2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes - Page 4- Mtbr.com
Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 601 to 800 of 2225
  1. #601
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Sweet bike!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  2. #602
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    Hope to have my "super 5" this Saturday, loving he colors more and more.

  3. #603
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    New Bike Day! Trek Farley 7. 30.3lbs with pedals and tubes, goal weight is 27.xxlbs.








  4. #604
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    46
    I have been riding the 27.5's for a month or so now. For the last week or two it has been in the snow in single track trails. I don't really have a good point of reference, since this is my first fat bike, but I am really impressed with them. I am tubeless, and ran 7 in the back and in the front today in 2" or so of new snow, and it hooked up good, but I felt like to could go lower on pressure. The picture is not a good example since I just went through some mud and water before this, but the tires shed the snow really well and it had great traction. The only place it did not work really well was sidehilling.


  5. #605
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    22
    Yup, but the situation here is complicated by higher prices and lower availability. I'm a plodding returning rider, so weight savings aren't my primary concern (unless you count reducing the 5kg spare tyre around my own middle). Back-country reliability, simplicty and fun factor are!

    Quote Originally Posted by rain100 View Post
    If you're looking into the Farley 5, and wanting a 1x drivetrain, I would suggest taking another look at the 7. The Farley 7 and above all have a much narrower 1x specific crank setup that decreases q factor by 20mm. This is huge!

    The other upgrades that the 7 has over the 5 (carbon fork, 11 speed rear sram setup, DB3 brakes) are nice, but the fact that it has a narrower q factor is reason enough to look past the 5.

    That being said, you could swap out the stock 5 crank for a race face Aeffect crankset to get the same q factor of the 7.
    ...and I don't want a purple rain ride

  6. #606
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    41
    I love the purple Farley 7, perfect choice of colour. I would love my 9.8 to be purple.

  7. #607
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    I would love my 7 to be grey and orange - the purple is growing on me more and more though.

  8. #608
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    ok it HAS arrived! Collecting tomorrow morning. Excited but literally have no room to store it. I haven't seen it yet but in the photo the paint job looks much better than I expected. I was worried it was going to be a bit glossy but it looks more dull metallic.

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-farley5.jpg

  9. #609
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes

    Has anyone converted the Wampa 27.5 TLR to a tubeless setup yet?

    I was wondering if you need tape or is it simply ready for a valve stem and some sealant after removing the tube.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  10. #610
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by LunchRider View Post
    Has anyone converted the Wampa 27.5 TLR to a tubeless setup yet?

    I was wondering if you need tape or is it simply ready for a valve stem and some sealant after removing the tube.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is my understanding that they include a TLR kit that has the tubless valves and rim tape with the bike.

  11. #611
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Really? I did not receive any accessories except a front derailleur bracket.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  12. #612
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    I received all that with my Jackelope wheels. IDK why they wouldn't include it with the Wampa's. Ask your dealer, or send Trek a question from their web site. They answer pretty quick.

  13. #613
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    I will report my findings.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  14. #614
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by bswedorski View Post
    Picked up a Farley 9.8 last week. Absolutely love it. It's my first Fat Bike althought I've demoed a few.

    I did manage to generate a slow leak in the front tire after the first ride. Due to there being ZERO replacement tubes in stock anywhere, it is now set up tubeless front and back.

    Still waiting on my xpedo spry pedals (tomorrow). Currently it weighs in at 24lb10oz for a 17.5 frame.

    https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...23263021_o.jpg
    I have a 9.8 and was wondering what was needed to go tubeless. did you need rim strips?

  15. #615
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    With the 9.8 the only things you need are sealant and valve stems. The wheels are already taped.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  16. #616
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    That is sweet! Thanks!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  17. #617
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by LunchRider View Post
    I have a 9.8 and was wondering what was needed to go tubeless. did you need rim strips?
    All I needed to go tubeless was valves and sealant. The Wampas are pre taped. I scored some sweet Roval alloy black tubeless valves for the conversion. 4oz of Stans in each wheel and just for the sake of trying used a floor pump to go tubeless on one wheel. Very easy tubeless!

  18. #618
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    81
    Wait til you guys slap some 29+ wheels and tires on the Farley. Completely changes the bike. I built a set of nexties on dt big rides slapped some 120tpi knards on them tubeless and transformed the fast fatty into a rocket ship.

  19. #619
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by silver2ks4 View Post
    Wait til you guys slap some 29+ wheels and tires on the Farley. Completely changes the bike.
    NO SHTI!- slap some road bike wheels on there and it will transform it even more!

  20. #620
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambit21 View Post
    NO SHTI!- slap some road bike wheels on there and it will transform it even more!
    Got a set of Maxxis Hookworms for those days.

  21. #621
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by jrogersAK View Post
    I have been riding the 27.5's for a month or so now. For the last week or two it has been in the snow in single track trails. I don't really have a good point of reference, since this is my first fat bike, but I am really impressed with them. I am tubeless, and ran 7 in the back and in the front today in 2" or so of new snow, and it hooked up good, but I felt like to could go lower on pressure. The picture is not a good example since I just went through some mud and water before this, but the tires shed the snow really well and it had great traction. The only place it did not work really well was sidehilling.

    Nice crank!

  22. #622
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Anyone use the Sun Ringle 78mm tape yet on the MuleFuts? I just picked up some up, gonna try to get them setup this weekend.

    Also, whats the bare minimum amount of sealant you can safely get away with in these things?

  23. #623
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    So just picked up my Farley 5 this morning and it is beautiful and ridiculous all at once. The width of the tires is INSANE. I took it for a very quick spin out of the shop and it moves pretty quick and feels lighter than the 15kg or so it is supposed to be. Actually feels very responsive. Tires came inflated from the factory and haven't checked pressure but I imagine it is quite high. Stuck some old blue Nukeproof Neutron flat pedals on it which match the blue highlights on the paint job perfectly. Now begins my whole learning curve with owning a Fatty. Think I need to get a couple of spare tubes but from what I read I can get away with a standard 3.5-3.8" MTB tube that will hopefully be considerably lighter than the stock ones it ships with. May chuck a 70mm stem on it and then look at going tubeless once I figure out how to do it. Any tips guys for a n00b with a new Farley 5? What pressures you recommend for riding hardpack trails and rooty technical (and muddy) single track. I weight about 86kg. cheers

  24. #624
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    I am new to the fatty scene as well. So far I have tried 10/10 and 10 rear/8 front. I liked them both. It all boils down to experimenting. I'm going to convert to tubeless tomorrow, not for the weight factor, but in preparation for some snow biking.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  25. #625
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Teton29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    429
    Congrats cr3anmachin3 on the new bike!!!

    Do some searching for the mulefut tubeless and you will find what you need. I'd suggest going with the tape made for this rim--78mm sunringle tape sold by universal cycles.

    As far as pressure, get a low reading pressure gauge and discover what works for you. On pavement, I use about 20. On nice hardpack or gravel maybe 15. On rough single track closer to 7-10. Basically use as much pressure as you can without the tires basketball bouncing over stuff. When the tires start bouncing, they eat up speed and you can loose traction.

  26. #626
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by Teton29er View Post
    Congrats cr3anmachin3 on the new bike!!!

    Do some searching for the mulefut tubeless and you will find what you need. I'd suggest going with the tape made for this rim--78mm sunringle tape sold by universal cycles.

    As far as pressure, get a low reading pressure gauge and discover what works for you. On pavement, I use about 20. On nice hardpack or gravel maybe 15. On rough single track closer to 7-10. Basically use as much pressure as you can without the tires basketball bouncing over stuff. When the tires start bouncing, they eat up speed and you can loose traction.
    Cheers! Many thanks for the advice. Yes got a nice little Topeak guage for measuring pressures. Yeah have read a few things about people using various duct tapes for sealing rims as the sunringle tape can be expensive. I will need to get the MASSIVE tires off and have a look. I assume the stuff I see bulging out is the tube pressing against the rim strip, so you will still get this amazing effect if you go tubeless. I sort of did A LOT of research on Fat Bikes before getting the Farley 5 but not so much research on the price of rim tape (ouch!), tubes (double ouch!) and tires (mega-ouch!!!). I cannot believe how massive those 4.7 Barbegazi tires are....they are HUGE! I may try a narrower tire come the summer but these will definitely rock throughout the winter!

  27. #627
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenkiS14 View Post
    Anyone use the Sun Ringle 78mm tape yet on the MuleFuts? I just picked up some up, gonna try to get them setup this weekend.

    Also, whats the bare minimum amount of sealant you can safely get away with in these things?
    Try a search - there's an entire thread on this subject.
    Hint 'Mulefut 80 SL'

  28. #628
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    Can some veteran bike/wheel ****s please chime in on the benefits/pro's and con's of the new 27.5 x 3.8 platform?

    I am curious where these may have advantages or disadvantages vs regular 4 and 5 in fat tires and also 27.5plus sizes and 29+ sizes.

    What are your overall opinions on this new platform? What is it doing for you?

    Does anyone see this platform eliminating other platforms?

    I agree with another member here, I would have also liked to see this tire put on a 60mm rim. (for tire profile reasons, and ability to run even narrower 3.5 and 3.0 sizes)
    However, I can see where Trek was headed with this in creating a fast "fatbike"

    I am really liking the fact that Trek has gone where no man has gone before.

    I am also curious how well the 27 x 3.8 would look and feel on a WTB scraper rim.

    This platform looks like a great 3rd option in the fatbike summer wheelset group!

    Can anyone see this being used as a 365 day a year platform?

    I am also curious if this would make a kick ass 365 days a year dirt platform.

    Please enlighten my mind.
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  29. #629
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    82
    My goal is to to run one set of rims year round on my farley 5, I am hearing that Nextie is coming out with a 65mm 27.5 I could run 3.2 to 4.0 but not sure about 4 plus.

    Thoughts ?

  30. #630
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    If Nextie comes out w/ a 65mm 27.5 rim you would be just fine running all 4.0-3.2 maybe even 3.0
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  31. #631
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    Aquamogal, will you be riding in snow?
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  32. #632
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    I don't think there are any frames that can handle a tire larger than 4 inches on a 27.5 wheel. ...at least yet.

    Did some measuring today at the LBS:
    26 X 3.8 is 29.0 in diameter
    26 x 4.7 is 29.25 in diameter
    27.5 X 3.8 is 29.3 in diameter
    29.0 x 3.0 is 30.25 in diameter.

  33. #633
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    props to the moderator for editing my post in style......that just made my day
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  34. #634
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    Can some veteran bike/wheel ****s please chime in on the benefits/pro's and con's of the new 27.5 x 3.8 platform?

    I am curious where these may have advantages or disadvantages vs regular 4 and 5 in fat tires and also 27.5plus sizes and 29+ sizes.

    What are your overall opinions on this new platform? What is it doing for you?

    Does anyone see this platform eliminating other platforms?

    Please enlighten my mind.
    http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/27-...ot-979984.html

    My advice- if you must go 27.5" fat, save your money until it at least has some market support aside from Trek.

    Otherwise buy a Farley 7
    ‘19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  35. #635
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    Are they really coming out with 27.5 x 4.0? or is the 27.5 x 3.8 hodag what we ended up with?

    Kinda like When everyone was excited for surly to release the 29 x 2.7 dirt wizard and then it came out in 3.0.....
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  36. #636
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes

    Am I the only one that's wants bigger rubber? Bud and Lou on 100's has plenty of clearance. Let's see a 27.5 x 5


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  37. #637
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    Can some veteran bike/wheel ****s please chime in on the benefits/pro's and con's of the new 27.5 x 3.8 platform?

    I am curious where these may have advantages or disadvantages vs regular 4 and 5 in fat tires and also 27.5plus sizes and 29+ sizes.

    What are your overall opinions on this new platform? What is it doing for you?

    Does anyone see this platform eliminating other platforms?

    I agree with another member here, I would have also liked to see this tire put on a 60mm rim. (for tire profile reasons, and ability to run even narrower 3.5 and 3.0 sizes)
    However, I can see where Trek was headed with this in creating a fast "fatbike"

    I am really liking the fact that Trek has gone where no man has gone before.
    (...).
    I am curious about this also.
    Currently looking at Trek Stache or Trek Farley with no way to test (no test bike in shops, nor test center/truck whatever you have in the US).

    Feedback from people who rode bigfats/650B+/29 and this new format is invaluable to new buyers. Especially with feedback on a variety of terrain (Is it much better than 26x4(.6) on road for example). Looking forward to it.

  38. #638
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    I specifically bought the 7 because I wanted a FATBike. And a 27.5x3.5 is too close to a 29+ tire, and I already have a few trail bikes. I wanted a dedicated snow bike, so thats why I bought the 7 with 26x4.7 tires.

  39. #639
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by Natedeezy View Post
    Am I the only one that's wants bigger rubber? Bud and Lou on 100's has plenty of clearance. Let's see a 27.5 x 5


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I will definitely want a wider option down the road for the 27.5. it could definitely go wider but I do understand that wider means taller also. How tall do you think a 27.5x5 would be? 32 inch or more?

  40. #640
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Natedeezy View Post
    Am I the only one that's wants bigger rubber? Bud and Lou on 100's has plenty of clearance. Let's see a 27.5 x 5


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Can you move the tire back in the drop outs? If not my concern would be clearance where the chainstay narrows if you went with a bigger diameter version of that tire. If you could move it back it should fit.
    ‘19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  41. #641
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    sort of related to above posts. Has anyone got an online guide or howto for the Stranglehold dropouts. I'm just wondering what's involved when I have my first flat and have to take rear wheel off. Is it simple enough?

    I only just got my new Farley 5 home the other night. I struggled to get it in the car, struggled to get it up the stairs into the apartment and struggled to find room for it. My girlfriend is now just calling it THE TRACTOR and every time we walk into the kitchen where it stored we walk out laughing again. The size of the tires on this bike are RIDICULOUS! Away this weekend so first ride will have to wait until next week :-(

  42. #642
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    152
    Literally unthread the through axle, slide it out and remove the wheel. Fork and rear wheel operate the same way *for Farley 7 and up. Farley 5 has front qr

  43. #643
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by crohnsy View Post
    Literally unthread the through axle, slide it out and remove the wheel. Fork and rear wheel operate the same way.
    ok that simple then! I already took the front wheel off which is just a standard QR but when I had a look at the rear it looked a bit different with a screw that goes in to the back. This is my first time with thru axles so I'm now thinking maybe I took the front wheel off the incorrect way :-/ I took it off like a regular QR but now realize you are supposed to slide the axle out,,,doh! Hope I haven't damaged anything.

  44. #644
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    ok that simple then! I already took the front wheel off which is just a standard QR but when I had a look at the rear it looked a bit different with a screw that goes in to the back. This is my first time with thru axles so I'm now thinking maybe I took the front wheel off the incorrect way :-/ I took it off like a regular QR but now realize you are supposed to slide the axle out,,,doh! Hope I haven't damaged anything.
    I misread you have a Farley 5' thought I read 7. You are correct the front is standard qr, the rear is through axle. all the hardware on the rear dropouts is to adjust the chainstays length. You might want to get your shop to show you how to adjust those for you.

  45. #645
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    82
    Yes riding snow, will keep the 80mm rims and the stock 4.7 to see how they do

  46. #646
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by crohnsy View Post
    I misread you have a Farley 5' thought I read 7. You are correct the front is standard qr, the rear is through axle. all the hardware on the rear dropouts is to adjust the chainstays length. You might want to get your shop to show you how to adjust those for you.
    ah ok phew! Yeah I thought it was a standard QR on front but never had a thru axle before so wasn't sure. Yes I don't plan on adjusting the chainstays on rear at all yet but if I understand you correctly it's just a case of sliding the thru axle out, and I don't mess with the wheel position at all. Yes, will ask the guy in my LBS about the Stranglehold stuff. He's a Trek dealer but I imagine this stuff is as new to him as it is to me. thanks

  47. #647
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    82
    Also anyone know if the 29+ tire on stache would fit on new farleys ?
    Just wondered, it may make more sense just to get 1600 new stache

  48. #648
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    They should but will not fit the 9, due to the Bluto. But the 5,7, 9.6 and 9.8 should all work.

  49. #649
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Quote Originally Posted by FT251 View Post
    They should but will not fit the 9, due to the Bluto.
    This is malarkey, I have not yet seen a 29+ setup that does not fit in the bluto, I've run dually rim/knard, northpaw rim/chupacabra/knard/fatbnimble and hugo rim/fatbnimble/chupacabra no problems
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  50. #650
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    ...if I understand you correctly it's just a case of sliding the thru axle out, and I don't mess with the wheel position at all...
    Correct.

    The axle holders are clamped to the drop-out slots by those big (20mm) hex nuts that you see either side of the bike...



    ...and they won't move unless you slacken the big hex nuts (and the allen bolt on the disc caliper mount).



    In case you don't know, you un-screw the axle to remove it. The handle won't clear the frame at first, but it is spring-loaded, so you can pull the handle out, rotate it clear of the frame (it doesn't turn the axle when you pull it out), then carry on for another ~3/4 turn before you need to do the same again.

    The inside of the axle holders is shaped to hold the wheel hub, so you can just drop the wheel into place and slide the axle in without having to try and hold everything in alignment. (Not like a motorbike!)





    At least in the UK, there are plastic spacers in the drop-outs which need to be removed before you can slide the wheel forwards. They are held behind the big hex nuts which need to be completely undone to do this (the axle holder / adjuster will fall out of the frame if you let it when you do this). Also beware that what looks like a machined slot under the head of the sliding bolt on the brake mount is, in fact, a thin, oval washer.

    There is *just* enough clearance to be able to slide the wheel all the way forwards without it hitting the front derailleur with the stock Barbegazi tyres on my Farley 5, but I haven't tried it in mud since I adjusted the dropouts.

    HTH

  51. #651
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Thanks man! This is useful info. I feel like I've bought a monster! It scares me to even look at it. Can't wait to get out on it though. The funny thing is I live in Ireland, if lucky we get 1-2 weeks of snow at most. I took it out of the LBS for a quick ride & I think a couple people almost crashed their cars looking at it. It really is a head-turner! LOL

  52. #652
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    I feel like I've bought a monster! ... It really is a head-turner! LOL
    I know what you mean!

    I'm in Wales, so we get about as much snow as you. I rode mine into work last week, and as word spread, pretty much the whole factory visited the bike racks to see the alien craft that had landed.

  53. #653
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by aquamogal View Post
    Also anyone know if the 29+ tire on stache would fit on new farleys ?
    Just wondered, it may make more sense just to get 1600 new stache
    http://danosmodernlife.com/2015/09/2...arley-29-plus/

    They fit.

  54. #654
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    45
    Love my 9.6
    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-p5pb12869261.jpg

  55. #655
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drmayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    251
    Set up the mulefut rims on my 7 last night with orange seal tape and stans sealant. I initially wasn't impressed with how the tape installed. It didn't seems to stick to the rim/rim strip real well and was difficult to keep wrinkle free.

    They seemed to seal up quickly though and held pressure overnight so we'll see how they do. Lbs recommended the orange seal tape over the sun ringle tape.

  56. #656
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    26
    Anybody mounted an X-Fusion Hilo Strate to a Farley? That's probably up next for me.

    I finally got the Bluto on my F7 two days ago. Of course, it's been raining ever since.

  57. #657
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes

    I have not, but would be very interested in your findings.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  58. #658
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    26
    My checking account says if I'm good, maybe next month!
    2016 Farley 7 +Bluto

  59. #659
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Paochow View Post
    Can you move the tire back in the drop outs? If not my concern would be clearance where the chainstay narrows if you went with a bigger diameter version of that tire. If you could move it back it should fit.
    They are all the way back in the drops in that pic, I'll have to throw the 100's back on and actually measure.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  60. #660
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    21
    Maybe there is another thread for this specific subject, but ill have a go anyway. Ive now followed Tubeless Fatbike Conversion Update | Cycles In Life for setting my mule fut on my farley7 tubeless.
    Ive replaced the original rim tape with a map printed on tyvek, and added tesa tape, not scotch (local shop did not have scotch). The tesa tape won't stick to the rim properly, maybe i washed with the wrong soap?
    Anyway, ive now put the tube back in, added 30psi of air and will wait for tomorrow to see if ill try with some stans sealant and no tubes...

    Anyone set it up tubeless using another method? Different tape?

  61. #661
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    You need the tape to stick to the rim for it to work - I wouldn't waste your Stans if the tape hasn't stuck.

    One of my rims had a LOT of tyre soap on it that would stop anything sticking to it. I took the rim strip off and washed both the rim and the rim strip with water / dish soap. I gave the rims a wipe with methylated spirit (denatured alcohol) before re-fitting the rim strips and taping.

    I used one wrap of 100mm wide Scapa 3122 Heavy Duty Waterproof Duct Tape over the top of the original rim strip. No problems so far.

  62. #662
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    I dropped by a LBS today and the 7 is very nice in person. Thing is that it's grossly overpriced for what you're going to get (not sure about US pricing but here in Canada it's $2900. You can get a Felt DD10 w/ Bluto for $500 more and the Bluto here retails for $800+)

    Time to consider other brands
    Welp, someone here is swallowing his words...





























    NOW AN OWNER OF A 7! HAHAHA

    Can't wait to ride this tomorrow. It was a roller coaster 3 weeks for me but ended up with a FB that I actually like.

    If anyone's on the fence on getting a 7: the color is killer in person unless you really hate Purple.

    I have a question: this is my first bike with thru axles and the guy at the shop placed a business card in between the brake pads when he removed the front wheel - is this a way to make sure the brake pads don't rub when you put the thru axle back in? I took the business card out and slid the thru axle and it looks like the rotor is rubbing (can you smell the roadie in me? yes we're barbarians that still use QR levers).

  63. #663
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    NOW AN OWNER OF A 7!
    Congratulations!


    ...the guy at the shop placed a business card in between the brake pads when he removed the front wheel - is this a way to make sure the brake pads don't rub when you put the thru axle back in?
    Most likely it's just to stop the pads closing up if you caught the brake lever with the wheel out - normal practice for hydraulic discs.

    I took the business card out and slid the thru axle and it looks like the rotor is rubbing...
    *Looks* like the rotor is rubbing, or *is* actually rubbing?

    If it's just a case that it looks close, and perhaps you can hear something as you spin the wheel, but it doesn't slow the wheel down, then just go and ride - it will bed itself in (IME).

    If it is actually rubbing enough to noticeably slow the wheel, then investigate further - it will probably rub if you haven't tightened the axle, but be cautious in case there is something amiss.

  64. #664
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    Congratulations!




    Most likely it's just to stop the pads closing up if you caught the brake lever with the wheel out - normal practice for hydraulic discs.



    *Looks* like the rotor is rubbing, or *is* actually rubbing?

    If it's just a case that it looks close, and perhaps you can hear something as you spin the wheel, but it doesn't slow the wheel down, then just go and ride - it will bed itself in (IME).

    If it is actually rubbing enough to noticeably slow the wheel, then investigate further - it will probably rub if you haven't tightened the axle, but be cautious in case there is something amiss.
    It is rubbing, but it doesn't stop the wheel from spinning. The sound is noticeable though.

    When I took it for a test spin last night I didn't notice any rub. When I put the front wheel back on (I suppose that business card needs to be removed? I did remove it but I don't think the rotor is centered when I put the thru axle back)

    Help a monkey out here!

  65. #665
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Congrats on ur purchase! I just bought a Farley 5 a few days ago. Yeah remove the card. Sounds like just a small bit of rotor rub & nothing to worry about. Generally it's only a problem if the disc is bent or it's slowing the wheel down. Usually with hydraulics when u reseat the wheel & close the QR u pump the brake a half dozen times & then hold for 30 seconds or so & the pads settle to the correct position. If ur transporting the bike a lot in back of car & removing front wheel then ask ur LBS if he has any spare Avid/SRAM or Shimano brake spacers. I use them a bit but easy to lose. Cheap solution is to stick a bunched up cloth between brake lever & grip so the lever can't compress accidentally.

  66. #666
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177

    My new build

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-img_0446-2-.jpg


    It's a F5 frame, all custom with XT 8000 drive, brakes, Next crank, Jackelope wheels, Makwa fork, Thompson stem, Easton carbon bars and lizard skin grips. XT 8000 brakes and rotors. 27.8 LBS with the Barbi tires on it.

  67. #667
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Why didn't you just start with a frame?

  68. #668
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    I did!

  69. #669
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Sweet!

  70. #670
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    some quick photos of my new Farley 5 now with pedals on. Have not ridden yet so need to adjust seat height and a few other things. It's a total BEAST.

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-image3.jpg2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-image2.jpg2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-image1.jpg

  71. #671
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    anyone suggest a cheap/light tube that would do for the Bontrager 4.8 tires pictured above? I've read that most people use Spesh 2.4 to 2.7 non-DH tubes but not sure how well these will work. Not ready to go tubeless just yet. Will be going tubeless eventually but also want to carry a spare. thanks

  72. #672
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    anyone suggest a cheap/light tube that would do for the Bontrager 4.8 tires pictured above? I've read that most people use Spesh 2.4 to 2.7 non-DH tubes but not sure how well these will work. Not ready to go tubeless just yet. Will be going tubeless eventually but also want to carry a spare. thanks

    Suck it up and go tubeless ASAP. Best thing you can do. Then if you want to carry a spare carry one of your old tubes..

  73. #673
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    LOL I kind of expected someone was gonna say that. It's in the cards but never done it b4 so don't want to screw it up.

  74. #674
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    46
    Get your LBS to convert it to tubeless for for you. I just had them do mine as part of the bike delivery.

  75. #675
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    LOL I kind of expected someone was gonna say that. It's in the cards but never done it b4 so don't want to screw it up.
    I did mine successfully - if it wasn't stupid simple, it wouldn't have happened. And there are plenty of folks here that will be happy to lend advice if you want to give it a go.

    Seriously, the biggest battle is getting the bead to break. So by the time you pull out the stock tubes, you're almost halfway done with the conversion - clean the rim inside, wrap it with tape, install the tubeless valve, reinstall the tire, add some sealant. I didn't even mess with the rim strips on mine. Helps to have a compressor to get the tire seated at first, but some have done it with a hand pump.
    2016 Farley 7 +Bluto

  76. #676
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    I am waiting for UPS to to bring me my valves and sealant right now!
    I am going to convert mine tonight!
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  77. #677
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Got my 7 stetup with Tubeless today, pretty painless, most difficult was removing the tires.

    Used the SUN specific rim tape. 4oz of Orange sealant per tire.

    Ended up shedding just over 1lb on the whole bike. Bike is now 29.17lbs with tires.

    My goal is to get it to 27.x . I have Guide R brakes, and Rhythm Pro Carbon bars coming for it this week.

    Waiting on availability of carbon seatpost still.

  78. #678
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Lowest hanging fruit weight savings-wise would be cranks,
    not that the stock cranks are heavy. You'll cut about a pound
    though with NextSL cranks. Carbon bars and post won't do
    much for you.

  79. #679
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Yea, I just like the bend and shape of them more. Have them on all my trail bikes.

    Cranks would probably be next...but they are so $$ and I dont get nearly as good of a deal on them.

  80. #680
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by crohnsy View Post
    Suck it up and go tubeless ASAP. Best thing you can do. Then if you want to carry a spare carry one of your old tubes..
    Exactly what I did. Haven't had any issues with tubeless and it shaved 2lbs off my Farley 5.

  81. #681
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    I am pretty new to biking technology so any help would be appreciated. It pains me because this bike cost more than every bike I ever owned combined but I may have to modify my Farley 7.

    When I first rode it on a test drive (pavement) I was surprised by how wide the bars were. I assumed it would make sense once I hit the MTB trails and I would need the leverage.

    I have 150 miles on it now with 50 being in my favorite MTB trails. I don't think the bars should be that wide, seems unnecessary. I also run a mirror (love it for commuting) that sticks out another 3/4 inch and there are sections of the trail I have to almost stop to avoid hitting narrowly spaced trees.

    1. Will I want the wider bars when the snow flies?
    2. Should I cut down the current bars?
    3. New bars? If so, suggestions?

    Thanks,

    Jeff_G

    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

  82. #682
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    I am pretty new to biking technology so any help would be appreciated. It pains me because this bike cost more than every bike I ever owned combined but I may have to modify my Farley 7.

    When I first rode it on a test drive (pavement) I was surprised by how wide the bars were. I assumed it would make sense once I hit the MTB trails and I would need the leverage.

    I have 150 miles on it now with 50 being in my favorite MTB trails. I don't think the bars should be that wide, seems unnecessary. I also run a mirror (love it for commuting) that sticks out another 3/4 inch and there are sections of the trail I have to almost stop to avoid hitting narrowly spaced trees.

    1. Will I want the wider bars when the snow flies?
    2. Should I cut down the current bars?
    3. New bars? If so, suggestions?

    Thanks,

    Jeff_G

    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"
    Hi Jeff. Not often you hear of people wanting to go down a bar size these days. As someone who only ran up to 700mm until I just got my Farley 5 (last week) I would say stick with it for a while. I found as my riding got more technical and tackling steeper stuff I wanted wider bars. I haven't ridden in deep snow much (if ever!...we get 2 weeks max if we are lucky) but you may find you will need that extra leverage in the snow. Here's what I would do:

    1. Will I want the wider bars when the snow flies?
    Probably. Don't get rid of them
    2. Should I cut down the current bars?
    I wouldn't as once it's gone...it's gone. Buy a spare set and keep your others. They are cheap.
    3. New bars? If so, suggestions?
    I've been a fan of these things here: Truvativ Hussefelt Comp Riser Bars | Chain Reaction Cycles I just wouldn't deviate too much from the rise/backsweep of your current setup unless it is really uncomfortable.

    On my commuter and XC bikes i run 660 and 680mm. They may not inspire confidence on DH sections but they don't snag wing mirrors or trees half as much. I just think given the size of the wheels on the Farley you may want that leverage on the snow...but as I say I am 1 week into this Fat Bike thing :-)

  83. #683
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    Exactly what I did. Haven't had any issues with tubeless and it shaved 2lbs off my Farley 5.
    yeah giving it a go. Been to TWO LBS's and neither have much experience setting tubeless up but can sell me stans sealant and valve stems. Might as well give it a go myself. More worried about my first puncture with tubes and trying to get tire of the rim for the first time :-/

  84. #684
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Regarding the Stranglehold rear dropouts:

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    There is *just* enough clearance to be able to slide the wheel all the way forwards without it hitting the front derailleur with the stock Barbegazi tyres on my Farley 5.
    I need to qualify that by saying that with 5 PSI in the tyre there is *just* enough clearance...

    Front derailleur on large chainring (wheel all the way forwards with 5PSI in the tyre):



    As above, but front derailleur on small chainring - less clearance:



    While very close, this actiually worked OK on a really dirty, muddy ride.

    BUT I pumped the back tire up to 8PSI today, as I was finding 5 PSI a bit draggy, and it started catching the front derailleur cable screw

    Just a gentle buzz initially, getting louder when I pedalled hard.

    As a compromise, I have come back 5 turns on the adjusters from full forwards which puts the axle at about 60% of the way towards the front of the slots.

    ...So, there isn't enough clearance, really.

  85. #685
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenkiS14 View Post
    Got my 7 stetup with Tubeless today, pretty painless, most difficult was removing the tires.

    Used the SUN specific rim tape. 4oz of Orange sealant per tire.

    Ended up shedding just over 1lb on the whole bike. Bike is now 29.17lbs with tires.

    My goal is to get it to 27.x . I have Guide R brakes, and Rhythm Pro Carbon bars coming for it this week.

    Waiting on availability of carbon seatpost still.


    I am down to 27.2lbs on my Farley 9.6, but that is already switched to a Next SL carbon crank and changing from DB3 brakes to Guide Ultimate. I think the big savings would be in light carbon wheels, but I may still do a different seat, post and bars first.

  86. #686
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    Interesting, I am at 27.8 lbs on my Farley 5 frame with NEXt crank, jack elope 26' wheels with Barbagazi tubeless tires, all XT components. My bigger tirs probably weigh .5 lb more than you so we are very close with my Alum frame.

  87. #687
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    46
    I assume you are including pedals. I am, but mine are the 45 North Helva which are pretty light as well. Did you change your bars and seatpost, or are they stock. I would be interested to see how the frame weights compare. For a tire weight comparison, I took my front off, and for the wheel, tire, and brake disk, it weighed 2950g. This is set up tubeless, but by LBS did it, so I am not sure how they did it.

  88. #688
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    Easton EC70 carbon riser bars and Kent Erkison titanium seat post. Thomson stem. XT 8000 brakes, rotors, cassette, derailleur and shifter and Salsa Makwa carbon fork..2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-img_0446.jpg

  89. #689
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    The inner roadie in me wants to cut and slam the stem down. I'm fairly flexible and can go on the drops on my crit races. I don't know if I should do it.

    I've already ordered some KCNC bar grips since I absolutely find the stock very thin for my liking.

  90. #690
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    here's the real reason to get a Farley. Found this printed beneath the top tube. Brilliant!2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-farley.jpg

  91. #691
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    I noticed that yesterday while converting to tubeless! Love my fatty!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  92. #692
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    Hmmm.... now I gotta go out to the bike rack and look!

  93. #693
    NRP
    NRP is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    720
    I got a chance to ride a Specialized Fat Boy at my LBS, and I was laughing my butt off riding a fat bike for the first time. (A Remedy 9 is my main mtn bike). I am now thinking about getting a fatty, although not sure where id ride it (I'm in the central valley in Northern California).

    Question: Is it worth getting a Farley with the Rockshox fork, or is rigid carbon fork preferable due to the reduced weight and tire size? What are your opinions on this?

  94. #694
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    216
    Has anyone with a 9.8 pushed the sliders forward with the stock Wampa and Hodags?

    I also want to say that the Front brake cable routing on the the Carbon fork is genius. I am a big fan of clean cockpit cables and this really solves the problem of the S curve in front cable lines nicely.

  95. #695
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by grendalfly View Post
    Has anyone with a 9.8 pushed the sliders forward with the stock Wampa and Hodags?

    I also want to say that the Front brake cable routing on the the Carbon fork is genius. I am a big fan of clean cockpit cables and this really solves the problem of the S curve in front cable lines nicely.

    Yes i have pushed my wheel all the way forward on my 9.8 with the stock wheels and tires!! what do you want to know?

  96. #696
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by grendalfly View Post
    Has anyone with a 9.8 pushed the sliders forward with the stock Wampa and Hodags?

    I also want to say that the Front brake cable routing on the the Carbon fork is genius. I am a big fan of clean cockpit cables and this really solves the problem of the S curve in front cable lines nicely.
    Can you post a pic with the routing. Mine looks as though it could have used a "haircut" before installation.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  97. #697
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    Regarding the Stranglehold rear dropouts:



    I need to qualify that by saying that with 5 PSI in the tyre there is *just* enough clearance...

    Front derailleur on large chainring (wheel all the way forwards with 5PSI in the tyre):

    As above, but front derailleur on small chainring - less clearance:

    While very close, this actiually worked OK on a really dirty, muddy ride.

    BUT I pumped the back tire up to 8PSI today, as I was finding 5 PSI a bit draggy, and it started catching the front derailleur cable screw

    Just a gentle buzz initially, getting louder when I pedalled hard.

    As a compromise, I have come back 5 turns on the adjusters from full forwards which puts the axle at about 60% of the way towards the front of the slots.

    ...So, there isn't enough clearance, really.
    'Zactly what I found, thus progressing quickly & cheaply to a 1x conversion on my 5.

  98. #698
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    New guy question. What benefit do I get pushing the rear wheel forward?

  99. #699
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    I find it much more trail friendly and playful with the much shorter chain stays. I did the same thing with my Stache!! i assume some may not like it that way and depending on what you are looking for, but that is why i got it was to have many options and hopefully be my only MNT/ATB bike..

  100. #700
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by tadraper View Post
    Yes i have pushed my wheel all the way forward on my 9.8 with the stock wheels and tires!! what do you want to know?
    How is the clearance? Enough for snow/mud?

  101. #701
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    New guy question. What benefit do I get pushing the rear wheel forward?
    Good question. Basically by decreasing the wheelbase (distance between the front and rear wheels) slightly, you trade some stability and comfort for increased manoeverability. This makes the bike quicker to turn and easier to wheelie (ie. move your centre of gravity back behind the rear axle), often described as making the bike more "playful".

  102. #702
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by grendalfly View Post
    How is the clearance? Enough for snow/mud?
    Yes i think so but we are a ways from having snow in SE Michigan.

    Here is a photo with the wheel all the way forward.

    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-img_0161.jpg

  103. #703
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Dan View Post
    'Zactly what I found, thus progressing quickly & cheaply to a 1x conversion on my 5.
    My legs need the 22T ring!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    New guy question. What benefit do I get pushing the rear wheel forward?
    I did it for maximum wheelie-ability (I'm intent on learning!), but also noticed that the bike fell into turns a little easier. (I have already fitted a shorter stem, which also helps).

    The down-side is that sliding the wheel forwards makes the front more 'lively' on climbs, but this is something I think I can manage.

    Oh, and I like fiddling with stuff...

  104. #704
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2
    Any tall riders out there have time on the 21.5"? I'm 6'7" and considering the 9.6.

    Thanks! Nick

  105. #705
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Really interested in a Farley 7. Heading down to my LBS to ride a 5 and see how I like it.
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  106. #706
    NRP
    NRP is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    720
    Tincup69,
    What don't you like about your Fat Boy?

  107. #707
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by NRP View Post
    Tincup69,
    What don't you like about your Fat Boy?
    I love my Fatboy and will be keeping it most likely. I'm just looking for another fat bike to tool around with.
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  108. #708
    NRP
    NRP is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    720
    Cool. Let me know how the Farley compares to your Fatboy. I too am considering both.

  109. #709
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Will do, hopefully I can ride the Farley 5 tomorrow.
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  110. #710
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    My legs need the 22T ring!



    I did it for maximum wheelie-ability (I'm intent on learning!), but also noticed that the bike fell into turns a little easier. (I have already fitted a shorter stem, which also helps).

    The down-side is that sliding the wheel forwards makes the front more 'lively' on climbs, but this is something I think I can manage.

    Oh, and I like fiddling with stuff...
    My legs will need a 42t on the back come Winter! Although the front does become lighter with the rear wheel adjusted forward, the phenomenal traction at the rear wheel lets you move your weight forward more readily to balance.

  111. #711
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post
    Really interested in a Farley 7. Heading down to my LBS to ride a 5 and see how I like it.
    Great choice, 1x drive train, good group set and a ball to ride!!!

  112. #712
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rain100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by nickowatts View Post
    Any tall riders out there have time on the 21.5"? I'm 6'7" and considering the 9.6.

    Thanks! Nick
    I would definitely try before you buy if possible. I'm 6'3" and it feels like it fits me perfectly. The Farley is pretty close, geometry wise, with the Stache, with each Farley size having less stack and reach. I know really tall people have had complaints with how the XL stache fits.

  113. #713
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Quote Originally Posted by NRP View Post
    I got a chance to ride a Specialized Fat Boy at my LBS, and I was laughing my butt off riding a fat bike for the first time. (A Remedy 9 is my main mtn bike). I am now thinking about getting a fatty, although not sure where id ride it (I'm in the central valley in Northern California).

    Question: Is it worth getting a Farley with the Rockshox fork, or is rigid carbon fork preferable due to the reduced weight and tire size? What are your opinions on this?
    I also ride a Remedy 9.8 as my main squeeze, and I decided to get a Farley 7 because of the bang for buck, I'll be able to ride mine in the snow this season quite a bit, but even as an alternative trail bike its a lot of fun!

  114. #714
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by rain100 View Post
    I would definitely try before you buy if possible. I'm 6'3" and it feels like it fits me perfectly. The Farley is pretty close, geometry wise, with the Stache, with each Farley size having less stack and reach. I know really tall people have had complaints with how the XL stache fits.
    Thank you! That helps.

  115. #715
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    3
    About to make my first fat bike purchase so that I can keep my mountain bike exercise going this winter. I'm torn between getting a Farley 7 and putting a Bluto on it and getting a Farley 9 which has a Bluto and those 27.5 x 3.8 wheels. While my fat bike purchase is mainly for this upcoming winter, I've been told I'll want to ride it year round once I get it. I've ridden my friends fat bike that has a rigid aluminum fork and I didn't like it at all on the trails we ride. My gut is telling me to go with the Farley 9 but I'm thinking that will require an additional 26" wheelset purchase to allow me to run wider tires for the winter. Which means more money after shelling out about $3000 on the Farley 9. I'm a heavier rider (270lbs) and I just want to keep moving and having fun. (FYI, I'm down 90lbs from where I was this time last year.) I'm currently riding my two month old Trek X-Caliber 9 and I've had issues with the free hub failing and the bb developing play and being noisy as of late. Still waiting on repairs. Looking to the experts here for advice on which to choose. Also, looking to hear from heavier riders on durability of the Farley line. Thanks in advance for any words of wisdom you might have for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  116. #716
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Teton29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    429
    HI GGkid,
    I really like my 27.5 x 4 on my 9.6. I think they have some small advantages for single track riding, though others have the opinion they are no different at all. They have worked well in some snow riding as well, though I'm happy to have a 26x5 setup now that the snow is deeper.

    In your situation, I'd probably steer you to the farley 7. It comes with a nice high volume tire to use in the winter and you will more choices for summer time tires. You could buy studded tires if you like in the winter.

    It will definitely be nice to have two bikes to choose from in the summer too--one can be down with mechanical issues and you will still be riding.

  117. #717
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Quote Originally Posted by ggkid View Post
    About to make my first fat bike purchase so that I can keep my mountain bike exercise going this winter. I'm torn between getting a Farley 7 and putting a Bluto on it and getting a Farley 9 which has a Bluto and those 27.5 x 3.8 wheels. While my fat bike purchase is mainly for this upcoming winter, I've been told I'll want to ride it year round once I get it. I've ridden my friends fat bike that has a rigid aluminum fork and I didn't like it at all on the trails we ride. My gut is telling me to go with the Farley 9 but I'm thinking that will require an additional 26" wheelset purchase to allow me to run wider tires for the winter. Which means more money after shelling out about $3000 on the Farley 9. I'm a heavier rider (270lbs) and I just want to keep moving and having fun. (FYI, I'm down 90lbs from where I was this time last year.) I'm currently riding my two month old Trek X-Caliber 9 and I've had issues with the free hub failing and the bb developing play and being noisy as of late. Still waiting on repairs. Looking to the experts here for advice on which to choose. Also, looking to hear from heavier riders on durability of the Farley line. Thanks in advance for any words of wisdom you might have for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I would go 7 and add the bluto if you want to ride it in summer, a lot of people run rigid in winter (potential fork seal issues on the bluto with cold weather, especially for heavy riders)

    some background, I'm in the same boat as you, 250ish# most of the time, (congrats on the weight loss by the way!)

    if you want to go ride all the time, go with the fattest knobbiest setup possible, yes, it's not the fastest but you will get to ride it more in bad snow conditions

    no one here can really tell you what the 27.5x4 will do in snow yet, I do know that the hodag was not an amazing snow tire in 26x4 size and while 27.5x4 is a bigger contact patch, having no other tires available currently is an issue if your primary goal is snow riding to stay active over winter

    I own a farley 9 as my summer fatty and it's already tucked away for winter, the 26x5 salsa is getting prepped and ready

    The farley will not have any issues handling your weight
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  118. #718
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the feedback Teton and Titan. It all makes sense and helps. My LBS has Farley 7's on the way so I'll test ride one when it arrives and go from there. They did not order any Farley 9's since they chose to stock the 9.6 and they just couldn't carry them all. Buying a 9 would've been a special order anyway so perhaps the 7 will be the right fit and something I'll be able to have sooner.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  119. #719
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Yea, if you are buying for mostly winter use, go with the 7, that was my same dilemma, and I wanted the bigger tires off the start.

  120. #720
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    26
    Good advice, I think. The F7 will get you through the winter as-is, and since you already have a summer bike, you won't need to invest in the Bluto immediately unless you wind up using the fattie more than the X-Caliber in the summer. Sort of the best of both worlds, getting the less expensive F7 now and having the time to upgrade it if you really want to. You can spend the winter shopping for a Bluto and find one reasonably, use the $$ saved to get the X-Caliber fixed - it's not like that bike is a bad choice to fall back on come summertime if necessary!
    2016 Farley 7 +Bluto

  121. #721
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    22
    If you're going to spend the $$ upgrading to an aftermarket Bluto, why not just start with a F5? As a winter bike, you could use it to inherit any parts you upgrade on your summer bike (wheels & tires excepted, obviously).

  122. #722
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Dan View Post
    If you're going to spend the $$ upgrading to an aftermarket Bluto, why not just start with a F5? As a winter bike, you could use it to inherit any parts you upgrade on your summer bike (wheels & tires excepted, obviously).
    FD, the main reason I'm thinking the F7 over the F5 is the F7 comes with a carbon fork and the front wheel on the F7 is already a 150mm TA which I'll need for the Bluto. The F5 is only a 135mm hub and I didn't want to have to get a new hub/wheel or have to use some sort of adapter setup when I go Bluto. I had thought about that option initially though. Seemed to me having the correct sized front wheel along with the other upgrades that the F7 made more sense. I'm sure for people that are more mechanically inclined than me they might choose the F5 and build themselves a new front wheel. I rely on LBS for all my work so I'm looking at labor costs as well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  123. #723
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Yep, 7 is good bang for the buck, and you might decide you don't need the Bluto.

  124. #724
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    5
    I too can not decide between F7 and F9.I noticed F9 has slightly different geometry than F7. Could it be that it is adjusted for different fork?

  125. #725
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    @ggkid @lantos Can I make it easy for you two?



    How can you not NEED this bike?

    Like everyone said the only thing that would probably need upgrading is a Bluto if you're gonna do any technical stuff during the summer.

    the 5 leaves something left to be desired (bigger tires, maybe 1x for some like me) and the 9 might be a bit of an overkill for some. I think the 7 is the sweet spot bike in the line.

    Just swipe that card godamnit.
























    *this ad is brought to you by a F7 owner

  126. #726
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    The 7 is the bike I'd buy. 26" wheels, 150mm front hub, a solid 1x drivetrain, and a carbon fork at a reasonable price. Best bike for the buck in the Farley lineup by far.
    ‘19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  127. #727
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    the 7 is the sweet spot bike in the line.
    Yep!

  128. #728
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    Like everyone said the only thing that would probably need upgrading is a Bluto if you're gonna do any technical stuff during the summer.
    I upgraded the brakes - 2016 XT with ICT rotors.
    Rigid forks are fantastic for technical riding, better than suspension forks in some respects. Bluto for faster, rocky descents maybe. I'm up in the air still if I'm going to add one later. I'm waiting to see what else comes out in that suspension fork department.
    Last edited by Gambit21; 11-12-2015 at 10:37 PM.

  129. #729
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MObiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    212
    I have a Farley 9 coming. I've never had a fatbike but a lot of my friends have them an no longer ride their 'skinny wheel' 29ers. Can't wait to try it.
    If the path ahead looks dangerous ------- it probably is!

  130. #730
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Robg68's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by nickowatts View Post
    Any tall riders out there have time on the 21.5"? I'm 6'7" and considering the 9.6.

    Thanks! Nick
    I'm 6'4" tall and ride a 21.5. It fits well. I installed a shorter stem and new bars with about 1.5" rise to them. My back doesn't like being to leaned over.

  131. #731
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    @ggkid @lantos Can I make it easy for you two?



    How can you not NEED this bike?

    Like everyone said the only thing that would probably need upgrading is a Bluto if you're gonna do any technical stuff during the summer.

    the 5 leaves something left to be desired (bigger tires, maybe 1x for some like me) and the 9 might be a bit of an overkill for some. I think the 7 is the sweet spot bike in the line.

    Just swipe that card godamnit.
























    *this ad is brought to you by a F7 owner
    I just got a F5 and it comes with 4.7 Barbegazis which are exactly the same as the F7 (I think!). Granted it has an AL fork vs Carbon I think on the 7 and front QR VS TA on the 7. I thought about the 7 but it wasn't listed on the UK Trek site although my supplier could get it. I tend to do a lot more long touring rides so the 2 x 10 made sense to me. As a very first Fat Bike i was prepared to spend a little over £1000 but the 7, while a lovely bike, was just a bit to expensive for me. I do think it looks great though. Purple as Da Bomb.

  132. #732
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,208
    Took my brand new 9.8 out for it's inaugural ride last night. Did some mileage on sand beaches in the dark with lights. Really impressed how well the 27.5x4's did over the sand. I bought this thing to ride all winter and I think that plan is going to work well.

    J.

  133. #733
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    5
    Farley 9 and 7 frames are not the same. This is a response from Trek when I asked them about geometry: "Thanks for writing Trek. The Farely 9's biggest distinction is the Bluto fork. The Farley 7 has different headtube and seattube angles than the Farley 9, so putting a suspension fork on the 7 will make it more similar to the 9 but it won't be identical.Another key difference is that the Farley 9 comes with 27.5 x 3.8" tires. This should give it a bit of a racier feel and a slightly bigger contact patch.

  134. #734
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by lantos View Post
    Farley 9 and 7 frames are not the same. This is a response from Trek when I asked them about geometry: "Thanks for writing Trek. The Farely 9's biggest distinction is the Bluto fork. The Farley 7 has different headtube and seattube angles than the Farley 9, so putting a suspension fork on the 7 will make it more similar to the 9 but it won't be identical.Another key difference is that the Farley 9 comes with 27.5 x 3.8" tires. This should give it a bit of a racier feel and a slightly bigger contact patch.
    Whether this came from Trek or not I highly doubt the frames are any different. Seems more likely the person from Trek is on crack.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  135. #735
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    5
    Why so hostile? Trek's website clearly shows different head angle. Don't you think suspension fork is longer that rigid fork and they had to adjust geometry slightly?

  136. #736
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    No hostility, the difference in geo is defiantly because of the Bluto. But I have to believe the frame is the same otherwise besides color.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  137. #737
    Pure Evil
    Reputation: [TA]'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    75
    Sorry for the confusion. All '16 Farley frames (carbon and aluminum) have the same geometry. The seat angle, head angle, and reach differences are due to the difference in axle to race between the bluto and rigid fork. I'm sure our tech rep was referencing this. They mean well but don't always have all the answers ;-)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    |Trek Bicycle Corporation|

    Stalk me on Instagram

  138. #738
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by lantos View Post
    Why so hostile? Trek's website clearly shows different head angle. Don't you think suspension fork is longer that rigid fork and they had to adjust geometry slightly?
    If they had adjusted the geometry accordingly, the final angles would be the same.
    Last edited by Gambit21; 11-13-2015 at 05:01 PM.

  139. #739
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Just rode the 5 at my LBS and it felt great. It just felt right, maybe even better then my Fatboy. I will be putting a deposit down on a 7 in the next few weeks.
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  140. #740
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    @ggkid @lantos Can I make it easy for you two?



    How can you not NEED this bike?

    Like everyone said the only thing that would probably need upgrading is a Bluto if you're gonna do any technical stuff during the summer.

    the 5 leaves something left to be desired (bigger tires, maybe 1x for some like me) and the 9 might be a bit of an overkill for some. I think the 7 is the sweet spot bike in the line.

    Just swipe that card godamnit.
























    *this ad is brought to you by a F7 owner
    I've seen many different shades of the 7's color, would this picture be closer to the actual color?
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  141. #741
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    No pic I've seen has done the 7 justice and completely agree that it's the sweet spot....and I have a 9.8


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  142. #742
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    26
    Yep - it isn't an easy color to photograph accurately. I'm no fashion maven, but it isn't offensive to me.
    2016 Farley 7 +Bluto

  143. #743
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sevenz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by M.Hunt View Post
    Yep - it isn't an easy color to photograph accurately. I'm no fashion maven, but it isn't offensive to me.
    This is mine...I feel this pic represents the actual color pretty well...Sick Flat Purple...Best Color Ever


  144. #744
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Got some more parts tossed on my 7, so I'm SRAM Guide R brakes, Bontrager Rhythm Pro carbon bars, and tubeless, and I am 28.6 lbs with pedals, which isnt bad! I'll probably keep it that way, maybe change up seat/post, but I'm good with that weight for now.

  145. #745
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenkiS14 View Post
    Got some more parts tossed on my 7, so I'm SRAM Guide R brakes, Bontrager Rhythm Pro carbon bars, and tubeless, and I am 28.6 lbs with pedals, which isnt bad! I'll probably keep it that way, maybe change up seat/post, but I'm good with that weight for now.
    What size is your 7?
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  146. #746
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sevenz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post
    What size is your 7?

    Mine is a Large...28# on bathroom scale with pedals. Set up all stock except I put the take offs from my Top Fuel on it(carbon bars, stem, post and saddle)...Also set up tubeless...

  147. #747
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post
    What size is your 7?
    Mine is 17.5"

  148. #748
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    41
    What tire pressure you guys run on the 27.5? I'm 225lbs and I think 8psi front and 10psi rear is good for me for summer. Will drop couple psi for winter.

  149. #749
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    41
    2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes-image.jpg

    My 9.8 xlarge, less than 27lbs with clipless pedals.

    Last year I had a Rocky Mountain blizzard with 26x4.7 tires. I found the 27.5 tires on this trek have stiffer sidewall because I run the same tire pressure so far and I don't hit the rims.

  150. #750
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PBL450's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Sevenz View Post
    This is mine...I feel this pic represents the actual color pretty well...Sick Flat Purple...Best Color Ever

    This is spot on. Having seen the 7 at the LBS. It is a somewhat muted purple. I absolutely LOVE the color. I went with the 5 for budget constraints... And I like the orange and black of the 5 a lot, but the color alone almost swayed me. The 1X too, but if I'm being honest, and I am the Cheshire Cat for better or worse, it was the color that had me flummoxed.

  151. #751
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by Alain2 View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	1898 
Size:	297.8 KB 
ID:	1029016

    My 9.8 xlarge, less than 27lbs with clipless pedals.

    Last year I had a Rocky Mountain blizzard with 26x4.7 tires. I found the 27.5 tires on this trek have stiffer sidewall because I run the same tire pressure so far and I don't hit the rims.
    I weigh 187 and have tried ten in the rear and eight up front on single track without issue. I converted to tubeless and left them both at fifteen for a few days. I liked fifteen, but that was tooling around the wood, checking my trail cameras and swapping out my feeder battery, but it felt like I could roll over anything. Not sure I will leave them like that for my next run on the local trails.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  152. #752
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    I weigh 193, I have been running 12 now for quite some time-several months in dirt, both on 3.8's and 4.7on 26 inch wheels. It seems to be my sweet spot FWIW.

  153. #753
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by FT251 View Post
    I weigh 193, I have been running 12 now for quite some time-several months in dirt, both on 3.8's and 4.7on 26 inch wheels. It seems to be my sweet spot FWIW.
    Did you just have the 4.8 on 26 left over from another bike, or did you purchase them specifically for your Farley? Did you get a chance to ride in snow and feel the 3.8 was lacking?

    I'm just curious, since I am waiting for my first snow in MI to see how the 3.8 on 27.5 will do. I have only seen one other review in snow from a person in AK.
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  154. #754
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    I had a farley 6, now I have a farley 5....although the 5 is just the fame and all custom parts, I took all the good stuff off the 6 and put it on the 5. I use jackelope wheels. I also have a set of jack elope 27.5's with hodags/bluto fork for dirt use. Bike is currently in "winter" mode with carbon fork.

    3.8 on a 27.5 is different then on a 26. I ride a lot of frozen rivers in winter (MI) and wanted more float than the 3.8 x 26 provides. The extra diameter the 26 x 5 provides is helpful as well. I think yo will like the 27.5 x 3.8's although I have not ridden on them yet my self. I think they will be fast

  155. #755
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    So finally got my 19.5" Farley 5 out for a proper ride at the weekend. Did about 16 miles on mixture of fire road, beach, hardpack gravel, mucky & rooty natural and tarmac. Here's some of my first impressions:

    Sizing - Feels and looks right, alongside my 19" Hardrock it looks slightly bigger. Possibly felt a little far forward on saddle but may be able to sort this with another stem or a setback seatpost. Could be my new Endura tights were sliding me forward a bit.
    Weight - I think this bike is 15kg but feels VERY nimble and much less than that. Quick to get up to speed and holy crap....when you are moving it's next to unstoppable. Rolls VERY fast. My girlfriend could not believe I was easily keeping pace with her on the climbs.
    Tyre pressure - so I think they came pre-inflated to 20psi. I dropped them to about 12 as I was doing a mixture of beach/mud/single track/gravel and tarmac. Thought that might be the best compromise. Was good fun on beach when I rode on solid partially wet sand couple of metres from the tide. Rolled like a demon on single track and gravel. Quite good on the muck but probably could have done with lowering psi a bit more there. As bike is fully rigid some sections were hard work on the arms. However, I can't remember having so much fun in muck & roots, rolling over things like angled roots I would have tried to avoid previously. Back end was sliding out loads probably due to my braking but it was so much fun just hitting everything.
    Jumping - I tried a few small hops off kerbs and gratings. All was ok until I jumped off a raised manhole cover and on landing I don't know what happened. Think I landed hard on front tyre and it bounced me back up & hands came off bars and I landed on my face in the mud in a crumpled heap. May have been a slip off the manhole cover or the tyres bouncing me back. Need more work on this.
    Punctures! - I had planned to do 26 miles but only got 15 done. Thorns At least 2 or 3 of them in front tyre. I had no spare tube with me and was reluctant to try and get tyre off rim in very cold & wet conditions so was able to get a ride home. Glad I did....getting the tyre off the rim took some work. Full weight (186kg) with 2 feet balancing and working my way round the bead on the tyre, then some hand pressure round the tyre. Easy after the first time, but had to patch tube THREE times. So what's the story with thorns? Do Fat Bikes puncture more easily. I may try and squirt some Slime into the tube if I can remove the valve core. I think I need to go tubeless ASAP. My girlfriend rode the same section (+10 more miles) on a 2.1" XC bike with Schwalbe BlackJacks on and not a single puncture.

    All in I really enjoyed it. I can't believe how much fun it is. Slightly worried by the raft of punctures from thorns. I would welcome opinions on best solutions from other Farley owners...I would guess go tubeless ASAP. I'm kind of concerned that if I go tubeless and end up carrying a spare tube on trail...what happens if both tyres puncture? Do you carry some Stans sealant as well as a spare tube?

    Also you cannot beat the looks you get from some passers by. Some middle aged man walking literally had his eyes hanging out. I think he thought it was an electric motorbike or something. Dog walkers also seem to get extra-worried when they see you pass although I always pass slowly and cautiously.

  156. #756
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Teton29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    429
    Glad you had a great first experience!
    Yes, tubeless and don't be skimpy with the sealant.

    Sounds like some of your comments relate to riding a rigid bike as much as it being a fat bike. Since I came from riding rigid 29ers, the fat bike felt like full suspension. Classic advice for new rigid riders is to "hold on tight"-- strong hands and relax your arms. I also changed the grips to some thick foam style ones--the stock grips felt about as comfy as a few wraps of duct tape on a steel bar.

    Also, try moving your rear wheel all the way forward for short chainstay. This will lighten the front end, allow more rear braking on downs as well as increase agility to steer around stuff. You may also be able to drop a few pounds front PSI to mellow out the bouncing.

    have fun!

  157. #757
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by Teton29er View Post
    Glad you had a great first experience!
    Yes, tubeless and don't be skimpy with the sealant.

    Sounds like some of your comments relate to riding a rigid bike as much as it being a fat bike. Since I came from riding rigid 29ers, the fat bike felt like full suspension. Classic advice for new rigid riders is to "hold on tight"-- strong hands and relax your arms. I also changed the grips to some thick foam style ones--the stock grips felt about as comfy as a few wraps of duct tape on a steel bar.

    Also, try moving your rear wheel all the way forward for short chainstay. This will lighten the front end, allow more rear braking on downs as well as increase agility to steer around stuff. You may also be able to drop a few pounds front PSI to mellow out the bouncing.

    have fun!
    Yes thanks. Yeah I ride Hardtails a lot of haven't ridden something fully rigid other than road bikes with carbon forks. Yeah I will try and build up my jumping skill and maybe swap out the stock grips with some SDG Han Solos I have which are pretty grippy and comfy. In the meantime I think I will inject some Slime into the tubes until I can get all the stuff ready for tubeless setup.

    If I move the rear wheel forward (need to check where it currently is and how to do this first) does it have any impact on the drivetrain/chain slack or is it neglible? Also I have 4.7 Barbegazis on this beast so not sure how much actual room I have to bring the rear wheel forward a touch.

  158. #758
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Teton29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    429
    Should be no problem to move things all the way forward. I have D5'd on clownshoes and was pleased to still be able to move the rear max forward.

    I had to adjust the rear D after the move though. In low gear, I had binding to the first pulley.

  159. #759
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    ...getting the tyre off the rim took some work. Full weight (186kg) with 2 feet balancing and working my way round the bead on the tyre
    186Kg you're a big guy!

    I was wondering how you were doing with getting the tyres off! FWIW: I found it easier to hold the wheel at a slight angle (about 30 degrees from flat) and concentrate all my weight (78kg) on one foot right next to the bead - sort of pulling the tyre away from the rim as much as trying to pull it across (difficult to describe!) at the same time holding the valve open to let out every last little bit of air.

    Tubeless for thorns +1.

    I had problems on my normal mountain bike around here - thorn punctures *every* ride. Tempting fate to say it, I know, but I haven't had a puncture for over a year since going tubeless (despite picking up plenty of thorns).

    I did risk a couple of rides on the Farley while I waited for the stuff to arrive to convert to tubless, and got away with it. Last ride out, though, there was about a mile of freshly cut hawthorn / blackthorn hedge on both sides, with trash still on the road. I *know* that I picked up at least two large thorns (I pulled them out), but tubeless did its thing.

    I'm kind of concerned that if I go tubeless and end up carrying a spare tube on trail...what happens if both tyres puncture? Do you carry some Stans sealant as well as a spare tube?
    I started out paranoid, and carried 2 spare tubes, but after a year, I just carry the one now. You also need a small pliers (Leatherman type thing) to pull all the old thorns out of the tyre before you can put the tube in (there will probably be dozens). The pliers will also come in handy to undo the tubeless valve. I have never carried sealant, as I'm assuming that I wouldn't be able to re seat the tyre out on the trail.

    Thin tyres puncture easier, (the Rocket Rons on my other bike were pathetic!) and I guess that fat bike tyres are built fairly lightly (in the main) to try and keep the weight down. Our odds aren't helped by sweeping up 4.7" of the trail compared to 2.1"

    I posted above about how far forwards I found I could bring the rear wheel, with the stock tyres, without fouling the front derailleur (I think you saw). Teton29er's wide clownfoot rims would probably help clearance for the front derailleur since they will make the tyre wider but shorter - YMMV.

  160. #760
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Teton29er View Post
    Glad you had a great first experience!
    Yes, tubeless and don't be skimpy with the sealant.

    Sounds like some of your comments relate to riding a rigid bike as much as it being a fat bike. Since I came from riding rigid 29ers, the fat bike felt like full suspension. Classic advice for new rigid riders is to "hold on tight"-- strong hands and relax your arms. I also changed the grips to some thick foam style ones--the stock grips felt about as comfy as a few wraps of duct tape on a steel bar.

    Also, try moving your rear wheel all the way forward for short chainstay. This will lighten the front end, allow more rear braking on downs as well as increase agility to steer around stuff. You may also be able to drop a few pounds front PSI to mellow out the bouncing.

    have fun!
    +1: Went back to chunkier old-style Oury grips with mine also. Lizard Skins North Shores, ODI Rogues or even ESI silicon grips could also be thicker alternatives to consider.

    You'll only be able to safely shift the Strangleholds forward to about halfway before your rear tyre starts to interfere with the front derailleur on the stock Farley 5. Requires a 20mm socket or spanner to loosen them after removing the through axle to access & remove the plastic tri-pointed plugs & backing off the disc mount allen bolt. This might be enough for you but any further forwards needs a 1x conversion (or smaller tyres): easily done with a RaceFace 30t chainring or similar but requires crank removal to accomplish.

    Tubeless? An almost mandatory conversion it seems. I've also improved the action of my F5's stock Avid brakes by removing & gently chamfering the pads' leading edges with a file, then a tiny dab of copper grease on the back of the pads on reinstall. Enjoy!
    Last edited by Fat Dan; 11-16-2015 at 06:03 PM.

  161. #761
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    186Kg you're a big guy!

    I was wondering how you were doing with getting the tyres off! FWIW: I found it easier to hold the wheel at a slight angle (about 30 degrees from flat) and concentrate all my weight (78kg) on one foot right next to the bead - sort of pulling the tyre away from the rim as much as trying to pull it across (difficult to describe!) at the same time holding the valve open to let out every last little bit of air.

    Tubeless for thorns +1.

    I had problems on my normal mountain bike around here - thorn punctures *every* ride. Tempting fate to say it, I know, but I haven't had a puncture for over a year since going tubeless (despite picking up plenty of thorns).

    I did risk a couple of rides on the Farley while I waited for the stuff to arrive to convert to tubless, and got away with it. Last ride out, though, there was about a mile of freshly cut hawthorn / blackthorn hedge on both sides, with trash still on the road. I *know* that I picked up at least two large thorns (I pulled them out), but tubeless did its thing.



    I started out paranoid, and carried 2 spare tubes, but after a year, I just carry the one now. You also need a small pliers (Leatherman type thing) to pull all the old thorns out of the tyre before you can put the tube in (there will probably be dozens). The pliers will also come in handy to undo the tubeless valve. I have never carried sealant, as I'm assuming that I wouldn't be able to re seat the tyre out on the trail.

    Thin tyres puncture easier, (the Rocket Rons on my other bike were pathetic!) and I guess that fat bike tyres are built fairly lightly (in the main) to try and keep the weight down. Our odds aren't helped by sweeping up 4.7" of the trail compared to 2.1"

    I posted above about how far forwards I found I could bring the rear wheel, with the stock tyres, without fouling the front derailleur (I think you saw). Teton29er's wide clownfoot rims would probably help clearance for the front derailleur since they will make the tyre wider but shorter - YMMV.
    Typo on my part..86kg....LOL. Thanks for the additional info!

  162. #762
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    I need some help here:

    - Scratched my fork earlier (stupidly) on my Farley 7. Does Trek provide touch up paint?

    I want to cry now.

    - Did a proper ride in it last Saturday and like I thought the crank is long for my taste. I use a 165mm on my Road bike and the jump to 175mm is too long for me. I'm thinking of getting a 165mm crank soon but:

    What are my options $200-250>?

    I'm confused as to what I should get. I got the basics down like the BB compatibility, 1x, Q factor...but what actually is chainline? Anything else I should look out for when choosing?



    TIA

  163. #763
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Just put down my deposit on a Farley 7. They are all sold out as of now but expect to be able to fulfill orders by January 8th. Can't wait!
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  164. #764
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2
    Anyone riding slammed forward stranglehold dropouts ? What is the ride sensation like ? Also, for a 1x11 setup are there any tricks in the process like rear derailleur adjustment or chainlink removal due to chain slack ?

  165. #765
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Quote Originally Posted by fatbikelover View Post
    Anyone riding slammed forward stranglehold dropouts ? What is the ride sensation like ? Also, for a 1x11 setup are there any tricks in the process like rear derailleur adjustment or chainlink removal due to chain slack ?
    yes and it's awesome, personal opinion...

    you will have to adjust the b-screw on the derailer, maybe take a link out of the chain, I think the derailer took up enough slack but it looked funny to me

    I also shortened the cable housing from the bottom of the down tube to the rear, 1x11 got a little hung up with the extra bend in the cable and I was snapping the last cable tie while riding, other 16' farleys do not seem to have this, I think mine had excessively long cable housing
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  166. #766
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2
    Great info, thanks ! I'll give it a try and hope I won't wheelie myself off the trail on a technical climb

  167. #767
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    ... the crank is long for my taste. I use a 165mm on my Road bike and the jump to 175mm is too long for me. I'm thinking of getting a 165mm crank soon but:

    What are my options $200-250>?

    I'm confused as to what I should get. I got the basics down like the BB compatibility, 1x, Q factor...but what actually is chainline? Anything else I should look out for when choosing?
    Good Luck! I would love to find some 165mm cranks to suit the Farley 5, but have had no luck so far at any price. 170mm is easy - the RaceFace Rides that are originally fitted are available in 170mm AFAIK.

    I emailed RaceFace and they replied that they don't make a fat-bike spindle for any of their cranks that are available with 165mm arms. (Maybe if enough people ask... )

    I can find loads of square taper cranks, but not a square taper BB adapter for the 120mm push fit BB shell (nor an ISIS or Octalink one).

    I'm currently wondering if it might be possible to plug and re-drill the existing arms (I know metallurgy is against it), or maybe extend the axle on a set of 165mm cranks...

    BTW: 'Chainline' is the distance from the centreline of the BB to the chainring(s) - the middle ring of 3X, centre of big/little 2X. For the current (2016) Farley, I believe it needs to be 76mm, but hopefully someone can confirm this.

  168. #768
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    Good Luck! I would love to find some 165mm cranks to suit the Farley 5, but have had no luck so far at any price. 170mm is easy - the RaceFace Rides that are originally fitted are available in 170mm AFAIK.

    I emailed RaceFace and they replied that they don't make a fat-bike spindle for any of their cranks that are available with 165mm arms. (Maybe if enough people ask... )

    I can find loads of square taper cranks, but not a square taper BB adapter for the 120mm push fit BB shell (nor an ISIS or Octalink one).

    I'm currently wondering if it might be possible to plug and re-drill the existing arms (I know metallurgy is against it), or maybe extend the axle on a set of 165mm cranks...

    BTW: 'Chainline' is the distance from the centreline of the BB to the chainring(s) - the middle ring of 3X, centre of big/little 2X. For the current (2016) Farley, I believe it needs to be 76mm, but hopefully someone can confirm this.
    Is it the spindle length that's crucial here?

    What are the options for 170? I don't want to fiddle around too much, I just need a straight swap (would love to have DM in case I want to swap between chainrings for regular riding and racing).

  169. #769
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    Is it the spindle length that's crucial here?

    What are the options for 170? I don't want to fiddle around too much, I just need a straight swap (would love to have DM in case I want to swap between chainrings for regular riding and racing).
    Yes, trying to find 165mm cranks with a 190mm spindle (or equivalent) is proving problematic!

    As regards 170mm cranks, pretty much everything seems to be available in 170 as well as 175.

    The chart below from RaceFace is quite good - Take your pickstick from the lines with the ~76mm chain line & 5" tyre clearance:

    http://www.raceface.com/comp/pdf/FAT...CLEARANCES.pdf

    I think you'd need to go up to a Cinch to get a DM ring, but I'm sure others have more experience of this. I'm strictly 2X or 3X

  170. #770
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by Misterg View Post
    Yes, trying to find 165mm cranks with a 190mm spindle (or equivalent) is proving problematic!

    As regards 170mm cranks, pretty much everything seems to be available in 170 as well as 175.

    The chart below from RaceFace is quite good - Take your pickstick from the lines with the ~76mm chain line & 5" tyre clearance:

    http://www.raceface.com/comp/pdf/FAT...CLEARANCES.pdf

    I think you'd need to go up to a Cinch to get a DM ring, but I'm sure others have more experience of this. I'm strictly 2X or 3X
    Surly Mr Whirly cranks with moonie spindle?
    https://www.universalcycles.com/shop...&category=3459
    I had that 165 mm set on my old 190mm 9:zero:7

  171. #771
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by JaMMu76 View Post
    Surly Mr Whirly cranks with moonie spindle?
    https://www.universalcycles.com/shop...&category=3459
    I had that 165 mm set on my old 190mm 9:zero:7
    Brilliant, thank you - at least I know it can be done now

  172. #772
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by JaMMu76 View Post
    Surly Mr Whirly cranks with moonie spindle?
    https://www.universalcycles.com/shop...&category=3459
    I had that 165 mm set on my old 190mm 9:zero:7
    I went on the Surly website and it says SS is only available in 175, 180 arms lengths

  173. #773
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Just got word they found a 7 at another shop and are shipping to my LBS. I should have it next week.

    Is everyone using the Mulefut tubeless kit to go tubeless?
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  174. #774
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    261
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post
    Just got word they found a 7 at another shop and are shipping to my LBS. I should have it next week.

    Is everyone using the Mulefut tubeless kit to go tubeless?
    Congrats. That's awesome news! I went tubeless w/ my F5. Used the Sun rim strip, tape and valves. I contacted Sun and they said I could use the stock rim strip but it was so oily that the tape would not stick.

    I removed everything, cleaned the rim real well with 70% rubbing alcohol. Then I installed the rim strip. It's a tight fit so I screwed in the valves to anchor it in place as I stretched it over the rim. Tapping was the toughest part. Take your time anchoring it down and really apply strong even tension as you are taping the rim to ensure it is grabbing the rim appropriately (a truing stand would be ideal). I then spent a couple of minutes really ensuring I pressed the tape down. I did reinstall a tube, air it up to 20 PSI and let it sit overnight. I needed a compressor to finish the job. The tubeless conversion has worked flawlessly for a couple weeks now.

  175. #775
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post

    Is everyone using the Mulefut tubeless kit to go tubeless?
    Everyone should be - that's all that matters.

  176. #776
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cr3anmachin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by SHowley2003 View Post
    Congrats. That's awesome news! I went tubeless w/ my F5. Used the Sun rim strip, tape and valves. I contacted Sun and they said I could use the stock rim strip but it was so oily that the tape would not stick.

    I removed everything, cleaned the rim real well with 70% rubbing alcohol. Then I installed the rim strip. It's a tight fit so I screwed in the valves to anchor it in place as I stretched it over the rim. Tapping was the toughest part. Take your time anchoring it down and really apply strong even tension as you are taping the rim to ensure it is grabbing the rim appropriately (a truing stand would be ideal). I then spent a couple of minutes really ensuring I pressed the tape down. I did reinstall a tube, air it up to 20 PSI and let it sit overnight. I needed a compressor to finish the job. The tubeless conversion has worked flawlessly for a couple weeks now.
    Ok I'm new to this whole tubeless thing but I want to have a bash at it. I have an F5 and now I've had the tyre off (due to a bunch of thorn punctures) I'm gonna give tubeless a go. I the meantime I think I'm gonna inject slime into the tubes to keep me protected. So I have a few points/questions for others that have converted tubeless on the F5

    - As far as I know I need the following: 2 X Tubeless valve stems, Stans sealant (6 oz per tyre), Sunringle 78mm tape or equivalent.
    - From your post above you obviously tried to stick the tape to the rim but had to clean it first. Have any others just kept the rim strip on and gave it a quick wipe down before applying tape?
    - That Sunringle tape is expensive. I've managed to land my hands on a massive roll of MOD waterproof adhesive gaffer tape 100mm wide which can be torn down to around 80mm or so. I'm hoping this will do the job as I'm worried about pissing money up the wall botching using the Sunringle stuff. I assume not everyone is using the Sunringle stuff made specifically for Mulefuts?
    - Slime - how much Slime would you inject into a Bontrager fat bike tube? Bottle suggests 4oz but I would guess 6oz per Fat Bike tube?
    - Last one :-) Does Slime inside a tube degrade it quicker or prevent it from being folded down tight to carry as a spare?

    Thanks all!
    Slime first this weekend then tubeless once I have the gear.
    P.S. I only have a track/foot pump and no air compressor. Many had success going tubeless using a track pump?

  177. #777
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    41
    I pinch flat the rear tire yesterday at 10psi. The carbon rim has no damage, but lesson learn.

  178. #778
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    Pinch flat is specific to running tubes correct? Tubeless takes away that risk?
    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

    16' Trek 8.4 DS
    16' Farley 7
    and I'm OK admitting..
    16' Sturgis

    Minneapolis MN

  179. #779
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    Pinch flat is specific to running tubes correct? Tubeless takes away that risk?

    that is correct!!!

  180. #780
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    Pinch flat is specific to running tubes correct? Tubeless takes away that risk?
    yes, but it indicates that the tire fully compressed between a rock and the rim and that means possible busted rim on a tubeless system.

  181. #781
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Misterg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by cr3anmachin3 View Post
    ..I've managed to land my hands on a massive roll of MOD waterproof adhesive gaffer tape 100mm wide which can be torn down to around 80mm or so.
    IMHO: Don't try and tear it - slit it down as shown here: Tech Tuesday: Gorilla Tape Tubeless Conversion - Pinkbike (I think 80mm would be too narrow, btw).

    Then like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VufMIROANxI

    It's more difficult to keep it neat on the wide rim - the middle will probably get a few wrinkles due to the cut-outs, but that shouldn't matter (I'll try and post a picture of mine later).

    You might want to look up 'ghetto inflater' if you don't have access to a compressor, but think you stand a decent chance of getting the stock tyres / rims to seat without - use plenty of very soapy water to lubricate the beads.

    (Oh, and like I said, I took the rim strip off and washed the strip and the rim with washing-up liquid and water, then wiped them with meths before taping.)

  182. #782
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    Anyone have a suggestion for a rear rack that mounts to stock bungs? I saw one online that you had to attach the bracket with rubber and clamps to the frame and one Surley that needed a new seatpost clamp to attach to. One was cheesy and one heavy duty but was $150.

    I need something solid but it does not need to hold three days of camping supplies.
    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

    16' Trek 8.4 DS
    16' Farley 7
    and I'm OK admitting..
    16' Sturgis

    Minneapolis MN

  183. #783
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    How are the Avid DB3's on the 7? I run XT's on my other bikes and I'm wondering if I should just get a set and swap them out or just run the Avid's for a while if they aren't horrible.
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  184. #784
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post
    How are the Avid DB3's on the 7? I run XT's on my other bikes and I'm wondering if I should just get a set and swap them out or just run the Avid's for a while if they aren't horrible.
    I didn't think the Avids are bad and worth using them first, in wet weather they can squeal a bit but they stop good. The newer XT 8000 brakes are better and have more modulation and lock up less but depending on your intentions of what you need or expect from them they are fine.

  185. #785
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Tincup69 View Post
    How are the Avid DB3's on the 7? I run XT's on my other bikes and I'm wondering if I should just get a set and swap them out or just run the Avid's for a while if they aren't horrible.
    And theres the whole Shimano brakes not being great in the cold thing...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  186. #786
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    261
    I completed a 1x conversion on my F5 today. I went with a 30 tooth CR and plan on leaving the cassette as is until I have a chance to test it in the snow. I think this will be the perfect gearing range for me, but only miles on it will tell for sure.

  187. #787
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by SHowley2003 View Post
    I completed a 1x conversion on my F5 today. I went with a 30 tooth CR and plan on leaving the cassette as is until I have a chance to test it in the snow. I think this will be the perfect gearing range for me, but only miles on it will tell for sure.
    That looks nice man!!

  188. #788
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    261
    Quote Originally Posted by moshock View Post
    That looks nice man!!
    Why thank you. In super pumped. My D-Hanger is severely bent so I'll have to take care of that tomorrow and get out in the trails Sunday to try it out.

  189. #789
    Classic weekend warrior
    Reputation: sk1er18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    222
    Anyone know the hub specs on the F7? I want to lace in different hoops and need to size up the spokes. My ERD and spoke hole offset is less than the Mulfuts so I know i'll have to go shorter.
    -Carver Ti O'Beast
    -Niner RLT 9
    -'16 Trek Farley 7 (hers)

  190. #790
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    75
    I just noticed they didn't quote the Mulefuts anymore as the wheelset on the website. They recently updated as well:

    http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bi...p/1064000-2016

    although they still have it on the stock photos of the bike. do I smell some cost cutting on the next batch?

  191. #791
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by KantoBoy View Post
    I just noticed they didn't quote the Mulefuts anymore as the wheelset on the website. They recently updated as well:

    Farley 7 | Farley | Trail | Mountain | Bikes

    although they still have it on the stock photos of the bike. do I smell some cost cutting on the next batch?
    I noticed that last night, interesting. I'm glad my LBS was able to source one before any potential changes.
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  192. #792
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    Took the Farley out to play in the snow today!! First real snow ride with the 27.5 wheels they did great.


  193. #793
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LunchRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by tadraper View Post
    Took the Farley out to play in the snow today!! First real snow ride with the 27.5 wheels they did great.

    Yes! I ran mine at 5 lbs. I was very impressed with them!
    1991 Trek Antelope 820
    2016 Trek Farley 9.8

  194. #794
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    I did gravel to the trail so ran a little more pressure but they worked great on the climbs!!

  195. #795
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    where was this?
    2016 Trek Farley 5 Frame and all custom parts.

  196. #796
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    The poto in s.e. Michigan!!

  197. #797
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    AH, I am going out tomorrow in Midland MI to try out the Barbagazi's. Probably start around 6-7 LB and go from there.
    2016 Trek Farley 5 Frame and all custom parts.

  198. #798
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    Those look like good tires hopefully next year the 27.5 will have a few more options. Until the the stock tires are working well.

  199. #799
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    177
    I hope they release a 27.5x4 Rougarou.
    2016 Trek Farley 5 Frame and all custom parts.

  200. #800
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    Agree those look nice as well!

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2015 Trek Farley 6 and 8 fat Bikes
    By Robg68 in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 1899
    Last Post: 2 Weeks Ago, 08:27 PM
  2. When should the 2016 models roll out?
    By Tizom in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 580
    Last Post: 12-05-2015, 12:58 PM
  3. Remedy 29 availability in EU, 2016 models ?
    By 20.100 FR in forum Trek
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-17-2015, 06:29 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-2014, 11:31 PM
  5. Trek Farley 6/8
    By BigVaz in forum Trek
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-23-2014, 08:29 AM

Members who have read this thread: 165

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 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.