I really like my Fat front Jones. I love the idea of this, but wouldn't want to go back to 100mm front spacing. I wonder how the 3" 29er tire would compare to the 3.8" 26er tire... Maybe I get these rims build onto 135mm front hub and give it a go.
I will be putting these rims on my Jones - and a Knard on the front!!! - this is what I've been waiting for - it will be fatter AND lighter than my Gordo/WW setup. I wonder how low you can run them? 15psi or less?
In a lineup that includes an Ogre and a Troll, a Krampus makes perfect sense. My only question is does this now belong in a new 29er+/semi-fat sub-forum? I love Surly's stuff, I'm only sad all I own is one of their forks.
Originally Posted by Skrufryder
Silly rabbit Jack Daniel drinking donkey kissing caterpiller
While it's a very cool bike, especially if you're looking for one, I'm more interested in the tyre. Would put it on my KM to help raise the front and BB a bit and slack out the HA a tad and slow the steering down. This would probably pair nicely with a WTB WW 2.55" outback This is the only thing I've wanted to do to my KM (slack the front) and was thinking of purchasing a 490-500mm fork to do it, but this would be more funner and add more cush
Originally Posted by Harold
You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.
'Normal' fat bikes are 26" rims. This is a full on 700c rimmed bike, placing it in the 29" realm. You might be lucky if these fit in your fat bike, as these appear quite tall. certainly won't fit in any normal suspension forks.
'Normal' fat bikes are 26" rims. This is a full on 700c rimmed bike, placing it in the 29" realm. You might be lucky if these fit in your fat bike, as these appear quite tall. certainly won't fit in any normal suspension forks.
I made some measurements from pictures, the diameter of the 3" wide tire is 765mm, about 35mm more than a 29x2.1 tire. I would be very interested to get an actual width measurement of the tire.
I made some measurements from pictures, the diameter of the 3" wide tire is 765mm, about 35mm more than a 29x2.1 tire. I would be very interested to get an actual width measurement of the tire.
Originally Posted by SURLY
Standover height measured using Surly Big Fat Larry tire measuring 762mm in diameter.
'Normal' fat bikes are 26" rims. This is a full on 700c rimmed bike, placing it in the 29" realm. You might be lucky if these fit in your fat bike, as these appear quite tall. certainly won't fit in any normal suspension forks.
Anyone know how much taller than a 29er w/2.4 tire would be?
Anyone know how much taller than a 29er w/2.4 tire would be?
Diameter should rise up to around 30 mm - it will rise the front about 15 mm and will be also 15 mm in the fork.
This makes it very interesting as a front tire for a Karate Monkey. Rising the front should make the steering angle about one degree slacker so it would run a little more stable on decents.
Because also the seat tube is a little more slacker I would use a seatpost without setback an the body centre is moved to the previous position for still good climbing.
BTW: On the Krampus pics there is much room between the tire and the seatpost - so it must have very long chainstays and should not have this quick steering like a Karate Monkey.
We will see, when the frame geometry charts are published...
Diameter should rise up to around 30 mm - it will rise the front about 15 mm and will be also 15 mm in the fork.
This makes it very interesting as a front tire for a Karate Monkey. Rising the front should make the steering angle about one degree slacker so it would run a little more stable on decents.
Because also the seat tube is a little more slacker I would use a seatpost without setback an the body centre is moved to the previous position for still good climbing.
BTW: On the Krampus pics there is much room between the tire and the seatpost - so it must have very long chainstays and should not have this quick steering like a Karate Monkey.
We will see, when the frame geometry charts are published...
Yeah, a well-fitted KM with 29+ front wheel would turn into a bit of a dual-slalom type of bike that will still climb well. Or one could make the bike fit that much more easily with a drop bar setup. I would like to suggest trying a 47mm On-One or Redline Flight fork on the KM, to compensate for the slackening of the head tube angle, (although the redline is a longer fork in itself, hmmm) and make the KM (or other 72º HTA 29"er) a bit more like the Redline Flight or, ultimately, Genesis 2.
If suspension forks can be found to clear the brace, just reduce travel to prevent bottoming and you're set.
Surly doesn't need to do the "yeah me too" stuff like 650B, they made their own new genre. Again.
Indeed. Let's not forget the Karate Monkey is the first 29" Singlespeed, the KM fork the first rigid one to fit 80mm corrected, and the frameset the first on the market in all of 29", if the Supercal 29 with Marz doesn't count. That was crazy expensive, BTW, the KM a steal.
If riding 26x3 Gazzalodis already made sense to some people, how about a 29+ tire half the weight?
Will someone beef the tire up with a layer of kevlar or whatever and build a (relative) short travel DH bike around it? Some DH forks are bound to fit it already.
Surly deserves respect for being a brand to just make bikes that are freeking fun, regardless of trends. All I hear these days is "650B this and 650B that" and they come out with something different and interesting. As a proud Karate Monkey owner for 8 years, I have faith that this bike will be a blast!
"Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself
Once a few of those Krampi are wandering our Earth...
Especially if they become one-and-only bikes for folks, or maybe only bike to take on a trip...
What about a road rim/tire standard to complement the 29+ bike? Regular 29" slicks would drop the BB. Maybe not such an issue on the road, but even a 2.35" Supermoto already drops it like one inch, certainly when using 50mm rim, if that works at all for 2.35's.
Enter: 32minus tires. Not quite 32" as one would expect.
32" is the standard I've been proposing for quite a few years now. Probably since around the time I proposed 29x3.0 (shortly after I learned of Surly's shocking Pugsley 26x3.7 project)
29+3" (a sound full size increment, nothing half-azzed) makes for 698mm bead seat diameter. Rim outer diameter 711mm.
Make the first batch of rims them 27mm wide, to work with both modest (up to 2.4") knobby tires, AND 35mm or so slicks to be used in 29+ bikes as road wheels. 36 spokes, of course. I prefer more actually.
Now 711mm is dead-on 28 inches. Yes, 700c/622/29" rims are 25" when you put the ruler to them.
Add some 2.5" for the 35mm slick tires, and you get 30.5" just like 29+. If you need only 23mm rims and 28mm tires, more power to you. It will be quite light and the BB height will still work out for the type of riding (asphalt) you'd typically enjoy with it.
Imagine a bike that fits you perfectly like a favorite MTB, which has road wheels which are significantly bigger than a typical 700c setup. As are your 29+ trail wheels. If the bike has the tire clearnance, you could even take it a step further, with 2.1" knobbies to make for 32" in diameter. Only .75" taller for your BB over 29+.
Remember 26x2.1" WTB nanoraptors, and the difference +10% made to arrive at 1999 29x2.1" Nanoraptors? That was huge.
Now, add ANOTHER 10%. Yes, it works out that way nearly to the third digit. Imagine that. The feel of that not-so-special Nano, as it was in 26", as it improved for 29", and then increased 10% once more. Then imagine your favorite 2.1" tire. Maybe a Conti Twister, maybe a soft compound Schwalbe Jimmy, maybe still that smooth rolling Nano.
And it just MIGHT fit your krampus bike, if surly is as generous as usual with tire spacing. Main concerns are seat tube, BB yoke and seat stay bridge. Fork is fine.
Seriously, think about it. 32" is getting closer and closer in terms of our everyday riding reality.
For Surly, I am sure one day it will be a dedicated model. It may be a half inch taller or smaller than I propose that time around. But if Krampus doesn't fit 32" and 32-, then soon one of its offspring will.
And making that rim and tire will be much easier than the Rabbit Hole/Knard combo. Don't underestimate the work this must have cost Surly. They likely took all their knowledge and balls, and still lost baths of sweat of this project. They once told me how hard it was to do the Pugsley, technically and financially. What they did here is huge, but 32" is now a piece of cake in comparison.
Your crampus bike and wheel sets:
29+ main wheelset for trail use, whatever that means to you
32- semi-skinny or real skinny road slicks to ride with the missus, or frustrate the local roadie peloton.
32" traditional 2.1" knobbies. Not looking for volume or mad grip, just something to make a dull trail a challenge, and still get nice flow and float. 32" will likely do better on the beach than 26x3.0 Gazzas.
A 30-35mm 32" rim and suited off-road tires 2.0-2.5" is the next step, and is at least as worthy as a stand alone project as is Krampus. Pick your favorite 29" rubber and setups, and extrapolate that 10% bigger. Yes, size L frames and up, it will not be easy to fit an M rider, sorry.
I recall a several years back during frostbike riding my 26er and trying a 29er for the first time. A good friend brought it to the show and I was able to try it out in the snow. It had so much more float over the 26 conti explorer pro wide 2.1" tire I was using (yep I just dated my self a bit). Then this really funky bike showed up. Welds were not all that clean and it was just raw steel that looked as if it was finished the night prior. Thing was rolling 36" tires that we played in QBP parking lot that day. Kept bashing it into curbs, with the snow and large tire diameter it felt as if we could roll over anything. Next year or year after the Pug was introduced. I was lucky enough to be able to grab my friends 29er trying to follow them on the trails. As long as you kept moving on the 29er you were good. Stop and you sink right thru the crust. The pugs kept on moving.
Blending the two a 29er and wider tire like the pug I am really excited seeing how it will ride. Now if I could order one with 16" Chain Stays keeping the wide tire and side wall with a narrow BB that would be ideal. Although I think it would violate one of the basic laws of physics.
Once a few of those Krampi are wandering our Earth...
Especially if they become one-and-only bikes for folks, or maybe only bike to take on a trip...
What about a road rim/tire standard to complement the 29+ bike? Regular 29" slicks would drop the BB. Maybe not such an issue on the road, but even a 2.35" Supermoto already drops it like one inch, certainly when using 50mm rim, if that works at all for 2.35's.
Enter: 32minus tires. Not quite 32" as one would expect.
32" is the standard I've been proposing for quite a few years now. Probably since around the time I proposed 29x3.0 (shortly after I learned of Surly's shocking Pugsley 26x3.7 project)
29+3" (a sound full size increment, nothing half-azzed) makes for 698mm bead seat diameter. Rim outer diameter 711mm.
Make the first batch of rims them 27mm wide, to work with both modest (up to 2.4") knobby tires, AND 35mm or so slicks to be used in 29+ bikes as road wheels. 36 spokes, of course. I prefer more actually.
Now 711mm is dead-on 28 inches. Yes, 700c/622/29" rims are 25" when you put the ruler to them.
Add some 2.5" for the 35mm slick tires, and you get 30.5" just like 29+. If you need only 23mm rims and 28mm tires, more power to you. It will be quite light and the BB height will still work out for the type of riding (asphalt) you'd typically enjoy with it.
Imagine a bike that fits you perfectly like a favorite MTB, which has road wheels which are significantly bigger than a typical 700c setup. As are your 29+ trail wheels. If the bike has the tire clearnance, you could even take it a step further, with 2.1" knobbies to make for 32" in diameter. Only .75" taller for your BB over 29+.
Remember 26x2.1" WTB nanoraptors, and the difference +10% made to arrive at 1999 29x2.1" Nanoraptors? That was huge.
Now, add ANOTHER 10%. Yes, it works out that way nearly to the third digit. Imagine that. The feel of that not-so-special Nano, as it was in 26", as it improved for 29", and then increased 10% once more. Then imagine your favorite 2.1" tire. Maybe a Conti Twister, maybe a soft compound Schwalbe Jimmy, maybe still that smooth rolling Nano.
And it just MIGHT fit your krampus bike, if surly is as generous as usual with tire spacing. Main concerns are seat tube, BB yoke and seat stay bridge. Fork is fine.
Seriously, think about it. 32" is getting closer and closer in terms of our everyday riding reality.
For Surly, I am sure one day it will be a dedicated model. It may be a half inch taller or smaller than I propose that time around. But if Krampus doesn't fit 32" and 32-, then soon one of its offspring will.
And making that rim and tire will be much easier than the Rabbit Hole/Knard combo. Don't underestimate the work this must have cost Surly. They likely took all their knowledge and balls, and still lost baths of sweat of this project. They once told me how hard it was to do the Pugsley, technically and financially. What they did here is huge, but 32" is now a piece of cake in comparison.
Your crampus bike and wheel sets:
29+ main wheelset for trail use, whatever that means to you
32- semi-skinny or real skinny road slicks to ride with the missus, or frustrate the local roadie peloton.
32" traditional 2.1" knobbies. Not looking for volume or mad grip, just something to make a dull trail a challenge, and still get nice flow and float. 32" will likely do better on the beach than 26x3.0 Gazzas.
A 30-35mm 32" rim and suited off-road tires 2.0-2.5" is the next step, and is at least as worthy as a stand alone project as is Krampus. Pick your favorite 29" rubber and setups, and extrapolate that 10% bigger. Yes, size L frames and up, it will not be easy to fit an M rider, sorry.
This is an excellent post and lot of thinking on your part...
...I commend you, very interesting reading!
This is an excellent post and lot of thinking on your part...
...I commend you, very interesting reading!
Thanks for sharing these thoughts!
Don't flatter me, it'll cost you rep points.
I am a poor man, otherwise I'd have launched 32" just to be able to ride it myself. And 29+ all the same.
If you are not really short, there is some fun or even advantage to be had with 32".
I built a 29er (170mm hub) rear wheel for my Mukluk. I run a Specialized Control 29X2.3 in back and a Surly 4.9 BFL in the front. With my other modifications, this half fat hybrid weighs 28.3 lbs in XL size. I'm hoping the Kanard fits in the rear of the mukluk frame (it might not). If it does, it would be the ultimate set up for most rides I do.
Paul...Palm Springs, CA
Most definitely sign me up for at least one of these Knard tyres when they're available, most definitely want one to put on the front of the KM with 2.55" WW LT outback
Originally Posted by MTBR
he Knard 29×3 weighs in at 820 grams and is available in 120tpi folding
Originally Posted by Harold
You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.
I think the Knard will fit in the p-35 rim but id worry it blows off the rim at the wrong time (technically there is no right time for a tire to roll off the rim )
I will contact Surly to see what they say about the Knard on a Karate Monkey.
This is going to be much better than adding a 490mm fork. I had a 490mm and ended up sticking with the KM fork. I think I will be trying the 29er+ setup myself. Right now I am running tubeless WWs.
I'd love to know if the Knard/Rabbit Hole combo would fit a Salsa Enabler fork. I am guessing yes. Much respect to the Surly for repeatedly making enormous contributions to cycling culture.
I'd love to know if the Knard/Rabbit Hole combo would fit a Salsa Enabler fork. I am guessing yes. Much respect to the Surly for repeatedly making enormous contributions to cycling culture.
I thought the front was going to be 100mm spacing. Isn't the Enabler 135mm? Would you just lace the RH rim to a 135 hub?
I run a carver carbon fork on my Mukluk. It's basically the same size as the Salsa enabler. There is lots of room with a standard 29er rim and a 2.4 tire (about 2.5 inches to the side of the crown). This tire is bigger but it can't be more than an inch taller than a standard 29er.
Bummer, not arriving until March. At least I have plenty of time to pile up my pennies for the purchase.
One of the hottest bikes at QBP’s SaddleDrive event is the new Krampus. A 29er fat bike with 3 inch tires. Complete bikes will be available around March with an MSRP of $1950.
I have no use for a bike like this. I ride on pavement or gravel. Really this bike has no practical appeal for me.
I still want one.
Here's why:
I built up a Surly Ogre over the winter. I built it up as an urban bike, and as I did parts selection I specifically chose parts that wouldn't break over parts that were high performance. My motto was "I'm not building a bike that goes AROUND things. I'm building a bike that goes OVER or THROUGH things.". It's an awesome bike. This bike is my ogre, turned up to 11.
I thought the front was going to be 100mm spacing. Isn't the Enabler 135mm? Would you just lace the RH rim to a 135 hub?
The front of the Krampus, i.e. its fork, will be 100mm. The Salsa Enabler is 135mm. The Knard is a tire. THe Rabbit Hole is a rim. The tire and rim can be built onto any size hub you want. I realize this thread is about the Krampus. But the Knard begat the Krampus.
I run a carver carbon fork on my Mukluk. It's basically the same size as the Salsa enabler. There is lots of room with a standard 29er rim and a 2.4 tire (about 2.5 inches to the side of the crown). This tire is bigger but it can't be more than an inch taller than a standard 29er.
Now all we need is a suspension fork!
Whatever the tallest rear tire you've run, consider that the difference with Knard's 30.5" need to be halved for loss of clearance. I bet lateral clearance will be fine, vertical might be a bit of a squeeze. Suppose the tallest you've run is ONLY 29.00". Tape a 0.75" block to it and see how it goes round.
A thing that sortof disappoints me in my mix-matching dreams, is that I don't think I'll get this to work with V-brakes. I'd buy 3.0" tire / 50mm fork compatible V's+Levers if they existed. Maybe in the Fat Bike forum someone runs a home made solution.
A thing that sortof disappoints me in my mix-matching dreams, is that I don't think I'll get this to work with V-brakes. I'd buy 3.0" tire / 50mm fork compatible V's+Levers if they existed.
My guess is it's better for your health if that dream does not come true. The stopping distance might be a little more than you dreamed of...
A thing that sortof disappoints me in my mix-matching dreams, is that I don't think I'll get this to work with V-brakes. I'd buy 3.0" tire / 50mm fork compatible V's+Levers if they existed. Maybe in the Fat Bike forum someone runs a home made solution.
I've used a Tektro 857AL (110mm arms) with a 26" 47mm rim (on a unicycle) and there is clearance for a Duro 26x3.
I've used a Tektro 857AL (110mm arms) with a 26" 47mm rim (on a unicycle) and there is clearance for a Duro 26x3.
That's very interesting, thanks! The Knard doesn't look very tall for a true 3.0.
Would canti post spacing not be an issue?
And Jeroen, you know me well enough to understand that I would even skip a front brake from a build I would think I go that minimalistic. Stopping distance is irrelevant with unlimited grip.
If you are listening, and I read in another thread that you are. Produce twice as many tires as you planned to in the first run. For if they fit in the front of a rigid fork, many are going to want one, just because.
If you are listening, and I read in another thread that you are. Produce twice as many tires as you planned to in the first run. For if they fit in the front of a rigid fork, many are going to want one, just because.
Me too! Just because. I want two. And a Krampus.
You surely need an old bike wrench as a test pilot. I am available!
Will the Kanard fit a Carver O'Beast FatBike fork?
Originally Posted by Cloxxki
Whatever the tallest rear tire you've run, consider that the difference with Knard's 30.5" need to be halved for loss of clearance. I bet lateral clearance will be fine, vertical might be a bit of a squeeze. Suppose the tallest you've run is ONLY 29.00". Tape a 0.75" block to it and see how it goes round.
A thing that sortof disappoints me in my mix-matching dreams, is that I don't think I'll get this to work with V-brakes. I'd buy 3.0" tire / 50mm fork compatible V's+Levers if they existed. Maybe in the Fat Bike forum someone runs a home made solution.
I uploaded a picture of the Carver O'Beast fork for FatBike with a 2.3X29er tire. Sure looks like the Kanard should fit.
If you are listening, and I read in another thread that you are. Produce twice as many tires as you planned to in the first run. For if they fit in the front of a rigid fork, many are going to want one, just because.
me too!
dont have the money at the moment for a complete build..but I guess I surely would like to try the wheel /tire combo on my rigid fork..
alright mikesee, since you seem to be chilling on this thread more'n the other.
in terms of traction, I'm assuming this compare smore favourably iwth hudu's than nate's?
I've still got gazzis, so not in a rush to lose traction for weight. (although it WOULD be luvverly!) which is why I was originally waiting for the nates to get more widely available before i got a fatbike.
If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!
I love the idea of big volume 29er tyres. 2.3 gatos are monsters (for me) and great for mud and wider on my p35s than 2.4 ardents. My jones has bags of clearance up front for more and I'm game for bigger. Starting to think about a fat front but I think this sounds much better. I'll wait and see if they would fit/work on the rims - too narrow? Interesting chat above regarding geo changes/tyre height.
Ultimately I reckon the Knards might not be absolutely right for me tread wise but I love the overall size being 'birthed'.
Think surly are a very interesting bike company, very creative. I won't be buying a Krampus but I think it looks like a great bike, looked at it a lot . I look forward to hearing the ride reports.
If you are listening, and I read in another thread that you are. Produce twice as many tires as you planned to in the first run. For if they fit in the front of a rigid fork, many are going to want one, just because.
Me too, just because !
Will (does) it fit a KM front fork ? Please Surly say yes !!
Bike looks fantastic. Just wondering what frame, fork and wheelset will weigh...
Also,how much and availability?
I would venture to say that if weight was a real concern, this is probably not the bike for you.
That said, this looks awesome.
Originally Posted by XJaredX
There are Lefty conversion kits for the Pugsley etc so I imagine it would, one way or another
Yeah, it should. P321 or Mendon Cycle is selling/making some Pugs Fatbike Lefty clamps for Lefty Max (clamped on, not bonded steerer clamps) forks. IIRC, Mendon (not affiliated, other than receiving awesome service from him) has some Lefty Max 140 alu forks with PBR dampers at a good price to go in those clamps. You just have to build the correct offset on the front wheel, and limit the travel of the Lefty Max fork so the tire doesn't hit the crown.
The forks are normally 140mm of travel, minus whatever it takes to clear the tire. For a regular 29er tire, the safe reduction is 30mm, leaving 110mm of travel.
Will (does) it fit a KM front fork ? Please Surly say yes !!
KM fork is about 90 mm wide and a Knard tire has 3" = 75 mm. Height should be about 15 mm more an the KM fork has about 50 mm room. So it will fit without problems So I will build a Knard/Rabbithole frontwheel for my KM as soon as the parts are availiable
Last edited by DerBergschreck; 07-25-2012 at 12:40 AM.
KM fork is about 90 mm wide and a Knard tire has 3" = 75 mm. Height should be about 15 mm more an the KM fork has about 50 mm room. So it will fit without problems So I will build a Knard/Rabbithole frontwheel for my KM as soon as the parts are availiable
I would venture to say that if weight was a real concern, this is probably not the bike for you.
That said, this looks awesome.
Yeah, it should. P321 or Mendon Cycle is selling/making some Pugs Fatbike Lefty clamps for Lefty Max (clamped on, not bonded steerer clamps) forks. IIRC, Mendon (not affiliated, other than receiving awesome service from him) has some Lefty Max 140 alu forks with PBR dampers at a good price to go in those clamps. You just have to build the correct offset on the front wheel, and limit the travel of the Lefty Max fork so the tire doesn't hit the crown.
The forks are normally 140mm of travel, minus whatever it takes to clear the tire. For a regular 29er tire, the safe reduction is 30mm, leaving 110mm of travel.
IIRC Mendon once said he could fit gazzis easily with the stock clamps.
Still need ot reduce travle but other than that... maybe Mendon will drop by and confirm!
If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!
I'm just curious as to whether or not it would be worthwhile to try to fit a Knard on the stock Alex Adventurer rim of the Ogre... if it did fit, i wonder if it would be too narrow a rim to even take advantage of the tire.
from Surly HQ, the OD of the Knard is 30.4", about the same as a BFL, and will fit in a Pugs.
That 30.4" is basically measured from the ground to the top of the tire, so those who wonder if it'll fit your existing bike just need to measure up from the ground to see if your bike has the clearance.
Sorry if this has already been covered in this thread
I asked this on Milltowns FB page but I wonder what this wheel/tire could do for the fat front crowd like my self. I would even love this rim with my studded rear tire to see what it could do.
Mr. Krabs: Is it true, Squidward? Is it hilarious?
Really interested to hear the price on these tyres and rims, hoping that it's more reasonable than what Fatbike stuff costs, i.e. aroundabouts your avg decent rim like a Stans around $70-80 and hopefully less than $70 for the tyre.
I've received some stupid, negative NEG rep and comments before (normally not signed by the loser), but this one for my reply to the thread below just absolutely amazes me - guess someone doesn't like me Normally a good sign you're being honest and forthtright
Originally Posted by Loser
Don't think they ship these to the third world. Not to peckerheads like you, at any rate.
Originally Posted by LyNx
Most definitely sign me up for at least one of these Knard tyres when they're available, most definitely want one to put on the front of the KM with 2.55" WW LT outback
Originally Posted by Harold
You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.
I was being sarcastic, I've my share of Surly and Salsa stuff. Although it just occurred to me that maybe the Surly/Salsa/QBP thing isn't common knowledge. But it certainly is known by Mikesee
Side note, it is interesting to see the coming together of Fatbikers and 29er heads in this thread ...not that the two are mutually exclusive, but still
Really interested to hear the price on these tyres and rims, hoping that it's more reasonable than what Fatbike stuff costs, i.e. aroundabouts your avg decent rim like a Stans around $70-80 and hopefully less than $70 for the tyre.
I've received some stupid, negative NEG rep and comments before (normally not signed by the loser), but this one for my reply to the thread below just absolutely amazes me - guess someone doesn't like me Normally a good sign you're being honest and forthtright
well.. anyone who judges other people by what they can afford should be dealt w/ harshly.
Considering that everyone is all amazeballs that they had the mold to make this tire, I'm guessing it's going to be closer to fatbike tire than normal tire. I'm figuring $100 USD and if it falls within $20 higher or lower, so be it
Side note, it is interesting to see the coming together of Fatbikers and 29er heads in this thread ...not that the two are mutually exclusive, but still
...29ers as far as tire OD is concerned! Here's an experiment I'm trying with my Pugsly; "Half-fat Doggie-style":
<a href="https://s1042.photobucket.com/albums/b426/pliebenberg/Bikes%20and%20Bike%20Hardware/Half%20Fat/?action=view&current=P6110006.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://i1042.photobucket.com/albums/b426/pliebenberg/Bikes%20and%20Bike%20Hardware/Half%20Fat/P6110006.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.
Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.
Considering that everyone is all amazeballs that they had the mold to make this tire, I'm guessing it's going to be closer to fatbike tire than normal tire. I'm figuring $100 USD and if it falls within $20 higher or lower, so be it
The low volume will drive the price high. A cheap fatbike tire is $90 and a bling one is $150. If they offer the Gnard in 27tpi and 120tpi versions they probably be priced along the same lines.
I'm not a mind reader nor do I play one on TV. It just seemed like kind of sharp edged anti-Salsa comment to me about how they jump on whatever bandwagon Surly develops. I think they're both great companies that happen to share a common owner. Maybe Salsa doesn't give Mike new free stuff to test like Surly does or something and it makes him sad? I don't know exactly the genesis of the Salsa slap.
Originally Posted by mikesee One of those has never been within a country mile of my shop nor my bikes, so I have no clear idea.
But I'd guess yes. Especially going forward--we all know Salsa will hop onto Surly's bandwagon and capitalize any way they can.
Originally Posted by XJaredX
I was being sarcastic, I've my share of Surly and Salsa stuff. Although it just occurred to me that maybe the Surly/Salsa/QBP thing isn't common knowledge. But it certainly is known by Mikesee
Whole heartily agree and never do, I'll ride with anyone, riding on anything as long as it's safe. Not quite sure which way your comment was meant to go though.
Originally Posted by colker1
well.. anyone who judges other people by what they can afford should be dealt w/ harshly.
Originally Posted by Harold
You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.
as far as the tire goes, I think one of the things i like most is the tread pattern. small, square knobs. they said "moto inspired." I think there is a reason every dirt bike tire there is has basically the same square knob pattern. because you don't need ridiculous knob shapes!!!!! they should make all sizes of this tire and people would buy them. perhaps even buy lots of them. simple, simple, simple!
So, with promises of mounting a 29er plus front wheel/tire are we rehashing the 69/96/55 concept on a bigger level?
Can I be the first to say 30.4/29 = 39er, or 30.49er, or 59.4er, or 29erplus/29er, or can we have "E" added to the mix in millimeters? 698E Will Carver make a Killer E?
Just ride the damn bike... LOL?
Krampus, Krampus oh so Fine...
...your Big Tires are just Divine
So, with promises of mounting a 29er plus front wheel/tire are we rehashing the 69/96/55 concept on a bigger level?
Can I be the first to say 30.4/29 = 39er, or 30.49er, or 59.4er, or 29erplus/29er, or can we have "E" added to the mix in millimeters? 698E Will Carver make a Killer E?
Just ride the damn bike... LOL?
Krampus, Krampus oh so Fine...
...your Big Tires are just Divine
Well, opionion make bikes interesting. We like to personalize.
I may an odd one wearing logo-less t-shirts in daily life, but most people like to be a billboard of their preference, or let thir bike extend their chosen identity.
I am extremely grateful Surly made 29x3.0 happen. It looks to have been worth the wait double over. They don't do things half-azzed.
698mm must happen also. Krampus likely is not the ideal framee for it though, as they seem to keep an eye on also fitting regular 29" tires. This means they'll need to use limited BB drop. With 29+ the BB is likely high-ish, as many playful bikes are. I would not be surprised if they used 68mm BB drop as works so well in regular sized for the KM. Sticking full-on 32"/698 wheels in that, will make it a bit toppy. Well, a lot. The skinny slick 698 tires would still be a fun addition for those in a one-bike marriage or dorm room, but such wheels would totally be wroth dedicated plus sized versions of Pacers, Cross-Checks and Karate Monkeys. I happen to own all in 622, BTW. I promise you, it will be as cool as 29+, just in its own way. 29+ is the not-skinny-anymore approach, 32" would be the tall people's fitted wheels, or medium folks' cool rollers. 36" is already out there, Waltworks has a decent knobby tire on the way, and even that clumsy size has a market. Unicyclists love it, oversized riders yearn for it. Undersized riders, just ride stairases up with sub-par quality heavy-azz tires. 36" when taken to commercial quality parts and a nice selection, will push some older bikes out of a stable for sure. Why commute (sub-urban and rural) the 700c skinny bike when the 36" performance bike is on stand-by? The float on those should be similar to 29+, just require gentler terrain and more speed to really shine I suppose.
Isn't it great that we have sizes to pick from now? In MTB's at least. 650B is just superfluous, the difference with 26" is so small that it will simply not happen that it's closer to a sweet spot than 29". The sweet spot for many riders will be above 29. 29+ is a gentle way to mentally prepare for what will come. As is 36". It's out there, and it works. For the right rider (friggin' tall) it's already better than any alternative.
I've been running a Mukluk half fat front, 29er rear. I can run 29er front as well. The Kanard might be be a tight fit in the rear. This set up is much faster for dirt. I have not tried the rear fat, 29er front set up. Maybe with the Kanard?
I've been running a Mukluk half fat front, 29er rear. I can run 29er front as well. The Kanard might be be a tight fit in the rear. This set up is much faster for dirt. I have not tried the rear fat, 29er front set up. Maybe with the Kanard?
I was going to build a KM this winter, but this might take its place.
yeah.....me too! hard to wait for interbike or whenever we will get full numbers on the frame geo. i hope the chainstays aren't super long. but they probably are to fit that beefcake tire.
yeah.....me too! hard to wait for interbike or whenever we will get full numbers on the frame geo. i hope the chainstays aren't super long. but they probably are to fit that beefcake tire.
Try the pic pix counting method, some of the pics are pretty good for this.
But first, have you ridden a rigid bike with (really) long stays? I found it to rail the corners. Just placed the rear wheel in the most aft position on a Monocog29. the difference to wheelieing was there, but it's not just downsides. Not at all. Comfort, climbing stability, downhill quietness, it's quite profound how that changes with long stays. Be open to it.
Riders between 5' and 6'8', for a given frame model, all share one thing: chain stay length. Do the math on that. It's one of those things like crank length. You should try the size that fits you, and try and get used to it :-)
Try the pic pix counting method, some of the pics are pretty good for this.
But first, have you ridden a rigid bike with (really) long stays? I found it to rail the corners. Just placed the rear wheel in the most aft position on a Monocog29. the difference to wheelieing was there, but it's not just downsides. Not at all. Comfort, climbing stability, downhill quietness, it's quite profound how that changes with long stays. Be open to it.
Riders between 5' and 6'8', for a given frame model, all share one thing: chain stay length. Do the math on that. It's one of those things like crank length. You should try the size that fits you, and try and get used to it :-)
you make a good point. I switched to a 29er, which also had longer stays than my older bike and I immediately noticed that my rear wheel would spin out easily; I compensated by keeping my weight further back, and my climbing is overall just as good.
The question of getting the correct cs length for your body is one that doesn't seem to have a clear answer. The various factors that affect center of gravity and how mobile your center of gravity is do not clearly depend in any straightforward way on how tall you are. I would guess that a taller ride can move their center of gravity fore and aft more than a shorter rider, all else equal, which would suggest that finding your optimal cs length matters more for shorter riders than taller riders, but not that shorter riders need a shorter or longer cs than a similar taller rider.
To me it seems that with such a large number of variables one's only option is to make an informed guess based one prior experience and expert advice. If you're really short, you may want to pay more attention.
Regardless, at 5'8" I'm not worried at all about being able to change my riding style to make a Krampus work for me.
you make a good point. I switched to a 29er, which also had longer stays than my older bike and I immediately noticed that my rear wheel would spin out easily; I compensated by keeping my weight further back, and my climbing is overall just as good.
The question of getting the correct cs length for your body is one that doesn't seem to have a clear answer. The various factors that affect center of gravity and how mobile your center of gravity is do not clearly depend in any straightforward way on how tall you are. I would guess that a taller ride can move their center of gravity fore and aft more than a shorter rider, all else equal, which would suggest that finding your optimal cs length matters more for shorter riders than taller riders, but not that shorter riders need a shorter or longer cs than a similar taller rider.
To me it seems that with such a large number of variables one's only option is to make an informed guess based one prior experience and expert advice. If you're really short, you may want to pay more attention.
Regardless, at 5'8" I'm not worried at all about being able to change my riding style to make a Krampus work for me.
I am 6'4" and I know not a single person with longer legs than myself without being inches taller. I have done XC racing up the steepest hills, and have learned to shift my weight the hard way.
IMO wheels, cranks and chainstays are all neglected height-specific parameters on the bikes. Standardized to one size fits no-one for cost and simplicity. No reason why S and M frames should share the same wheels, someone is drawing the short straw. There should be a wheel size difference of about 2" for a 2" frame height increment. Wheels are just less than your inseam. 2"in the frame is 4" in the body.
Tall riders will need to man up, and deal with long chainstays. Learrn to loft a front wheel by will, not by merely allowing it to loft.
Mr. Jones, meet Mr. Knard and Mr. Rabbit Hole. Gentlemen, we'll be spending a lot of time together
I was thinking that ) But adding 1/2"+ of tyre radius will have a similar effect as slackening the bike a degree, nothing major, but the Jones is pretty spot on as-is. I like the idea of this tyre, but not so sure the effect it may have on the handling. It'll be an expensive experiment.
650B x 3.2"ish would match a 29er diameter better, as a half-fat option I think it's the way to go.
I was thinking that ) But adding 1/2"+ of tyre radius will have a similar effect as slackening the bike a degree, nothing major, but the Jones is pretty spot on as-is. I like the idea of this tyre, but not so sure the effect it may have on the handling. It'll be an expensive experiment.
650B x 3.2"ish would match a 29er diameter better, as a half-fat option I think it's the way to go.
Good points. And I have also been thinking about 650b. Tire and rims will no doubt be coming in those sizes seeing as how 650 seems to be the way the big hit bikes are going to go. For me, depends on the wait. I would build my Rabbit hole/knard wheel this winter. Jeff runs/has run 50mm 29er rims on the front and back of his bike with Ardents. He's very fond of the 72mm fat front with the BFL & 50 mm/Ardent rear. I couldn't anticipate the changes that would come with handling using the Knard/Rabbit Hole, but the thought of slacking the front of Jeff's bike a bit is kind of appealing. In fact, I'm going to run my headset spacers under the head tube with the truss as jeff mentions on his blog. Supposed to slack the bike just a bit.
Oh, and with the Rabbit Hole/Knard I could lose at least 400 grams of rotational weight over my current fat front set-up.
I was thinking that ) But adding 1/2"+ of tyre radius will have a similar effect as slackening the bike a degree, nothing major, but the Jones is pretty spot on as-is. I like the idea of this tyre, but not so sure the effect it may have on the handling. It'll be an expensive experiment.
650B x 3.2"ish would match a 29er diameter better, as a half-fat option I think it's the way to go.
The Surly input on the Krampus I've seen says the Rabbit Hole + Gnard is the same outside diameter as a BFL. Jeff runs a BFL on the front of the Jones so a Krampus-esque wheel/tire there shouldn't change anything.
Will a Rabbit Hole fit on the back of a Jones?
My friend has run both a BFL and a HDU on the front of his Jones and not had any issues with the difference in steering geo using slightly bigger or smaller tires.
The Surly input on the Krampus I've seen says the Rabbit Hole + Gnard is the same outside diameter as a BFL. Jeff runs a BFL on the front of the Jones so a Krampus-esque wheel/tire there shouldn't change anything.
Will a Rabbit Hole fit on the back of a Jones?
My friend has run both a BFL and a HDU on the front of his Jones and not had any issues with the difference in steering geo using slightly bigger or smaller tires.
A 47mm Kris Holm rim with a 2.55 WTB Dissent rubs on the rear of my Ti Jones. The same tire on a P35 on the rear of my steel Jones does not rub.
Oh crap... I was under the impression I could put a Rabbit Hole and Knard on the front of my Ogre but if this is true, I dunno then?
The Krampus wheel is tall, but not wide like a 5" tire. Surly has said the Rabbit Hole will work on the front of a Karate Monkey which means an Ogre is good to go...
A 47mm Kris Holm rim with a 2.55 WTB Dissent rubs on the rear of my Ti Jones. The same tire on a P35 on the rear of my steel Jones does not rub.
Hmm. That doesn't bode well for the Rabbit Hole. I know Jeff and Aquaholic have been using 50mm rims on the Jones out back. Maybe they have the eccentric bottom bracket in a different position?
Hmm. That doesn't bode well for the Rabbit Hole. I know Jeff and Aquaholic have been using 50mm rims on the Jones out back. Maybe they have the eccentric bottom bracket in a different position?
How does moving the bb affect the rear axle location?
My friend has run both a BFL and a HDU on the front of his Jones and not had any issues with the difference in steering geo using slightly bigger or smaller tires.
With those large tires there has got to be some sag involved too. IOW with rider mounted the tire must flatten out a bit and lower the bike a bit because the pressure is so low. I don't know personally though, I haven't had an opportunity to ride one.
There aren't many 'stock' 29" frames that the RH/Knard are gonna fit into.
Not without some serious muffin top action anyway.
I had to run a 2.4 Ardent out back on an amphibious tour of Canyonlands this spring. No match for the Knard--none. 50mm rims pictured.
<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/SNq_d97ImuGnqVby-y1N-RltJjMXiDiNlir3tmyGpnU?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-2niNYvNdgx0/UBQjFfjiIoI/AAAAAAAAg0k/3qEUjE0nuUI/s800/IMG_7181.jpg" height="537" width="800" /></a>
There were enough hard surfaces on this route that full fat made no sense--too heavy, too slow, too big of a magnet for goatheads. And enough soft surfaces that 'normal' 29" didn't make much sense either. The Krampus platform ticked all the right boxes, but since the frame/fork weren't available yet I did the next best thing.
The combined speed and float are indeed the answer to the question that I've been asking the last few years. Now that this platform exists I've begun plotting other, similar, but better tours to places I'd not have wanted to go before.
In fact, I'm going to run my headset spacers under the head tube with the truss as jeff mentions on his blog. Supposed to slack the bike just a bit
No Jones-tech hijack intended here, but I have mine with a couple of spacers under the lower cup, feels good but only tweaks it ~1/4 degree, it's subtle but I doubt I'd really notice much now if I changed it back. A full degree I do start to feel though.
Vik, that BFL looks quite close to a big 29x2.4" OD based on fork clearance in the pic, there's less in it than I thought. Headset spacers / cup depths can balance things a bit and minor differences you get used to. The bigger tyre volume willl be more noticable and fun.
By the way, JNCarpenter, I covet your bike. Probably the most flexible bike I've seen. Full fat, 29er, fat front, now the Rabbit Hole/Knard. I guess the Pugs is the closest production bike to being able to do all these things. I wonder how your bike would do with 650b?
If I were a bike producer, I would be striving to create a bike that has the flexibility to do all these wheel sizes well. Surly really is opening doors for others.
Just got back from a wee blat in the northern Japan hills with the Sam's Bike crew (a local bike store) and the Surly Japan Tour team. I took a few sneaky pics of their Krampusessses.
Very much not stock-standard, not production versions.
So are these new rims singlewall? Judging them by the cutouts, they are. Many long years as a bmx rider has left me highly skeptical of single wall rims. In bmx, double-wall is a mantra we repeat for several hours each day--it used to be "triple wall" until we realized that 40lb bikes weren't necessary.
I would definitely opt for a large marge over a rolling daryl in the fatbike world, simply b/c I don't trust single wall rims, even if they are super wide.
Maybe I'm mistaken that these are single wall or maybe i'm mistaken that single wall isn't strong enough. Can anybody fill me in?
Clueless question: what headset system is used? Are the top and bottom bearing cups pressfit into the frame or is part of this system of the dropin integrated type? Thanks
Just got back from a wee blat in the northern Japan hills with the Sam's Bike crew (a local bike store) and the Surly Japan Tour team. I took a few sneaky pics of their Krampusessses.
Very much not stock-standard, not production versions.
There aren't many 'stock' 29" frames that the RH/Knard are gonna fit into.
Not without some serious muffin top action anyway.
I had to run a 2.4 Ardent out back on an amphibious tour of Canyonlands this spring. No match for the Knard--none. 50mm rims pictured.
There were enough hard surfaces on this route that full fat made no sense--too heavy, too slow, too big of a magnet for goatheads. And enough soft surfaces that 'normal' 29" didn't make much sense either. The Krampus platform ticked all the right boxes, but since the frame/fork weren't available yet I did the next best thing.
The combined speed and float are indeed the answer to the question that I've been asking the last few years. Now that this platform exists I've begun plotting other, similar, but better tours to places I'd not have wanted to go before.
Gonna be a good fall. And winter. And spring...
I heart Surly.
MC
This is what I was hoping to see. I am already thinking along these lines for some bikepacking trips.
Thanks for the input, Mike.
Much better color than the "Xmas tree green" seen on other prototypes. Do you know what the colors will be wehn the frame is produced? Will there be a black on a one with a different color - like other Surly frames?
awww man that super metal flakey paint would have been awesome, maybe not in that xmas green but still. probably more $$$ though to paint, i suppose it may have been axed to keep the cost down
Much better color than the "Xmas tree green" seen on other prototypes. Do you know what the colors will be wehn the frame is produced? Will there be a black on a one with a different color - like other Surly frames?
The metallic/flecked green paint-job version was there yesterday also; I was told that that will be the production color. That metallic green is really nice in sunlight; photos do not do it justice. Photos of the metallic green always seem to show the color up much darker than it really is. The light-mint-green shown here is just a one-off job. I didn't ask about any other colors. But if previous bikes are any indication, I extremely highly doubt there will be color choices available
awww man that super metal flakey paint would have been awesome, maybe not in that xmas green but still. probably more $$$ though to paint, i suppose it may have been axed to keep the cost down
See the reply below...this is a one-off color. The metallic green is still the planned production color.
too lazy to read the whole thread (tl;dr) but is the front wheel a good spacing or the old 100mm standard? I would be highly disappointed if it wasn't a 135mm spacing. Hard to tell from the pictures.
edit: 100/135 standard from their blog. Disappointing...just really been waiting for someone bigger to challenge the dominant front 29er wheel paradigm, besides Jones.
too lazy to read the whole thread (tl;dr) but is the front wheel a good spacing or the old 100mm standard? I would be highly disappointed if it wasn't a 135mm spacing. Hard to tell from the pictures.
edit: 100/135 standard from their blog. Disappointing...just really been waiting for someone bigger to challenge the dominant front 29er wheel paradigm, besides Jones.
No-one is keeping you from sticking a fat fork in it. Aren't there no-offset 135mm fat forks out there? Height is not an issue.
No-one is keeping you from sticking a fat fork in it. Aren't there no-offset 135mm fat forks out there? Height is not an issue.
I thought height was the issue. For tire production it is. Are there a bunch of fat tire forks out there that will accommodate a 29x3? I imagine the salsa fork would be a candidate if what you say is true, that height is not an issue.
edit: 100/135 standard from their blog. Disappointing...just really been waiting for someone bigger to challenge the dominant front 29er wheel paradigm, besides Jones.
Personally I'm happy it's not something other than a standard 100mm front wheel. That means other 29er wheels will drop into the frame and wheels from a Krampus will drop into a 29er frame with smaller tires.
I thought height was the issue. For tire production it is. Are there a bunch of fat tire forks out there that will accommodate a 29x3? I imagine the salsa fork would be a candidate if what you say is true, that height is not an issue.
OD is 30.4" Surly says their 3" 29er rubber has the same outer diameter as a Big Fat Larry and that it will work in a Pugs on their 50mm rim.
Personally I'm happy it's not something other than a standard 100mm front wheel. That means other 29er wheels will drop into the frame and wheels from a Krampus will drop into a 29er frame with smaller tires.
Everything I've read says that this was the precise design challenge that Surly posed for themselves.
I know this is a probably a dumb question to most of you, but their other self-imposed challenge was to use a "no-offset fork." What does that mean, exactly? What's the value of drastically increasing trail figures? Not trying to be coy - I really just don't know.
Or, by "offset," are they talking about side-to-side shifts and wider front hubs, like the Pugsly uses?
We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]
Or, by "offset," are they talking about side-to-side shifts and wider front hubs, like the Pugsly uses?
Offset to the side as in the Pugs to get driveline clearance in the rear. There isn't any need for an offset fork unless you want the wheels to be swappable front to rear like the Pugs.
The Moonlander fork is non-offset 135mm and it should work. I have one on my Pugs with a BFL on a Rolling Daryl rim so the Knard/Rabbit Hole combo should fit fine. I switch it out and run it on my Niner MCR occasionally for the fat front setup and it works there too.
So are these new rims singlewall? Judging them by the cutouts, they are. Many long years as a bmx rider has left me highly skeptical of single wall rims. In bmx, double-wall is a mantra we repeat for several hours each day--it used to be "triple wall" until we realized that 40lb bikes weren't necessary.
I would definitely opt for a large marge over a rolling daryl in the fatbike world, simply b/c I don't trust single wall rims, even if they are super wide.
Maybe I'm mistaken that these are single wall or maybe i'm mistaken that single wall isn't strong enough. Can anybody fill me in?
Granted single wall are not as strong as double wall and if they made them really thin and also drilled/cut double wall they might get the weight down some. But weight is an issue when rims get wide and with more tire to protect the rim you can get away with more. I have some 29er Kris Holm FR 47mm rims on as set of wheels and they are 895g each for those rims. That rim plus a heavy tire make for some heavy ass wheels.
No it never stops hurting, but if you keep at it you can go faster.
[QUOTE=jollynut;9549538]Just got back from a wee blat in the northern Japan hills with the Sam's Bike crew (a local bike store) and the Surly Japan Tour team. I took a few sneaky pics of their Krampusessses.
I thought height was the issue. For tire production it is. Are there a bunch of fat tire forks out there that will accommodate a 29x3? I imagine the salsa fork would be a candidate if what you say is true, that height is not an issue.
Originally Posted by vikb
Personally I'm happy it's not something other than a standard 100mm front wheel. That means other 29er wheels will drop into the frame and wheels from a Krampus will drop into a 29er frame with smaller tires.
Originally Posted by Cloxxki
No-one is keeping you from sticking a fat fork in it. Aren't there no-offset 135mm fat forks out there? Height is not an issue.
Guess my only concern is that the fork offset might be optimized for the larger diameter and when going to a 29er wheel you would get slow steering because of the decrease in trail due to the shorter tire height. Guess we'll have to wait and see if they tweaked the offset for the Krampus or not.
Guess my only concern is that the fork offset might be optimized for the larger diameter and when going to a 29er wheel you would get slow steering because of the decrease in trail due to the shorter tire height. Guess we'll have to wait and see if they tweaked the offset for the Krampus or not.
Less trail doesn't give you slower steering. The lighter tire/rim should also steer more easily than a fat front. I'd expect a more lively ride.
Mikesee- Can you tell us an actual calipered width of the rabbit hole/knard combo?
I talked to them at Surly and they said don't build anything around the current size. Wait until it goes into production at the end of the year. Guess they are still testing.
But I would still like to hear the actual measurements both full width and OA Diameter. My 3.8 and 4" tires are actually only 3 1/4" wide on 47mm rims.
No it never stops hurting, but if you keep at it you can go faster.
Looking for opinions, guys...I'm most likely going to purchase either the Krampus frameset with rims and tires or the complete bike (depending on how impatient I get and if/when I sell my Stumpjumper). I read (on here I think) that the Rabbit Hole/Knard will fit on the front of the Karate Monkey and a Rabbit Hole with a 29x2.5 tire (I think) would fit out back. Would you guys suggest going with a KM vs a Krampus and just making it like a Krampus? Or, at least, what are your thoughts on that? I'm considering multiple possibilities since I'm not going to make a decision for at least a couple months. Anybody interested in a Stumpjumper? lol
t Would you guys suggest going with a KM vs a Krampus and just making it like a Krampus?
I can't see any reason not to buy a Krampus frame or complete if you are buying a new bike. What's the point of buying a KM when it's never going to be able to run 29 x 3" tires?
You'll probably regret that decision very quickly.
If you buy a Krampus frame and decide to run narrower 29er wheels and rubber it's no problem.
that's what I want to consider. would the bb be too low on the krampus with regular 29" wheels, though?
I can't say until they publish the frame specs.
But let me say this a lot of fat bikers talk about using skinny 29er wheels/tires when they are buying their fat bikes. Very few actually bother because they like the way fat rubber works.
Your BB will be a bit lower with normal 29er rubber, but that's secondary in my mind to getting access to 3" 29er tires. You may never want to use smaller rubber.
I talked to them at Surly and they said don't build anything around the current size. Wait until it goes into production at the end of the year. Guess they are still testing.
But I would still like to hear the actual measurements both full width and OA Diameter. My 3.8 and 4" tires are actually only 3 1/4" wide on 47mm rims.
modifier- Gotcha, after more measuring tonight, it really doesn't matter. I'd have to buy a second frame anyway.
"I ride to clear my head, my head is clearer when I'm riding SS. Therefore, I choose to ride SS."~ Fullrange Drew
looking for opinions, guys...i'm most likely going to purchase either the krampus frameset with rims and tires or the complete bike (depending on how impatient i get and if/when i sell my stumpjumper). I read (on here i think) that the rabbit hole/knard will fit on the front of the karate monkey and a rabbit hole with a 29x2.5 tire (i think) would fit out back. Would you guys suggest going with a km vs a krampus and just making it like a krampus? Or, at least, what are your thoughts on that? I'm considering multiple possibilities since i'm not going to make a decision for at least a couple months. Anybody interested in a stumpjumper? Lol
Looking for opinions, guys...I'm most likely going to purchase either the Krampus frameset with rims and tires or the complete bike (depending on how impatient I get and if/when I sell my Stumpjumper). I read (on here I think) that the Rabbit Hole/Knard will fit on the front of the Karate Monkey and a Rabbit Hole with a 29x2.5 tire (I think) would fit out back. Would you guys suggest going with a KM vs a Krampus and just making it like a Krampus? Or, at least, what are your thoughts on that? I'm considering multiple possibilities since I'm not going to make a decision for at least a couple months. Anybody interested in a Stumpjumper? lol
My KM rubs in the rear with the wheel slammed foward in the slots. This is running a velocity p35 and racing ralph 2.4. I don't think the rabbit rim with a 2.5 will fit even pushed backwards.
A Krampus with skinny rear tire, or 2 skinnies for that matter, will ride differently from a KM with 29+ front or 2 skinnies. Apparently Krampus will get a (very?) slacked out front end, whereas KM is actually one of the steeper ones still on the market.
I just want to know Krampus' fork specs. Especially the rake (offset has proven too confusing a word in fat bike-context). Sortof hoping there will be significantly more rake than on the KM (43mm), but not counting on it.
Regarding a KM with a 2.5" tire on a Rabbit Hole, right now I'm running 2.3" Big Apples on Alex Adventurer (not so wide) rims on an Ogre (same as KM), and using Monkey Nuts it just *barely* clears the front derailleur. I'm not sure about side clearance, though
"thickfog" My judo ape( renamed KM) has the red velocity p-35's with spec purgatories 2.4. I use the monkey nuts, it puts the axle in the middle of the dropouts. No rubbing and about 4 mm on each side on the inside of the chainstays and clearance for a front der. too.
Would the knard work on a standard, wider mtb rim? like for instance, the salsa ride and smile at 29mm? just a thought.
You can mount it to a narrow 29er rim. Whether you like how it rides is another matter.
I just swapped some 2.4" MTB tires from a standard rim to a Velocity P35. The wide tire on a wider rim is a noticeable improvement - particularly in steering accuracy. The wide tire of the narrower rim isn't as well supported and flexes more giving a vague feeling to the bike.
The 2.4" tires on the narrower rims are totally useable, but they are much better on a wider rim.
"thickfog" My judo ape( renamed KM) has the red velocity p-35's with spec purgatories 2.4. I use the monkey nuts, it puts the axle in the middle of the dropouts. No rubbing and about 4 mm on each side on the inside of the chainstays and clearance for a front der. too.
Yup, I now run mine mid way in the drops with no issue. I should clarify, I only had rub when cranking uphill super hard with the bike set up single speed.
Just got a call from Surly/QBP last night (I'd just closed, glad I took the call!)
Apparently they are prebooking these, and not surprisingly, expect the first somewhat limited run, to sell out fast.
Frame sets will be black, completes will be Moonlit Swamp (assuming that's the cool bass boat green we're seeing).
Tires will be in 27 and 120 TPI.
Tires will be sold with frames, no tires only for the first run, and no extra tires, two tires, one frame, you go now....
Just tossing out info that I now have, didn't know if all that was already on the table.
I did a preorder, and I would suggest anyone who wants them, to chat ASAP with their local Surly slinger about calling QBP first thing in the AM. Prebooking will commence Monday AM, and likely won't last till Tuesday.
Go get 'em tiger(s).
This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by evasive
edit- looks like I have a max of 3-3/8" clearance, so it'd be tight but doable.
This is the only thing I've wanted to do to my KM (slack the front) and was thinking of purchasing a 490-500mm fork to do it, but this would be more funner and add more cush 
Normally a good sign you're being honest and forthtright 
...not that the two are mutually exclusive, but still
