Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28
  1. #1
    Phil
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    77

    What to get next?

    I have a 2014 Trek Fuel 7 but am looking to add a hardtail to my stable. Should I go with a Stache or a Superfly? Probably looking at 2015 Stache 7 or 2014 Superfly 7. May save the cash and hold for either the 2015 Stache 8 or the 2015 Superfly 9.6. What are the main differences between the two? Will the stache be more like my Fuel?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    How are you gonna use the HT?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Phil
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    77

    What to get next?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rideon View Post
    How are you gonna use the HT?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Mostly singletrack trails in NC. Would like to race a bit eventually, but that's not a huge priority.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    Frankly if I wasn't racing I wouldn't mess with a hardtail. What else is in your stable? Do you have a Remedy or something like it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Phil
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    77

    What to get next?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rideon View Post
    Frankly if I wasn't racing I wouldn't mess with a hardtail. What else is in your stable? Do you have a Remedy or something like it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Just my 2014 Fuel EX 7 29er at the moment. Used to have an 07 Rockhopper, but that has since been sold. Also, I am a heavier rider at 225lbs
    Last edited by asuprice; 2 Weeks Ago at 09:03 PM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    76
    I believe the Stache is pretty much a hardtail version of the Fuel. It's a really fun bike. I just picked up the 2015 Stache 7 a few months ago, and I'm really enjoying it. I wish I had spent the extra $800 to step up to the Stache 8 though.
    1992 Trek 800 Antelope
    2015 Trek Stache 7

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,760
    Things change.
    The Superfly 9.6 is engineered with very noticeable rear compliance. It rides with more comfort than an aluminum Stache.
    The Stache has traditional Trek 'stable platform', imo from demoing, handling.
    The Superfly is quicker and still stable going down. Fun. With two bottomless tokens in the fork you don't need 120mm.
    It comes from 435mm chainstays and the 51mm offset fork with the 69* head tube angle. Throw wide carbon wheels on and you have more comfort at the rear. I don't need a fs until 140mm travel terrain.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    2014 Superfly has nice compliance. Frankly I can't tell that much improvement over the 2013 which had nice compliance too. What I don't like one bit on the 2014's is the 72 degree seat tube angles. I have a 21" and the relaxed ST angle forces you to move the saddle pretty forward compared to the previous models. These are bikes we pedal damnit and with the abundance of readily available setback seatposts moving you in a better direction(if it was traditional 73deg) vs forward, it's a bad design element in my book. Wish I would've kept my 2013. Stache is the same geometry unfortunately.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,760
    Sounds like you belong on a 19.5 now for the same position as your old bike. The virtual and actual sizing can be confusing. Compare ETT numbers. I demoed 18.5, 19.5 and 21 at a Demo couple of Days for a few hours to pick the right size. The steering can handle a shorter stem with a non-forward neutral seat position because of the 435mm chainstays. I'd play with 70-80mm stems for fit. The curved seat tube makes the 72* angle listing inaccurate. It is like a setback. The SL frame is not the same because the seat tube is straight, 72 is 72.
    The compliance may be like a new design '13 9.9SL, but the previous generation old carbon bike design was stiff as a board for long rides when I rode it in sizes smaller than 21.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    I'm on a Superfly SL. Straight seat tube. 72 is 72. Makes no sense. I've been on Trek hardtails(Gary Fisher) for years. With carbon manufacturing there's no reason to be limited to straight tube shapes. I'm 6'2+" and really prefer a 25" TT. The 19" would be even worse given that it has the same 72 seattube angle.

    It would be great to see Trek make the Stache frame as compliant as the newer carbon models though. Ditch the relaxed seattube angles though.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,760
    Test out a 9.8. Trek finally curved the seat tube to get short chain stays like everyone else is doing(435). Curved seat tube so 72* is not 72*. One year more development = different frame so the feel and compliance is different. Better geo, the steering is intuitive. I don't think it can be improved. And all this for a lower cost. Sometimes you get more than you pay for.
    Put a 120mm 51 offset Pike on a 9.8 if you want a better steering compliant Stache. But actually with two bottomless tokens in the 100mm SID and a RCT3 damper upgrade you won't need 120mm. I never feel the fork bottom out even though I always use all the travel.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    So are you saying that the 9.8SL rides better than the 9.9SL(of which I own)? I see on the website that they have different geo numbers. Is this a 2015 change?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    Actually it looks like the curved seattube frame starts at 9.8 X1 model, while the 9.8 SL still has the straight seattube geo. How confusing...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    I hate that name.
    Reputation: blunderbuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,507
    Think about a fatbike or a road/gravel bike. If you get something too similar to your EX, you'll end up ignoring one over the other. In my case it was a Rumblefish and a Stache. The Stache was fun but not so different from the RF that I craved riding it. It collected dust until I stripped it to build something else.
    Worked at Trek/Fisher dealer 2008-2013. Only a little biased.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Rideon View Post
    So are you saying that the 9.8SL rides better than the 9.9SL(of which I own)? I see on the website that they have different geo numbers. Is this a 2015 change?
    The 2013 9.9SL and 9.8SL(sold in Europe last year) are the first frame from the Apollo Project road and mtb carbon frame guys working together. Each different size mold cost Trek 50k. They didn't want to just throw that away. They got feedback. Then they produced the 2014 9.6-9.8 carbon frame. Curved seat tube for 435 vs 445mm chainstays and they dropped the bb 5mm. That sure looks like refinements or version 2 to me. And the bike rides like wearing it as a skin(after you acclimate). Not the usual Trek 'safe stable platform' but will go wherever you tell it ride feel. You don't have to tell it just think it. And the platform is, of course, gone.
    And then there's the compliance. You feel the rocks under the rear tire but no jarring like a quality shimmed shock. This is a completely different frame remember. It just happens to be priced under the SL frame which was already placed at the high end of the market. There wasn't any other spot to put it. Not a single bike sent out for reviews last year.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    So regarding the original post, asuprice should seriously consider a 9.8 Superfly if he wants a hardtail. I tend to agree. I test rode a Stache when they first came out, and even though I liked the comfy position w/120 fork, my 2013 Superfly SL was way more compliant.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    Eb1888 - sounds like I need to seriously consider the 2015 9.8. I'd probably still go 21.5 due to the longer TT and taller headtube. So what exactly is the seattube angle? My only beef with my 2014Superfly SL is what I consider to be a too relaxed ST angle of 72deg. Like I said before, that forces you to move the saddle way forward to get the correct power pedaling position. And that move forces you into a longer stem - 110. My 2013 SL was as compliant but it's 73deg ST angle was perfection from a handling perspective. 1 degree is HUGE with a seattube angle.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    I hate that name.
    Reputation: blunderbuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,507
    According to the charts, the SLs run the same seat tube angle across all three years. Actually the numbers are virtually the same as the non Sls as well. Images are 13,14,15

    What to get next?-trek2013.jpg
    What to get next?-trek2014.jpg
    What to get next?-trek2015.jpg
    Worked at Trek/Fisher dealer 2008-2013. Only a little biased.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,760
    That's what the chart says, but...
    Specialized has had a curved seat tube for a longer number of years on the Stumpjumper and lists the angle as 'effective' because of the curve.
    What that means is if you start off with 90* and curve to 72* the spot you end up is effectively 73*. I think the curve of the 9.6-9.8 does the same thing. Trek isn't listing it that way, more actual.. Your best bet is to sit on them and bring your bike to switch back and forth.
    I'm using a setback post on mine, seat centered. But I just fit on an 18.5 with an 80mm stem and 720 lo rise RXL bar.. I could easily ride a 19.5 with a straight post. I have perfect handling. My bike is setup more trail than flat XC. 5'10.75"/32 inseam. I prioritize moving around on the bike and moving the bike around over pedaling efficiency.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    First of all, apologies to asuprice for the complete thread hijack.

    Blunderbuss - thanks for posting the charts. I dug a little deeper and what I thought was a 2013 SL, looks to really be a 2012 Superfly Elite Carbon frame. I confirmed online with the paint scheme and shape. Makes sense with the 73 deg seat tube angle. When I got my new 2014 frame, I literally took the seatpost with the saddle attached and put it in the new frame, expecting it to be the same position...not even close. Ended up being about a 2.5-3cm difference. And not the same sweet handling I was used to.

    I need to find a trek demo this winter and test out that 9.8.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    I hate that name.
    Reputation: blunderbuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,507
    eb, I know exactly what you mean. The AL Remedy 29 I'm building has a seriously bent seat tube. They list the angle as 69 with the mino link in the steep postion, but the effective has to be at least 74. I did the direct post/saddle swap from my Rumblefish (72) and the seat was over an inch more forward. I'm guessing this is where the "runs small" reputation is coming from for this frame.

    Rideon, no problem. It's a shame Trek only puts the archived charts on the dealer site. That stuff is vital info for bike geeks like us.
    Worked at Trek/Fisher dealer 2008-2013. Only a little biased.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    "I prioritize moving around on the bike and moving the bike around over pedaling efficiency."

    The great thing about my 2012 Superfly Carbon Elite frame was that I had both...pedaling efficiency and moving around in the bike as you say. Great compliance too. I've been riding and racing mountain bikes for 15 years now. I've owned 20+ different bikes and that bike was exactly how you describe your 9.8. I'm bound and determined to find a demo now. Need to get that lovin feeling back!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  23. #23
    Phil
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    77
    [QUOTE=Rideon;11608350]First of all, apologies to asuprice for the complete thread hijack. /QUOTE]

    Haha. No worries. I've enjoyed following this one.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382

    What to get next?

    Quote Originally Posted by eb1888 View Post
    Test out a 9.8. Trek finally curved the seat tube to get short chain stays like everyone else is doing(435). Curved seat tube so 72* is not 72*. One year more development = different frame so the feel and compliance is different. Better geo, the steering is intuitive. I don't think it can be improved. And all this for a lower cost. Sometimes you get more than you pay for.
    Put a 120mm 51 offset Pike on a 9.8 if you want a better steering compliant Stache. But actually with two bottomless tokens in the 100mm SID and a RCT3 damper upgrade you won't need 120mm. I never feel the fork bottom out even though I always use all the travel.
    Tell me about these bottomless tokens. Do they already come in a solo air Sid? Are they volume reducers? And what does the RCT3 damper give you over a stock Sid? Mine is terribly harsh btw. I was attributing that to the carbon crown and 100mm travel. I've come to prefer 120 forks.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Rideon View Post
    Tell me about these bottomless tokens. Do they already come in a solo air Sid? Are they volume reducers? And what does the RCT3 damper give you over a stock Sid? Mine is terribly harsh btw. I was attributing that to the carbon crown and 100mm travel. I've come to prefer 120 forks.
    The token add progression to the end of the fork stroke. My SID RL 2014 came with two. I have used the travel on every ride at some different air pressure settings and don't feel the fork bottom out. RS has a couple kits out since Sept. with an air cap threaded on the inside and 5 tokens and just the tokens $17 & $11.
    No shim stack circuit in the RL and RLT.
    RCT3 compression damper shim circuit. In play when set to run(open).
    What to get next?-complete-rct3.jpg

    2014 also has a DIG mid valve in the rebound circuit that is shimmed. This rebound damper is in all the SID versions and some Rebas.
    FAQLoad - Rockshox RCT3 damper

    A few good comments in this thread.
    Converting Reba RL 29 to RCT3 (solo air, 2014)

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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