.e. probably better to get the aluminum frame and lighter wheels and cassette).

    Handling strikes a good balance of quickness and stability. Felt similar to the Hightower and, unsurprisingly, many other bikes with similar geometry. Plus tires were well supported by the rims and struck a good balance of traction, lateral stability, and smoothness without excessive bounce or "fat bike" feel.

    Summary:
    - Achieved most of the Plus benefit with minimal drawbacks
    - Felt like many other modern trail bikes with similar geometry, which is a good thing
    - Set itself apart from competitors with the excellent RE:aktiv shock, which allows a better balance of efficiency and descending performance than I've found with other shocks
    - Did nothing wrong ... though I would prefer an even longer reach and slacker head angle; I have yet to determine whether angled headset cups will work on this frame
    Last edited by R-M-R; 07-02-2016 at 01:55 PM. Reason: Correcting an error

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Thanks for the review, very interesting. Just for clarification: You say you rode the 2017 Fuel EX 8? That's an aluminum frame, not carbon. Did you mean the 9.8?

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    Thanks for the review, very interesting. Just for clarification: You say you rode the 2017 Fuel EX 8? That's an aluminum frame, not carbon. Did you mean the 9.8?
    Hmm ... Now I'm confused. It was definitely a single ring drivetrain and KS dropper post, yet I feel certain it was a carbon frame. Maybe the shop built up a carbon frame with the 8 kit? If it was aluminum, then - aside from raising questions about my sanity - that's a seriously light aluminum front triangle.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    That sounds exactly like the 8. Was the frame black with red accents?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    557
    Here is another curious thing about this new '17 Fuel EX 9.9 full carbon frame; it is no longer available in a 23" frame (which is really a 22" frame). Strange.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Do you have a link to the 9.9?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Do you have a link to the 9.9?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    Trek's official website (US version) doesn't have the full lineup on it yet. For some reason, the Trek Superstore has the frame-only full carbon listed. While this is certainly not the "definitive" answer, it suggests a good likelihood that Trek is not making the full frame sizes available in full carbon that they did with the '16 Fuel EX's.

    Trek Fuel EX Carbon Frameset - Trek Bicycle Superstore

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Interesting in the pic the chain stay looks like carbon as compared to the models with alum chain stays. Also description says performance shock again the pic looks like a factory model. Again I know I'm just looking at a pic. Hopefully we will have the definitive answer


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    Hmm ... Now I'm confused. It was definitely a single ring drivetrain and KS dropper post, yet I feel certain it was a carbon frame. Maybe the shop built up a carbon frame with the 8 kit? If it was aluminum, then - aside from raising questions about my sanity - that's a seriously light aluminum front triangle.
    If you were at the Calgary Cycle demo day yesterday, it was the 8. Alum frame. I've got one on order that should be here this week.

    I rode the Scott genius 710 non plus, the 5010 and the Bronson yesterday. All bikes that are more money than I want to spend. This will be my first DS bike and will be replacing a 17 year old hard tail. Your review suggests that I made a good choice. I've been on road bikes for the last 10 years. Madone and Domane. I seem to like Trek.

    I loved the 710. I'm seriously debating upping my budget to get one. We rode race of spades and family guy and swapped bikes part way through each trail.

    The 710 was much better and quicker turning. Both the Bronson and 5010 felt like busses.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by beastmaster View Post
    Trek's official website (US version) doesn't have the full lineup on it yet. For some reason, the Trek Superstore has the frame-only full carbon listed. While this is certainly not the "definitive" answer, it suggests a good likelihood that Trek is not making the full frame sizes available in full carbon that they did with the '16 Fuel EX's.

    Trek Fuel EX Carbon Frameset - Trek Bicycle Superstore
    Usually:
    - 9.7 carbon main frame, alloy seat and chainstay.
    - 9.8 carbon main frame, carbon seatstay, allow chainstay.
    - 9.9 caron main frame, seatstay and chainstay

    That frame looks full carbon to me, I'd imagine they will also do that on a complete bike.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105


    Here's the Ex 9.9:

    -Full carbon
    -looks like eagle x01 drivetrain


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    1,117
    Yes it will have Eagle XX1.

  46. #46
    Master Gardener
    Reputation: Velokid1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,347
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Interesting in the pic the chain stay looks like carbon as compared to the models with alum chain stays. Also description says performance shock again the pic looks like a factory model. Again I know I'm just looking at a pic. Hopefully we will have the definitive answer


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    The Trek Bicycle Superstore photos aren't accurate at all. I'm curious where they even get the photos they have up.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Velokid1 View Post
    The Trek Bicycle Superstore photos aren't accurate at all. I'm curious where they even get the photos they have up.
    Didn't somebody indicate that all Fuel EX info would be up on the Trek consumer website by the 30th?

    If so, we'll know a lot more then.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  48. #48
    Master Gardener
    Reputation: Velokid1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,347
    dealers got the announcement on the 23rd, including photos and specs on the dealer website, which is where the accurate photos in this forum have come from, like the matte silver EX9 vs the 2x white version on the Superstore website. Trek gives dealers 7-10 days to actually get bikes in stock before making announcement to public, magazines and publications, and updating the consumer website.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    I believe 6/30 was an estimate. But lets hope its legit.

    I'm still wavering between the EX 9 and EX 8 Plus. I'm worried that 27+, while fun & fast, would make my OH/KY/IN trails seem too easy eventually. I loved demoing 27+, but owning it might slow down my improvement as a rider. I'm 27, been mountain biking for less than 2 years. On the other hand, the plus would give me more confidence when traveling to take on some bigger chunk.

    I'm also looking at the Transition Smuggler 3, but it I have virtually no chance of demoing it

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Horrorshow View Post
    I believe 6/30 was an estimate. But lets hope its legit.

    I'm still wavering between the EX 9 and EX 8 Plus. I'm worried that 27+, while fun & fast, would make my OH/KY/IN trails seem too easy eventually. I loved demoing 27+, but owning it might slow down my improvement as a rider. I'm 27, been mountain biking for less than 2 years. On the other hand, the plus would give me more confidence when traveling to take on some bigger chunk.

    I'm also looking at the Transition Smuggler 3, but it I have virtually no chance of demoing it

    Im 42, been mountain biking for over 10 years and I'm still as slow as molasses . But I too am in the same dilema, my first thought was get the 29 and build the 27.5+ wheel set. But with the difference in the fork (9.8), now Im thinking +. But according to current specs, the 29 comes with the line seat dropper versus ther reverb on the plus, and Ive the reviews are solid on the line dropper. decisions decisions. My LBS is going to check into the fork, that if I go 29, if the fork can be adjusted to 140mm later on.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    27
    I'm curious about the Line Comp wheels that are on the EX 29. I'm guessing they are about a $600 retail wheelset? The width is nice I hope they're not too heavy.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by jkinnee View Post
    I'm curious about the Line Comp wheels that are on the EX 29. I'm guessing they are about a $600 retail wheelset? The width is nice I hope they're not too heavy.
    I'm wondering, too. I just hope they are sub-1900g, are wide and strong, and have the 54pt engagement of the more expensive Line series wheels.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    I'm curious about the Line Comp wheels as well. How wide are the Duster Elites?

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Just got back from the LBS. I just ordered a Superbly for the wife to replace an old Trek 3700. I have interest in the EX9 and they brought up the spec page for the 2017. It looks like the HA is going to be 67 low setting and 67.7 in the high for the 29er version. The CS was 433,434, 0r 435 cannot remember.....but about the same as the 2016's. The stem was 60mm long. These measurements were for a 17.5 or 18.5
    2017 Fuel EX 9

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    That sounds exactly like the 8. Was the frame black with red accents?
    I realize it sounds just like the 8, but I'm pretty sure it was the carbon front triangle.

    Just called the shop and spoke to an employee who hasn't seen the demo bikes, but says they're the 8, so it's likely it was just a basic 8.

    I suppose we can conclude:
    1. I'm crazy
    2. It's a very light aluminum frame

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by benyl View Post
    If you were at the Calgary Cycle demo day yesterday, it was the 8. Alum frame. I've got one on order that should be here this week.

    I rode the Scott genius 710 non plus, the 5010 and the Bronson yesterday. All bikes that are more money than I want to spend. This will be my first DS bike and will be replacing a 17 year old hard tail. Your review suggests that I made a good choice. I've been on road bikes for the last 10 years. Madone and Domane. I seem to like Trek.

    I loved the 710. I'm seriously debating upping my budget to get one. We rode race of spades and family guy and swapped bikes part way through each trail.

    The 710 was much better and quicker turning. Both the Bronson and 5010 felt like busses.
    I was indeed at the 22X demo!

    Interesting that you found the handling of the 710 so different from the 5010, as their geometries are similar. The lower BB and shorter chainstays of the 5010 should make it quicker, if anything, though the steeper head angle of the Scott (especially if it was in the High position) could make its steering feel lighter.

    If you haven't been on a Plus bike, you'll find the steering feels heavier than with narrow tires. It's almost imperceptible at low speeds, but becomes prominent at high speeds. I felt the Fuel EX struck a good balance between stability and quickness and managed the quirks of wide tires as well as any bike I've tested, though I still think all bikes should be much longer and slacker.

    I do think you made an excellent choice. If pedal/crank strikes are a concern, swap the cranks for 170 mm.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    I realize it sounds just like the 8, but I'm pretty sure it was the carbon front triangle.

    Just called the shop and spoke to an employee who hasn't seen the demo bikes, but says they're the 8, so it's likely it was just a basic 8.

    I suppose we can conclude:
    1. I'm crazy
    2. It's a very light aluminum frame
    The new frames have extremely smooth welds, so it may have looked carbon.

    Another thing, I previously said that I went with the Ex 8 plus, but I have decided to order an Ex 9 instead through my lbs. Based on the huge interest in this bike, I will be more than willing to answer questions about it when it comes in.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by justinnardella View Post
    The new frames have extremely smooth welds, so it may have looked carbon.

    Another thing, I previously said that I went with the Ex 8 plus, but I have decided to order an Ex 9 instead through my lbs. Based on the huge interest in this bike, I will be more than willing to answer questions about it when it comes in.
    What time frame did they give you? And ya I'm super curious about what the 'Matte Quicksilver' looks like in person.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by Horrorshow View Post
    What time frame did they give you? And ya I'm super curious about what the 'Matte Quicksilver' looks like in person.
    They said about one week. I hope the color looks as good as it does in the stock photos. I'll let you know!

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by justinnardella View Post
    The new frames have extremely smooth welds, so it may have looked carbon.

    Another thing, I previously said that I went with the Ex 8 plus, but I have decided to order an Ex 9 instead through my lbs. Based on the huge interest in this bike, I will be more than willing to answer questions about it when it comes in.
    Yes photos please!

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    Also, what made you decide to change from EX 8 Plus to EX 9?

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by Horrorshow View Post
    Also, what made you decide to change from EX 8 Plus to EX 9?

    I just felt that the Ex 9 was a much better value given the price difference and that i wanted a 29er out of the gate. Building a decent 29er wheelset for the Ex 8 plus would have brought the money spent on the bike really close to the price of the ex 9, but I still wouldnt have all of the other better parts of the ex 9.

    Just made more sense in the long run.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    84
    Picked up my EX 8 27.5+ today. Pretty stoked for the weekend.

    Rode around my neighbourhood tonight and I like it so far.

    Already modded it. Moved the dropper post lever to inside the brake so it doesn't rub my thumb.

    Got a 28T ring put on to replace the 32T. The granny is super granny. I'll see how it goes.

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0663.jpg

    What is this plastic shit? Did I pick this up from Walmart?

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0665.jpg

    Matte paint with red accents. Check out the pedal strike carnage already...

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0666.jpg

    The bike just floats over this pea sized gravel at a local park. I've set my tires to 20 PSI. Still have the tubes. Debating whether I should go tubeless.

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0667.jpg

    I am really liking the infinitely adjustable fork.

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0668.jpg

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Sweet! Post pic of the seat post lever remount please


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    84
    Sure, here's a few different angles. I might move it back and adjust my grip. The cable it kind of "out there." It was between the grip and the brake. It definitely tucked behind the brake in the original location. It definitely doesn't rub the scaphoid area.

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0670.jpg2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0671.jpg2017 Fuel EX Official Post-img_0672.jpg

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    36
    Nice pics benyl!

    Has anyone compared this new Fuel to the new Ibis Mojo 3? Both are 140/130 setups with tires that can go 2.8 wide. The Ibis has the flexibility to run regular 27.5 tires whereas Trek doesn't recommend it for the Fuel EX. Any thoughts and comparisons? Also, is the standover correct for the 15.5? Looks like a typo to me...

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justinnardella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by benyl View Post
    Sure, here's a few different angles. I might move it back and adjust my grip. The cable it kind of "out there." It was between the grip and the brake. It definitely tucked behind the brake in the original location. It definitely doesn't rub the scaphoid area.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0670.jpg 
Views:	355 
Size:	218.4 KB 
ID:	1079161Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0671.jpg 
Views:	333 
Size:	210.6 KB 
ID:	1079162Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0672.jpg 
Views:	1265 
Size:	214.3 KB 
ID:	1079163
    Size 21.5?

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    312
    will the suspension be affected by changing the ring size?

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post

    Ring size of what?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  70. #70
    A-X
    A-X is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Ring size of what?


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
    Chainring size.

    Some rear suspension systems will have their anti-squat optimised to a specific chainring size while pedalling.
    Bird Aeris : Remedy 9.9 29er : Procaliber 9.8 SL

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by A-X View Post
    Chainring size.

    Some rear suspension systems will have their anti-squat optimised to a specific chainring size while pedalling.
    That's what I figured, but didn't realize it impacted the suspension as well. Thank you for the education


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by A-X View Post
    Chainring size.

    Some rear suspension systems will have their anti-squat optimised to a specific chainring size while pedalling.
    How does that work with double and triple chainrings?

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by benyl View Post
    How does that work with double and triple chainrings?
    There's a tradeoff in performance.

    Is that a KS dropper? Their Southpaw lever is awesome, works like a shift lever. Or you could spend more for the Race Face version.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by benyl View Post
    Sure, here's a few different angles. I might move it back and adjust my grip. The cable it kind of "out there." It was between the grip and the brake. It definitely tucked behind the brake in the original location. It definitely doesn't rub the scaphoid area.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0670.jpg 
Views:	355 
Size:	218.4 KB 
ID:	1079161Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0671.jpg 
Views:	333 
Size:	210.6 KB 
ID:	1079162Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0672.jpg 
Views:	1265 
Size:	214.3 KB 
ID:	1079163
    Can't wait to hear what you think of it once you get to really get a feel or it. I'm stopping by my Trek dealer tomorrow to see if they might have one I can demo. I'm really starting to think about trading my 9.8 29er for the EX8 plus since they are in the same price range. I really don't think I will notice the little bit of extra weight in that vs. the carbon frame.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Just got off the phone with my LBS. Talked to them about ordering a 2017 Fuel EX 8 27.5+ in a size 19.5. They said that the ordering system shows expected delivery for that model isn't until late October!

    Strangely, the EX8 29ers show good availability (even though they're not officially out yet) so we may order one of those and swap parts with floor models of the 27.5+ that they have in stock.

    Still, sounds crazy to not have the plus models until late October. Anyone else run into this problem?

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    Just got off the phone with my LBS. Talked to them about ordering a 2017 Fuel EX 8 27.5+ in a size 19.5. They said that the ordering system shows expected delivery for that model isn't until late October!

    Strangely, the EX8 29ers show good availability (even though they're not officially out yet) so we may order one of those and swap parts with floor models of the 27.5+ that they have in stock.

    Still, sounds crazy to not have the plus models until late October. Anyone else run into this problem?
    That is weird. There are people on here that already have the EX8's so maybe they just did a first batch and they wont have anymore until then?

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    Just got off the phone with my LBS. Talked to them about ordering a 2017 Fuel EX 8 27.5+ in a size 19.5. They said that the ordering system shows expected delivery for that model isn't until late October!

    Strangely, the EX8 29ers show good availability (even though they're not officially out yet) so we may order one of those and swap parts with floor models of the 27.5+ that they have in stock.

    Still, sounds crazy to not have the plus models until late October. Anyone else run into this problem?
    I'm not ready to pull the trigger, but my LBS has the EX8 Plus in the store on the floor. And its $100 off. So hard not to just go buy it... I talked to them about the EX 9 and they have them available for order (one of the few apparently). They might bring a 9 in for stock so myself and others can check it out.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    The links have been pulled.


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    Still, sounds crazy to not have the plus models until late October. Anyone else run into this problem?
    Yes. I ended up with an 18.5 instead of a 19.5 because the 19.5 were October delivery. The shorter reach is better for me anyway.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Sorry if this is a double post but the links have been pulled


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    The links have been pulled.
    Sorry, what links are you talking about?

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Horrorshow View Post
    I'm not ready to pull the trigger, but my LBS has the EX8 Plus in the store on the floor. And its $100 off. So hard not to just go buy it... I talked to them about the EX 9 and they have them available for order (one of the few apparently). They might bring a 9 in for stock so myself and others can check it out.
    Yes. I ended up with an 18.5 instead of a 19.5 because the 19.5 were October delivery. The shorter reach is better for me anyway.
    Yeah, my LBS has 2017 Fuel EX 8 27.5+ models in sizes 17.5, 18.5 and 21.5 on the floor. But no 19.5, which is what I'm after (I'm 6'1", 34" true inseam).

    I'm going to throw my leg over the 18.5 and 21.5 next time I'm in the shop, but I'm not going to get a bike that doesn't fit just right.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    I went to look at the specs again from the links provided and it says its been pulled from their catalog

  84. #84
    A-X
    A-X is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    337
    I had similar issues last year when the Procaliber was first released. Certain sizes and colours were November/December delivery.
    Bird Aeris : Remedy 9.9 29er : Procaliber 9.8 SL

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    I went to look at the specs again from the links provided and it says its been pulled from their catalog
    Well that explains it

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Sorry. Meant the links provided in this forum towards the beginning of the posts


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by leathernuts View Post
    Sorry. Meant the links provided in this forum towards the beginning of the posts
    You mean the Trek Bicycle Superstore links?

    Full-Suspension - Trek Bicycle Superstore

    They seem to be working for me. Actually, they now also have a page for the 2017 Farley 8, which I don't remember being there before (though maybe I just didn't notice it).

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    You mean the Trek Bicycle Superstore links?

    Full-Suspension - Trek Bicycle Superstore

    They seem to be working for me. Actually, they now also have a page for the 2017 Farley 8, which I don't remember being there before (though maybe I just didn't notice it).
    Try clicking the spec for a 2017 bike though, for me they haven't been working. For example I can't view the EX 9 2017 spec anymore.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    Yes. Me too. I can see them listed but when you click on a specific one, you get the message.


    Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk

  90. #90
    Master Gardener
    Reputation: Velokid1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,347
    You're right. Now all you can see is the EX 9 photo, which is nothing like the actual EX 9 bike that Trek is shipping.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    Interesting! Yeah, I see the same thing. Yet some as-yet-unannounced bikes (e.g. the EX 8 29er) are still there.

    Anyway, the public announcement for all the new models is scheduled for tomorrow, I believe, so I guess we just have to wait 24 hours.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    Yeah, my LBS has 2017 Fuel EX 8 27.5+ models in sizes 17.5, 18.5 and 21.5 on the floor. But no 19.5, which is what I'm after (I'm 6'1", 34" true inseam).

    I'm going to throw my leg over the 18.5 and 21.5 next time I'm in the shop, but I'm not going to get a bike that doesn't fit just right.
    I'm 5'10" with a 33.5" inseam. My legs are proportionally longer than my torso. The 19.5 9.8 I sat on fit, but like I said, I was fine getting the 18.5 as the reach is only 1.5 shorter on the 18.5 which is fine by me. Frame stack is the same.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    770
    Quote Originally Posted by benyl View Post
    I'm 5'10" with a 33.5" inseam. My legs are proportionally longer than my torso. The 19.5 9.8 I sat on fit, but like I said, I was fine getting the 18.5 as the reach is only 1.5 shorter on the 18.5 which is fine by me. Frame stack is the same.
    Similar here:

    5'10" with 34" actual inseem. Riding a 18.5" 2016 EX 9.8 with a 90mm stem. My short torso and desire to have a more nimble bike lead me to the 18.5" and longer stem.

    This is my XC/Endurance bike since I have a more slack trail bike already.

    I could have done the 19.5" with a 70-80mm stem, but I like the front wheel closer for more balanced weight on the tires.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,683
    FWIW: 5'9", 34" bike inseam, stock 18.5" '16 EX-9. Running the Mino link in high.

    Edit: 28 chainring.
    Last edited by Lone Rager; 06-30-2016 at 03:16 AM.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by benyl View Post
    Got a 28T ring put on to replace the 32T. The granny is super granny. I'll see how it goes.
    How much granny do you need =D

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by R-M-R View Post
    2. It's a very light aluminum frame

    If you think thats light, try picking up a CF Top Fuel. Made my CF Remedy feel like a monster truck.
    Still surprising how light a dual suspension FS bike weighs. Especially when my first dually was a kmart/walmart special, think it was made of solid steel.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115
    fc's got his first ride posted:

    2017 Trek Fuel EX first ride - Mtbr.com

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    115

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: leathernuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    309
    nice-ordering mine today

  100. #100
    fc
    fc is online now
    stoked Administrator
    Reputation: fc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    28,069
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencemike View Post
    fc's got his first ride posted:

    2017 Trek Fuel EX first ride - Mtbr.com
    Sweeeeeeet. Here' my photo dump.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2017 Fuel EX Official Post-steep-drop.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-abp-tech.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-cable-management.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-downtube-indent.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-dtswiss-hub.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-eagle-cassette-derailleur.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-eagle-drivetrain.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-entering-slab-drop.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-frame-side.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-front-quarter-profile.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-knock-block.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-left-cable-management.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-mino-link.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-rear-der-cable.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-rocker-arms.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-rocks-root.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-rolling-big-rock.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-side-profile.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-sitting-giant-slab.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-taking-hairpin.jpg  

    2017 Fuel EX Official Post-talking-cam-mccaul.jpg  

    IPA will save America

Page 1 of 31 1234511 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Post Your FUEL EX official post
    By efecto 0 in forum Trek
    Replies: 1159
    Last Post: 1 Week Ago, 01:50 PM
  2. 2016 Fuel EX 29 Official Post
    By kosmo in forum Trek
    Replies: 1987
    Last Post: 09-14-2017, 02:16 PM
  3. Fuel EX 29er official post
    By stygz1 in forum Trek
    Replies: 815
    Last Post: 03-30-2017, 06:46 AM
  4. 2016 or 2017 Fuel Ex 9.8?
    By a6rnner in forum Trek
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-20-2016, 06:46 AM
  5. Mountain Cycle (official post)
    By TWISTED in forum Mountain Cycle
    Replies: 707
    Last Post: 07-14-2013, 01:46 PM

Members who have read this thread: 584

Posting Permissions

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