Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33

    Rumblefish Vs Superfly 100 AL Pro

    Hi Everyone,

    I'd like to get your thoughts, opinions and advice on the following two models:

    Trek Rumblefish

    Rumblefish - Trek Bicycle

    Trek Superfly 100 AL Pro

    Superfly 100 AL Pro - Trek Bicycle

    Price difference is approx $400 AUD in my part of the world and my LBS. In essence the Rumblefish has the following high profile advantages:
    ~ Dropper Seat
    ~ deeper fork and rear suspension travel of 120mm over 100 on the Superfly.

    Is the extra $400 worth the extras on the Rumblefish?

    Thanks in advance...

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    224
    Depends on your needs, different strokes. Superfly will have a firmer, racier ride. Rumblefish will be more plush and will give up some weight. They are different bikes aimed at different (although not vastly so) purposes -- don't be under the mistaken impression that the extra $400 is simply buying you more travel, there are tradeoff's...

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    103

    Re: Rumblefish Vs Superfly 100 AL Pro

    I am a rumblefish owner and I ride with others who have a rumblefish and some who have the Superfly. To help with your decision ask yourself the following questions. What percentage of your writing is going to be racing or training for racing? What percentage of your writing is going to be trail riding for thrills and spills looking for jumps and drops? If you are more of a racer you might want to lean toward the Superfly for the weight savings and the miniscule increase in Pedaling efficiency. Otherwise go for the RumbleFish and its super plush ride.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    152
    I have owned both and started with a Rumblefish. The RF was great and very plush, but heavy. I then got into racing so bought a used SF100 carbon and took 2 min. off my lap times on my second ride over the RF. I sold the RF and just ride the SF now on all different trails. The SF does not have as plush of ride as the RF, but the weight savings is worth it to me. My SF weighs just under 23lbs with pedals and I think the RF weighed 29lbs. You just have to figure out what kind of riding you want to do.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33
    Thanks Guys,

    Ideally I'd want the best of both worlds - I'm not into racing but would prefer a nice "plush" ride without excess wastage of energy through pedal inefficiencies.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by Peach4me View Post
    Thanks Guys,

    Ideally I'd want the best of both worlds - I'm not into racing but would prefer a nice "plush" ride without excess wastage of energy through pedal inefficiencies.
    You want the Rumblefish.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David_315's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    255
    Rumblefish would be best. If you can clear it. I want and need 120mm i dont fit on any of the Rumblefish.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    45
    I walked into a shop seriously looking at the SF,

    And after a few visits and a few rides brought the RF instead ,

    Depends on your needs, to me, a guy that doesnt race, but rides for fun and fitness , the RF was the better take anywhere ride anywhere bike,

    The SF is quicker but in saying that the RF isnt slow either , but the SF is out of its comfort zone compared to the RF when the going gets rough.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33

    Superfly it is...

    Thanks for your help, advice and feedback.

    As a newbie I'm impressed at your helpfulness.

    I ended up purchasing the SF and my partner bought the RF and we're both having fun so far.

    Attached is a pic of the two steeds. Both are AL Pro models

    Thanks again...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Rumblefish Vs Superfly 100 AL Pro-photo.jpg  


  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    53
    I'm in the same boat. I'm looking at either purchasing the trek superfly 100 al elite or the trek rumblefish base model. I'm not trying to race at all. I'm getting a bike for exercise and to have as much fun as possible. I might do some small jumping here and their too. Sounds like I may be more interested in the rumblefish. Mostly going to use the bike for trail riding.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33
    I would recommend trying both from your LBS if you have the opportunity as they do ride differently. If you will be trail riding with drops and prefer a plush ride then go the Rumblefish. It's a nice comfortable bike. I enjoyed my ride on it immensely...I'm not sure what group set and suspension the RF base model has but the SLX on the Elite Pro is a very nice setup. But in saying that you can always upgrade the base model RF should you feel the need to. Enjoy...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    53
    The base model comes with the avid setup. I'm pretty sure the superfly 100 elite comes with the slx. I'm planning on riding both of them on thurs. but my lbs only has a parking lot to test them in.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33
    Locally the base SF came with the Avid setup and when I compared the braking capability I preferred the Shimano SLX/XT capability and upgraded on that alone. The SLX SF Elite would have been fine for my needs and bang for the buck is a better buy than the XT. But in saying that I don't regret the XT on the SF Pro as I have great confidence in the braking and overall performance. Make sure you're comfortable with the braking of the Avid setup.

    I hope that parking lot has some drops etc as I would predict that the SF will feel better on flat terrain compared to the Rumblefish but from what you want to use the bike for I think the RF will be the one for you. Enjoy the test ride - and ask them if you can ride the RF in the bush for a test ride...you never know how they might respond.

    Let us know how you go with the test ride and your final decision....

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33
    Locally (ie Australia) the LBS just announced a new Trek Fuel 29er that would be worthy of a look in comparison to the Rumblefish. Will be in shop this weekend.

    Looks great in that metallic colour scheme...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Rumblefish Vs Superfly 100 AL Pro-trekfuelex29er.jpg  


  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    84
    I've got a rumblefish and it's an excellent fun ride that I don't think I'd ever get rid of, but that's a very nice looking bike...

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    53
    So I got my cast off yesterday and went straight to my lbs. I test rode the superfly 100 al base model instead of the elite because it was a 17.5" and that's the size I want. I was enjoying he test ride untill I jumped a curb And realized my hand was still killing me. So I guess I gotta wait another week or 2 to test ride the other bikes.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    35

    New SF 100 al Pro!

    I originally road the RF, then the SF, then the Fuel. I bought the SF 100 al Pro: picked it up last Friday but then got 7" of snow! As I was coming from my HT, I thought the RF was simply heavy although well spec'd. The Fuel just came across as 'vanilla'...nothing about it really grabbed me and gave me the instant smile and/or fun bike feeling that the SF did. I rationalized that since I've never bottomed-out my 4" travel on my HT, the SF would be plenty. Sure I may need the trail application on occaision but for the vast majority, I'll be on single-track, roads and not necessarily big drops and jumps. I wanted a fun bike to ride, the Superfly is it. KICKER--I got a '13 closeout for $2600...I still can't believe it. If you're still contributing threads, I'd be interested in hearing how you both like your bikes!

    Quote Originally Posted by Peach4me View Post
    Thanks for your help, advice and feedback.

    As a newbie I'm impressed at your helpfulness.

    I ended up purchasing the SF and my partner bought the RF and we're both having fun so far.

    Attached is a pic of the two steeds. Both are AL Pro models

    Thanks again...

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    53
    Nice congrats on the new bike. I actually ended up buying the rumblefish elite. I ****ing love it

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33
    I bought the Superfly, my partner bought the Rumblefish and my neighbour ended up buying a Fuel EX 29. We have a favourite saying that these bikes all do what they're designed to do very well.

    Personally I love my SF - It does everything a Dual Suspension XC can be asked of. My friends and I head down some trails and mild DH so I've put a dropper seat on it to make my sharp technical descents more comfortable and this transformed my bike totally. I don't race so have a dropper seat on a DS XC is ok.

    I have the suspension dialled so I utilise every mm of the 4 inches as I need as much as I can get on the steep trail/DH descents. My SF came with an Fox Evolution 32 Fork and it is twitchy over fast rocky descents but I may be asking too much of a XC. I have been tempted to swap the fork to another brand, Rockshox or possibly even X-fusion for now I'm keeping as it it. Apart from the dropper post everything is stock Trek/Bontrager and it works well and fine.

    I read an article on a journo who road with Gary Fisher and he noticed how often he changed the dial on the suspension between Climb/Trail/Descend. I've followed suit and often change between Clmb/Trail and save the Descend for purely the technical work. I've found there is a big difference between Climb and Trail in terms of power through the rear of the frame so I recommend you find what works for you and your trails. Personally I climb with the rear shock in Climb and front fork in Trail unless it's super steep then put both in Climb mode.

    The XT componentry works very well and the braking is superb! No complaints! I've been tempted to change the Bontrager alloy bars to carbon though but it's not a biggy.

    I like the 29 wheel size for all things bar twisty technical riding. But with the wheel size debate it's each to their own as it's purely personally preference.

    It sounds like you got a great bargain with your SF so congrats and I'm sure you'll have a lot of fun riding with speed around your trail.

    I'd be interested to see how you find the bike after settling in.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    35
    We got another 5" of snow today so the inaugural ride will have to be sometime later this week. CRAZY--I'm also thinking that the only change/addition I'd make to the bike is a new bar (maybe a slightly higher rise) and a dropper post! Which one did you get and have you had any issues with it? My bike's an XL and I can already see where some descents might be tricky--I've heard they're a nice compliment to riding.

    If you ever get on your partners' RF, how do you like it? That was the first bike I rode and I found it quite heavy but capable of rolling over anything. I then rode the SF and of course it felt like a Schwinn Stingray after the RF! Then I jumped on the Fuel EX7...it was fine but that was it. You three could have a blast (if you're all the same size) trading bikes throughout the day just to get different experiences.

    Once the snow melts I'll update you on my impressions etc. Note--I'm a little biased already as the 'self full-filling prophecy' has got me smiling even while it's just parked in the garage. I did, however, get to drive my snow-blower tonight!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    53
    I'm also getting a dropper post and new bars this spring. I got a sprocket bash guard last season and new grips.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by BigSki View Post
    I originally road the RF, then the SF, then the Fuel. I bought the SF 100 al Pro: picked it up last Friday but then got 7" of snow! As I was coming from my HT, I thought the RF was simply heavy although well spec'd. The Fuel just came across as 'vanilla'...nothing about it really grabbed me and gave me the instant smile and/or fun bike feeling that the SF did. I rationalized that since I've never bottomed-out my 4" travel on my HT, the SF would be plenty. Sure I may need the trail application on occaision but for the vast majority, I'll be on single-track, roads and not necessarily big drops and jumps. I wanted a fun bike to ride, the Superfly is it. KICKER--I got a '13 closeout for $2600...I still can't believe it. If you're still contributing threads, I'd be interested in hearing how you both like your bikes!
    I rationalized exactly the same thing and so far it seems about right for my riding style and the trails I ride. Still extremely plush on the downhills compared to my hardtail. The thing for me was that this bike just seemed to fit me like a glove from the moment I sat on it. I simply adjusted the saddle height and it felt as comfortable as an old slipper. I have spent a lot of time dialing the cockpit on my hardtail, different stem lengths, flipping the stem, adjusting the spacers etc. I feel pretty good on my HT but this just felt perfect from the get go.

    Let's know how you like the bike once the snow melts.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by Peach4me View Post

    Personally I love my SF - It does everything a Dual Suspension XC can be asked of. My friends and I head down some trails and mild DH so I've put a dropper seat on it to make my sharp technical descents more comfortable and this transformed my bike totally. I don't race so have a dropper seat on a DS XC is ok.

    Apart from the dropper post everything is stock Trek/Bontrager and it works well and fine.

    I read an article on a journo who road with Gary Fisher and he noticed how often he changed the dial on the suspension between Climb/Trail/Descend. I've followed suit and often change between Clmb/Trail and save the Descend for purely the technical work. I've found there is a big difference between Climb and Trail in terms of power through the rear of the frame so I recommend you find what works for you and your trails. Personally I climb with the rear shock in Climb and front fork in Trail unless it's super steep then put both in Climb mode.
    Interesting about Gary Fisher using the CTD so often. I haven't really found the need to use the Climb setting as I find the bike climbs pretty well in Trail mode. When I get to the top of a long climb I like to use the Descend mode. One of the trails I ride has a long, tough climb but you are rewarded with 3km of fun, flowy downhill. I put both the fork and the shock in Descend mode and away I go. When the track levels out I just flick back to the Trail setting.

    Like you I am very happy with the stock Shimano/Bontrager parts specs and don't see any need to upgrade but the dropper post sounds like a worthwhile addition for trail riding.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    407
    P.S. I am riding a 2014 Superfly FS 8. My LBS had the 2013 Superfly AL 100 Elite discounted 30% but when I made enquiries they had sold out of the medium. So he offered me the same price on the 2014 FS 8.

    Not all XT like the AL Pro or 2014 FS 9 but the mix of SLX and XT plus SLX brakes is good enough for me.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by BigSki View Post
    We got another 5" of snow today so the inaugural ride will have to be sometime later this week. CRAZY--I'm also thinking that the only change/addition I'd make to the bike is a new bar (maybe a slightly higher rise) and a dropper post! Which one did you get and have you had any issues with it? My bike's an XL and I can already see where some descents might be tricky--I've heard they're a nice compliment to riding.

    If you ever get on your partners' RF, how do you like it? That was the first bike I rode and I found it quite heavy but capable of rolling over anything. I then rode the SF and of course it felt like a Schwinn Stingray after the RF! Then I jumped on the Fuel EX7...it was fine but that was it. You three could have a blast (if you're all the same size) trading bikes throughout the day just to get different experiences.

    Once the snow melts I'll update you on my impressions etc. Note--I'm a little biased already as the 'self full-filling prophecy' has got me smiling even while it's just parked in the garage. I did, however, get to drive my snow-blower tonight!
    I have a Reverb dropper seat and it's great as it has worked from day one with no problems. The RF's Reverb had problems from day one and it's been fixed with some niggling issues that need to be looked at again. I can recommend them for your SF if you want to take it down steep trails. My friend has a Thomson dropper and the lever is easier to use than the Reverb but I'm unsure on performance.

    The bikes are all a different size which makes it difficult but I have ridder the RF and it swallows up anything downhill. Down a rock garden hill on which the SF is jittery the RF just ate it up and there was no comparison. But as you've noted the RF is a heaver bike than the SF so on open trails and up climbs it struggles.

    I also run a tubeless tyre system (bontrager) and would highly recommend it as I hate changing tubes. It does work and has saved me on flat tubes numerous times. There was only occasion wear my rear tyre had a hole that was too large for the tubeless solution to work. That's another upgrade I would recommend if you haven't already.

    Enjoy the Superfly...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rumblefish vs. Superfly for Long Distance Rides
    By KingCobra in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 2 Days Ago, 01:13 AM
  2. Trek Superfly 100 Pro or Trek Rumblefish
    By Peach4me in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-08-2013, 07:30 AM
  3. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 08-26-2012, 08:48 AM
  4. Rumblefish vs Al Superfly 100
    By Fett in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-28-2011, 03:20 PM
  5. superfly fs versus rumblefish
    By hiawatha-de in forum Trek
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-24-2011, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

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