135mm Rear Frames- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 53 of 53
  1. #1
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553

    135mm Rear Frames Available?

    Hi all you fat bikers.

    I currently ride a Salsa El Mariachi set up single speed. I am a super newbie when it comes to knowledge about the fatbike market and whats available currently.

    I am very likely going to go Fat-Front this year and would like to start with the fork, initially using my spare 29er rear wheel with differently toothed cog as a front wheel that I can swap with the (other) rear wheel for gearing versatility on longer rides.

    I eventually would like to build up a fatbike and be able to do the same thing (swap front and rear wheels during the ride for different gearing) on the fat bike frame with the new wheelset.

    So...I would like to know which frames have:
    1) 135mm rear spacing (offset?) so I can use rear wheels for both front and rear
    2) which of those frames are single speed compatible.

    Thanks everyone.

    I am riding a friends Pugsley for my first real (not just parking lot experience) trail ride tomorrow morning.
    Can't wait!
    Last edited by forgiven_nick; 09-24-2012 at 06:09 AM.
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    225
    I've been wrong before but I think your choices are pugsley and 9zero7

  3. #3
    nvphatty
    Guest
    yup that pug you'll be riding is exactly what your seeking.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    919
    Most other frames will require an adapter to reduce the rear dropout size to 135mm and then need a chain tensioner as most of them don't have horizontal dropouts.

    MrClean is right, although I should point out that the current 135mm 907's have vertical dropouts so you might want to wait for the 2013 sliding rear dropout frames.

  5. #5
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    Doing some more searching, I found the inexpensive Black Sheep too. If I sold my suv I may be able to afford the frame, but that us the ultimate bike imho. I am taking about the one in the mtbr video from NAHBS. Thanks for all the replies so far!
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  6. #6
    ADV
    ADV is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    162
    I have a Schlick northpaw this another one you can go with. 135mm offset with paragon sliders for single speed setup. I have a set of rolling darryls with an alfine 8 and I am going to pick up a set of large marge wheels in about 12 hours so I can set them up for single speed.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by OFFcourse View Post
    ...MrClean is right, although I should point out that the current 135mm 907's have vertical dropouts so you might want to wait for the 2013 sliding rear dropout frames.
    or magic ratio it

    [IMG]
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    919
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    or magic ratio it
    Maaate, ya dreamin'!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,142
    Quote Originally Posted by forgiven_nick View Post
    Doing some more searching, I found the inexpensive Black Sheep too. If I sold my suv I may be able to afford the frame, but that us the ultimate bike imho. I am taking about the one in the mtbr video from NAHBS. Thanks for all the replies so far!
    Twenty2 Cycles has what you want in steel or Ti, at a much lower price than Black Sheep. Great company to deal with, too.

    https://www.twenty2cycles.com/

  10. #10
    Living the thug life.
    Reputation: Logantri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    795
    Quote Originally Posted by forgiven_nick View Post
    1) 135mm rear spacing (offset?) so I can use rear wheels for both front and rear.
    I am not sure if you realize this, but the 135 rears are offset by 17.5mm. You can't just throw in any 135 rear wheel. You can get a matching 135 offset fork so that the wheels can interchange.
    I proudly ride for these guys.

    My blog.

  11. #11
    nvphatty
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Logantri View Post
    I am not sure if you realize this, but the 135 rears are offset by 17.5mm. You can't just throw in any 135 rear wheel. You can get a matching 135 offset fork so that the wheels can interchange.
    such as a PUG fork which accepts either wheel.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by OFFcourse View Post
    Maaate, ya dreamin'!

    Maaate, ya blind?

    (Check the picture)
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    919
    What size dem cogs?

  14. #14
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    will Twenty2 (or other less expensive builders) make me something like in the vid below?
    I believe he says it is non-offset 135mm which is what I am hoping for if possible. (100mm BB required, but if its a single or dingle, why offset?)

    NAHBS 2012 - Black Sheep Fat Bike - YouTube
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,142
    Quote Originally Posted by forgiven_nick View Post
    will Twenty2 (or other less expensive builders) make me something like in the vid below?
    I believe he says it is non-offset 135mm which is what I am hoping for if possible. (100mm BB required, but if its a single or dingle, why offset?)

    NAHBS 2012 - Black Sheep Fat Bike - YouTube
    Dunno. Shoot them an e-mail. They're usually pretty responsive.

  16. #16
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    New Fatback 170mm SS frame with 135mm Adapter is also an option when it comes out here soon.

    Run 170 or 135 offset, your choice!

    Fat bike Frame

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    Dunno. Shoot them an e-mail. They're usually pretty responsive.
    Todd, Ben and the Twenty2 cycles gang have already been asked the 135mm symmetrical rear fattie question. They were willing, but it commits you to a Rohloff, ideally with 13T sprocket rather than the standard 16T; and probably nothing much fatter than HuDus on Marges (Lite or normal).

    The other potential option is to use the upcoming Surly Rabbit Hole 29er rims (as on Krampus) to build you rear 29er wheel on a 135mm offset rear frame. (or Bontrager Duster offset rims). I've yet to put the Rabbit Hole rim through Freespoke to see what the spoke tensions work out as, but think it may be ok.

    The Calfee Bamboosera Africa fat bike project uses 135mm symmetrical rear - NuVinci 360 hub with LM rims and Larrys. If you're not averse to the relatively extended wheel base of these bikes they make a pretty cheap entry point to the market.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,742
    Pugsley- simple, durable, easy to SS, rides great.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    205
    Haha! Just read about offset Surly Moonlander fork on the interbike thread. Kinda figured that was coming though.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,142
    Quote Originally Posted by bicyclenomad View Post
    Todd, Ben and the Twenty2 cycles gang have already been asked the 135mm symmetrical rear fattie question. They were willing, but it commits you to a Rohloff, ideally with 13T sprocket rather than the standard 16T; and probably nothing much fatter than HuDus on Marges (Lite or normal).

    The other potential option is to use the upcoming Surly Rabbit Hole 29er rims (as on Krampus) to build you rear 29er wheel on a 135mm offset rear frame. (or Bontrager Duster offset rims). I've yet to put the Rabbit Hole rim through Freespoke to see what the spoke tensions work out as, but think it may be ok.

    The Calfee Bamboosera Africa fat bike project uses 135mm symmetrical rear - NuVinci 360 hub with LM rims and Larrys. If you're not averse to the relatively extended wheel base of these bikes they make a pretty cheap entry point to the market.
    If it works with an IGH, it should work with SS.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    If it works with an IGH, it should work with SS.
    It will do, but in my looking into things, the chainline is important and determines which IGH you pick and which degree of 'fat' it will take.

    SS can be set up with at least as much chainline as the 54mm you get with a rolhoff.

  22. #22
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,576
    Only because it hasn't been specifically mentioned, the Moonlander is 135mm w/28mm offset. Takes an IGH very well

  23. #23
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    You guys are all awesome. Thank you api much for this very valuable discussion. Keep it coming!
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  24. #24
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by bicyclenomad View Post
    It will do, but in my looking into things, the chainline is important and determines which IGH you pick and which degree of 'fat' it will take.

    SS can be set up with at least as much chainline as the 54mm you get with a rolhoff.
    I was reading your blog and you left a comment about your Twenty2:
    "It’s got the normal pugsley offset – mainly in case I want derraileurs later. In minor hindsight I might have pushed for a symmetrical 135mm rear to run a rolhoff with fat tyres as long as you don’t want to go above huskers on marges and maybe a more conventional 29er set up if you wished. Maybe with enough space for 29×3″ too… That’s what we’ll be aiming for on my wife’s bike as she wants to be able to do 29er expedition touring in the future with the same frame."

    I would like the possibility of doing 29er expedition touring as well. What frame/wheels setup did you decide on for her bike?
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by forgiven_nick View Post
    I was reading your blog and you left a comment about your Twenty2:
    "It’s got the normal pugsley offset – mainly in case I want derraileurs later. In minor hindsight I might have pushed for a symmetrical 135mm rear to run a rolhoff with fat tyres as long as you don’t want to go above huskers on marges and maybe a more conventional 29er set up if you wished. Maybe with enough space for 29×3″ too… That’s what we’ll be aiming for on my wife’s bike as she wants to be able to do 29er expedition touring in the future with the same frame."

    I would like the possibility of doing 29er expedition touring as well. What frame/wheels setup did you decide on for her bike?
    We're just in the process of making final decisions. Basically the fat bike for my wife will be symmetrical 135mm rear - spec'd with HuDus on marge lights - rolhoff rear and hope pro2 Evo fatsno front. This will mean she can run a conventional 29er wheel set if she wishes - either fully rigid or with an 80mm suspension fork.

    The only thing left is to decide between Ti and bamboo...

  26. #26
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553

    Upset

    Quote Originally Posted by bicyclenomad View Post
    We're just in the process of making final decisions. Basically the fat bike for my wife will be symmetrical 135mm rear - spec'd with HuDus on marge lights - rolhoff rear and hope pro2 Evo fatsno front. This will mean she can run a conventional 29er wheel set if she wishes - either fully rigid or with an 80mm suspension fork.

    The only thing left is to decide between Ti and bamboo...
    Sounds very similar to what I am looking for, except I want to run two rear ss wheels, With ability to be either 29er or fat.
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  27. #27
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    Any other ideas?
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    453
    Fatsandbikes also has 135mm hubs. I haven't understood why more people aren't interested in these bikes. For $1250 you get an aluminum frame with 4" rims and 5" tires. I can make this purchase happen more easily than a pug, muk, or moonlander. Why no love?
    Fat Sand Bike TERRAIN DESTROYER 8 ALL PURPOSE 8 SPEED

  29. #29
    nvphatty
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by alexkraemer View Post
    Fatsandbikes also has 135mm hubs. I haven't understood why more people aren't interested in these bikes. For $1250 you get an aluminum frame with 4" rims and 5" tires. I can make this purchase happen more easily than a pug, muk, or moonlander. Why no love?
    Fat Sand Bike TERRAIN DESTROYER 8 ALL PURPOSE 8 SPEED
    If used for strickly sand / cruzin the beach scene then yes! otherwise no luv due to hellongish chain stays, the Q factor is no where near the others mentioned and the list goes on.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    If used for strickly sand / cruzin the beach scene then yes! otherwise no luv due to hellongish chain stays, the Q factor is no where near the others mentioned and the list goes on.
    Q-factor - understood.
    Wheelbase - for snowy conditions - wouldn't the wheel base help?

  31. #31
    nvphatty
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by alexkraemer View Post
    Q-factor - understood.
    Wheelbase - for snowy conditions - wouldn't the wheel base help?
    personally i can't speak to it but help with what??

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    personally i can't speak to it but help with what??
    Stability in loose conditions

  33. #33
    Witty McWitterson
    Reputation: ~martini~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,024
    The chainstays on the fatsandbikes are way too long for reasonable trail riding.

    If you want easy interchangeability between 29, and fat, with 135 spacing, your best bet right now is either custom, or Origin8 will be coming out with their aluminum frame with track ends. Completes are due spring, but frames might be available sooner.
    Just a regular guy.

  34. #34
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Quote Originally Posted by ~martini~ View Post
    If you want easy interchangeability between 29, and fat, with 135 spacing, your best bet right now is either custom, or Origin8 will be coming out with their aluminum frame with track ends. Completes are due spring, but frames might be available sooner.
    Why doesnt the fatback or muk with 135 adaptor fit any of this? Are we stuck using 68/73mm Crankset??? As far as I can tell, the Fatback SS with adapter would make 170mm sym fat and 29er wheels and offset 135mm wheels which also fits 100's, etc with crankset/drivetrain mods...what am I missing?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: NOBBY605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    379
    Viva 135mm!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 135mm Rear Frames-red-yellow-pugs-001.jpg  


  36. #36
    Witty McWitterson
    Reputation: ~martini~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,024
    Quote Originally Posted by JordyB View Post
    Why doesnt the fatback or muk with 135 adaptor fit any of this? Are we stuck using 68/73mm Crankset??? As far as I can tell, the Fatback SS with adapter would make 170mm sym fat and 29er wheels and offset 135mm wheels which also fits 100's, etc with crankset/drivetrain mods...what am I missing?
    Because building 135 off set 29er wheels makes them quite weak with the amount of offset that needs to be built into them. The convenience of the asym 135 design is the interchangeability of the fat front/rear wheels, not swapping in a new wheel size. This makes sense when you're way the fvck out there, and something goes terribly wrong with your hub/drive train. At least you'll have a bail out option. Big plus there. Then there's the simple availability of the 135 standard. They're everywhere. Not every shop is ready to accept the availability of the 170 rear hub. Not every shop out there has ready a truing stand to build or maintain a wheel of that width.

    Fat bikes use a 100mm bb shell. The new Krampus 29x3 might be more your speed. 73 bb shell, room for 29x3 rubber [good flotation, not as good as 4"+, but a far sight better than 2.5!] The Krampus uses normal parts all the way 'round. its just got room for giant rubber.
    Last edited by ~martini~; 09-24-2012 at 05:32 PM.
    Just a regular guy.

  37. #37
    Maestro
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    80
    I run a pugsley (135 rear with offset) year round with a 135 (centered) Salsa enabler fork. In Fat bike mode, rear wheel is stock pugs with offset. Front wheel is Rolling Darryl, 135 hub, centered. For street and gravel grinder duty, I run a standard centered 29er rear rim on the rear. The 29er wheel is a centered design, that ends up 17.5mm offset from frame centerline, in the pugsley frame, but with no noticable ill effects. For street and gravel grinder duty, for the front, I use a singlespeed 135 29er rear wheel on the salsa enabler fork. It is important to have the front wheel centered for agressive urban (street) riding. I ran the stock 29er rim on the stock pugsley fork for awhile, but at limit handling, in traffic, was spooky. I love pugsley. This combination is very versatile. The 135 rear fits on the trainer in winter, when family scheduling prevents an outdoor ride.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    753
    Yes you can have a centered single speed 135mm fat frame built.

    That's the way I had my frame built.

  39. #39
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by dvo1 View Post
    Yes you can have a centered single speed 135mm fat frame built.

    That's the way I had my frame built.
    Can't leave me hanging like that! Where are the pics?! :n)
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  40. #40
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by forgiven_nick View Post
    Can't leave me hanging like that! Where are the pics?! :n)
    If dvo1 is who I think he is, he's the best single speeder I've met. Fewer chain line issues. And his bikes tend to be pretty *****in'.

    If you want to get theoretical: 135mm divided by two, minus a chain's width, then doubled, is the width of fat tire you could fit with a single chain line setup.

    135 / 2 = 65 (EDIT: 67.5, whatever, I'll leave the rest)
    65 - say, 8 = 57
    57 * 2 = 114

    This doesn't take into account millimeters of clearance that you'd want, vibration, etc.

    You could fit a 100mm wide tire with a hub that has a properly wide chain line.

    So no Big Fat Larry on 100mm rims, basically.
    Disclaimer: I run Regular Cycles (as of 2016). As a profiteer of the bicycle industry, I am not to be taken very seriously.

  41. #41
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    Well HuDu's could fit then? Bfl's are cool, but not required fit my needs.
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  42. #42
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    This is a centered 135mm rear fat bike frame.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 135mm Rear Frames-p1050471.jpg  

    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by forgiven_nick View Post
    Can't leave me hanging like that! Where are the pics?! :n)

  44. #44
    Adventure Mapper
    Reputation: forgiven_nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    553
    Black sheep custom?
    My YouTube channel for MTB content:
    http://youtube.com/RideAlongside

    Website:
    RideAlongside

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,142
    Quote Originally Posted by dvo1 View Post
    Wow!

  46. #46
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    Wow!
    Yeah. His bikes are quite a thing to see, my kind of equipment nerdery.

    Ha, so I do know this guy. You should see him *ride* the damn thing. Amazing. First time I rode with him, I watched him do trials esque rear wheel hops on a fat bike like it was some routine thing.
    Disclaimer: I run Regular Cycles (as of 2016). As a profiteer of the bicycle industry, I am not to be taken very seriously.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,142
    What is that? Fork looks Black Sheepish, but I don't recognize the frame.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    What is that? Fork looks Black Sheepish, but I don't recognize the frame.
    Frame fork bar/stem, seat post are all done by Black Sheep, Frame is a snow version of the bike on page.

  49. #49
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    or magic ratio it

    [IMG]
    Pardon the off topic, but what handlebar is that? Is it cut down or stock? It might be the angle, but it looks like what I've been looking for and can't find.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by rocwandrer View Post
    Pardon the off topic, but what handlebar is that? Is it cut down or stock? It might be the angle, but it looks like what I've been looking for and can't find.
    On-One Midge

    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  51. #51
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    On-One Midge

    I actually just bought one of those (hasn't arrived yet). It's funny that in your magic ratio photo the drops look super short and flared, and the hoods look usable (even on my road bike, I angle the hoods in).

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by ~martini~ View Post
    Because building 135 off set 29er wheels makes them quite weak with the amount of offset that needs to be built into them.
    This is a fallacy. The resultant wheel of a 29er offset leaves a left side angle very close to (if not identical to) the typical drive side angle. And last I checked, 29er wheels aren't imploding all over the place... Go play with freespoke and check it out...

    Is it ideal? No. But they certainly work.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    24






    Here's my sheep. 135 centered front and rear. A dingle on both (inner ratio only accessible on floyds or more narrow- as it sits) Even finagled a 68mm bb on it.

Members who have read this thread: 1

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.