Not a whole lotta love for Trek Superfly Full Suspension on this forum?
My LBS had the 2013 Superfly AL100 Elite on discount marked down 30% from original retail price. It ticked all the boxes in terms of specs I was looking for so I made enquiries about it and the manager told me they had just sold their last one but that he would give me the 2014 Superfly FS 8 for the same price!
Went and had a quick demo ride and the fit feels perfect. Took the demo on my local trails and it felt awesome compared to being on the HT. He's given me a couple of days to make up my mind but obviously won't hold it at that price for long.
I'm coming from a XC hardtail and mostly ride fairly moderate, easy trails but just beginning to explore steeper, tougher terrain with my buddies who are on full suspension bikes. Just looking for something to smooth out the ride a bit and help me keep up with my buddies. Thought the Superfly would be just the job coming from a hardtail but reading the threads everybody seems to be getting the new Fuel Ex.
He has that in stock too but way more expensive for the Fuel Ex 7 or 8. So I guess my question is how much better/different is the Fuel vs the Superfly and is it worth the extra $$$.
Personally the rear suspension setup on the Superfly looks much simpler than the Fuel Ex. Would the Fuel Ex have more maintenance issues in the long run?
test-ride the FUEL also. if you are going from a HT to a Fully the Fuel seems much more Trail-worthy. 20mm more in front fork, etc. AND the big thing to me is slacker angles!!
It seems like folks go from HT to Fully to ride more challenging trails? but if you are riding XC trails then the 100 should be fine (just not as slack angles)----
WHICH IS CRAZY TO ME because my Superfly HT has a 69.3/72.5 angles.. BUT the 100 has not as slack 70/73.8.
--but the fuel does have a slightly more slack 69.5 head angle (not much difference but enough maybe to notice??)
--I know my Paragon HT had 71/74, and my new Superfly HT has 69.3/72.5 and I can tell a HUGE difference in those angles (more aggressive riding stance...)
--ALSO depends on Year of Superfly 100 (I think the 2013 had a 71 degree head angle??) So I know going from a 71 to a 69.5 (on the FUEL) I could tell the difference...
Nothing wrong with the SF100. Sounds like a great price. The new SF100 8 has a rear through axel which is a plus. The SF100 is great if you are going to race or want to be one of the fastest on the trail. Keep in mid down the road this is a race bike, too many people try to make the bike something it is not. While the SF100 is a capable bike on a variety of trails the Fuel makes it a more playful ride. A couple guys I ride with have the SF100 and do just fine with them. We have been in the N GA mountains and the SF100 does fine. They do on the other hand wish they had the more suspension travel while riding there. Also they find themselves putting wider tires on and making changes to try to mimic the traits of a more playful trail bike.
I am on my second Fuel and have had no more and no less loosening/problems with my rear suspension design than my buddies with the SF100's.
There does seem to be a slow of people buying 100mm traveled FS bikes. I think it is because in the past couple years the 29 wheel size has entered more bike segments (Trail, All mountain). The price of the SF100 sound really good. You really have to think where and what type of riding you will be doing in the future.
You don't always remember what you paid but you remember what you got......don't let price sway your decision to the point of buying the best type of bike for your riding style
2014 Niner RIP 9 (Roval Carbon wheels, Pike)
Trek Fuel EX8 29er (Rhythm Pro wheels, 2x conversion)
Thanks for the replies. Picked up the Superfly last night and took it for a spin on the steepest trails I ride. Bear in mind these are the same trails I've previously been riding my hardtail. The ride was awesome! There is a long steep climb near the beginning which is rewarded with a long steep (for me) descent. I kept the suspension settings in 'trail' going up then switched to 'descend' for the downhill section and the bike felt great. It may only be 100mm of travel but that feels unbelievably plush coming from a hardtail. For the rest of the ride I set it back to the 'trail' setting which seemed to work well for more undulating trail riding. Really pleased with the fit, feel and handling of the bike. I got the 17.5 and it fits me like a glove. Feels more comfortable right off the bat even compared to my Scott Scale hardtail that I also love and have spent a lot of time dialing the fit.
I'm not a racer I just wanted a fun, relaxed trail bike but I'm also no daredevil so I think the Superfly is plenty of bike for me. I'm in my mid forties and don't want to risk hurting myself at this stage of life so it's XC and relaxed trail riding for me.
One of my buddies who is riding an older Giant Reign struggles on the uphills but usually leaves me for dead downhill. Last night on the Superfly I still had to wait at the top of the hill but I was able to stick closer to him on the downhill. The FS really does help descending.
Congrats! That's a nice bike and seems like you got a great deal. A lot of people buy too much bike but it seems you did really well!
2011 Trek Remedy 8
To Get Me There:
2012 Ford F150 Ecoboost
The fuel wold have felt more "plush" going down hills. But with the deal you got. Nothing wrong with the Superfly. It's trek's Mountain race bike. It's just limited to the max amount of travel due suspension. Reason they stopped making the Rumblefish.
Congrats on the bike though. I just piked up a Slash 7 and thinking about going back and getting a Remedy 9 (650B) and Fat tire bike
2013 Trek Rig SS
2013 Trek Rumblefish Elite
2014 Trek X-Cal 5
2014 Trek Slash 7
By metalmmmitch in forum Beginner's Corner
Last Post: 01-24-2014, 08:10 AM
Last Post: 09-08-2013, 02:16 PM
Last Post: 07-20-2013, 01:36 PM
By CHINOTAKER in forum All Mountain
Last Post: 12-15-2012, 04:39 AM
By guitarman2011 in forum Bike and Frame discussion
Last Post: 10-14-2012, 12:43 PM