26x 132 mm rim!- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 51 of 51

Thread: 26x 132 mm rim!

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22

    We the people ... 26x 132 mm rim!

    The monster it's here. I ordered front one since my fatmobile doesnt fit 132 on rear(yet). I'm pretty sure I'll need to customise my fork too since the tire is a Vee Snowshoe 2XL. I'll post photos when it's done.
    In the meantime, I'll share this for anyone interested.

    Classic-Cycle | Alu rim 26 inch 132 mm black matte | online kaufen


    This is how a 132 mm rim looks like:

    Foto in attachment belongs to Röder-Bikes

    Cheers!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26x 132 mm rim!-12068458_1745896845630561_5892827184545744443_o.jpg  


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ADKMTNBIKER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    728
    ummmmmm. wow. I guess the 3XL wasn't a joke

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    187
    No way, 1490gram just for the rim! I'd love to go fat, but damn that's some heavy s***.
    A 100mm carbon rim is half the weight, and most 100mm rims stay under 1 kilo..

    Regardless of weight that rim would be very nice with the vee 2xl though.. (or if 3xl hit the market)
    Imagine the flotation..
    I'm curious to see how square the tire profile would be with 2xl tires, please post some pics once you get it.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: baltobrewer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    242
    Slightly insane. Can't think of a single practical application where I'd need a rim that wide, and can't think of a single situation besides a flat beach where I'd have anywhere near the motor to spin those massive wheels up. To each his own, though.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,514
    i ride a 1400 gram 100mm rim on my cruiser with black floyds and it stink. It loses momentum the second you stop peddling.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FatBike&SlenderWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    220
    Went on their site looking for a wide 29+ rim (something wider than a Rabbit Hole). Found a 622x67mm rim but all of their rims are 36 hole. Good luck trying to find a 197x12mm Thru-Axle hub for that!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    The 8" tyre is on its way....

    (I hope)
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  8. #8
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    There's a lot of material waiting to be drilled out of those rims. I imagine you could get them down under 1000 grams if you really wanted.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FatBike&SlenderWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by sean salach View Post
    There's a lot of material waiting to be drilled out of those rims. I imagine you could get them down under 1000 grams if you really wanted.
    There you go, let's put them on a milling machine and drill them out to a 32 hole so we can lace them to a 197 thru axle hub.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    Quote Originally Posted by FatBike&SlenderWoman View Post
    There you go, let's put them on a milling machine and drill them out to a 32 hole so we can lace them to a 197 thru axle hub.
    I did just that with a 36 hole fat rim when I wanted to build with an Alfine 32 hole. There's plenty metal to play around with, it's no big deal.

    I generally prefer 36 hole rims anyway.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  11. #11
    N8R
    N8R is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    629
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit View Post
    i ride a 1400 gram 100mm rim on my cruiser with black floyds and it stink. It loses momentum the second you stop peddling.
    Uhh, that goes against the laws of physics. The more mass a wheel has, the more momentum it maintains and it will roll farther, and be harder to slow down. Heavy things spinning want to keep spinning. The downside is slower acceleration and deceleration. If your heavy wheels lose momentum faster than lighter wheels, I suspect you have other issues, like tire psi, dragging brakes, or dragging wheel bearings....

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Rims just came from Germany. I'll put them on hubs monday.
    Very dissapointed with SUrly, just bought Surly ICT fork and it's impossible to put PM adapter on that fork because it touches the disk. I'll roll without brakes until i'm gonna buy a ney ISO front brake.

    pic - rims
    2nd pic - 2XL on 84 mm rim


    p.s. I don't really care about weight, I'm a big boy, 141 Kg. I'm more interested in geting my bike feel like i'm doing gym )

    For fast runs there's my other bike, Blackie
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26x 132 mm rim!-15042016706.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-27032016700.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-12096010_1144037698952544_6511567434811032656_n.jpg  


  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    ...Very dissapointed with SUrly, just bought Surly ICT fork and it's impossible to put PM adapter on that fork because it touches the disk. I'll roll without brakes until i'm gonna buy a ney ISO front brake....
    Are you sure you have the correct hub for the fork? There are hubs spaced for front mount and some spaced for rear mount, so check which type of hub your fork requires.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,252
    135 ICT requires rear spaced hub.
    Latitude 61

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Ah, so it's not Surly, it's my bad for not reading. I appologize to them. Gonna buy new front hub rear spaced lol. Thank you very much.

  16. #16
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    798
    Gabriel:
    Can you mount the 2XL on the 132mm rim and measure the maximum casing width at 20psi?
    I would estimate right around 5.5'' max casing width, but might very well be wider too.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Sure, but i'll do it tommorow, I have no pump at home. I think I'll have to "tweak" the Surly fork with the hammer for 5.5 inch )

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FatBike&SlenderWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    Rims just came from Germany. I'll put them on hubs monday.
    So where do you find a 197mm hub to mate with those 36h German rims?
    All of the hubs that Classic-Cycle has are outdated crap.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by FatBike&SlenderWoman View Post
    So where do you find a 197mm hub to mate with those 36h German rims?
    All of the hubs that Classic-Cycle has are outdated crap.
    Re drill the rim to 32 holes.
    Latitude 61

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Greenfin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    332
    ooooh with is going to be good.
    Still cleaning my Fatback.
    It's a life style.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FatBike&SlenderWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Re drill the rim to 32 holes.
    I would love to drill my own and also remove 200g of excess metal but he won't sell a 67-622mm rim without holes unless I buy 50 of them.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,252
    Just re drill a 36 hole pair. If the base metal is thick enough you can drill on a little bit different offset and there will be no danger of hole conflict. If not plot out where the 32 holes would fall compared to the existing 36. I suspect they could be made to miss each other. You could fill the old holes with epoxy paste or something if you wish. I went from 32 to 28 on a pair of Fat Shebas. That was back in the day when the only tire was the Endo. They are still going strong.
    Latitude 61

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Just re drill a 36 hole pair. If the base metal is thick enough you can drill on a little bit different offset and there will be no danger of hole conflict. If not plot out where the 32 holes would fall compared to the existing 36. I suspect they could be made to miss each other. You could fill the old holes with epoxy paste or something if you wish. I went from 32 to 28 on a pair of Fat Shebas. That was back in the day when the only tire was the Endo. They are still going strong.
    I did that to fit a 32 hole Alfine hub to a 36 hole rim.

    You don't have to drill a complete set of new holes because you can keep the quarter holes, N E W & S, and just drill new intermediate holes. I just stuck little squares of duct tape over the spare holes - the bike was for mud, so appearance isn't an issue because it is rarely clean.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Gabriel:
    Can you mount the 2XL on the 132mm rim and measure the maximum casing width at 20psi?
    I would estimate right around 5.5'' max casing width, but might very well be wider too.


    Espen, 0.8 bar was max pressure i could inflate the tyre with 1 mm clearance on each side of inner fork legs. max case width for tyre was 142 mm. The surly fork was hammered to fit the tyre )

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Done, but i cant fit the front brake with this rim(because of the spokes), so I removed the front brake. the space between spokes and disk is now 15 mm. So. I must find a front brake that will fit there.
    Surly fork was hammered on the inside to gain some space.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26x 132 mm rim!-18042016709.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-18042016713.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-18042016714.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-18042016715.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-18042016710.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-18042016711.jpg  

    26x 132 mm rim!-18042016716.jpg  


  26. #26
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Try running a larger rotor. Might push it out far enough to gain the spoke clearance for the caliper. Probably a good idea with the increased rim weight anyway.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    doesnt work, spokes angle on rim is 90 grade, because of the spacing on 132 rim.
    I need to find an IS brake and push the disk out with longer screws or some adapter. Basicly, PM adapter fits now because i played with spacers but calliper hits the spokes
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26x 132 mm rim!-18042016717.jpg  


  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    I'm curious how wide Espen's prototype tyre would be on 132 rims. My guess would be 6.0 at 20 psi. but fork would need at least 160 mm clearance.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FatBike&SlenderWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    doesnt work, spokes angle on rim is 90 grade, because of the spacing on 132 rim.
    How wide is the hub? 197/190?

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by FatBike&SlenderWoman View Post
    How wide is the hub? 197/190?
    135 ((:

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    doesnt work, spokes angle on rim is 90 grade, because of the spacing on 132 rim.
    I need to find an IS brake and push the disk out with longer screws or some adapter. Basicly, PM adapter fits now because i played with spacers but calliper hits the spokes
    Could you re drill the rim to get a better spoke angle? I'm starting to sound like a broken record. Oh wait many on here probably don't even know what that even means.
    Latitude 61

  32. #32
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    I'm curious how wide Espen's prototype tyre would be on 132 rims. My guess would be 6.0 at 20 psi. but fork would need at least 160 mm clearance.
    Yep, my guess would also be right around 6.0'' at 20psi, seeing that the production 2XL went from a typical 5.2'' on a 100mm to close to 5.6'' on the 132 (and that at less than 12psi).
    Would be interesting too see how much total volume that you gained. An easy way to measure that is to let all the air out (with the tire off the ground) and then count how many complete strokes it takes with a given pump in order to reach for example 20psi. Then do the same on the narrower rims. Note: should be done tubeless as a tube will throw the measurements off.
    Someday, I need to graph out tire volume vs rim width, as there is a sweet spot before total volume drops again due to the tire being pulled outwards and downwards from a rim that is wider than optimal (volume wise).

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Yes, but i seriously doubt I can do that with my current inner tube, which is a Chaoyang 4.0-4.9 inner tube. Over 1-1.2 bar, I'm pretty sure that inner tube will explode. Then there's the tubeless option, which presents the risk of the tyre reaching from 142 to 150 mm wide, so my cuurent fork wont fit that.

    I guess my next option would be a custom frame+fork titanium. 750 E frame + 250 E fork + 100 E transport from RUssia to Romania.

    And of course, I need bigger inner tubes. 5.5-6.0 would be nice.


    Check this guys out! Galery of RAPID Company titanium products | RAPID*Company official website
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26x 132 mm rim!-10291043_1177815105574803_4038133321216495188_n.jpg  


  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Someday, I need to graph out tire volume vs rim width, as there is a sweet spot before total volume drops again due to the tire being pulled outwards and downwards from a rim that is wider than optimal (volume wise).
    For what it's worth, I did a little study once to find the maximum diameter versus rim width of a given tire. If I'm not mistaken, the max. diameter is produced by the most circular cross-section that can be achieve using the rim as a chord of that circle. Theoretically, the maximum volume for a given tire carcass arc and rim width should be achieved at the same time, since a circle has the highest area/perimeter ratio of all shapes.

    Given all of this, I came up with the rim width needing to be approximately 31% of the flat bead-to-bead width of any given tire.

    Hope that helps in some way!

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Could you re drill the rim to get a better spoke angle? I'm starting to sound like a broken record. Oh wait many on here probably don't even know what that even means.

    Yes, I could do that, now theres 80 mm spacing between spoke holes.
    Or, another option, to make spokes in X, left row on right side and right spokes on left side.

  36. #36
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by JR Z View Post
    For what it's worth, I did a little study once to find the maximum diameter versus rim width of a given tire. If I'm not mistaken, the max. diameter is produced by the most circular cross-section that can be achieve using the rim as a chord of that circle. Theoretically, the maximum volume for a given tire carcass arc and rim width should be achieved at the same time, since a circle has the highest area/perimeter ratio of all shapes.

    Given all of this, I came up with the rim width needing to be approximately 31% of the flat bead-to-bead width of any given tire.

    Hope that helps in some way!
    Yeah, my old engineering professors would kill me for not having modeled total volume vs. bead and rim width yet, but just too busy right now..

    Sure about the 31% number?
    That would mean the following results:
    Typical 4.0 labeled tire (220mm B-B): 68mm rim
    Typical 4.8 JJ/XL/B&L: (260mm B-B): 81mm rim
    2XL (production) (298mm B-B): 92mm rim
    2XL (proto) (314mm B-B): 98mm rim

    Does not sound right.
    Empirical example:
    The Juggernaut Pro 4.0 is 231mm bead to bead.
    It measures a max casing width of 4.2'' on a 80mm rim and 4.6'' on a 100mm.
    The 31% rule would indicate max tire volume with a 72mm rim.
    However, I have measured approx 16% more volume when the tire is mounted on the 100mm vs the 80.
    I first inflate the tire, then let all air out with the tire off the ground (otherwise it would go into vacuum). I then count the number of complete pump strokes (with my Lezyne monster floor pump) required to reach 20 psi.
    Some numbers:
    Juggernaut Pro on 80mm, 4.2'' casing width: 49 strokes
    Juggernaut Pro on 100mm, 4.6'' casing width: 57 strokes
    Jumbo Jim 4.8 on 100mm, 4.8'' casing width: 67 strokes
    Snowshoe 2XL (prototype) on 100mm, 5.6'' casing width: 103 strokes

    All tubeless of course, as an inner tube would throw the numbers off.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    140
    Looking back at how I figured my 31%, you're right. I did not come up with a maximum volume, I came up with the most efficient volume for a given perimeter. In other words, I (unintentionally) came up with the ratio for the maximum volume for the least amount of weight (given that all with rims and tires weigh the same proportional to their size)... That's kinda cool, I guess...

    Really, I was looking for max. diameter, originally. Hadn't given volume too much thought, but thanks for starting the dialog! I'm gonna think on what other effects of the 31% cause. Right off the bat, I gotta believe (in a tubeless scenario) internal pressure has the most even leverage on all parts of the tire?

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    This is an interactive formula for a segment:

    (it's interactive and can work from chord length and arc length). Need to test it to see if it comes close in real life.

    The Complete Circular Arc Calculator



    Edit:

    Using Surly's chart a BFL on 82mm rim has a casing width of 110mm (Measured at max psi)

    My measurement of the bead to bead of a BFL is 225mm (using internal because tread gets in the way externally), and that give a radius of 51mm or diameter of 102mm. Add on a bit for casing thickness and it's not far off.

    (NB my measurement of bead to bead could be off because it was rough and ready - it would be more accurate with a dressmakers tape which would conform to the tyre and also give a slightly higher reading)

    Another edit:

    Just fitted BFLs to my Pugsley for the Forth Fat this weekend. On a 80mm nominal rim, ie 78mm internal, the BFLs measure up at 104mm at 10psi. The calculation gives a radius of 50mm, ie diameter (casing width) of 100mm, so allowing for the thickness of the tyre wall, it appears spot on.

    I'll be using this from now on for estimating tyre size on a rim.


    NB I have edited out an earlier formula in this post because this one works better.
    Last edited by Velobike; 04-21-2016 at 09:59 AM.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Yeah, my old engineering professors would kill me for not having modeled total volume vs. bead and rim width yet, but just too busy right now..
    The inflation thing is a decent indicator, but how do you account for different rim shapes?

    Rims with a huge center canal will take a lot more pumps to fill than flat rims.
    And what about sidewall hight on the rims and hookless vs hooks. A rim with a short sidewall, big centre canal and no hooks will allow the tire to really balloon out and it will take lots of pups to fill it.

    I bet that nextie dragon 90mm will take more pups to fill say jj 4.8 than 103mm weinmann rims with jj 4.8 (same tires)
    If so, perhaps the biggest rims is not the best to get the highest volume..?

    Even if we take the centre canal out of the equation, imagine high walled rims with large hooks that really hold the tire tight and squared compared to any low sidewalled hookless rim that allow the bead/sidewall to really bulge outwards..

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy81 View Post
    ...Even if we take the centre canal out of the equation, imagine high walled rims with large hooks that really hold the tire tight and squared compared to any low sidewalled hookless rim that allow the bead/sidewall to really bulge outwards..
    Good point. Wish you'd posted this before my post above. I could have measured that and used it as my base.

    However I suspect that unless you had a way to accurately measure bead to bead, (eg on a shaped form) it's all within a certain tolerance anyway.

    Edit:

    OK tried it. Using the same rim I deducted the height of the rim wall from the bead to bead measurement.

    On an ordinary Larry with a 217mm b-to-b it gives a 46mm radius, ie 92mm diameter, whereas the measurement comes out to 94mm at 10psi. Close enough for me (allowing for sidewall thickness).

    In this case I allowed for the width of the bead hook so the rim effectively became a 76mm width (in the previous post I measured the rim width below the bead hook).
    Last edited by Velobike; 04-21-2016 at 09:54 AM.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    Yes, I could do that, now theres 80 mm spacing between spoke holes.
    Or, another option, to make spokes in X, left row on right side and right spokes on left side.
    I wouldn't go there. The spokes will be very bent at the rim and hub. Truing is counter intuitive as well. Note there are some that like cross lacing but I think it just adds complication and potential failure points.
    Latitude 61

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    I wouldn't go there. The spokes will be very bent at the rim and hub. Truing is counter intuitive as well. Note there are some that like cross lacing but I think it just adds complication and potential failure points.

    Already did it! No more adapter for disc, same brake, now it fits with plenty of space left. Gonna post pics tommorow.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,191
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    ...Note there are some that like cross lacing but I think it just adds complication and potential failure points.
    That would be me then.

    Wheels on my Pugsley are about 5 years old now, and have done several 24 hour solos. No failure points yet.

    However it is a faff compared to a normal spoke pattern and those are well proven. I do it because I can and I like how stiff the wheel feels. I wouldn't recommend cross-spoking unless you do it yourself because ordinary spoking is well proven.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Any bike, anywhere, anytime.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Greenfin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    332
    [QUOTE=Someday, I need to graph out tire volume vs rim width, as there is a sweet spot before total volume drops again due to the tire being pulled outwards and downwards from a rim that is wider than optimal (volume wise).[/QUOTE]

    I like the way you think.
    Still cleaning my Fatback.
    It's a life style.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    problem solved.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26x 132 mm rim!-22042016734.jpg  


  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22

    Hope

    the fatmobile looks like this now:

    26x 132 mm rim!-img_20190111_095312.jpg26x 132 mm rim!-img_20190111_093540.jpg26x 132 mm rim!-aprscan3147.jpg26x 132 mm rim!-aprscan0273.jpg

  47. #47
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,898
    Quote Originally Posted by FatBike&SlenderWoman View Post
    Went on their site looking for a wide 29+ rim (something wider than a Rabbit Hole). Found a 622x67mm rim but all of their rims are 36 hole. Good luck trying to find a 197x12mm Thru-Axle hub for that!

    Onyx.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: El_Topo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    84
    Just out of sheer curiosity, did the 142mm tire fit into the ICT without any modifications?

    As mentioned in the other thread about the rim, for anyone still interested in these 132mm rims, Classic Shop now sells them in 32 holes as well.
    Looking for fairly priced 17.5" Farley EX 8/9.8 in Germany or neighbouring countries. Frame only or whole bike, TIA!

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Topo View Post
    Just out of sheer curiosity, did the 142mm tire fit into the ICT without any modifications?

    As mentioned in the other thread about the rim, for anyone still interested in these 132mm rims, Classic Shop now sells them in 32 holes as well.

    Hi. The fork suffered minor modifications, as in russian hammer style. Gained about 10 milimeters that way. )

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel F. Popescu View Post
    The monster it's here.
    Damn it man, this is the worst news I've seen all week.

    I JUST came to terms with going 90mm (blizzerks) + 2XL's on an ICT and BFD. UPS has both sets on their way.

    Now, whenever I look down at my wheels I will continue to feel the puny inadequacy.

    Seriously, though, I'm in a similar situation as you; relatively fit but well on the bigger/taller side; I enjoy the workout and have a smaller (mtb) i can ride if I changed my mind. And the fatter the better, year round, for fun as far as I'm concerned

    I will have to dig through these links to see if I should sell the blizzerks.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by FatBike&SlenderWoman View Post
    Went on their site looking for a wide 29+ rim (something wider than a Rabbit Hole). Found a 622x67mm rim but all of their rims are 36 hole. Good luck trying to find a 197x12mm Thru-Axle hub for that!
    https://classic-cycle.com/all/151/al...es-black-matte

    looks like at least some are 32h.

    Unfortunately, appears to be definitely, 100%, non tubeless compatible, even with split tubes or fattyStripper

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.