FAtback/ Speedway Tires?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 183 of 183
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Beard of Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    82

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    A little bird just told me about some new tires coming out this year under the Fatback name, with a size slated between 4.0 and 4.8...
    I predict a faster rolling, high flotation option, with less aggressive tread than Bud/Lou.

    Will be nice to have another option, adding to the Specialized and Bontrager releases this year as well.
    __________________________________________________ __
    Bike is the New Black

  2. #2
    JYB
    JYB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    213
    Wicked cool!!!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,360
    I should neg rep you for being a tease, but I am a good mood from a 30 mile road ride, so I will let this slide.

  4. #4
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Freakin awesome!!
    Last edited by bdundee; 08-28-2013 at 11:31 AM.

  5. #5
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    Why do tyres excite me more than any other component
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  6. #6
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    Poz rep for freeing the cat.... i'll hunt you down if they don't eventuate
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    213

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    which little bird told you this ,,,is it a trusted source ,get some more info plz

    Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Why do tyres excite me more than any other component
    Me too. The pile of tires in my basement is impressive. There are at least a dozen different models in a variety of sizes adding up to about 30 pieces. For me it's because the tire can make or break the ride so I have a collection. When I travel I bring a box of tires so I can change out depending on what's needed for the the day.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,142
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Why do tyres excite me more than any other component
    Cuz tires are the thing that makes a fatbike fat!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Between 4.0 and 4.8 is awesome!


    "You're like a Ferrari engine driving a dump truck"

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gizzard75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    93
    I need some speedie tires for my clown shoes!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603
    schwing!

  13. #13
    =========
    Reputation: ~gomez~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,869
    owner/raconteur at fat-bike.com

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yxan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    396
    those look real nice!

  15. #15
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by yxan View Post
    those look real nice!
    +1 Good size as well.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    I'm excited for these. I hope the pricing is reasonable!
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  17. #17
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    I'm excited for these. I hope the pricing is reasonable!
    One would guess maybe they would be, seeing that they are Vee Rubber made.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted View Post
    One would guess maybe they would be, seeing that they are Vee Rubber made.
    That's what I'm hoping, but a wider casing, custom tread, and sole distributor (guessing) might add a slight premium.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  19. #19
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Sweet!! kinda looks like a serious game of tetris going on.

  20. #20
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Oh and I wonder what they measure on 90"s and hundies?

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Beard of Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Oh and I wonder what they measure on 90"s and hundies?
    Wider and flatter
    __________________________________________________ __
    Bike is the New Black

  22. #22
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by Beard of Power View Post
    Wider and flatter
    Brilliant but fat tires are a game of mm looking for a true answer. It makes a big difference in future purchases.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    A little more fatness for sub 190?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Brilliant but fat tires are a game of mm looking for a true answer. It makes a big difference in future purchases.
    Patience is a virtue.


    "You're like a Ferrari engine driving a dump truck"

  25. #25
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by Schott View Post
    Patience is a virtue.


    "You're like a Ferrari engine driving a dump truck"
    Thanks Schott I needed that! (btw enjoy your posts) I've been anxious to hear more about these tires for a couple of months now

  26. #26
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,711
    This tire might be the ticket to running one of the new suspension forks with clown shoe rims. The Carver rep said in one of the threads that they fit BFL but it was tight... so this slightly narrower but still big Fatback tire gets
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    Is it possible that this tire will still be over 4" on a Marge Lite?

    Either way put me down for a pair.

    Any word on carbon rims?

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    28
    nice!
    I hope they fit on a 2012 fatback with 90mm rims

  30. #30
    nothing to see here
    Reputation: Stevob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,271
    thread fails without pics

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img_4842-600x800.jpg
    I see hills.

    I want to climb them.

  31. #31
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Brilliant but fat tires are a game of mm looking for a true answer. It makes a big difference in future purchases.
    If you look here:

    How Fat can we go? | Blog | Surly Bikes,

    You'll see that most tire casing widths grow 5-7 mm as you step up from 80 mm to 100 mm rims (Lou is an exception at 10 mm casing growth). Call the average 6 mm. That means every 10 mm increase in rim width yields roughly 3 mm in casing growth. So if the tire is really 4.25 inches on a 70 mm rim, then its width in mm on that rim is 108 mm (=4.25 *25.4). So you'd expect it to be 111 mm on a 80 mm rim and 117 on a 100 mm rim. That puts it somewhere between a Big Fat Larry and Bud/Lou. If so, it's my next tire purchase.
    --Peace

  32. #32
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    If you look here:

    How Fat can we go? | Blog | Surly Bikes,

    You'll see that most tire casing widths grow 5-7 mm as you step up from 80 mm to 100 mm rims (Lou is an exception at 10 mm casing growth). Call the average 6 mm. That means every 10 mm increase in rim width yields roughly 3 mm in casing growth. So if the tire is really 4.25 inches on a 70 mm rim, then its width in mm on that rim is 108 mm (=4.25 *25.4). So you'd expect it to be 111 mm on a 80 mm rim and 117 on a 100 mm rim. That puts it somewhere between a Big Fat Larry and Bud/Lou. If so, it's my next tire purchase.
    That's cool thanks but still pushing for real life actual measurement atleast for a starting point. It kinda makes a difference if I want to stick with my 90's or go up to hundies.

    P.S. I do believe as far as what my resource was saying it should be pretty close to a .4.25 but I do know the kingpin is watching this thread so I'm just trying to pry some more info out of him. Oh and tubeless width as well

  33. #33
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,711
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    That puts it somewhere between a Big Fat Larry and Bud/Lou.
    Just wondering how you think that? The "spec" measurements are 4.2" / 4.7" / 4.8"

    I don't see how this 4.2" could be between BFL and Bud/Lou.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  34. #34
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    Just wondering how you think that? The "spec" measurements are 4.2" / 4.7" / 4.8"

    I don't see how this 4.2" could be between BFL and Bud/Lou.
    Wow, did you even bother to read my post or look at the link? Take a look at the link and compare the tire widths at various rim sizes.
    --Peace

  35. #35
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by duggus View Post
    Just wondering how you think that? The "spec" measurements are 4.2" / 4.7" / 4.8"

    I don't see how this 4.2" could be between BFL and Bud/Lou.
    This is why I'm trying to get it right from the horses mounth to bypass the armchair tire speculations. So far all I've gotten is one smart a$$ answer and one good edjucated guess (the later was appreciated btw)

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    Haven't the 70mm/90mm UMA rims given similar tire widths to Surly 82/100 rims? I thought I read that somewhere.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  37. #37
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    Haven't the 70mm/90mm UMA rims given similar tire widths to Surly 82/100 rims? I thought I read that somewhere.
    My experience yes and no at least for the 90mm/100mm. with the Umas set up tubeless they run pretty close to a hundie with a tube but with both set up with tubes there is a 3mm ish difference.
    Last edited by bdundee; 08-27-2013 at 08:46 PM.

  38. #38
    Wizard of the Trail
    Reputation: Geist262's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    912

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    I will be curious to see the reviews of these tires.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    There is no charge for awesomeness......or attractiveness.

    Good rep does not wash out the bad, nor the bad the good.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,360
    The tread blocks look like tetris cubes.

  40. #40
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,137
    Might be looking at my next set of tires!! Hopefully they roll fast on dirt!

  41. #41
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,711

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    Wow, did you even bother to read my post or look at the link? Take a look at the link and compare the tire widths at various rim sizes.
    Yes I read your post and I've seen the Surly specs. But if you take 3 tires at 4.2, 4.7, and 4.8 and put them on the same rim, the 4.2 isn't going to fall between the 4.7 and 4.8 width. Unless the tire manufacturer is bad at measuring or I am missing something?
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    ...different tire manufacturers...different standard measurements...
    AngryAsian: Tyre Makers - Spell Out Exactly What You're Selling - BikeRadar

    I would compare the measurements to VeeRubber's other tires...
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  43. #43
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by damnitman View Post
    ...different tire manufacturers...different standard measurements...
    AngryAsian: Tyre Makers - Spell Out Exactly What You're Selling - BikeRadar

    I would compare the measurements to VeeRubber's other tires...
    Or one of our AK friends could sneak over to their shop with a caliper and put end to this.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    I think the tires are currently out on a beach trip...https://www.facebook.com/SpeedwayCycles
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  45. #45
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by damnitman View Post
    I think the tires are currently out on a beach trip...https://www.facebook.com/SpeedwayCycles
    Damn it men what are you waiting for, somebody go catch up with them fellers
    Last edited by bdundee; 08-26-2013 at 04:02 PM.

  46. #46
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    subscribed
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  47. #47
    Wizard of the Trail
    Reputation: Geist262's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    912

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    So these tires are .2 wider than current vee rubber offerings So does vee rubber have a new casing or is it the knobbies bringing the width out to 4.2? I guess we will find out when released.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    There is no charge for awesomeness......or attractiveness.

    Good rep does not wash out the bad, nor the bad the good.

  48. #48
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    More tease from the lasted ride found on Faceboon:


  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    From the article posted giving the tire info...it states that it's a Kevlar bead that is tubeless compatible.

    It is also my understanding that the Uma rims are designed to hold a tire bead a little tighter than other rims, and thus hold a tubeless setup better; correct?

    Now; is this tire designed with the Uma rims in mind; and if so, what does that mean? Seems like a natural course of action that they are.

    Again; if so, what will it mean for the non Uma rims?

    I suppose that will take a little time to pan out.

  50. #50
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Word is the casing width is about 105mm set up tubeless on a 70mm rim and GO!!


    p.s. Thank you Fatback!!
    Last edited by bdundee; 08-28-2013 at 02:37 AM.

  51. #51
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    If you look here:

    How Fat can we go? | Blog | Surly Bikes,

    You'll see that most tire casing widths grow 5-7 mm as you step up from 80 mm to 100 mm rims (Lou is an exception at 10 mm casing growth). Call the average 6 mm. That means every 10 mm increase in rim width yields roughly 3 mm in casing growth. So if the tire is really 4.25 inches on a 70 mm rim, then its width in mm on that rim is 108 mm (=4.25 *25.4). So you'd expect it to be 111 mm on a 80 mm rim and 117 on a 100 mm rim. That puts it somewhere between a Big Fat Larry and Bud/Lou. If so, it's my next tire purchase.
    This turned out to be pretty close only about 3mm off

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    So this tire could be very close to 4.5" (casing width) on a 100mm rim?

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603
    Quote Originally Posted by mtuck1 View Post
    So this tire could be very close to 4.5" (casing width) on a 100mm rim?
    I'll bet once someone actually measures the tire it will be precisely "as fat as Speedway could make it to fit on as many pre-Bud/Lou 170mm frames as possible", or in another unit of measurement "just what a lot of people have been asking for".

  54. #54
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    It was already measured 105mm on 70mm rims tubeless and yes it will about max out a Fatback 170mm frame on hundies

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: E6roller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    154
    "....just what a lot of people have been asking for..."!

    !

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    Will the Sterling tire fit the Ti fatback 170 on 80 mm Uma?

  57. #57
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Quote Originally Posted by buggymancan View Post
    Will the Sterling tire fit the Ti fatback 170 on 80 mm Uma?
    Didn't know they made a 80mm rim.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Didn't know they made a 80mm rim.
    I guess it will be 77 mm Carbon according to the preliminary specs
    Last edited by buggymancan; 09-22-2013 at 07:28 PM.

  59. #59
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    I would call Fatback on that one or measure your clearance and we can help ya armchair guess it.

  60. #60
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    anyone have any updates, possibly availability dates of this tire?
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  61. #61
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Just got this response from fatback

    "Look for release early next month."

    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  62. #62
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    789
    Good stuff!
    I'm pretty sure that these have the same casing as the Vee Snowshoe that we developed with Vee (see separate thread). I'm sure the weight will be awesome on the Sterlings as well.

  63. #63
    PUG U!!!
    Reputation: joboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    192
    Drop date Nov. 10th
    Per Nick @ FatBack

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    I'm excited for these....but I doubt they will fit....my steel Fatback
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  65. #65
    PUG U!!!
    Reputation: joboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    I'm excited for these....but I doubt they will fit....my steel Fatback
    Yeah me too!!
    I have 4.75" on my Pugsley, both front and rear.
    I've got H.D. On LM right now; so I'm hoping 4.25's will squeeze in, but we'll see.
    I've got maybe 1/2" on either side at around 12-15 psi...... So it a big maybe.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    It should fit a Pugsley fine. It should be a touch smaller than a BFL, which I stuffed in my Pugs on LM's without issue or loss of gearing.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  67. #67
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340
    Supposed to be coming in this week!!

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-sterling.jpg

    I am mounting mine on a Clownshoe on the back of my Mukluk. If it fits with any extra room, then I may set it up tubeless.
    --Peace

  68. #68
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  69. #69
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    789
    Quote Originally Posted by TitanofChaos View Post
    Sweet!
    Rated 4.25'' on a 70mm rim, so wider on a 80mm, wider yet on a 90mm, even more on a 100mm, and widest on a 103mm rim. I have a strong suspicion that Vee used the same casing as on the Vee Snowshoe. Same Silica compound, and tubeless friendly beads.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    I'm in!

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tincup69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    496
    Ohhhhhhh! This could be just the ticket for my Muk.

    Can't wait for some reviews!
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2019 Salsa Journeyman Apex 650B
    2014 Trek Fuel EX8

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: maddslacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    530
    I saw these at Outerbike and they are cool. Also, they just posted on facebook today that they will be available this week and weigh 1300 grams.

    Also, the ones at Outerbike were set up tubeless ...

  73. #73
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    assuming they leave the shop pretty quickly I can get pictures and measurements on my 907 and farley on 47mm northpaws, 65mm marge lites and 70mm fatback rims by middle of next week

    if my friends with muks stop over we'll get them on 80's too yet
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    Ordered. I'm interested to see how they compare to the snowshoe.

  75. #75
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Picked mine up just now. Weight is good.


    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-uploadfromtaptalk1383792565015.jpg


    --Lars
    --Peace

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    919
    Come on it doesn't take 15 minutes to mount a tire !!!!!!

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5
    Nice Weight...Can you get a pic and some specs mounted on your clown shoe?

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    Can you give us the following mounted measurements:

    Rim outer width (100)?
    tire casing width?
    tire width at shoulder knobs?
    tire height?

    recommed 10PSi

    Thanks,

    Ken

  79. #79
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    I picked one up after work and mounted it on the rear of my 2012 Mukluk with a Clownshoe rim. The tire seated very easily with a hand pump. I didn't even need to use dish soap. I don't have a caliper, but it looked comparable to my very well stretched Husker Dus.

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-uploadfromtaptalk1383796576751.jpg

    ...and also looked good on the bike...

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-uploadfromtaptalk1383796700282.jpg

    After mounting it, I took it for a short test ride. The tire felt nice and supple. The rolling resistance was as low or lower than my Husker Du, which was impressive given the tire's lack of a center ridge.

    The next morning, the tire had stretched a bit but still cleared the chain stays with 4-5 mm on each side. I'd say it's now 3-4mm wider than the Husker Du and probably about 110mm at the widest part of the casing. The extra width compared to a Husker Du doesn't sound like a lot, but if you do the math its 6-8% more float--a nice improvement.

    I should probably note that the tread is narrower than on some other fat tires. Greg actually pointed that out to me when I picked it up. He said that the last row of side nobs are mostly for looks and don't do much to help traction. To test that I leaned the bike over to the very edge of the tread. It looked to me like the bike would have to be almost horizontal before the tread contact would be an issue, so I tend to agree with Greg.

    Overall, my first impression was very favorable--the tire is affordable, light, and helps add a bit more float.
    Last edited by Lars_D; 11-08-2013 at 07:04 AM.
    --Peace

  80. #80
    PUG U!!!
    Reputation: joboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    192
    Would I need to worry about the rated min psi rating??
    At times, I'm riding at 4 psi or lower. I've never seen a min psi rating before is why I'm asking.
    Thank you for your time!
    Peace, Joe

  81. #81
    Loser
    Reputation: Jisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,535
    I ride the Vee Mission on my bike at 5PSI without issue (it says minimum of 8 PSI on the sidewall).

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    81
    Someone corrrect me if I'm wrong, but riding any of the tires at extremely low psi on a regular basis will wear out the sidewalls faster than if you didn't. The Sterling should be no different in that regard. It's a great looking tire and a nice all around size. I plan on using them this winter. The weight is similar to a Husker Du and the Escalators, but you should get better floatation.

  83. #83
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Quote Originally Posted by TBerntson View Post
    Someone corrrect me if I'm wrong, but riding any of the tires at extremely low psi on a regular basis will wear out the sidewalls faster than if you didn't. The Sterling should be no different in that regard. It's a great looking tire and a nice all around size. I plan on using them this winter. The weight is similar to a Husker Du and the Escalators, but you should get better floatation.
    This is correct. I usually kill 1 tire a winter season due to sidewalls wearing away. Mostly the rear tire if I don't rotate it around enough. In winter, you'll lose your sidewalls long before you wear away the tread, for me at least.

  84. #84
    PUG U!!!
    Reputation: joboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    192
    Yeah, not like I'm riding at that low psi all the time, but there are times it's needed. I guess seeing the 8 psi on the sidewall kind of made me think twice for a minute. LOL
    My Husker Du's have served me very very well.... I'm interested to see how well the Streling will hook up!

  85. #85
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Can't wait to put a few thousand miles on this tire. Ive Never had any long term time spent on VeeRubbers casing and interested to see how the dual compound silica performs.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: f00g's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    190
    I stopped in Speedway earlier this week and after feeling how light they are compared to my 90 tpi Nate and HuDu, I'm itching to give my Fatback a huge upgrade.
    "but you are a jerk, google it!" anonymous negative feedback 09-18-2012 09:07 AM Keep is positive folks!

  87. #87
    Hammer Nutrition
    Reputation: wyoracerX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by TBerntson View Post
    The weight is similar to a Husker Du and the Escalators...
    Escalators yes, but the new 120TPI non studded Dillenger (no more Escalator) weighs in at just over 1200 grams new, 100 grams less. Pretty significant, but I still ordered a pair of Sterlings based on the tread pattern expecting a slight increase in weight with the larger casing. Sure would be nice though if they came in at the low 1200s.

  88. #88
    Fatback
    Reputation: thirstywork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by wyoracerX View Post
    Escalators yes, but the new 120TPI non studded Dillenger (no more Escalator) weighs in at just over 1200 grams new, 100 grams less. Pretty significant, but I still ordered a pair of Sterlings based on the tread pattern expecting a slight increase in weight with the larger casing. Sure would be nice though if they came in at the low 1200s.
    The average Sterling is coming in at 1250g. All the pre-production samples were at 1300g, so that's where that number came from.
    It's fine to run as low pressure as you need. We test them tubeless down to 2psi.
    Speedway Cycles owner http://fatbackbikes.com

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by wyoracerX View Post
    Escalators yes, but the new 120TPI non studded Dillenger (no more Escalator) weighs in at just over 1200 grams new, 100 grams less. Pretty significant, but I still ordered a pair of Sterlings based on the tread pattern expecting a slight increase in weight with the larger casing. Sure would be nice though if they came in at the low 1200s.
    My Escalators weighed in at 1250 each and I was in my LBS yesterday and they had 180 tpi Escalators in brand new packaging right next to all the other 45 North tires. I wondered about the tales of their demise when I saw that.
    Latitude 61

  90. #90
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340
    I set up my Sterling tire tubeless today. It went well. The details are on the Tubeless Tuesday thread.

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img00444.jpg
    --Peace

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    Lars,

    Thants a nice looking rack... i mean the rear rack looks sturdy. What brand of rack is that?

  92. #92
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Topeak Super Tourist.

    --Lars
    --Peace

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    I got mine today. Pretty fast shipping from Alaska to NY! They weigh 1,240, and 1,290 grams respectively. Width (with tubes) on Marge Lites at 20 psi is 3.74", and 3.76". I would guess they may grow slightly as they acclimate to being fully inflated but I will also air them down before riding so they may wind up smaller. I think these measurements are pretty close to a test I read on fat-bike.com involving the snowshoe which is suppose to be the same casing which they measured at 3.69" on ML's. The HuDu's that I normally run measure 3.56" - 3.62". I would say the glaring difference without having ridden the Sterlings yet is the width of the shoulder knobs which is narrower than the HuDu's. Not sure how I feel about that.
    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-dscn1183.jpg

  94. #94
    wannabe fat biker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    25
    How tall are the lugs?

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    Knob height on the Sterlings is just slightly under 4mm.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    How wide are the marge lite rims? I thought these were to measure 4.25" on a 70 mm rim?

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    Marge Lites are 65mm.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    Do you happen to know the inner width of the Marge Lites?

  99. #99
    Hammer Nutrition
    Reputation: wyoracerX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    292
    Mtuck, care to post some pics of the tires mounted. Close ups, side and head on?

    Sent from my mobile

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    The Marge Lites measure approximately 59mm inside. I took the Sterlings out for a short trail ride today and then swapped back to the Husker Du's and went back out and did the same ride at the same effort again. The garmin data is posted on my Strava page so if you are in the group it is easy to find if anyone wants to see it. Long story short, from my seat of the pants perspective, the HuDu's are the clear winner. I have a couple of pic's of the Sterlings but won't put them back on to take more. The side view is in an earlier post. There is plenty of clearance everywhere. I was hoping they were going to be almost half an inch bigger which would have still cleared easily.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-dscn1184.jpg  

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-dscn1185.jpg  


  101. #101
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    I'd keep in mind that guessing this tire was designed for snow, in Alaska, for the conditions most Fatbacks see. Sure it can be used in any other condition, but wont your mileage may very?

    Wouldn't the Du roll a little faster on hard pack based on knob height being shorter and knob shape/shaping?

  102. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    The knob height on both tires (Sterling and HuDu) is the same.

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trevorrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    91

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Quote Originally Posted by mtuck1 View Post
    The knob height on both tires (Sterling and HuDu) is the same.
    What were the trail conditions? Hard pack dirt? Snow?

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    Generally kind of miserable. Muddy everywhere, firm in some spots with a light dusting of snow. Cold enough so the mud thrown on the frame froze there.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-dscn1188.jpg  


  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    Yes, it was a rail trail. Tracks were removed at least 30 years ago. It's not in very good shape and now 4 wheelers ride on it but it is 1/4 mile from my house.

  106. #106
    Hammer Nutrition
    Reputation: wyoracerX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    292

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Got mine on the mail today. Folded they look to have more volume than Dillengers/Escalators(my favorite btw). Weights differed by ~75 grams. One weighed in 1226 the other 1299. Would have liked them both at 1226. A near tubeless bead on the lighter one which was nice.

    Sent from my mobile

  107. #107
    Hammer Nutrition
    Reputation: wyoracerX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    292

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    I work in the calibration field and my scale is dead on btw.

    Sent from my mobile

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    That is a really good scale! I would be interested in your thoughts after you get a chance to ride the new tires.

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603
    Quote Originally Posted by mtuck1 View Post
    Long story short, from my seat of the pants perspective, the HuDu's are the clear winner.
    Clear winner for speed, traction, float? Do you have a link to your Strava page?

  110. #110
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Mounted up my set last night on marge lites and then on my fatback 70 uma 2's

    the tire volume is noticeably larger than my current knards on both rims, measuring at least 3/8" at the widest part of the tire, knobs for the knard, casing for the sterling

    the tread width is narrower but I've still got all the tire fuzzies on the knard knobs that stick out wider than the tread on this tire anyways, so I won't be missing that

    I don't have a caliper but I can't see exactly how this is a 4.25" tire, unless running 10-15psi and someone is sitting on the bike when measuring

    either way, larger volume, slightly taller knobs than my current knards and silica rubber for winter, I'll be giving them a good long test
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    Smithcreek... I felt that the Sterlings were slower rolling than the HuDu's. Lower max. speed at the bottom of a coasting down hill (road), and lower average speed over the 8 mile (trail) stretch. I felt that it was noticeable how much easier the HuDu's spooled up on acceleration. I felt overall trail grip was a little better on the HuDu's as well on this wet,muddy, but mostly firm trail with a trace of snow. The Sterlings look like they may be better in snow than these conditions but being old and slow already I can't see trading off rolling resistance for that possibility. I'm no expert, just my two cents.

    you may have to register/sign in to view the Strava info.

    Michael T. | Cyclist | Strava

  112. #112
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    789
    Would be great to know the total casing width of this one:
    Flip it inside out, lay it flat on a table and measure the width from the outer edge of one bead to the outer edge of the other.
    This is the way to truly measure the volume of a given tire, and I propose that it should be the measuring standard for all bike tires
    If possible, do the measurement in millimeters.

  113. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603
    Thanks mtuck. I know what you mean about spooling up. I just used my fat bike in a TT last night because my usual bike is out of commission. Nates front and rear on a very twisty-turny with lots of braking and accelerating. Not a strong point for Nates.

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    The casing width of the two sterling tires I received was 235mm, and 238mm respectively. Pretty easy to guess from that why one is heavier than the other.

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    I put one on the rear of my Motobecane in place of the stock mission. I've still got some irregularities to work out (the tire is a little uneven on the rim, but I think that might be the tube, as it was the case with the mission as well), so I'm not ready to give final impressions.

    This morning on the way to work I did notice that the rolling resistance was higher than the missions, but that's not a surprise with the more aggressive tread. This might also have been exacerbated by a long/steep ride I took last night. I did notice that the tire gave noticeably more grip on steep wet grassy areas, so climbing was much better.

    When mounting, it definitely seemed to have significantly more volume than the mission. Mounted on the rim it doesn't seem greatly bigger, but we'll see how much it stretches (sorry, no measurements). The rear rim is 80mm, and there's still a lot of clearance between the tire and frame.

  116. #116
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    789
    Quote Originally Posted by mtuck1 View Post
    The casing width of the two sterling tires I received was 235mm, and 238mm respectively. Pretty easy to guess from that why one is heavier than the other.
    Awesome!
    Very close/same width as the Snowshoe (238mm), so as I have suspected, likely the same casing.
    The Mission that I have here is 227mm
    The

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50

    Tire wobble, thoughts?

    Well, I've spent the last hour trying to get the tire not to wobble. Unfortunately, I don't have a spare tube on hand to test whether that's the culprit, but the wobble is pretty severe at reasonable pressures.

    At the max (20 PSI) it's not quite so bad, but it returns when I drop back to normal. The video below was taken around 8-10 psi.




    Any thoughts? I'm new to the fatbike thing, so I'm not used to this kind of troubleshooting.

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gcappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,640
    Did the tire seat properly all the way around? You might try some soapy water on the bead during installation.

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by gcappy View Post
    Did the tire seat properly all the way around? You might try some soapy water on the bead during installation.
    It certainly seems seated. I'll try with soapy water though.

  120. #120
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,678
    Yes soap it up

  121. #121
    wannabe fat biker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    25
    Regular white go-joe works well, no water just the soap, dries fairly quick as well

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gcappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,640
    Also crank up the pressure even ten psi above recommended running pressure just till seated then back it down to normal running pressure.

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    Well, after another hour splashing around with soap and water I've had no luck. I've deflated and inflated the damn thing about a dozen times at different speeds and while trying to watch the bead. There's always one section of bead which is just a tiny bit farther out than the rest, but when I try to hold it steady while pumping the problem migrates somewhere else. I'm also not sure that the difference is big enough to cause such a drastic wobble. Are folding bead tires always this hard to get set up?

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gcappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,640
    You need to actually break the bead and start all over with the soapy water on the bead. If that doesn't work the tire is crap.

  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by gcappy View Post
    You need to actually break the bead and start all over with the soapy water on the bead. If that doesn't work the tire is crap.

    Yeah, I did that several times. Just tried over-inflating in my desperation, having heard that it can pop the bead. Popped the tube instead

    I think I might have gotten a crap tire.

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gcappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,640
    Quote Originally Posted by randomsample View Post
    Yeah, I did that several times. Just tried over-inflating in my desperation, having heard that it can pop the bead. Popped the tube instead

    I think I might have gotten a crap tire.
    Sounds like that's the case. We'll now you know how to start with the new one you get.

  127. #127
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    So both the stock tire and a sterling have the same wobble? What pressure did your tube let go at? I mounted up a pair last night on UMAs, poped on the bead lock above 30 psi dry. Round and true. My guess is your tube had an issue or your rim doesn't center the tire due to a lower bead profile so you have center it yourself as you air up.

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by JordyB View Post
    So both the stock tire and a sterling have the same wobble? What pressure did your tube let go at? I mounted up a pair last night on UMAs, poped on the bead lock above 30 psi dry. Round and true. My guess is your tube had an issue or your rim doesn't center the tire due to a lower bead profile so you have center it yourself as you air up.
    The stock tire was a very mild wobble, but the sterling was very noticeable. The tube let go at 50, blew through my amateur rim tape. Tomorrow evening I'll throw the stock tire back on and see if I can get it true. I've got some new tubes coming in the mail, and I'll try those before trying to get a tire exchange.

  129. #129
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Dang, 50, that's much too hi. Surprised that didn't blow the tire off the rim! ;p Be careful.

  130. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    213

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    I had this trouble with a bud on 70mm rim I found if you get it on and not seated evenly a little ride round at low pressure will seat it even ,then pump up to required pressure or to pop bead on

    Press thx if i help you

  131. #131
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    It doesn't hurt to use talc powder/baby powder inside the tire casing either. Sometimes tubes tend to lock onto a spot when you are airing it up causing the bead to not sit into the rim correctly. Might be worth a shot. Of course, if you are going tubeless, never mind.

    For what it is worth, the Sterling tires I have were tough to get seated, but they eventually did. I used some "Bead Slip" on my beads and baby powdered the inside of the casing. Using Bontrager 29 X 2.5" tubes.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  132. #132
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340
    I guess they are fatter than I thought. I had about 3 mm chain clearance on my lowest gear with a husker du in the rear. I discovered today that I have no chain clearance with the Sterling. So if a husker du is 107 on a clown shoe, then these are about 113. Pretty nice. I'll increase the spoke tension on the left side of the wheel a little and see if that gives me any space.
    --Peace

  133. #133
    Hammer Nutrition
    Reputation: wyoracerX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    292
    After letting the tires virtually sit unbound on the floor for 2 days I attempted to put the one that looked most "Tubeless" ready onto a Marge lite that was wearing a Husker Du tubeless since Feb. It was on my now rarely ridden Half Fat setup so if I was going to have any problems I didn't want it on one of my primary wheels.

    Mounted it up, sprayed the sidewalls with soapy water and Voila! 25 psi later the tire was fully seated and (sorry sample) no wobbles or problems of any kind. in fact an hour later and they are still solid without sealant.
    So, they appear the slightly wider than my Escalators mounted on MLs, BUT the big surprise is how much taller they are. When comparing both tires at 20psi (stretching out the casing people, this tire will probably never see 10psi again) it's ~3/4" taller. More volume for sure, just too bad they measured roughly 3.85" wide when aired up at 25psi. I may mount both up on the SS Sheep this weekend and see how they ride. I just hate swapping out tires and sealant just to test rolling resistance and such. Maybe it'll snow big time soon here and I'll be able to compare them against Escal/Dillingers.
    Alphazz, you doing a snow dance ritual soon?

  134. #134
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    789
    Lars: they should be very close to 114mm on Clown Shoes, which is the same as Surly says the BFL is on the same rim.
    Sterling obviously has the same casing as the Snowshoe, which we measure to 115mm on Weinmann 100mm rims and 117mm on our C4 103mm rims.

  135. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Awesome!
    Very close/same width as the Snowshoe (238mm), so as I have suspected, likely the same casing.
    The Mission that I have here is 227mm
    The
    Didn't the Snowshoe thread indicate a casing width of ~245mm? Was that a misprint or is that just variation between samples?

    For what it is worth I measure my BFL casing and get a width of around 245mm.

  136. #136
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    789
    Quote Originally Posted by BobShort View Post
    Didn't the Snowshoe thread indicate a casing width of ~245mm? Was that a misprint or is that just variation between samples?

    For what it is worth I measure my BFL casing and get a width of around 245mm.
    I need to check the one that I have at home, could be a variation, and it could be that I remembered/measured wrong when I wrote 245mm.
    BFL and Snowshoe seem to measure the same casing width when mounted, but Snowshoe could have somewhat shorter sidewalls and thus somewhat less total volume than BFL. I have suggested to Vee that they up the total casing width to 250mm on the studable/studded ''Snowshoe 2''. For comparison, Bud measures approx 260mm, but the studable Snowshoe should be kept slightly smaller in order to take the height of studs into account and to make it fit more frames.

  137. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    I need to check the one that I have at home, could be a variation, and it could be that I remembered/measured wrong when I wrote 245mm.
    BFL and Snowshoe seem to measure the same casing width when mounted, but Snowshoe could have somewhat shorter sidewalls and thus somewhat less total volume than BFL. I have suggested to Vee that they up the total casing width to 250mm on the studable/studded ''Snowshoe 2''. For comparison, Bud measures approx 260mm, but the studable Snowshoe should be kept slightly smaller in order to take the height of studs into account and to make it fit more frames.
    Thanks for the info. It sounds like the Snowshoe 2 is the tire I *really* want. Something bigger than a BFL but smaller than a Lou. I guess I have to wait

    Anyway, I don't want to hijack this thread so I'll direct future questions over on the Snowshoe thread.

    Cheers!

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    After consulting with my LBS, it seems the tire I got has an asymmetry in the casing that's big enough to throw off the ride. Jeff and Greg at FatBack/Speedway have been really helpful, and I'm getting the tire exchanged.

    Awesome service, +1 would buy again.

  139. #139
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    ^^^ Glad to hear!

    Mounted up a pair last night. More to come!



  140. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by JordyB View Post
    ^^^ Glad to hear!

    Mounted up a pair last night. More to come!


    Nice! Hows the snow handling? It's still raining down here in Ia.

  141. #141
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Cold, slow, hard, no real base as it's only snowed once. With the ground frozen, you can pretty much ride anywhere you want short of deep rivers and creeks. The maze of singletrack trials in the local Anchorage greenbelts is huge right now.

  142. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iamkeith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    834
    I might have missed something, but has anybody reported the actual measurements of these tires on some mid-width rims (80-85mm), like Graceful Fat Shebas / Rolling Darryls, etc? Seems like the 70mm & under and 100mm & over ranges have been covered - though I'd still like to know the measurements to the shoulder (to the extent that there is one), as @buggymancan requested above. I'm pretty interested in them, but sort of need to know if they'll fit before I order them.
    We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jstews's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    121
    @randomsample, are those Darryls? Any pics of the tire mounted up?

  144. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50

    New tire is great

    Quote Originally Posted by Jstews View Post
    @randomsample, are those Darryls? Any pics of the tire mounted up?
    I got the new sterling mounted up last night - I'm running it on the rear of my Motobecane FB4, which is a 75mm rim (Weinmann I think). The new tire seated with no problem, and ran true right away (even better than the stock mission which came with the bike).

    Having been mounted for one day and about 15 miles of riding, I measure the max width at right around 94-95mm. This is a little skinnier than the previous tire, but that one stretched a bit over the week or so I rode it.

    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img1.jpg
    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img2.jpg
    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img3.jpg
    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img4.jpg
    FAtback/ Speedway Tires?-img5.jpg

    (I know, I need to clean my bike. I commute through a construction zone.)

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,025
    Ya, Mine too measure 3.75 " (or 95 mm ) on a 70 UMA Rim, no where near the advertised 4.25" width. Disappointing to say the least at $ 130. price.

  146. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603
    Not sure if this has been posted, but from the Fatback website:

    We have heard from customers about tires coming in narrow, and we’re doing the research to find out how many and why. We’ll be working with Vee to figure out the solution shortly. The goal was to have a 4.25″ tire on our Uma 70 rim, and that’s what we want to deliver. More to come soon.

  147. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    50
    There must be some variability, I think the other tire was probably much closer to 4.25, but I'll take a non-wobbling tire over some extra width. I like the tread pattern too.

  148. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    99
    I'm not impressed with the tires at all. I've got them setup tubeless running 7psi. I've done about almost 2 weeks of trails riding and some road. They do have self steer for sure. Super bad on the road, on the trail they don't really bother me I can deal with it.

    They are setup on UMI 70 rims tubeless and measure around 3.89 at best not sure where they got 4.25??? I haven't been on snow with them yet... Maybe they are great on that.? Rolling resistance seem horrible on the road at 7psi. I rode with my friend today that has Nates with tubes and is also running about 7psi and he out coasted me bad. I hopped on his bike and we costed again and I out costed him. Maybe it was because he is running tubes I don't know. I just know I was having to pedal all the time just to keep up with him and he wasn't even pedaling.

    Quick notes.

    I was running Knards before and they seem like a lot better tire.

    The sidewall seems stiff like a cheap tire. Having to run a lot lower pressure on the fatback tire then I did on the Knards. I think Vee rubber just uses cheap rubber. I'm sure the tire is tougher then the Knard but the ride quality sucks.

    Traction seem ok, but not that great. Rode some trail with wet rocks and they hooked up ok but not that great.

    Save you money people don't buy Vee Rubber.

  149. #149
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by quicksilverta View Post
    I'm not impressed with the tires at all. I've got them setup tubeless running 7psi. I've done about almost 2 weeks of trails riding and some road. They do have self steer for sure. Super bad on the road, on the trail they don't really bother me I can deal with it.
    Over in the On One Floater thread, (similar tire made by Vee Rubber), there are a few examples of folks running these Vee tires at higher pressures. The self steer goes away and ride feel seems to be similar to Surly (Innova) tires at lower pressures. It could be that Vee tires need to be run at different pressures to obtain similar results to Surly tires. Makes sense if you consider the tires probably have different construction to the carcass which affects how tires feel at a given pressure. In other words- it may be a variable we need to account for with a different tire pressure when using Vee tires. My experiences are seeming to bear this out.

    They are setup on UMI 70 rims tubeless and measure around 3.89 at best not sure where they got 4.25??? I haven't been on snow with them yet... Maybe they are great on that.? .............
    My Sterlings are on 70mm Uma rims as well, and I am using Bontrager 2.5" 29"er tubes. My tires are measuring out at 97mm. On snow they are performing in a slightly better manner in terms of float than the previously used Surly Larry 3.8's and have much better traction. My pressure? Right now between 15-20 psi!

    I will be experimenting with a bit lower pressures, but I am becoming convinced that I can not treat these tires with the same pressures as I did with Surly tires.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  150. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iamkeith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    834
    I'm holding out hope that Guitar Ted is right, and hoping that the width issue gets worked out. I really want this tire to work!

    This is interesting: In this ongoing review of the Snowshoe on fatbike.com (likely the same casing, according to earlier posts in this thread?), the tire happens to measure exactly 4.25".... on 100mm rims.

    Product Spotlight – Vee Tire Snowshoe 26 x 4.7 | FAT-BIKE.COM

    Kind of makes you wonder if Greg didn't get screwed over by miscommunication through a bad translator. On the other hand, the Snowshoe is actually billed as a 4.7" tire! Maybe there really are some random too-narrow ones out there.

    Ironic that this review doesn't show the tire on an 80 or 82 mm rim, either - just like this damned thread!
    We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    The Fat-Bike article indicates Snowshoes on RD's measure 4.218. I would be willing to bet that Sterlings will be very close to that since the casings seem to be nearly identical and measurements on other rims of these two tires have been very similar.

    Interesting that Fatback seems concerned about the claimed size discrepancy. Since size is ultimately dependent on the rim used I have just come to expect that tires will be much smaller than the value indicated on the sidewall when mounted on ML's.

  152. #152
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,355
    Quote Originally Posted by quicksilverta View Post
    I'm not impressed with the tires at all. I've got them setup tubeless running 7psi. I've done about almost 2 weeks of trails riding and some road. They do have self steer for sure. Super bad on the road, on the trail they don't really bother me I can deal with it.

    They are setup on UMI 70 rims tubeless and measure around 3.89 at best not sure where they got 4.25??? I haven't been on snow with them yet... Maybe they are great on that.? Rolling resistance seem horrible on the road at 7psi. I rode with my friend today that has Nates with tubes and is also running about 7psi and he out coasted me bad. I hopped on his bike and we costed again and I out costed him. Maybe it was because he is running tubes I don't know. I just know I was having to pedal all the time just to keep up with him and he wasn't even pedaling.

    Quick notes.

    I was running Knards before and they seem like a lot better tire.

    The sidewall seems stiff like a cheap tire. Having to run a lot lower pressure on the fatback tire then I did on the Knards. I think Vee rubber just uses cheap rubber. I'm sure the tire is tougher then the Knard but the ride quality sucks.

    Traction seem ok, but not that great. Rode some trail with wet rocks and they hooked up ok but not that great.

    Save you money people don't buy Vee Rubber.
    7psi on pavement? Why?

    And why would you expect *any* tire to exhibit anything other than self steer at 7psi on a hard surface?

  153. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    603
    Quote Originally Posted by mtuck1 View Post
    Interesting that Fatback seems concerned about the claimed size discrepancy. Since size is ultimately dependent on the rim used I have just come to expect that tires will be much smaller than the value indicated on the sidewall when mounted on ML's.
    From the post on the Fatback blog I copied earlier, it sounds as though they are scratching their heads also. Reading into the post, it does not sound like all the tires are coming in narrow since they are trying to figure out "how many and why." I don't know about tire manufacturing, is it possible Vee Rubber put the same tread on more that one casing size or changed the casing size between the prototypes and production run?

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iamkeith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by mtuck1 View Post
    The Fat-Bike article indicates Snowshoes on RD's measure 4.218. I would be willing to bet that Sterlings will be very close to that since the casings seem to be nearly identical and measurements on other rims of these two tires have been very similar.

    Interesting that Fatback seems concerned about the claimed size discrepancy. Since size is ultimately dependent on the rim used I have just come to expect that tires will be much smaller than the value indicated on the sidewall when mounted on ML's.
    I guess I didn't see the 4.218/RD measurement, but this just confirms that the tire being tested/reviewed is either one of the too-narrow flukes, or is indicative of a bigger problem. They were intended/promised to be 4.25 on 70mm rims and 4.7" on 100mm rims! Yes, the actual width depends on the rim used but, given those numbers, a Rolling Darryl SHOULD yield something like 4.33".

    I can understand why fatback is concerned. But I have faith that they'll get to the bottom of it... way more calmly and professionally than I could. I'd be pretty pissed off if I was them.

    Another point of interest is that, in the other thread about the development of the Snowshoe, the prototype tires DID measure as they should.
    We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]

  155. #155
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    I went and bought a set of uma 70's and sterlings for my new build and mine are also measuring 3.8 ish, emailed fatback, they have been really good to me so far, hope they can get to the bottom of it and get these swapped out

    I like the pattern and feel of the tire, a little fatter was the goal though and I didn't really get it
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  156. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtuck1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    439
    I'll be interested to see how this plays out. Like others, I purchased these believing they would be close to the size Fatback claimed on their website that the "Sterling is 4.25" wide on a 70mm rim". It appears they are consistently 10mm small.

  157. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    7psi on pavement? Why?

    And why would you expect *any* tire to exhibit anything other than self steer at 7psi on a hard surface?

    The trail head is 2 miles from my house... Would you like me to air my tires up and then let air out for trail use. Then air them back up when i head home. My knards where not nearly as bad as the sterling tires.

    Also the self steer isn't bad at all when you air them up... But isn't the point of a fatbike to run low PSI.. The trail i'm riding is one of the rockiest local trails. I dont' want to bounce around a bunch, which is what they do with 10 psi or more. Maybe it's just because i'm only 145 with winter gear on I don't know. I was hoping this tire as going to be wider then the knard (my knards are wider) and a stronger sidewall which it does. In my opinion the knard is a better, faster tire for single track.

  158. #158
    Location: SouthPole of MN
    Reputation: duggus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,711
    God I'm sick of hearing about "xx" tire having self-steer on pavement. They aren't made for pavement... and that's not a review... so don't post it as a characteristic of said "xx" tire. Over and over this keeps coming up in all sorts of threads. Don't ride your fat bike for floating on pavement then.
    ...Be careful what you're looking at because it might be looking back...

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    99
    They have self-steer on the trail also.... The self steer is not a issue for me I don't care. All fatbike tires have self-steer at low pressure. These tires have more then knards. I shouldn't have put anything in my posts about pavement. I knew that was going to open up a can of worms.

    Here are the facts!

    They are not 4.25 on 70mm UMA rims
    Rolling resistance seems more the then Knards
    Traction ok, little better then Knards
    Sidewall are beefer then Knards (maybe that's why the knards ride better, softer sidewall?)
    100 grams ligher then Knards
    Low pressure is required on the trail for a nice non-bouncy ride (Rider weight 145)
    Tubeless setup went great, nice tight bead.

  160. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve Balogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    806
    Haven't ridden them yet, but I'm getting around 3.8" also. I noticed the bead was about .060" thicker than my Husker Du's, took about 38psi to get them to seat. They are on the UMA 70 rims pretty solid. I was unable to make them tubeless, so I put my Schwalbe extra-light tubes back in. My Husker Du's are about 1 year and 9 months old, the bead started to stretch, I don't think this will happen as bad with the Sterlings. The width is about the same as the Vee-8's I just put on my Wildfire with Large Marge rims. Got these to have something between a Husker Du and a Nate with traction for snow/mud. Despite being smaller than expected, I'm thinking these will work out. I'm not too concerned about getting more float. The tight bead lock is nice considering I'm using small free ride tubes, have heard some horror stories locally where tires have popped off inward on people when getting a flat with small tubes.

  161. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve Balogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    806
    Did my first ride on these today. Aired up to 10-12 PSI. The trails were frozen this morning and as we finished the sun started warming up a few areas, very slight mud at the end in some places. The only noticeable "self steer" I encountered was standing up in a sprint on some hard frozen trail, but nothing nasty. They roll pretty well. On a slick bridge and a few wooden boardwalks they had pretty good traction, no sliding at all. The tread seems to shed mud well, I didn't pack up any mud. May try and hit some sand tomorrow, temps will be above freezing.

  162. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    347
    I have a fatback sterling tire on the rear now for two weeks. I have been mostly pretty happy with it. It is 4.2" (or there abouts) mounted up on my 90mm UMAs. It does appear to have one downside - it appears to "pack up" with snow a bit.

    <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Od0PDCm4KKy3c_OSzTyFUNMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-q9y6jmCYMaM/UpZMHwRYKbI/AAAAAAAANVs/Jn7Ql5D5pAA/s800/IMG_0010.JPG" height="800" width="600" /></a>

    compared to a bud, taken as the same time:

    <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/RBOwQbdgcg3zGLYI3vKaYNMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-MGxjjjnujp4/UpZMIua_b2I/AAAAAAAANV4/Z7xi1owP64s/s800/IMG_0012.JPG" height="800" width="600" /></a>

    This might be a one-off thing, however snow seems to stick to it much more than the Husker Dus or Buds do.

    Otherwise I am pretty happy with it, though I wish it as wide as a BFL. Rolls a bit slower on snow than the Husker Du does, but it could just be in my head. I have been running it tubeless, and it has been burp free for me, even at very lower pressures. YMMV of course.

  163. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    63
    Here's my quick review. Mounted the tires up on my Marge Lites with no problems. Used talc and soapy water and they came out perfectly round. They are noticeably taller than the Vee 8s they replaced, but no wider which is a disappointment. My guess is they are around 3.8" but I have not measured them.

    Did a 35 mile ride on Sunday that included a 10 mile paved climb, about 5 miles of packed snow/ice at the top, then the rest a combination of dirt forest service roads with the occasional rocky section and gravel roads including some 30+ mph downhills. On the climb my butt-o-meter seemed to indicate that they were definitely a bit slower than the Vee 8s they replaced (makes perfect sense and was expected) and maybe a bit slower than the Husker Dus than were on Uma 70 rims. Overall, pretty much a non factor.

    Where these tired really seemed to excel is in grip. Even aired up to 15lbs for the climb (which is the normal pressure I start with for big climbs) they stayed hooked up when we got to the snowy parts. Now it wasn't much snow, but even where it was packed down an icy they were great. For the big descent down the back side I left them aired up (just lazy) and continued to be impressed with the grip in loose gravel/dirt corners. Once again I never expected the Vee 8s to excel in cornering, but the Sterlings definitely outshines the Husker Dus also.

    Overall while I'm a bit disappointed in the width, and will be waiting to see what Fatback has to say, I like them. They are a bit slower rolling, but I'll give that up for the grip any day. Your mileage may vary, and it is quite possible I'm a complete idiot. Just ask JYB.

  164. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve Balogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    806
    I hit the gravel pit last Saturday, hooked up fine in sand, both coarse and fine-grained. Sunday I tried a trail with steeper hills, it was a bit greasy with slight mud in some sections. This time the mud tended to stick more. But I didn't loose much traction, so it must be shedding some. No problems climbing, I had been sick for a couple weeks but the higher rolling resistance didn't bother me and I made all the hill climbs as I normally do there. Hopefully it snows here in SE Michigan this weekend.

  165. #165
    JYB
    JYB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    213
    "Save you money people don't buy Vee Rubber. "

    I don't like this statement at all. It seems that many people are criticizing the Sterling because it isn't everything that they dreamed it would be. I have a pair sitting in my basement that I will mount up some time in the near future to ride in the snow, so I do not have any experience with this tire at this point.

    What bothers me about the above "slam" on Vee Rubber is that any of the current Fat tire offerings could be "nit-picked" if you put it under a microscope. I could identify pros and cons of each and every Surly and Vee Rubber tire that I have ridden, but they have all provided me with shit-eating grins on many rides. Instead of complaining about your new tires not being up to your standards, people need to get out there and ride on them more. I guarantee that each Fat tire offering has its own strengths and weaknesses. Welcome the strengths with open arms and determine how to work with the weaknesses. Otherwise, I wouldn't ride a fit bike in anything but snow. All of these big, beefy tires are going to have self-steer on hard surfaces at low pressures. Some of these tires wear a lot faster than others. Some of these tires rock on drier trails and aren't as good in the wet. Some of the tires are super heavy but are also really durable for riding on gnarly rocks. This is all just part of year-round fat-biking. Be happy that you have tires to choose from and just get out there and enjoy!

    And yes...aerotugpilot is a complete idiot

  166. #166
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,340
    --Peace

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    63
    Just measured mine on Marge Lites and got a casing width of 3.8". And thanks to JYB for confirming my idiocy. Plan on proving it again by riding in the ice storm on Sunday.

  168. #168
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    has anyone heard anything this week from fatback regarding the tire size?

    the post on their blog has been there for like 2 weeks now
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  169. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by TitanofChaos View Post
    has anyone heard anything this week from fatback regarding the tire size?

    the post on their blog has been there for like 2 weeks now
    After reading through this....and from my own experience with it's sister tire, the Snow Shoe...
    I am going to bet the sizing problem is over blown .
    My tire was well under 4 inches....but grew after a ride and an over night sit to around 4.25.
    Add in folks who don't know how to operate a ruler....

  170. #170
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    After reading through this....and from my own experience with it's sister tire, the Snow Shoe...
    I am going to bet the sizing problem is over blown .
    My tire was well under 4 inches....but grew after a ride and an over night sit to around 4.25.
    Add in folks who don't know how to operate a ruler....
    Mine have been in the house (warm) sitting at 40PSI (beads seated and to stretch) when not being ridden and are still 3.8 casing width on the 70mm umaII
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  171. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,133

    Re: FAtback/ Speedway Tires?

    Quote Originally Posted by TitanofChaos View Post
    Mine have been in the house (warm) sitting at 40PSI (beads seated and to stretch) when not being ridden and are still 3.8 casing width on the 70mm umaII
    Try riding them. Maybe just letting them sit with high psi isn't enough to stretch them.

  172. #172
    Lord Thunderbottom
    Reputation: TitanofChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    907
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    Try riding them. Maybe just letting them sit with high psi isn't enough to stretch them.
    they've got around 30 miles on them now, probably another 20 after tomorrow
    Today I will do what others won't, so tomorrow I can do what others can't

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    Quote Originally Posted by spruceboy View Post
    I have a fatback sterling tire on the rear now for two weeks. I have been mostly pretty happy with it. It is 4.2" (or there abouts) mounted up on my 90mm UMAs. It does appear to have one downside - it appears to "pack up" with snow a bit.

    <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Od0PDCm4KKy3c_OSzTyFUNMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-q9y6jmCYMaM/UpZMHwRYKbI/AAAAAAAANVs/Jn7Ql5D5pAA/s800/IMG_0010.JPG" height="800" width="600" /></a>

    compared to a bud, taken as the same time:

    <a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/RBOwQbdgcg3zGLYI3vKaYNMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-MGxjjjnujp4/UpZMIua_b2I/AAAAAAAANV4/Z7xi1owP64s/s800/IMG_0012.JPG" height="800" width="600" /></a>

    This might be a one-off thing, however snow seems to stick to it much more than the Husker Dus or Buds do.

    Otherwise I am pretty happy with it, though I wish it as wide as a BFL. Rolls a bit slower on snow than the Husker Du does, but it could just be in my head. I have been running it tubeless, and it has been burp free for me, even at very lower pressures. YMMV of course.
    Spruceboy:

    With the snow clinging to the tire; did you happen to notice any actual slippage?

    Reason to ask; have heard it from truckers that snow clinging to the tires provides great traction.

  174. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    480
    It may provide great traction, but we don't run on diesel. That extra weight can be a 1hp (human power) killer.

  175. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iamkeith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacons View Post
    It may provide great traction, but we don't run on diesel. That extra weight can be a 1hp (human power) killer.
    Agreed. You don't want it sticking, because it will continue to accumulate and get heavier. At least that's what happens with skis and climbing skins. (To the point where you can't lift your skis anymore, sometimes.) If you follow this analogy further though, it's probable that there will be certain snow conditions which are worse than others for causing the problem. For those, you might be able to try one of the same solutions, like this:

    Free Glide Skin Care - Black Diamond Gear

    Or possibly even silicon spray. (Disclaimer: try at your own risk, and research compatibility of solvents with rubber compound first)

    Once the tires have been used for a whole year, been exposed to UV, had their surface roughed, lost all traces of the mold release compound, and picked up regular contaminants like dirt and oils and dust, I bet it all changes again.
    We still hang bike thieves in Wyoming [Pedal House]

  176. #176
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Initial impression, after the first ride.

    Loose and packed snow trails, some punchy
    Temps in the teens F
    Measured about 98mm on an UMA 70mm rim
    Switched from a Nate F/backward Larry 3.8 R to Nate F/Sterling R
    -A little bit slower rolling than the Larry
    -Significantly more traction than Larry
    -Floats on punchy trail better than a Larry, about on par with a Nate
    -Significantly faster rolling than a Nate out back
    -A tiny bit less traction than Nate

    When I ran a Nate out back, the only thing I didn't like about it was the rolling resistance. The Sterling has most of the traction of the Nate but rolls fast enough for me. It definitely seemed to excel on more marginal conditions. Uphill traction was phenomenal. Starting from a stop mid-hill with a narrow, punchy, soft trail had no slipping and instant drive.

    EDIT: I did experience something kind of like the packing Jay noted above. It was nowhere near that bad though, and was just more like a light coating. There was about an inch of untracked snow on some of the trails and it also picked up a little bit of the loose snow on most of the other trails. Never had any effect on traction, but like I said, it wasn't actually packing up in the conditions I was in, just getting a dusting of it stuck to the tire. I'm sure snow temperature and humidity level plays a huge role in that.
    Last edited by sean salach; 01-14-2014 at 02:52 PM.

  177. #177
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Almost two months later and a few hundred more miles review:

    -Measures out to 101 mm casing on a 70mm UMA at around 10 psi.

    -Traction continues to be excellent, rolling resistance continues to be at the just right level for me.

    -Spreads out pretty big at low psi, bigger than I thought it would. Float is great, noticeably better than endo/larry/nate/dillinger(only other tires I've tried) in conditions where those tires are on the verge of sub-par float.

    -Rolls fast with excellent traction on dirt, did not pack up in the mud I rode it in.

    -OK traction on hard/cold ice. Nate seems to be a little better on hard ice for me, but the Sterling is decent. Almost no traction on water over ice, but that's studded tire territory, so not really applicable. Looks like it would stud well with gripstuds.

    -Excellent traction in mashed potato and sugar snow.

  178. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    Is this the tire you rode to McGrath?
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  179. #179
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Yeah, out back. Nate front.

  180. #180
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: anortherncrazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    658
    Got in some trail time finally with these tires today with temps in the mid 20's in Anchorage. Super stoked on them. Rolls like a Knard but with more traction(sold them earlier this winter). Like 'em better than my Hudu's that I have on my other bike. Not as aggressive as a Dillinger, but rolls a lot better. Still have yet to try out some Nate's just for a good, well rounded comparison. My house is 2.5 miles away from the trails so, I like to have something with a good balance of low rolling resistance and traction. Great tire overall. Cant wait to see how they do on dirt, etc. for summer time riding.
    two wheel livin'..

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 10:53 AM
  2. 70mm Speedway rim problem?
    By davefj40 in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-12-2012, 05:44 AM
  3. Speedway Fatback with Big Fat Larry
    By fc in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-16-2011, 04:41 PM
  4. Speedway/Fatback handlebar?
    By sslos in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-07-2011, 12:42 PM
  5. Speedway and Integra
    By Trek223 in forum Cars and Bike Racks
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-18-2011, 12:09 AM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.