2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike- Mtbr.com
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 200 of 362
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kawidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    444

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike

    Available in Alloy and Carbon
    Farley EX 8 $3499 and Farley EX 9.8 $5499 USD
    Farley EX 8 $4600 and Farley EX 9.8 $7200 CDN

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-12983955_10154107210554555_7688439161536692141_o.jpg2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-12970969_10154107210434555_9162489861595609849_o.jpg
    Current bikes:
    2018 Trek Top Fuel 9.8 SL
    2018 Trek Farley 7
    2015 Framed Alaskan Carbon
    2014 Giant TCX SLR2

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    Thinkin about getting out of the Framed game are ya'?
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kawidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Thinkin about getting out of the Framed game are ya'?
    Not at the moment but it sure would be a nice option to have in the stable.
    Current bikes:
    2018 Trek Top Fuel 9.8 SL
    2018 Trek Farley 7
    2015 Framed Alaskan Carbon
    2014 Giant TCX SLR2

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    989
    Nailed it.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    Quote Originally Posted by litespeedaddict View Post
    Nailed it.
    What, Trek nailed it? Just asking a question from one Framed fanboy to another.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,044
    whoa..love my Farley so far and I loved my old EX9 as well.
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2019 Scott Foil 10 Disc
    2019 Norco Search XR Steel
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,734
    I was wanting a fuel ex 9, maybe ill sell the 6 and get just a farley ex 8 and a second 29 wheelset
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  8. #8
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,149
    Yawn, another me too, copy cat "option" from the evil empire of the industry, yay, not.
    Cannondale Lefty and HeadShock servicing, wheel building, etc...


    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Yawn, another me too, copy cat "option" from the evil empire of the industry, yay, not.
    Who did Trek copy with this bike?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Yawn, another me too, copy cat "option" from the evil empire of the industry, yay, not.
    I've considered them as such ever since they bought and pimped Gary Fisher.

    Not sure on the copycat, perhaps the Bucksaw? 11nine? Lenz? That said, we all knew it was coming. Next up, where's Spesh's version?
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Aceldama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    322
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Yawn, another me too, copy cat "option" from the evil empire of the industry, yay, not.
    This is a great point. If you want a bike you should have to build it yourself from the frame up.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    After you build the frame, after you pull the tubing, after you mine the raw ore and smelt it... of course. Nothing like doin' a job yourself.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  13. #13
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,149
    They copied the *idea* of fat fs, not any particular model. Had they been a true leader, they would be first, not say, 6th.

    They haven't been relevant in a long time, they simply follow trends then leverage their might to foist product on as many people as are willing to spend the $.

    Anybody here know that Gary Fisher, Keith Bontrager, Gary Klein, Greg Lemond et al, actually made bikes under their own names before being crushed like bugs by Trek who fears/buys any competitor they can?

    Fisher liked 29ers, was one of the early pioneers in the movement. Trek wasn't sure they were a license to print money yet, so they kept him around, just long enough for proof of concept, then gave him the axe. Nice.

    I could go on, but it's boring industry stuff like screwing long serving LBS dealers, filling the parts supply chain with vast amounts of grey market parts on the web based companies, etc....
    Cannondale Lefty and HeadShock servicing, wheel building, etc...


    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    They copied the *idea* of fat fs, not any particular model. Had they been a true leader, they would be first, not say, 6th.

    They haven't been relevant in a long time, they simply follow trends then leverage their might to foist product on as many people as are willing to spend the $.

    Anybody here know that Gary Fisher, Keith Bontrager, Gary Klein, Greg Lemond et al, actually made bikes under their own names before being crushed like bugs by Trek who fears/buys any competitor they can?

    Fisher liked 29ers, was one of the early pioneers in the movement. Trek wasn't sure they were a license to print money yet, so they kept him around, just long enough for proof of concept, then gave him the axe. Nice.

    I could go on, but it's boring industry stuff like screwing long serving LBS dealers, filling the parts supply chain with vast amounts of grey market parts on the web based companies, etc....

    I was sure you were going to end all that with a "Now get off my lawn" blast.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Aceldama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    322
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    They copied the *idea* of fat fs, not any particular model. Had they been a true leader, they would be first, not say, 6th.

    They haven't been relevant in a long time, they simply follow trends then leverage their might to foist product on as many people as are willing to spend the $.
    Nearly every industry leader in every market has copied ideas and improved on them to get where they are today. Apple copied the idea of the graphical user interface... why should it stop people from buying their products?

    When you copy an idea you still need to make it better or a better value than your competitors in order for people to buy it.

    I wasn't really concerned with who came up with the idea first when I was choosing which bike to purchase. I chose based on which one I liked riding the best. It happened to be a Farley 8.

  16. #16
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,149
    Quote Originally Posted by litespeedaddict View Post
    I was sure you were going to end all that with a "Now get off my lawn" blast.
    Ha!

    As for the rest, if buying from the Koch Industries of the bike world works for you, all good.

    And yes, I understand there's nothing new under the sun, I just prefer supporting brands that don't act like they invented the wheel and that their poop doesn't stink....

    I'm out, just spreading a little sunshine everywhere I go today.
    Cannondale Lefty and HeadShock servicing, wheel building, etc...


    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tyriverag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,195
    Trek's fat bike are arguably the best designed out there, generally receive very favorable reviews, and are a great value. I didn't really want to buy a Trek (fattie), but I did and I love it. That's the only Trek I've ever owned.
    it's a challenge some of us are ultimately worthy of.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    Now lets see a better RS offering and something from Fox.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Ha!

    As for the rest, if buying from the Koch Industries of the bike world works for you, all good.

    And yes, I understand there's nothing new under the sun, I just prefer supporting brands that don't act like they invented the wheel and that their poop doesn't stink....

    I'm out, just spreading a little sunshine everywhere I go today.

    I understand, and if I were an LBS that didn't carry Trek who's to say I wouldn't feel the same way you do about them, but I think they are more forward thinking than you're giving them credit for.

    Domane was a really cool idea. Not that there's anything wrong with a road bike (cough, cough)

    27.5 fat tires were pretty cool, even if you weren't a fan of that tire size, it was still very cool of them to do it and it took some balls.

    I am sure I'm missing some, but the point is they do their own thinking from time to time and every bike company rips off something from somebody and tries to make it their own.

  20. #20
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,288
    27.5 fat is stupid. 27.5+ is the answer to more air volume with the same diameter as 29ers.

    27.5 fat is the answer to less air volume than 26x5.
    You change your own flats? Support your LBS and pay them to instead.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Volsung View Post
    27.5 fat is stupid. 27.5+ is the answer to more air volume with the same diameter as 29ers.

    27.5 fat is the answer to less air volume than 26x5.
    Nahhh.... We got packed trailed here, dont need that fat slow shit. If its speedier than 26 than im all for it. Treks about speed btw
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  22. #22
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,421
    Nice, they finally took my idea from 4 years ago..... About time.
    They would have sold way more if they hadn't let salsa release the bs first.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    Nahhh.... We got packed trailed here, dont need that fat slow shit. If its speedier than 26 than im all for it. Treks about speed btw
    So you're the guy that shows up a few weeks after the rest of us have done all of the work of getting a trail rideable. Next, maybe I should pay you money so you don't have to work?
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    396
    Really sucks that there's another fs fattie. Totally ruins my day.

    Furthermore, this is a blatant ripoff of the fuel.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,020
    Anyone have a geo chart for these? No press release yet?

  26. #26
    Human Test Subject
    Reputation: Volsung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,288
    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    Nahhh.... We got packed trailed here, dont need that fat slow shit. If its speedier than 26 than im all for it. Treks about speed btw
    Bikes aren't slow, I am.
    You change your own flats? Support your LBS and pay them to instead.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Paochow View Post
    So you're the guy that shows up a few weeks after the rest of us have done all of the work of getting a trail rideable. Next, maybe I should pay you money so you don't have to work?
    No all our trails are all in city limits along a river that divides the city and we maybe get 1-2 feet of snow max, so a few inches here and there. I actually try to go out and make fresh tracks but they get steam rolled flat by dog walkers and people before sunrise as it is.
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    The writing has been on the wall for a while with this one, but I'm stoked about it! Don't know if I'll end up buying one, I already have a Remedy 9.8 and a Farley 7, I just can't wait to see what they do with the Stache this year...

  29. #29
    cmg
    cmg is online now
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,468
    Bloody expensive
    always mad and usually drunk......

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kawidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    444
    Full specs and real world pic of the Alloy

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-12985529_10153813744229191_3357024412033707519_n.jpg2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-13015686_10154107654899555_8580407726698147850_n.jpg2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-13006572_10154107655849555_1246878118546480029_n.jpg
    Current bikes:
    2018 Trek Top Fuel 9.8 SL
    2018 Trek Farley 7
    2015 Framed Alaskan Carbon
    2014 Giant TCX SLR2

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    More details and pics here: SOC16: Trek Farley EX full suspension 27.5" fat bike crushes all seasons, hardtails get lighter - Bikerumor

    Looks like a cool bike and well spec'ed for the price. The low profile 27.5 tires make more sense on a FS bike than a rigid one.

    Only bummer is the 27.5x4 max tire size, why run a 197mm rear hub if it can't take bigger meats out back.
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  32. #32
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Bikin' Bric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,014
    Looks badass

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Engineer90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    604
    Based on those specs, seems like carbon frame model will be very light considering it's a fatty.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Paochow View Post
    More details and pics here: SOC16: Trek Farley EX full suspension 27.5" fat bike crushes all seasons, hardtails get lighter - Bikerumor

    Looks like a cool bike and well spec'ed for the price. The low profile 27.5 tires make more sense on a FS bike than a rigid one.

    Only bummer is the 27.5x4 max tire size, why run a 197mm rear hub if it can't take bigger meats out back.
    could always run 26 x 4.8 like on the current Farley's.

    At least they kept the standard hub width 12 x 197
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2019 Scott Foil 10 Disc
    2019 Norco Search XR Steel
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Swerny View Post
    could always run 26 x 4.8 like on the current Farley's.
    Height wise yes, width wise probably not judging from the pics.
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,020
    head angle? chainstay length?

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chad_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    505
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post

    Anybody here know that Gary Fisher, Keith Bontrager, Gary Klein, Greg Lemond et al, actually made bikes under their own names before being crushed like bugs by Trek who fears/buys any competitor they can?

    ...
    Are you sure that is the way it worked between the mtb founders and Trek?

    Watch the Bike Ask the Founders video series. It seem like Trek rescued more than crushed...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYvPMmlBZwg
    Ridley CX, Stumpjumper Carbon HT, Surly Wednesday

  38. #38
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,149
    If rescued were used in the sense that they rescued a dog and gave it a good home, health care, food and let it live out it's natural life in happy contentment, sure.

    But if you buy a "name" use it to your own financial advantage, then cut it's throat when it's not necessary to you anymore, I don't see that as a kind act of caring, I see it as business bullying 101.

    Sorry, said I was out, but was asked a direct question, out again now!
    Cannondale Lefty and HeadShock servicing, wheel building, etc...


    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    I'm kinda new to this whole bike thing. I wish I would have known I was stealing money from under privileged industry pioneers and kicking small puppies when I bought my Treks.

    I don't think the alloy is very expensive for FS at all. Or is it?
    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

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

    Minneapolis MN

  40. #40
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,421
    Quote Originally Posted by cmg71 View Post
    Bloody expensive
    Have you not looked at the other full suspension offerings?

    Gotta pay to play.

  41. #41
    Loud tyres save lives
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    504
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    I don't think the alloy is very expensive for FS at all. Or is it?
    I don't know what the UK price will be but I thought it reasonable as well bearing in mind the Farley 6 with mostly Deore level stuff and no suspension was 1300 while the SLX and Fox equipped Fuel Ex8 was 2500 therefore I was expecting a full suspension Farley to be a silly price. In some ways I wish it was a silly price to put it out of consideration as the idea of huge traction and full suspension is very tempting although I have bought the 29+ as my faster summer bike already.

    John
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8
    2015 Trek Farley 6
    2016 Trek Stache 7

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnMcL7 View Post
    I don't know what the UK price will be but I thought it reasonable as well bearing in mind the Farley 6 with mostly Deore level stuff and no suspension was 1300 while the SLX and Fox equipped Fuel Ex8 was 2500 therefore I was expecting a full suspension Farley to be a silly price. In some ways I wish it was a silly price to put it out of consideration as the idea of huge traction and full suspension is very tempting although I have bought the 29+ as my faster summer bike already.

    John
    Agree on the bold.
    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

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

    Minneapolis MN

  43. #43
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Yawn, another me too, copy cat "option" from the evil empire of the industry, yay, not.
    Geez Craig -- shut down the computer and go for a ride.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,709
    Quote Originally Posted by rfxc View Post
    head angle? chainstay length?
    It's all on here:

    Trek Farley EX - Sea Otter 2016 - Pinkbike

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    Wish they rushed something out to be "first" and released something that handled like crepes and had many many faults and issues.


    Also, kinda hope they do a farley ex "5" or some sort of lower spec further down the line. Kinda blew my money on a remedy 9.8.... who am I kidding I'd prob rob a bank or sell my left testicle (actually possible) to get a farley ex 9.8

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DethWshBkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,407
    Quote Originally Posted by LinkyPinky87 View Post
    ....sell my left testicle (actually possible) to get a farley ex 9.8
    You can do this?

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by DethWshBkr View Post
    You can do this?
    Donate a Testicle The payout for this is $35,000

  48. #48
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,421
    Quote Originally Posted by LinkyPinky87 View Post
    Dang, I could have enough for a new bike And a Corvette.... Where do I sign!

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    13
    If I didn't have a remedy 9.8 I would def get ther Farley 9.8 and maybe a set of 29+hoops.

    Looks like a cool bike! Still unclear if the 27.5x4.5'a will fit though

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8

    options

    Quote Originally Posted by Paochow View Post
    More details and pics here: SOC16: Trek Farley EX full suspension 27.5" fat bike crushes all seasons, hardtails get lighter - Bikerumor

    Looks like a cool bike and well spec'ed for the price. The low profile 27.5 tires make more sense on a FS bike than a rigid one.

    Only bummer is the 27.5x4 max tire size, why run a 197mm rear hub if it can't take bigger meats out back.
    It can still take 26 x 4.8 with the 197 rear hub.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by DirtZen View Post
    It can still take 26 x 4.8 with the 197 rear hub.
    That is what I'm saying- with a 197mm rear it should easily fit 26x4.8 and 27.5x4.5, since they both measure out to similar diameter (760-770mm). However, Trek says 27.5x4.0 is the max and if you look at the pics of the chain and seat stays there is not a whole lot of side clearance with a 3.8 Hodag, not a very wide tire to start with. It looks similar to the pic Gigantic posted of his Bucksaw running 27.5 Hodags, so I'd think it has similar clearance to the other 177mm FS fatties (Bucksaw/Mutz) I.e. No 4.8's and a maybe a few of the undersized 26x4.5-4.6 tires if you don't mind tight clearances.

    Not that I'm sure the world needs a 4.8" FS fattie, but I'd definitely like to try one
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    I'm kinda new to this whole bike thing. I wish I would have known I was stealing money from under privileged industry pioneers and kicking small puppies when I bought my Treks.

    I don't think the alloy is very expensive for FS at all. Or is it?


    It just dawned on me. Apparently I own the two most hate bicycle brands on the interwebs.

    If I wasn't having so much fun riding them I may have developed a complex.
    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

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

    Minneapolis MN

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Engineer90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    604
    Why does the author of this article think the tires are 27.5 x 4.5? Is he on crack?

    Sea Otter 2016: Trek Farley EX

    The spec sheets posted in this thread clearly says the tires are 27.5 x 3.8. The most you can probably fit is a 26 x 4.5, but deff not a 27.5 x 4.5, doesn't even exist yet (maybe it does but hasn't been huge)! Plus that would be massive!

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,933
    69 degree headangle... no thanks.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    27.5 x 3.8s would be plenty wide for me.

    If I consider this bike then there is no reason for me to consider 27.5+ wheel/tyres for my remedy 9.8 eh =D

    ........We'll see if they do a 29er Slash haha

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Paochow View Post
    That is what I'm saying- with a 197mm rear it should easily fit 26x4.8 and 27.5x4.5, since they both measure out to similar diameter (760-770mm). However, Trek says 27.5x4.0 is the max and if you look at the pics of the chain and seat stays there is not a whole lot of side clearance with a 3.8 Hodag, not a very wide tire to start with. It looks similar to the pic Gigantic posted of his Bucksaw running 27.5 Hodags, so I'd think it has similar clearance to the other 177mm FS fatties (Bucksaw/Mutz) I.e. No 4.8's and a maybe a few of the undersized 26x4.5-4.6 tires if you don't mind tight clearances.

    Not that I'm sure the world needs a 4.8" FS fattie, but I'd definitely like to try one
    The 27.5 x 4.5 won't fit the rear stays on the Farley EX due to the larger diameter at the widest part of the tire encroaching on the stays taper at the main frame end of the part. There is a ton of clearance with the 27.8 x 3.8 but not enough for the 4.5. 26 x 4.8 clears easily.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8
    27.5 x 4.5 does exist and is OE on the Farley hard tails, and yes is huge but will not fit on the dually which gets 27.5 x 3.8. Both the hard tails and the dually will also fit 29 x 3.0.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    69 degree headangle... no thanks.
    kntr, does that sound to steep or to slack?

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by DirtZen View Post
    The 27.5 x 4.5 won't fit the rear stays on the Farley EX due to the larger diameter at the widest part of the tire encroaching on the stays taper at the main frame end of the part. There is a ton of clearance with the 27.8 x 3.8 but not enough for the 4.5. 26 x 4.8 clears easily.
    Based on what has been shown with the 27.5X4.5 prototypes, they are similar diameter (768mm) and smaller width wise than a 4.8 Bud/Lou. http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/27-...l#post12529182 http://surlybikes.com//uploads/downl...o_Chart_v2.pdf

    I'd guess Trek made them that size so the'd fit in a Bluto's arch and not screw over all the Farley 9 owners. So if a 26X4.8 fits on the EX, then a 27.5"X4.5 would also fit and that would be super cool.
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Engineer90 View Post
    Why does the author of this article think the tires are 27.5 x 4.5? Is he on crack?

    Sea Otter 2016: Trek Farley EX

    The spec sheets posted in this thread clearly says the tires are 27.5 x 3.8. The most you can probably fit is a 26 x 4.5, but deff not a 27.5 x 4.5, doesn't even exist yet (maybe it does but hasn't been huge)! Plus that would be massive!
    There are so many f-ups in that article they should fire the editor. 27X4.7 on the Farley 9.9? Half the MTBR readers could do a better job than that clown.
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  61. #61
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,421
    It would be amazing if they sold a "fat rear end" conversion and bb spacer that you could convert an older ex skinny frame.

    /dreaming

    Pretty sure trek would never do that.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by Shark View Post
    It would be amazing if they sold a "fat rear end" conversion and bb spacer that you could convert an older ex skinny frame.

    /dreaming

    Pretty sure trek would never do that.

    No company would lol... they would want you to buy the WHOLE bike hahaha $$$$

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    The bike manufacturer (Trek or otherwise) wouldn't, but if the market was there, I'm sure a third party could get it done. Problem is with so many different frames out there it would be risky to attempt.
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  64. #64
    cmg
    cmg is online now
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,468
    Quote Originally Posted by Shark View Post
    It would be amazing if they sold a "fat rear end" conversion and bb spacer that you could convert an older ex skinny frame.

    /dreaming

    Pretty sure trek would never do that.
    A long time ago.......there is a thread where a dude converted his Trek Rumblefish to fat, its pretty cool, l tried to contact him but never got a reply.

    Found it my PMs http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=917821
    always mad and usually drunk......

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    509
    Stopped in at my LBS and he told me that he basically has 3 already sold. I have the feeling that people better get their names on them early or they may not get one. My other half looked at me tonight and said " you're getting one aren't you?" Hell ya, if I can figure out how to.

  66. #66
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,068
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    It just dawned on me. Apparently I own the two most hate bicycle brands on the interwebs.

    If I wasn't having so much fun riding them I may have developed a complex.
    When did you get a Specialized, bro?

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    ^ I was going to say something very similar when he posted that, but didn't.

    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Gigantic again.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post

    I'm out, just spreading a little sunshine everywhere I go today.
    Now, get off my lawn!


  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    It was a mistake going with a 197 rear and 120 BB, pedal strike is a big deal with an FS fatty, so this will be the worst of the worst.

    I like that they went with the 27 x 4" tire, that size plays better with 29+ for three season use.

    Anyone see a spec for rear end travel? If they stuck to 100mm like Salsa, then they're dead out of the gate.

    They need to junk the Bluto, I can't even fathom putting a Reba based fork on any fat bike over the 2k pricepoint, espo one that is not rigid.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post

    Anyone see a spec for rear end travel? If they stuck to 100mm like Salsa, then they're dead out of the gate.
    It's 120 MM rear travel as per the Pinkbike article:

    Trek's Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike - Sea Otter 2016 - Pinkbike

    In addition to further smoothing out rough terrain, the bike's 120mm of front and rear travel makes it easier to keep the undamped rebound created by the big tires in check.
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2019 Scott Foil 10 Disc
    2019 Norco Search XR Steel
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    69 degree headangle... no thanks.
    68.8, BUT, that's with a Bluto 120...make it a 140 and you have ~67.8deg which is not too shabby.

    I'd prefer a 140 rear, 140 front, 68deg, then you could slack it more depending on use by using an angleset or by increasing front travel.

    The 197mm rear hub spacing is a real bummer, that'll really increase pedal strike and reduce heel clearance.

    I'm in this one just to see a big player pushing for more fork options. What would have made this a super huge win is a fat Manitou fork...rumors of one in the works, so perhaps we'll see it on the production carbon.

    Seriously, if you are gonna market a bike like this to a non-snow crowd, they need to start thinking about how the bike will be ridden and what that crowd needs. In terrain where a fat FS is most beneficial, pedal clearance side to side, and BB height are a problem. I just got back from a SW tour, rode trails in Moab, Cortex, Sedona, St George, where I had numerous tight rock squeezes which became walks on my Mutz because a 100mm BB puts the pedals out too far. And yet, the super traction was just the ticket for clamboring over rocks and shelves; I was running 27+, but with enough spacing I woudl have ran 29+ without a thought.

    A 73mm BB (maybe 83mm), 27.5 x 4" tire, spacing for 29+, 1X drivetrain is ideal for an FS fatty. I'd also include a flipchip to lower the BB and slack out the HTA and/or offer a long travel fork option.

    120mm rear travel is not bad for an all around bike, though kind light for my needs; it certainly makes the BS less relevant.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Yawn, another me too, copy cat "option" from the evil empire of the industry, yay, not.
    I don't understand the hate, the bike industry is tough to survive in. At least Trek advanced the Fisher vision for 29ers and provided Bontrager the opportunity to do what he does best with components, wheels and tires. Would it have been better for those companies to vanish or exist in the nether world ala Richey? Having a major player enter the full suspension fat world will hasten the availability of a trail worthy, long travel fork. That is good for everyone.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  73. #73
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Stu Pidassle View Post
    I don't understand the hate
    Already said my bit on it, do some research if you're actually curious and not just blindly supporting the brand, discover why, they are killing the industry, not saving it.

    Politely, no, they didn't advance it, they bought out a competitor, then let him do the heavy lifting then dumped his brand like a bad habit. Wash, rinse, repeat.
    Cannondale Lefty and HeadShock servicing, wheel building, etc...


    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Stu Pidassle View Post
    I don't understand the hate, the bike industry is tough to survive in. At least Trek advanced the Fisher vision for 29ers and provided Bontrager the opportunity to do what he does best with components, wheels and tires. Would it have been better for those companies to vanish or exist in the nether world ala Richey? Having a major player enter the full suspension fat world will hasten the availability of a trail worthy, long travel fork. That is good for everyone.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
    It's not hate. I think Mendon (like me) is looking for a little more advancement in the product development that big companies bring vs taking the easy line and selling stuff AFTER others take the chance and build the market; or killing off a brand.

    I suppose Trek does break some ground, like the Stache, 27.5 x 4/4.5" tires, and bringing Manitou back to the table, same with Specialized who has invested in the plus size earlyish.

    I don't own either brand, so I can't speak to how they function. I tend to go with smaller builders and homegrown stuff, not because it's better, but because I feel better riding it

    I want more info on the Manitou fat fork...

  75. #75
    sluice box
    Reputation: Co-opski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    975
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff_G View Post
    It just dawned on me. Apparently I own the two most hate bicycle brands on the interwebs.

    If I wasn't having so much fun riding them I may have developed a complex.
    No you need a Specialized to bring the real hate. Please Specialized lawyers don't sue me for typing your trademarked name.
    ptarmigan hardcore

  76. #76
    sluice box
    Reputation: Co-opski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    975
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Already said my bit on it, do some research if you're actually curious and not just blindly supporting the brand, discover why, they are killing the industry, not saving it.

    Politely, no, they didn't advance it, they bought out a competitor, then let him do the heavy lifting then dumped his brand like a bad habit. Wash, rinse, repeat.
    Too bad they did not pick up Wildfire Fatbikes back in 2004.
    ptarmigan hardcore

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    It's not hate. I think Mendon (like me) is looking for a little more advancement in the product development that big companies bring vs taking the easy line and selling stuff AFTER others take the chance and build the market; or killing off a brand.

    I suppose Trek does break some ground, like the Stache, 27.5 x 4/4.5" tires, and bringing Manitou back to the table, same with Specialized who has invested in the plus size earlyish.

    I don't own either brand, so I can't speak to how they function. I tend to go with smaller builders and homegrown stuff, not because it's better, but because I feel better riding it

    I want more info on the Manitou fat fork...
    Expecting a large manufacturer to drive innovation is akin to looking to small bike companies to offer cost effective solutions based on economies of scale. Small frame builders survive by offering revolutionary and/or higher quality products, large companies survive by offering cost effective solutions that appeal to the masses. Two different business models, together they influence the parts manufacturers to keep pace. It is great that you can afford to buy from niche manufacturers, not everyone can. If all bikes cost $10k, the industry would die.

    I am not an advocate for Trek, but this bike is very innovative based on the fact that it is available before a suitable fork is on the market. FWIW, I agree with you that the 120/197 combination is less than optimal because of Q factor and heel clearance issues.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,133
    Did someone hold a gun to Gary Fisher's head and force him to sell out? Nah, his suspenders wearing ass took the money and bent the knee.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: schnee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,797
    I was wondering why this thread was four pages long. I was not disappointed!

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: schnee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by LinkyPinky87 View Post
    27.5 x 3.8s would be plenty wide for me.

    If I consider this bike then there is no reason for me to consider 27.5+ wheel/tyres for my remedy 9.8 eh =D
    If you buy this bike, think of how much money you'll save on your Remedy!

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,208
    Quote Originally Posted by Stu Pidassle View Post
    Expecting a large manufacturer to drive innovation is akin to looking to small bike companies to offer cost effective solutions based on economies of scale. Small frame builders survive by offering revolutionary and/or higher quality products, large companies survive by offering cost effective solutions that appeal to the masses. Two different business models, together they influence the parts manufacturers to keep pace. It is great that you can afford to buy from niche manufacturers, not everyone can. If all bikes cost $10k, the industry would die.

    I am not an advocate for Trek, but this bike is very innovative based on the fact that it is available before a suitable fork is on the market. FWIW, I agree with you that the 120/197 combination is less than optimal because of Q factor and heel clearance issues.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
    Actually, it's a combination of the two. With the maturation of the bike market, it takes real engineering and real R&D to do innovation. A lot of that is getting beyond the scope and budgets of a small company - no different than a lot of other industries.

    You can get some sense of that by listening to the https://fat-bike.com/2015/10/fat-cam...rek-engineers/ Looks like the Farley 2016 fatbikes were something like 2 years in development.

    J.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    41
    You may not even want the second set of wheels! The 3.8s on wide rims may help to make you ride better?

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6
    I'm riding a Surly Pug Ops right now and I was interested in the Farley 9.8 last year, but I held off. I like the upgrades that they did for this year on the 9.8 (hard tail) and thinking about pulling the trigger on a pre-order. I've read elsewhere that Trek dealers should be able to wiggle on the price, but my LBS is telling me it's firm MSRP. This is quite a large purchase so I'm wondering what other people's thoughts on this are.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    Is there another LBS that sells Trek? Play the dealership game, get a quote and go to the other LBS and see if they can do better, repeat until satisfied. My mom did this with the last car she bought, she ended up purchasing the car for a dollar over dealer price. I should add though the she paid a good amount in cash and worked out a package deal where the dealership added paneling and a couple other "upgrades". So, play them off each other and tell them you have some cash and see if that loosens up the price a little. Another option is to see what you can get for store credit or extended shop warranty.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Is there another LBS that sells Trek? Play the dealership game, get a quote and go to the other LBS and see if they can do better, repeat until satisfied. My mom did this with the last car she bought, she ended up purchasing the car for a dollar over dealer price. I should add though the she paid a good amount in cash and worked out a package deal where the dealership added paneling and a couple other "upgrades". So, play them off each other and tell them you have some cash and see if that loosens up the price a little. Another option is to see what you can get for store credit or extended shop warranty.
    ? Did she buy Clark Griswold's Family Truckster?

    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

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

    Minneapolis MN

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    Sadly no.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6
    What I have heard so far, talking to a few shops, is that Trek sets the prices and the dealers have to stick to them. Maybe it is only on the used bikes and potentially other brands where there is room for negotiation.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    95
    i talked to a shop near my house..they want 2k down payment for the bike.. what is the better deal, a Santa cruz hightower, or this trek.? only problem i have, is i can get the SC now, but I have to wait until august to get the trek. what is your guys opinion a fat bike vs. mid fat bike..

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    If you will be using the bike in the snow/sand then it may be better to go with the fat bike. Also, you can run 650b+ or 29+ in a lot of fatty frames. Although, I'm not sure on the clearance for these Treks, so ask the dealer or see if they have a wheel they can throw in the rear to check for clearance. It's a personal decision based on your preferred terrain and style.

    Personally, I'd go fat and build a 2nd wheelset. My 2 pennies.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6
    My feeling on fat vs mid is that it depends on where you are coming from. If you are used to riding 4"+ width, then going back down to mid will probably take some adjusting in terms of gripping through the turns.

    I borrowed a Stache 9 from the shop for a couple of days, and I found myself pushing it too hard in corners for the grip level it was giving me. That is most likely just because I'm so used to riding the Pugsley with so much grip. I did have a lot of fun on the Stache though, and it is much less expensive than the Farley 9.8.

    I opted to go with a 2016 Farley 9.8 because I like the black/red color scheme and it is available now instead of waiting until August. My LBS price matched the new year model so that saved me a couple hundred. They didn't have one in stock, but had to call around and ultimately got one from several states away and it is on its way to us now.

    And for what it's worth, but not really on topic, I got an AMEX offer in the mail to spend a certain amount of money in the first 3 months and get $450 back, so I decided to open that account and save about 10% on the bike cost and get 12 months no interest. Obviously this tip won't work for everyone, but just something to consider doing.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,208
    I'd go fat if you want to extend your riding season. I actually enjoy riding my fatbike more than I ever did with my MTB. With the Trek, you can go skinner as well as fat, so that adds more versatility.

    J.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by ALC0R73Z View Post
    i talked to a shop near my house..they want 2k down payment for the bike.. what is the better deal, a Santa cruz hightower, or this trek.? only problem i have, is i can get the SC now, but I have to wait until august to get the trek. what is your guys opinion a fat bike vs. mid fat bike..
    Since I have both I can give you a fairly Honest Opinion.

    Trek Farley w/Bluto 4" Jumbo Jim's / 26" HED Carbon Wheels

    -- This is a bike I can easily ride year round. The light weight wheel make this bike feel like my Jamis Dakar Pro 27.5 bike. There really isn't much this bike can't do. Well maybe "Big Air" but lets be honest I am 49, broken 20+ bones, Surgery 13x and Cancer twice so I pretty much keep the wheels close to the ground.



    Trek Farley w/Bluto 3.5 Fat-B-Nimble / 27.5+ WTB Scrapper Rims

    -- Now this bike is "FUN & FAST" so fast that it actually scarred me on one of my last rides. It rolls pretty much over everything in it's path and corners better then anything that I have ever ridden. One thing that I have to get used to on this bike is when heading into a corner full speed just hang the heck on and don't brake as the bike will corner and and not lose grip. It's crazy how well this bike handles with this wheel combo.

    Not let's be honest the 3.5's are actually 2.8's on the 45mm rims. Let's just call it a fishing story when it comes to actually size.

    Jamis Dakar Pro w/Revelation 27.5 / 2.2 Rocket Ron's

    -- Great bike that I used to love to ride. I will be gifting this to my lovely wife so she has a nice bike.

    In the end when Trek built the Farley they screwed up in my opinion. Why, because I haven't seen another bike that I want as much as the Farley. I love this bike and it has become my do-all bike. I like it so much I may buy a third Farley and set it for Winter only and be done.

    Honestly I don't work for Trek I just love the heck out of this bike.
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    46
    So HED is now doing a 27.5 x 80mm carbon rim for this bike. I think that is the first non-bontrager adoption of the 27.5 x fat spec, right?

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by jrogersAK View Post
    So HED is now doing a 27.5 x 80mm carbon rim for this bike. I think that is the first non-bontrager adoption of the 27.5 x fat spec, right?
    Not sure about that. But if they are making them then I'm in
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,208
    Quote Originally Posted by jrogersAK View Post
    So HED is now doing a 27.5 x 80mm carbon rim for this bike. I think that is the first non-bontrager adoption of the 27.5 x fat spec, right?
    Hmm. Good sign. From what I'm hearing, Trek sold a ton of the 27.5" Farleys. If HED is getting in, that is also a good sign because it means they see a market for it.

    J.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    5
    Paid for the new EX-8, now I wait. I hate waiting. Put my Farley 6 up for sale with the "I don`t want to sell it" price. Of course some guy paid it. Now I sit with out a fat bike. Booo.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    46
    The problem I see with these new FS bikes is that they will not take the 27.5 x 4.5 tires that just came out. I ran the 27.5 x 3.8's last winter, and even studded, I wished that I had a bit more width. The 27.5 x 4.5 is wider, but they still need to go wider, and with the FS EX frame, this would not be an option for winter riding.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,208
    Quote Originally Posted by jrogersAK View Post
    The problem I see with these new FS bikes is that they will not take the 27.5 x 4.5 tires that just came out. I ran the 27.5 x 3.8's last winter, and even studded, I wished that I had a bit more width. The 27.5 x 4.5 is wider, but they still need to go wider, and with the FS EX frame, this would not be an option for winter riding.
    I agree with that. While I see the 3.8 tires doing most of it for me and that I found them much more capable than I had thought, for a fat bike I'd hate to be locked out of the biggest tire sizes.

    J.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    My only guess is that they wanted to keep the chainstays short, but as it doesn't fit larger than 4", it'd be better off with a narrower 177mm hub for better q-factor.

    IMHO a bike with a 197mm rear hub should be able to run 27.5x4.5"/26x4.8".
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dRjOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,604
    there is already a Nextie rim 27.5x65mm. its in same ball park. i have one coming to use with a Barbegazi...

    Quote Originally Posted by jrogersAK View Post
    So HED is now doing a 27.5 x 80mm carbon rim for this bike. I think that is the first non-bontrager adoption of the 27.5 x fat spec, right?
    For a rock steady Gas Tank bag > the DeWidget

    bit.ly/BuyDeWidget

    https://www.instagram.com/drj0n_bagworks/

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by jrogersAK View Post
    The problem I see with these new FS bikes is that they will not take the 27.5 x 4.5 tires that just came out. I ran the 27.5 x 3.8's last winter, and even studded, I wished that I had a bit more width. The 27.5 x 4.5 is wider, but they still need to go wider, and with the FS EX frame, this would not be an option for winter riding.
    You really don't want or need 5" fat tires on a full suspension fatty, these are not snow/sand bikes. I wonder what Trek was thinking when they spec'd this bike with a 197mm rear. Clearly they were thinking hardtail, too bad as it would have been nice to have another all mountain FS fatty.

    What we really need to see is a narrowing of the BB to something like 83mm, which would still clear a 4" tire and would significantly narrow the Q. Fat bikes suffer from serious pedal strike issues.

    Of course we also need a decent fork that is 3-4" tire specific, but that's an entirely different can o worms.

  102. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat old man View Post
    Paid for the new EX-8, now I wait. I hate waiting. Put my Farley 6 up for sale with the "I don`t want to sell it" price. Of course some guy paid it. Now I sit with out a fat bike. Booo.
    Which one did you get?

    Did you consider the Bucksaw or the Mutz? It's a big gamble to buy a bike without a test ride.

    Just looking at geometry for the Farley FS: 17.5" chainstay/68.8 deg HTA, you could get a Bucksaw and be just as happy, maybe happier with a slacker HTA.

    About the only thing the Farley FS has going for it is 120mm travel. The hub spacing is too wide, the chainstays are too long, and of course it's Trek

  103. #103
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    What we really need to see is a narrowing of the BB to something like 83mm, which would still clear a 4" tire and would significantly narrow the Q. Fat bikes suffer from serious pedal strike issues.
    For every person that agrees with you (and I don't necessarily disagree) there are three others saying 'but what about crank options? there are so few in 83mm...".

    Not as clear cut as we'd like it to be.

    < edit > I just went and searched QBP for 83mm options. Heaps of BB's -- no surprise, as any 73mm or 100mm BSA BB can be made to work. But for cranks, there are few options: Shimano, Hope, Race Face, and E-Thirteen are it. And of those, not one offers anything longer than 170mm.

    That's honestly more than I expected. And even though I'm OK with 170 or 165mm lengths, the lack of a 175mm option just alienated yet more of those who were uncertain about 83mm in the first place.

    Aaaaaand, of the options listed above, more than 1/3rd are for 104mm BCD rings only, meaning 32t or maaaaaybe 30t if you're lucky. The others look to have direct mount options, but I'm not well versed on what "standard" they use.

    Add it all up and 83mm is a dead end IMHO.

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Which one did you get?

    Did you consider the Bucksaw or the Mutz? It's a big gamble to buy a bike without a test ride.

    Just looking at geometry for the Farley FS: 17.5" chainstay/68.8 deg HTA, you could get a Bucksaw and be just as happy, maybe happier with a slacker HTA.

    About the only thing the Farley FS has going for it is 120mm travel. The hub spacing is too wide, the chainstays are too long, and of course it's Trek
    Most of my riding is in the woods, I prefered the tighter steering. After riding a Bucksaw it felt like a chopper. And the fact that I really liked my Farly 6 made me hope this would have a simular ride. But with the cush of suspension. My dealer has already pre sold all of there first bikes, I didn't want to wait any longer.

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dRjOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,604
    if its of help and slightly off topic: raceface sixc are available 175mm/83 as a special order. (they are also easily available 175mmx73mm and the spindles are available aftermarket) i have a set - pricey, to be fair, but a nice set up! the sixc spindle has a longer fluted section than the other race face cranks, but a friend has modded it to use the next sl (and hence less expensive race face cranks)...but modding is mikesee's valid point! not easily available !

    i have a next sl on a 170 width spindle and cant say i feel much difference Q wise.

    in europe there are some other options for 83mm including BOR, which are a similar design to the hollowgram/race face style -pretty versatile - but again, pricey and not easily available to youse guys over the pond...
    For a rock steady Gas Tank bag > the DeWidget

    bit.ly/BuyDeWidget

    https://www.instagram.com/drj0n_bagworks/

  106. #106
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Of course we also need a decent fork that is 3-4" tire specific, but that's an entirely different can o worms.
    I've been riding the Fox for the past ~month with a 27.5 x 3.6" Hodag. Would fit a 3.8 for sure if there was one in 27.5, and does fit a 26 x 4". 140mm travel now, soon to be stretched to 150. Supple on small, good midstroke support, and with all tokens installed it has a great ramp to bottom. I haven't ridden a Pike recently enough to say for sure, but my gut feeling is that this Fox doesn't give up much to Pike, if anything. It's that good. And I typically detest Fox stuff, so for me to write the above, it really has to be good with zero glaring flaws.

  107. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    8

    NBD: Trek Farley ex8 They are here!

    Its finally here, ever since I saw the preview of them I knew I could not wait to order one because usually all the XL's of other fs fat bikes sell out fast! I haven't hit any single track yet but I will have a video and some sort of review once I have had a chance to ride about 100miles on some single track and back to back ride's, stay tuned.




  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeff_G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    676
    The black X color scheme is sweet, and stealth. (at least for me)
    "At least I'm enjoying the ride"

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

    Minneapolis MN

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Looking forward to your review as this bike is on my Radar.

    Quote Originally Posted by hise442 View Post
    Its finally here, ever since I saw the preview of them I knew I could not wait to order one because usually all the XL's of other fs fat bikes sell out fast! I haven't hit any single track yet but I will have a video and some sort of review once I have had a chance to ride about 100miles on some single track and back to back ride's, stay tuned.
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  110. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    8
    Here is a quick video going over the bike last time it will be this clean!
    https://youtu.be/33cSeo5Zy-E

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    Very interested to hear more about this bike.
    I agree that it doesn't appear to be "the best machine for snow"
    However, I view this thing as a rock garden destroyer.
    I think I would like to ride it with the Fox fork and narrower rims closer to 50mm

    Speaking of snow... Trek's other 22 pounder with the 27.5 x 4.5 tires
    Now that's a snow beast!
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  112. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    ...
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:40 PM.

  113. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,759
    Not that I have any time to race let alone ride these days, but most fat-bike classes require a minimum of a 3.8 or 4.0 tire width to somewhat level the playing field. I can tell you for sure that Hodag B+ 3.8 tires are nowhere near 3.8". Mine measure 3.4" at best. I doubt racing was the focus for this bike, but it is possible that somebody would race it, and on hard chunky rough conditions it might be a good choice.
    "Wait- I am confused" - SDMTB'er

  114. #114
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    Bottom line, the best FSFB, feature-wise, is the LaMere Dopamine.
    Well, then. It's no surprise that you sell LaMere.

    I also find it intriguing that you have a relatively scathing description of the Wren fork on your website, a fork which many forum users here are extremely happy with. It makes me take anything you say with a lot of grains of salt.

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by deuxdiesel View Post
    Not that I have any time to race let alone ride these days, but most fat-bike classes require a minimum of a 3.8 or 4.0 tire width to somewhat level the playing field. I can tell you for sure that Hodag B+ 3.8 tires are nowhere near 3.8". Mine measure 3.4" at best. I doubt racing was the focus for this bike, but it is possible that somebody would race it, and on hard chunky rough conditions it might be a good choice.
    Since the tires are marked 3.8", they will qualify for most events. I've seen several theories that Trek intentionally undersized the tire so its riders would have a faster rolling tire than those riding actual 3.8-4" tires.
    19 Fargo Ti
    '17 Cutthroat
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:39 PM.

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:41 PM.

  118. #118
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    Yes, we do carry LaMere. For good reason. They make the best FSFB for trail conditions here, which is southern Ontario Canada.

    We quoted other brands, and which environments they would excel at, like the Foes Mutz would be good for more aggressive AM and some DH-style riding out west, where there are actual mountains.

    Same with Wren forks. They weigh 5-6 lbs. When we are making the lightest custom Carbon Fat bikes, mostly for XC to AM riding, it makes little sense to add a Wren to a fat bike here, when other choices are lighter and perform just as well.

    Wren forks are designed for an environment that very few riders/racers will find in southern Ontario, as compared to other locations that have trails which could use the full potential of the shock.

    That said, why add an extra 2-4 lbs of weight to your carbon fat bike and seldom get full use out of THAT particular front shock?

    You won't win many of the Fat bike class race series here, if for instance, racing on a Foes Mutz and a Wren fork. You will be at or over 30-34 lbs, and about 4-6 lbs (or more) heavier than the other Fat bikes in the same class.
    You really don't understand what FS fatbikes are good at, do you? Because you seem to subscribe to the notion that everybody races high end fatbikes in the snow. And Lauf as an all mountain fork? I didn't think Ontario was so out of touch. Lauf is nothing but pure lightweight xc.

    The Wren exists because people can and do exceed the limits of the Bluto. And sometimes even in purely xc situations. The Wren fills a need for a more aggressive fork and the extra weight absolutely is worth it for the stiffer chassis and longer travel.

    You are selling your customers short by being too focused on snow racing. There is other riding out there and the people doing it WANT to be better served.

    Your harsh statements about the more robust Wren fork do nobody any favors. It is not a race fork, no. But it very well may suit bigger riders who do race and who find the Bluto too flexy. IMO, after riding one on my Bucksaw, the Wren fork is much more balanced for a FS fatbike than the Bluto is, and I do not notice the extra weight when riding.

    Claiming that the LaMere is the best fs fattie out there based on the variety of options is disingenuous at best. How many of the competing bikes have you actually ridden? Do you have the practical experience with other fs fatbikes to say that those options make the LaMere actually RIDE better? Because that is where it counts.

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12

    We the people ...

    Glad you like your fork.
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:45 PM.

  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    You really don't understand what FS fatbikes are good at, do you? Because you seem to subscribe to the notion that everybody races high end fatbikes in the snow. And Lauf as an all mountain fork? I didn't think Ontario was so out of touch. Lauf is nothing but pure lightweight xc.

    The Wren exists because people can and do exceed the limits of the Bluto. And sometimes even in purely xc situations. The Wren fills a need for a more aggressive fork and the extra weight absolutely is worth it for the stiffer chassis and longer travel.

    You are selling your customers short by being too focused on snow racing. There is other riding out there and the people doing it WANT to be better served.

    Your harsh statements about the more robust Wren fork do nobody any favors. It is not a race fork, no. But it very well may suit bigger riders who do race and who find the Bluto too flexy. IMO, after riding one on my Bucksaw, the Wren fork is much more balanced for a FS fatbike than the Bluto is, and I do not notice the extra weight when riding.

    Claiming that the LaMere is the best fs fattie out there based on the variety of options is disingenuous at best. How many of the competing bikes have you actually ridden? Do you have the practical experience with other fs fatbikes to say that those options make the LaMere actually RIDE better? Because that is where it counts.
    Sounds like RFBca has a very myopic view of the MTB world that is focused solely on Southern Ontario. What works there would not work in many parts of the US but different needs for different people.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    cool
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:47 PM.

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    ...On the front page of our web site, it states our target customer base and audience :

    "Located in Burlington Ontario Canada, rideFATbikes.ca is passionate about Fat biking and promotes the sport, above all else. We partner with regional cycling clubs, trail building associations, and city governments, to promote the Fat bike trail systems accessible within our local conservation areas and provincial parks.

    We ride all 4 seasons, and only sell the products we test and race ourselves, specifically for the riding conditions found in southern Ontario, Canada."
    I don't know why you are so touchy about the statement, ride what works for your area and don't worry about what people say works in theirs.

  123. #123
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    Sounds like RFBca has a very myopic view of the MTB world that is focused solely on Southern Ontario. What works there would not work in many parts of the US but different needs for different people.
    not just southern Ontario. But specifically racing fatbikes in Southern Ontario. EXTREMELY limited position. Everything he seems to say assumes that people only ever want to race fatbikes. I haven't signed up for a race since 2003, and I'm doing ONE in November. My goal has never been to be competitive for a podium position when I have signed up for a race, so I don't give a rat's behind whether my bike is a pound heavier for installing a fork that's more fun in rocky chunder and downhills.

    I encountered his website months ago in my Wren research, saw his myopic drivel and discounted it as BS. But now I see him appear here, and I feel it's worthwhile to point out that myopic view. Especially since a discussion about the Farley EX is about as far removed from racing fatbikes in southern Ontario as can really be, and since he decided to interject some opinions about how the LaMere is the best FS fatbike (at least on paper, and only really considering that it has more possible build options, with no real statements regarding how the bike actually rides).

    I further support my statements by pointing out that FS fatbikes really aren't race bikes, and I've never seen a manufacturer market them as such. IMO, you have to make too many compromises in functionality to get them very far below 30lbs. They are better suited as adventure bikes and bikes for more aggressive riding styles.

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    ...
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:35 PM.

  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    ...
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:36 PM.

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    ...
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 08:47 PM.

  127. #127
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    Harold - How does the trek EX ride? Did you ride the aluminum or carbon version? Have you tried it with a Wren 110 or 150? What types of trails were you on? Did you have to do any climbing, or use the chairlift? Which tires and rims did you use? Tire PSI both front and rear?

    How does the Wren 110 or 150 on the Trek EX compare to the standard Bluto RL it ships with?

    How heavy of a rider are you? Which size EX frame did you test on?

    Which race will you be attending in November? Expecting snow in the race,or not?

    Please describe your view of which of the 8 FSFBs posted is the best, and please do qualify it as to why? How many of them have you tested so far? And in which conditions and riding setups? (tires, PSI, rims, shocks, etc).

    Please describe your results. We would love to hear it.
    You can see pretty much all of the answers to your questions (and more) in my post history. I really don't care what you think of me or my own experience. But I know enough to know that my way of riding isn't the only legitimate way to ride, and just because someone doesn't ride the way I do, doesn't mean anything. It doesn't mean that my experience can't be useful to them, and it doesn't mean that what doesn't work for me, won't work for someone else, even under the same conditions. It also doesn't mean that what does work for me, won't necessarily work for anyone else.

    I see a lot of people here where I live who approach mtb with the same tiny box you use. They see ALL mtb in the XC race box. They criticize platform pedals and loose-fitting clothing. They criticize long travel full suspension. They criticize hydration bladders and carrying toolkits and first aid supplies and so on and so forth. They criticize all those things because it's not what works best for them in their xc racing and training riding, refusing to acknowledge that there are a LOT MORE RIDERS who don't race (or who only do so occasionally) than who do.

  128. #128
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    All, and especially Harold, Interbike's outdoor event is Sept 19-20th, and since most replying on the thread are from out west, maybe you can try to make it to the event to test all the FSFB's out for yourself?
    LMAO - amusing that you're unable to see how unrealistic that is.

  129. #129
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    Hi - I can provide some info
    Info is good, especially when it is backed up with context. In this case the context needed when claiming a certain product is "the best" is "for whom?", "where?", "according to whom?", and "for what application?".

    Other posters here have teased most of this info out in ensuing posts, so I won't rehash it.

    I will say that showing up to a forum with no post history, immediately claiming to know what is "the best", and then sort of offhandedly admitting that yes, indeed, you do sell said product sounds fishy at best, and shilly at worst.

    Not the end of the world in any event. Just know that your credibility here is more or less shot from the start.

  130. #130
    cmg
    cmg is online now
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,468
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Just know that your credibility here is more or less shot from the start.
    This......
    and posting all this crap in the "Trek Farley" thread hasnt helped your cause, it shouldve gone in a "best FSFB" thread.
    always mad and usually drunk......

  131. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    All, it will be great to know if the EX turns out to an awesome FSFB. Not enough competition in that segment yet. Only 6 brands currently... Maxx Huradax (alloy), Salsa BS (carbon/alloy), Trek Farley EX (carbon/alloy), Foes Mutz (alloy), Dopamine (carbon), and another new chiner design (carbon).

    the trek marketing engine just ran over me for posting "feature-wise" that another FSFB competes with the EX on frame design and feature levels (like 120mm front and 115mm rear travel, 177+197 RR hub compatibility, and several competitors were weighed and verified to be up to 6 lbs lighter than the EX, with wider tire capability (and almost all accept the 27.5 x 4" standard of the EX. I never mentioned anything about how they all compare in ride quality, as no one here claimed, including myself, to have tried all the FSFBs available. Only chance to do that at the same time will be at Interbike. I even got hammered for mentioning that too.


    cheers!
    Last edited by RFBca; 09-11-2016 at 09:26 PM.

  132. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,186
    My friend Chad on the Farley EX. It was fun knowing this multi-season video would be coming as well as being around some prototype products.

    I hope I'm not harassed as too much of a Trek fan or with something to sell. Yes, I do know and socialize with Trek employees but do same with another brand and count 5 bike brands in our family fleet.




  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    Attachment 1092375

    Stats taken from the Manufacturers' web sites.

    Other posters in this thread already mentioned the Salsa Bucksaw and the Foes Mutz as comparisons, so I included their stats.

    I forgot I ride bikes on paper stats

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    Quote Originally Posted by bitflogger View Post
    My friend Chad on the Farley EX. It was fun knowing this multi-season video would be coming as well as being around some prototype products.

    I hope I'm not harassed as too much of a Trek fan or with something to sell. Yes, I do know and socialize with Trek employees but do same with another brand and count 5 bike brands in our family fleet.



    This was rad, thanks for sharing!

  135. #135
    cmg
    cmg is online now
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,468
    Quote Originally Posted by bitflogger View Post
    My friend Chad on the Farley EX. It was fun knowing this multi-season video would be coming as well as being around some prototype products.

    I hope I'm not harassed as too much of a Trek fan or with something to sell. Yes, I do know and socialize with Trek employees but do same with another brand and count 5 bike brands in our family fleet.



    Im pretty sure thats how l look on my Fattie (not a Trek)

    however lm positive l dont

    Nice vid, thanks
    always mad and usually drunk......

  136. #136
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    Quote Originally Posted by cmg71 View Post
    Im pretty sure thats how l look on my Fattie (not a Trek)

    however lm positive l dont

    Nice vid, thanks
    Nah, we all ride like that on our bikes.

    in our imaginations

  137. #137
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by RFBca View Post
    Stats taken from the Manufacturers' web sites.


    You completely, or perhaps conveniently, missed my point.

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    great video! thanks for sharing.

  139. #139
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    not just southern Ontario. But specifically racing fatbikes in Southern Ontario. EXTREMELY limited position. Everything he seems to say assumes that people only ever want to race fatbikes. I haven't signed up for a race since 2003, and I'm doing ONE in November. My goal has never been to be competitive for a podium position when I have signed up for a race, so I don't give a rat's behind whether my bike is a pound heavier for installing a fork that's more fun in rocky chunder and downhills.

    I encountered his website months ago in my Wren research, saw his myopic drivel and discounted it as BS. But now I see him appear here, and I feel it's worthwhile to point out that myopic view. Especially since a discussion about the Farley EX is about as far removed from racing fatbikes in southern Ontario as can really be, and since he decided to interject some opinions about how the LaMere is the best FS fatbike (at least on paper, and only really considering that it has more possible build options, with no real statements regarding how the bike actually rides).

    I further support my statements by pointing out that FS fatbikes really aren't race bikes, and I've never seen a manufacturer market them as such. IMO, you have to make too many compromises in functionality to get them very far below 30lbs. They are better suited as adventure bikes and bikes for more aggressive riding styles.
    Interestingly, not only did he delete nearly all of his posts in this thread tonight, his website's Wren content has been revised.

    I also get a chuckle over the fact they he promotes Maxxis tires without the compulsive need to refer to them as Cheng Shin Rubber Industry Co. tires.

  140. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by evasive View Post
    Interestingly, not only did he delete nearly all of his posts in this thread tonight, his website's Wren content has been revised.

    I also get a chuckle over the fact they he promotes Maxxis tires without the compulsive need to refer to them as Cheng Shin Rubber Industry Co. tires.
    I deleted my posts because i realized its not worth the effort. Too many people log in and find amusement in nit-picking and taking cheap shots at others....putting them down....arguing... giving them bad rep... They ENJOY acting like this and treating others in that manner,and keep attempting to turn forums into soap operas. Plus they keep picking all sorts of random crap to complain about and can't stay on topic.

    great video post though!

    take care.

  141. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    8

    Update, ride report and video of the 2017 Trek Farley ex8!!!

    OK everyone sorry for taking so long for an update! I have a newborn and the construction world has picked up quite bit but anyway, The bike is one word -- AWESOME!

    After riding it since mid July and putting over 500 miles of trail and back road riding I really feel that I have gotten to know the bike well. First things first, after my initial few rides there were a few things I needed to address right away, one being upgrading the stock 28 tooth chainring to a 32 I immediately was completely maxed out on the trail and never got into the 3 lowest gears. With the 32 I feel that it is a good combination of top end speed without sacrificing any climbing ability although I do use the lowest gear now.

    The only other thing that needed change right away was adding way more air to the shock and fork the recommended pressure is 265 in the shock and 135 in the fork. sure that felt great for small bumps but was way to soft and bottomed out on every drop and when flying through roots and rocks! With gear I'm 225 and I found that right around 290psi in the shock and 150 in the bluto worked great. I'm right at 25% sag and still have good small bump compliance but feel way more stable at high speed. The bike feels super dialed in and for me the fit and feel is one of the best if not THE best fit on a bike I have ever rode.

    Now I'm 6'2" 225 with gear and a 34in inseam on an XL with the seat level and maxed out to the rear with the bars not cut at stock length, I really feel it's a perfect fit and the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden and with the 2017 trek fuel ex a close second (my brothers bike) I still feel that I made the right choice. One of the reasons is options; you can run 27.5 fat, 27.5+, 29+, 26fat and even if you wanted to lace some custom 29 you can do that also.

    Speaking of 27.5 fat I do notice a difference really only in acceleration and in the air other than that it's still a 3.8 tire on an 80mm rim but the sidewall has slightly less rubber. Everything on the bike has worked flawlesley and the only thing I really wished the bike had was a beefier fork. There really is not an option but hopefully we see something like a fox 34 in fat or maybe 35mm based of the pike. You can really haul so much on this bike that you are constantly pushing the limits of the bluto.

    The function of the RE:aktiv shock is awesome and really is impressive compared to something like the brain from specialized -- that is a whole other conversation -- but unlike the brain where there is that delay you can't tell when the damper is locked then open on the RE:aktiv stuff.

    Soon I will have a more detailed review and a video review but in the mean time I'll keep shredding on it and keep everyone posted! so far so good. Like I said I couldn't be happier with the bike. Here is a quick video shredding on it while filming the review while playing hookie on a 90deg day. I hope you enjoy and can't wait to hear what others think of this beast!


  142. #142
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    28,423
    FWIW, there IS an alternative to the Bluto for more rowdy/aggressive riding. The Wren fits that bill perfectly. 36mm stanchions. Between two models of the fork, you can have travel anywhere from 80-150mm in roughly 10mm increments.

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,458
    The 27.5 Hodag fits fine in the Fox 34.....you would need to go with a 110 hub though.
    Great to hear you like the bike.

  144. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    8
    Thanks Harold for showing me the Wren option, those look like awesome forks and if anything happens to my bluto those will be a worthy upgrade!

    And Mr Mayor that might be interesting to see what a 27.5X3.8 looks like in a fox 34, I don't have an extra boost hub but might see how it looks for fun on a 50mm rim when my brother gets a 27.5+ wheel set for his fuel ex!

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    132

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike

    Quote Originally Posted by hise442 View Post

    Poto?? Lookin good


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  146. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    311
    I'm guessing this was filmed in the UP? Jealous. I just bought a 27.5+ Fuel, if it weren't for getting such a great deal, this would be my bike.

    **edit: For clarity, I was referring to the Trek produced video earlier on the page.
    Last edited by Pack66; 09-17-2016 at 09:26 PM. Reason: clarity

  147. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    268
    So far, the reports are good, the K-Lev post was sluggish, 29+ tires fit. Do all the Stem's say Knock Block on them? I think this one also has a misprint on the frame with the Mino link decals. Maybe a Dent in the lower part of the seat tube?

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-14359868_10157371891770401_190129826_o.jpg

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-14424136_10157371891700401_1969391388_o.jpg

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-14423781_10157371891685401_282880614_o.jpg

  148. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    This looks AWESOME ^^^
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  149. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,458
    Quote Originally Posted by 2LO4U2C View Post
    So far, the reports are good, the K-Lev post was sluggish, 29+ tires fit. Do all the Stem's say Knock Block on them? I think this one also has a misprint on the frame with the Mino link decals. Maybe a Dent in the lower part of the seat tube?
    The ding in the seat tube is normal....on the other 2 I've seen and you can see it on the Trek Website
    Got the hots for a 29+ set up like this...including the fork

  150. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    I'd be interested in doing this possibly with the new Pike 29+ fork, possibly even Olaf Lefty
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Is it wrong for me to consider doing a 27.5+
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300
    Not wrong. The 27.5 x 3.8 tires that come stock on this thing can be run on 40mm-80mm wide rims, these tires are actually measuring 3.2-3.5 inches wide on the narrower rims.
    Totally doable!!!
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  153. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    Is it wrong for me to consider doing a 27.5+
    It pretty much is already.
    Those tires run narrow. Put them on narrower rims like 65mm and you'd have a sub 3.5" tire.
    If you were to run standard B+ tires....you may have a really low bb

    I run the 26" version Hodags on 65mm rims and they are about 3.5 after a year of riding.

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mikeetheviking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    300

    Subtle, very subtle, sometimes you have to smooth with your approach

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-collage.door.jpg
    Mikee Likes It! :cool:
    @gordosbicycleclub

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    I think your getting a new Farley

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	collage.door.jpg 
Views:	490 
Size:	72.1 KB 
ID:	1095394
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  156. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeetheviking View Post
    I'd be interested in doing this possibly with the new Pike 29+ fork, possibly even Olaf Lefty
    The Pike 29+ fork is only available on bikes for now, not available aftermarket yet.

  157. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24

    Farley EX 9.8

    I just got the new Farley EX 9.8. I was riding the 2015 Farley 8. Initial impressions: The EX has a wide bottom bracket, but I am getting used to that. I noticed the pedal strikes way more. I hit my calves on occasion on the seat stays, they are wide and when seated and pedaling I hit if the bike if it is not perfectly straight up and down. Thats all the negitive stuff for me. The 27.5 wheels are faster and do keep your momentum going better than the 26. I dont notice any negative impact from the 27.5 wheels. It is a very stout frame, so stiff. It feels great. I love how I can get more pump out of the full suspension, and more pre-load before jumps. The Bluto is a standard bluto so not super stiff, but it work well for my terrain. I am still working on getting the rear suspension dialed in, it feels a bit harsh. I upgraded the bars to sixc 35mm 35mm rise and love them. This bike is a ton of fun to ride and thats why I bought it. Racing it at Ice Man next month. I am expecting my time to improve vs the hardtail, this bike is faster!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-farley-ex-9.8.jpg  

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-farley-ex-9.8-2.jpg  

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-image.jpg  


  158. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    32
    Hi all I am new here but have been following a few threads for a while now. My thoughts on this sweet machine is just that. My first few rides on it were unreal and had me thinking that they have perfected the mountain bike. I have since taken it on some bigger rides and while still awesome and quite possibly my favorite bike it wasnt nearly as lively as my regular mtb. Still would highly recommend to anyone.
    Cheers

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    I picked up a Farley ex 8 last week so far super fun bike.

    Haven't had a ton of time on it but can tell it is fun and rolls great.


    Enjoyed it setup stock tried my 29+ wheels while setting up the stock wheels tubeless.


    29+


    Stock

  160. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    So, do you like the 29+ better or the stock 3.8s?

  161. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike

    I wouldn't say I like them better I had the Farley 9.8 before this one so full rigid and used both wheels sets. I like the options of changing based on how I am feeling or where I am riding. I also have a 26x4.8 wheel set for deep snow that I put on to validate they fit.

    I just like having options as this is my only mountain bike so it will be well used.

    T

  162. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    Cool, thanks

  163. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    855
    How does the Farley EX compare to a Top Fuel? The 29+ option intrigues me for XC racing.

  164. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    I rode a top fuel for a few weeks really liked it which is one reason I went this direction. For me it is very comparable other than weight of the Farley being a little heavier. I think this bike will work for XC racing with the 29+ or 27.5x3.8. I need to change the front chainring 34-36 oval and want to get the new e thirteen 9-44 cassette and then XC will be good.

    T

  165. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    109
    so is the bottom bracket drastically wider than your old Farley 8 ?
    i was under the impression that the Farley EX 9.8 uses the NEXT SL cranks and flipped chainring to achieve the same Q factor as a 170 or 177 frame.

    QUOTE=Telebikes;12867994]I just got the new Farley EX 9.8. I was riding the 2015 Farley 8. Initial impressions: The EX has a wide bottom bracket, but I am getting used to that. I noticed the pedal strikes way more. I hit my calves on occasion on the seat stays, they are wide and when seated and pedaling I hit if the bike if it is not perfectly straight up and down. Thats all the negitive stuff for me. The 27.5 wheels are faster and do keep your momentum going better than the 26. I dont notice any negative impact from the 27.5 wheels. It is a very stout frame, so stiff. It feels great. I love how I can get more pump out of the full suspension, and more pre-load before jumps. The Bluto is a standard bluto so not super stiff, but it work well for my terrain. I am still working on getting the rear suspension dialed in, it feels a bit harsh. I upgraded the bars to sixc 35mm 35mm rise and love them. This bike is a ton of fun to ride and thats why I bought it. Racing it at Ice Man next month. I am expecting my time to improve vs the hardtail, this bike is faster![/QUOTE]

  166. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    It is wider. The chain ring is flipped for better chain line but it's wider overall. I think it will be nice to have the chain away from the wheel however as that was an issue for me on 2015 hardtail.

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    I have a question for anyone who has switched over to the 27.5 from 26. Do you use less pressure than you would with the same 3.8 hodags on the 27.5?

  168. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    I had the first Farley with 26 wheels and hodags the pressure is a personal preference. I am heavier than most people I ride with and generally use more pressure. If I recall I use the same general pressure.

    T

  169. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    109
    that could be a deal breaker for me. really want a farley EX 9.8 but I am concerned that the Q factor will be too wide for me.

    QUOTE=Telebikes;12868406]It is wider. The chain ring is flipped for better chain line but it's wider overall. I think it will be nice to have the chain away from the wheel however as that was an issue for me on 2015 hardtail.[/QUOTE]

  170. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by donkeykongchamp View Post
    that could be a deal breaker for me. really want a farley EX 9.8 but I am concerned that the Q factor will be too wide for me.

    QUOTE=Telebikes;12868406]It is wider. The chain ring is flipped for better chain line but it's wider overall. I think it will be nice to have the chain away from the wheel however as that was an issue for me on 2015 hardtail.
    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, it caught me be surprise. The only issue I have found is with pedal strikes and that is very manageable. Pedaling with the width has not been an issue yet, but only
    2 rides so far

  171. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    109
    pedal strikes are manageable for sure. the wide q factor is a little more of a slow change for the body to adapt to. i tried to get my body to adapt to a specialized fatboy carbon last year but just couldn't do it. so i sold it.

    Yeah, it caught me be surprise. The only issue I have found is with pedal strikes and that is very manageable. Pedaling with the width has not been an issue yet, but only
    2 rides so far[/QUOTE]

  172. #172
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,068
    Quote Originally Posted by Telebikes View Post
    I have a question for anyone who has switched over to the 27.5 from 26. Do you use less pressure than you would with the same 3.8 hodags on the 27.5?
    I switched over from a hardtail 26 to a Salsa Bucksaw, running 27.5, with Hodags. I generally ride with higher pressure than on 26 in all instances, but I'm not a big fan of having the sidewalls fold over on me. In the snow, I''ll go as low as I can without denting the rims.

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by donkeykongchamp View Post
    that could be a deal breaker for me. really want a farley EX 9.8 but I am concerned that the Q factor will be too wide for me.
    The Wider bottom bracket shouldn't be a concern as it is actually better for your knee's and you should in Theory be able to put more power to the ground.

    Ex. If you were to go to the gym and try to squat with your feet close together you would be limited by your poor foot location. The wider bottom brackets actually put your feet in a much better position to exert power. So honestly the wider bottom bracket is a good thing for pretty much everyone.

    Just think if your a big guy, wide hips and big legs your legs are on an inward angle which then puts stress on the outer part of your new joint.
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  174. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    The Wider bottom bracket shouldn't be a concern as it is actually better for your knee's and you should in Theory be able to put more power to the ground.

    Ex. If you were to go to the gym and try to squat with your feet close together you would be limited by your poor foot location. The wider bottom brackets actually put your feet in a much better position to exert power. So honestly the wider bottom bracket is a good thing for pretty much everyone.

    Just think if your a big guy, wide hips and big legs your legs are on an inward angle which then puts stress on the outer part of your new joint.
    It may be better for my knee's, but after pedaling normal Q factor bikes for 10+ years it definitely puts strain on my ankles, knees, and hips. I should note that I am a big guy at 6'4" with a 36" waist. That being said, I want my legs to adjust so badly because this bike feels like a dirt bike without a motor. It is so much fun to ride. 27.5 wheels are so much faster, it's amazing!

  175. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Telebikes View Post
    It may be better for my knee's, but after pedaling normal Q factor bikes for 10+ years it definitely puts strain on my ankles, knees, and hips. I should note that I am a big guy at 6'4" with a 36" waist. That being said, I want my legs to adjust so badly because this bike feels like a dirt bike without a motor. It is so much fun to ride. 27.5 wheels are so much faster, it's amazing!
    Curious if your riding clipped in ??

    If you switch to flat pedals and a pair of 510 shoe's I am betting a silver dollar your discomfort will go away.
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  176. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Way2ManyBikes View Post
    Curious if your riding clipped in ??

    If you switch to flat pedals and a pair of 510 shoe's I am betting a silver dollar your discomfort will go away.
    I ride clipped always. I have a size 16 foot so there are no good flat shoe options for me. I have a hard time keeping my big feet on flat pedals unforunately.

  177. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Way2ManyBikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Telebikes View Post
    I ride clipped always. I have a size 16 foot so there are no good flat shoe options for me. I have a hard time keeping my big feet on flat pedals unforunately.
    Wow, I didn't know they made a clippless shoe that big.
    MJ
    14 Farley,Bluto,i9-27.5FatBNimbles
    16 Farley5,CarbonFork,27.5x4.5Barbegazi
    16 Farley9.6,Bluto,Onyx-26JumboJims

  178. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lphillips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    37

    My new Farley EX 8 in 29+ mode

    Here's my new Farley EX 8. I also swapped the Bluto for the Fox 34 I had on my Stache+ and am running 29+ wheels. I also have 9Point8 dropper and Shimano m8000XT drivetrain and discs. Really, REALLY, love the ride on this bike! It's an XL sized frame and weighs ~31 pounds as shown.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-farleyex1.jpg  


  179. #179
    zeb
    zeb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    368
    Tested for 2 days.2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-p4pb14046332.jpg

  180. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    13
    Hey all! Brand new here. Been reading for the last few weeks about Fat Bikes and got me a Farley EX 8 last Fri. Let go of my YETI last march after Moab and been without since. Look forward to a good couple weeks. Headed to Bella Vista AR this morning from Central Ks. Doing Slaughter Pen and Blowing Spring for a couple days then down to the Womble at Lake Ouachita. Got 2 KTMs, ( 640Adv and 450EXC) the Kayak and the Trek all loaded up in the trailer. Should be fun!!

    Hayden.

  181. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3

    So 26 x 4.8 actually fits?

    Quote Originally Posted by tadraper View Post
    I wouldn't say I like them better I had the Farley 9.8 before this one so full rigid and used both wheels sets. I like the options of changing based on how I am feeling or where I am riding. I also have a 26x4.8 wheel set for deep snow that I put on to validate they fit.

    I just like having options as this is my only mountain bike so it will be well used.

    T
    Tad, just wanted to make sure- you've actually ridden the bike with 26 x 4.8 and it works? What width were the rims? Cuz others have been saying the 4.8 won't fit due to the suspension arch. Thinking of getting one if I can run 26 x 4.7 in the winter.

  182. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309
    i have minions 26x4.8 on 80's no issues with fit or ride. i will get some photos this weekend if i have time to show how they compare to the stock 27.5x3.8 Hodag's

  183. #183
    cmg
    cmg is online now
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,468
    Quote Originally Posted by allezdude View Post
    Tad, just wanted to make sure- you've actually ridden the bike with 26 x 4.8 and it works? What width were the rims? Cuz others have been saying the 4.8 won't fit due to the suspension arch. Thinking of getting one if I can run 26 x 4.7 in the winter.
    Can you please do a width measurement as well?
    always mad and usually drunk......

  184. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tadraper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    309

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike

    Wheels tested no issues with any rubbing.





  185. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    268
    This really could be one bike for all seasons. Fits D5's on Mulefut 80's


    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-15397669_10154559072225751_1825737270_o.jpg

  186. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    268
    Rear Shock doesn't like the cold, -25c

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-20161207_191445.jpg

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-20161207_193125.jpg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-20161207_193125.jpg  


  187. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    827
    holy cow. Thats brutal

  188. #188
    A-Y
    A-Y is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A-Y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    42
    Anyone else having issues with the Bontrager Drop Line seat post in the cold (sub zero celsius temps.)? Dropper won't hold its position and drops all the way within a few minutes of pedalling, seems worse the colder it is. Its been in the LBS once already and I'm going to have to bring it back again. Otherwise this is a great bike. The suspension really smooths outs the ruts and bumps caused by frozen foot prints.
    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike-img_4013.jpg

  189. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ccornacc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    311
    Does anyone know how much the EX 9.8 frame weighs? I have not been able to track a frame weight down yet.

  190. #190
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,421
    Quote Originally Posted by 2LO4U2C View Post
    Rear Shock doesn't like the cold, -25c

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20161207_191445.jpg 
Views:	393 
Size:	104.5 KB 
ID:	1109237

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20161207_193125.jpg 
Views:	401 
Size:	99.8 KB 
ID:	1109239
    Warranty?

  191. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by donkeykongchamp View Post
    that could be a deal breaker for me. really want a farley EX 9.8 but I am concerned that the Q factor will be too wide for me.

    QUOTE=Telebikes;12868406]It is wider. The chain ring is flipped for better chain line but it's wider overall. I think it will be nice to have the chain away from the wheel however as that was an issue for me on 2015 hardtail.
    Flipping the chainring changes the chainline, NOT the Q. The Q factor is the width from outside of crank arm at pedal to outside of crank arm at pedal.

    A 120mm crank spindle will have 20mm wider Q factor on average than a 100mm bb.

    Some cranks have a narrower Q, like the Next SL.

    If you want a 100mm bb it may be possible, you just need to look at crank clearance.

  192. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by 2LO4U2C View Post
    Rear Shock doesn't like the cold, -25c

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20161207_191445.jpg 
Views:	393 
Size:	104.5 KB 
ID:	1109237

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20161207_193125.jpg 
Views:	401 
Size:	99.8 KB 
ID:	1109239
    That shouldn't be a suprising, the Bluto would have the same problem. -25 is very cold for air shocks with rubber seals.

    I just had this vision of you riding back to the car, fork and shock fully compressed

  193. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That shouldn't be a suprising, the Bluto would have the same problem. -25 is very cold for air shocks with rubber seals.

    I just had this vision of you riding back to the car, fork and shock fully compressed
    Why? Fox float snowmobile shox work fine.
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  194. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,734

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike

    Quote Originally Posted by A-Y View Post
    Anyone else having issues with the Bontrager Drop Line seat post in the cold (sub zero celsius temps.)? Dropper won't hold its position and drops all the way within a few minutes of pedalling, seems worse the colder it is. Its been in the LBS once already and I'm going to have to bring it back again. Otherwise this is a great bike. The suspension really smooths outs the ruts and bumps caused by frozen foot prints.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4013.jpg 
Views:	1810 
Size:	112.5 KB 
ID:	1111221
    Only cold certified dropper is the 9point8 fall line.
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  195. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    277
    I would guess it's around 6.5-7.5 lbs including the rear shock.

  196. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    889
    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    Only cold certified dropper is the 9point8 fall line.
    I have ridden my Drop Line around zero with no issues. It is slow but works.

  197. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by solarplex View Post
    Only cold certified dropper is the 9point8 fall line.
    His dropper was the 9point8 as well, it has also gone in for warranty.

  198. #198
    A-Y
    A-Y is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A-Y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by josh8 View Post
    I have ridden my Drop Line around zero with no issues. It is slow but works.
    Bontrager sent a replacement Drop Line and so far it appears to work well. Tested on two rides: -5 and -10C respectively with no slowness when triggered. I also noticed the replacement had the trigger under the bar vs. over the bar that came stock with the bike.

  199. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Y View Post
    Bontrager sent a replacement Drop Line and so far it appears to work well. Tested on two rides: -5 and -10C respectively with no slowness when triggered. I also noticed the replacement had the trigger under the bar vs. over the bar that came stock with the bike.

    We had a couple of the Bontreger droppers in the group, both were fine at -30c. Thats where I'm going next.

  200. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,734

    2017 Trek Farley EX Full Suspension Fat Bike

    Well i think im going to pull a trigger on a 8 next season.

    Never found a drawback for my 3.8" hodags on my farley 6 for my conditions. But im going to keep it as ive put some $$ into it and it can be my really cold weather bike, also had a gnarwhal on it, might put another and it can be an icy condition bike then too.

    Ill probably ditch the dropper for weight savings. How much is saved going tubeless? Heard 3lbs but i doubt that. If its 33 lbs thats fine, just make the legs stronger for summer xc season.

    I seen the dish on the ring was wrong on the ex my lbs has. Its chainlines not centered, is that for tire rub or is it set up wrong?
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-17-2015, 07:26 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-2014, 11:31 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-19-2014, 01:17 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-27-2013, 05:15 PM
  5. SPAM: Trek Liquid 30 full suspension bike
    By appleSSeed in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-03-2013, 04:31 PM

Members who have read this thread: 51

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.