Sugar Q- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Sugar Q

  1. #1
    luckiest of the unlucky
    Reputation: JoelM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    478

    Sugar Q

    Welp, my Paragon is going to have to be warrantied soon... I'm thinking about throwing in some extra dough and getting a Sugar 29x. I know theyve got some issues, here's one I haven't heard before- Sugar frames have a tendency of developing cracked headtubes (or cracks around the headtubes). Any truth to that? I even searched the forums for such, and found nothing.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeeZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    6,235

    Cracks

    Quote Originally Posted by JoelM
    Welp, my Paragon is going to have to be warrantied soon... I'm thinking about throwing in some extra dough and getting a Sugar 29x. I know theyve got some issues, here's one I haven't heard before- Sugar frames have a tendency of developing cracked headtubes (or cracks around the headtubes). Any truth to that? I even searched the forums for such, and found nothing.
    The word on the street is that some have cracked at the shock mount on the top tube. Also Fisher indicated the problem has been fixed. Only time will tell.

    I have riden my Sugar for a year with no issues

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    787

    crack sugar

    I cracked mine at the known problem area Deezee mentioned. I certainly don't know much, but I can pretty much assure you that the only frame problems posted here in the last year or more have been that top tube/shock mount spot or a broken chainstay.

    As I recall, most of the broken chainstays were associated with "trauma" in the form of a rock. Not to pass judgment on those folks, because I agree that carbon is an unnecessary risk on the back of my machine. I guess luck plays a factor...

  4. #4
    rider
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,355
    Just broke my 2nd front frame section at the same point on the upper shock plate to TT junction. My Sugar is an '04 and the first front frame section broke after 18 months. The early '05 replacement section that I got in May was supposed to be improved and not prone to cracking in this same problem area, but it only lasted 9 months. Same crack in the same place. Guess they were wrong about that "fix". Yet another "fix" to the TT problem came out in November, we will have to see about this newest revision.

    My rear swingarm assy. broke at the front of the derailleur hanger pocket as well. The right dropout is only 4mm thick right there. Not very reassuring.

    I need a new FS 29er frame...

    Unless you are very light AND really easy on equipment AND not planning on riding much I would not suggest getting a Sugar or any other Fisher 29er due to frame cracking issues.
    I would suggest getting a Cobia and stripping it out to build another frame up. Then just ebay the Fisher frame.

    29erchico
    Last edited by 29erchico; 02-13-2006 at 12:12 AM.

  5. #5
    Compulsive Bike Builder
    Reputation: DirtDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    1,512

    I went for it

    In spite of the reputation, I popped for an '06. I don't have an '05 for a side by side comparison. It apprears much beefed up at the mount of the shock at the top tube. The mount "plates" do not fork off into a Y shape with two separate welds at the top tube, it makes contact with the tube for the whole length of the mount. I hope that makes sense. Plus the plates look very thick, thicker than on any other XC bike I have seen, thicker than '05? Fisher also uses a 2-pass weld there now, Fisher Guy posted info and pics on the Trek/Fisher board.

    We these improvements, it should last at least until the replacement model is out, and Fisher/Trek have a great reputation for warranty support. Just keep your receipt. I really like the bike just as it is, if these latest mods fix the problem that will be good, too.
    Disclaimer: ComCycle USA

  6. #6
    luckiest of the unlucky
    Reputation: JoelM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    478
    I should find out today whether or not it's even a possibility for me to upgrade. If so, I think I'm gonna do it. I am fairly light, (<150lbs) and I'm not planning on hitting any 5' drops anytime soon. I think it'd be a great frame, especially if it were outfitted with the components I've built up on on my Paragon. I've seen several people racing Sugars that seem to be quite happy with them. One of my teammates is talking about cutting down the size of our 12hour team (after 1 season... err, one race!), so a fully may be in order

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Quasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,049
    Quote Originally Posted by 29erchico
    Just broke my 2nd front frame section at the same point on the upper shock plate to TT junction. My Sugar is an '04 and the first front frame section broke after 18 months. The early '05 replacement section that I got in May was supposed to be improved and not prone to cracking in this same problem area, but it only lasted 9 months. Same crack in the same place. Guess they were wrong about that "fix". Yet another "fix" to the TT problem came out in November, we will have to see about this newest revision.
    I didn't think the changes were fully implemented until the 06 model. Did your 05 frame have the smooth welds on the brackets or were they wavy welds? What size is your bike?

  8. #8
    rider
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,355
    Quote Originally Posted by Quasi
    I didn't think the changes were fully implemented until the 06 model. Did your 05 frame have the smooth welds on the brackets or were they wavy welds? What size is your bike?
    My point was that there have been several attempts to fix the Sugar front frame issue. The Sugar 29er came out in '03 but few were sold due to delays and changes so that they would hold together. The '04 was claimed to be much improved, so I bought one in XL.. I took delivery just after Thanksgiving in '03. In '05, when my TT broke in early May a mfg. engineer (my formal college training also, BTW) assured me the the improved mfg. process being used "crushed" the TT failure issues. Got to wonder if he is still working at Fisher? No, my current broken frame does not have the multipass welding on the shock plate mounting. But please forgive me for taking a "wait and see" attitude on Sugar 29er front frame section reliability. Been told that "the problem has been fixed" before.

    It's not like I hate Fisher, I happen to love how my Sugar rides. It is a climbing fool. That is, when I can ride it. I want them to get past this problem so that they can stop pouring money into frame replacement. Also, being able to go for a really long ride in the hinterlands w/o wondering if my frame components are going to fail would be nice as well. Walking out a long ways pushing an unsafe to ride Sugar is no fun. From personal experience.

    29erchico

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.