high end fat bike purchase help.- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 60 of 60
  1. #1
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182

    high end fat bike purchase help.

    I want to upgrade from my mukluk to something much lighter with a bluto fork.

    i have been looking at the echo, don't like what i hear about the rims though.

    I was also thinking a beargrease carbon might be good, but would then need to get a bluto put on it.

    where i live we do get snow, but not usually a lot and then it doesn't stick around long most of the time, so not sure if i should even worry about not being able to run the bigger tires.

    I have a mukluk now, so have been limited on size with it too, i did put a bud on the front this last winter and was impressed, so makes me wonder how good it would be to have a big one on the back too.

    other issue i have concerning rims, is that i have had 2 flats so far on the muk running split tubes, i get such big thorns around here that they go clear through the tire and out the rim cut outs! i am thinking a carbon tubless setup is the way to go for me, what are my options?

    summary:

    1- carbon wheel options that will support a 215lb rider?
    2- carbon frame options that support the bluto?
    3- could i just buy an echo frame/fork and build it myself? or would it be too expensive? i have never done this but always heard it's cheaper to buy bikes already built.
    4- would the echo or beargrease be sturdy enough for a 215lb + rider?

  2. #2
    Rocking on a Rocky
    Reputation: RockyJo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,510
    Twin 6 Ti?
    :thumbsup:It doesn't matter what I ride as long as I ride it Rubber Side Down●~●.

  3. #3
    ebnash
    Guest
    1- All the carbon fat rim offerings will support your weight, as long as the wheel build is sound. I don't know of any carbon wheelsets that exist other that HED, but technically those are custom built.

    2 - The Borealis Echo and Pivot Les Fat Frames are built around the Bluto geometry. Not sure about the Beargrease.

    3 - Buying a complete is always cheaper, but you are not able to select every component. If you are particular about components, it is wiser to do full custom build, but pricey. I would guess that a carbon frame/Bluto/Carbon Wheel highend custom build would in the neighborhood of 8K-9K. Your one option for a complete that meets your listed requirements is the Borealis Echo XX1 with HED wheel option. Since Borealis no longer has the Carbondale Wheels, they will will supply HED Big Deals for the 2K upcost making that bike around 8K.

    4 - Any current Fatbike carbon offering will hold up to a 215lb. rider. I am riding a Pivot Les Fat and I am around 250lbs. and riding technical dirt terrain agressively.

  4. #4
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,235
    Honestly, if you're happy with the Muk, I'd just build a carbon wheelset. Nextie's are rated to 200kg, so I think you're good there.

  5. #5
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    95
    215 nekkid? Don't go plastic. At your weight get something reasonably light that is strong and provides a nice ride like a good steel frame. Ti is kinda flexy and many ti frames ride kinda meh compared to a nice snappy steel frame. Plus ti frames crack/fail quite often compared to other frame materials. I'm 165 and cracked my ti IF. Lynsky's die all the time. 2 guys i know who weigh the same as me have cracked more than one lynsky each.

    Upgrading your wheels is sound advice if you like yer current bike.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by stremf View Post
    Honestly, if you're happy with the Muk, I'd just build a carbon wheelset. Nextie's are rated to 200kg, so I think you're good there.
    Best advice IMO.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,001
    Quote Originally Posted by stremf View Post
    Honestly, if you're happy with the Muk, I'd just build a carbon wheelset. Nextie's are rated to 200kg, so I think you're good there.
    Agreed
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6
    2017 Diamondback Haanjo Trail Carbon
    2016 Scott Solace 10 Disc

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,360
    just an fyi, simple1 hates all materials except steel. I would ignore anything he has to say about carbon, but his experience w/ Ti sounds legit.

  9. #9
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    15,944
    Quote Originally Posted by simple1 View Post
    Plus ti frames crack/fail quite often compared to other frame materials. I'm 165 and cracked my ti IF. Lynsky's die all the time. 2 guys i know who weigh the same as me have cracked more than one lynsky each.
    The IF surprises me, but there Lynskey? I'd be more surprised to hear about one that hasn't broken. Has to do with using crappy offshore inferior quality ti tubing, and I've little doubt their process which is designed around speed and volume production, doesn't help either.

    Pick a good builder, and I doubt you'll see many failures. I have a few ti frames, (old school, not ABG built) Merlins, a Titus, and they've served me well for many many years of hard use.

    Moral of the story, if you want ti, don't be a cheapskate.

    And I'd double, triple, whatever, down and say yes, upgrade the wheels if you want to lighten the ride. Not like you're 120 lbs soaking wet, a 1/2 lb lighter frame will mean jack squat other than a lighter wallet....
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  10. #10
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    Hmmmm, if I remember right Rog broke an IF ti and had a couple of friends break Lynsky's and also likes white. Rog also hates everything but steel and says ti is flexy. Is S1 Rog?

  11. #11
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    Quote Originally Posted by simple1 View Post
    I'm 165 and cracked my ti IF. Lynsky's die all the time.
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    The IF surprises me, but there Lynskey?
    Im 205lb, ride a steel IF, ride a Ti Carver fatty and a plastic Chi fatty, the more I read simple's posts, the more I reckon its a sock-puppet for someone trying to steal Mr Copperfield for #1 red medal count. Please investigate his IP addy... you don't own a Independent Fabrications, Lynskey and all that shit, then only discover MTBR this month, then be a pain in the ass...
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  12. #12
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    3rd red chicklet given simple1.
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  13. #13
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    yes, i do love the way the muk rides and handles. i just don't know about spending almost as much on wheels as i did the whole bike? if i put a bluto on it and carbon wheels, wouldn't it about cancel each other out and still weigh the same?

    I spoke with borealis about the hed wheels, they said they wouldn't support my weight. He said they're made for under 200lbs and riding groomed snow trails only.

    I would like to get the bike under 30lbs. my muk weighs 38.8lbs with frame bag full of tools, inner tube, saw, etc

  14. #14
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    Rotational weight and weight that well doesn't rotate are two completely different things.

  15. #15
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    hmm, i was just looking at frame weights between mukluk, echo, and carbon beargrease.
    muk - 4.63
    bg - 3.61
    echo - 3
    that really isn't that big a differance. Where do people get these builds from that are less then 30lbs? some even claim to be less then 25lbs.

    I do agree about rotational weight savings helpling a lot. My muk rims weren't drilled when i got it, i drilled them out and it was very noticeable.

    I am starting to wish i would have taken the bluto upgrade on my fork recall now - i had always had it in my head to get a higher end bike rather then dump a bunch in the current one though.

  16. #16
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by jonshonda View Post
    just an fyi, simple1 hates all materials except steel. I would ignore anything he has to say about carbon, but his experience w/ Ti sounds legit.
    I've owned carbon (scott and trek) and cracked one when i tipped over in a very techy rocky area. seat stay pretty much shattered. Alu woulda dented, Ti woulda come out unscathed unless i smacked a weld, and steel woulda scratched, nothing a bit of nail polish wouldn't cover up.

  17. #17
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Im 205lb, ride a steel IF, ride a Ti Carver fatty and a plastic Chi fatty, the more I read simple's posts, the more I reckon its a sock-puppet for someone trying to steal Mr Copperfield for #1 red medal count. Please investigate his IP addy... you don't own a Independent Fabrications, Lynskey and all that shit, then only discover MTBR this month, then be a pain in the ass...
    oooooh this innanet is serious bidness for ya ozzy! find the culprit! find the imposter! lol

  18. #18
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    hmm, i was just looking at frame weights between mukluk, echo, and carbon beargrease.
    muk - 4.63
    bg - 3.61
    echo - 3
    that really isn't that big a differance. Where do people get these builds from that are less then 30lbs? some even claim to be less then 25lbs.
    Ding ding ding winner winner chicken dinner. So many people see the weights of these carbon complete bikes and get the gotta have googly eyes. Your right the frame helps some but in the end it's the crap ton of money in parts they stick on the carbon frames that makes just as big of difference as the frame. Not many can see this, it's impossible to replace a 5 pound frame with a 3 pound frame and the bike automatically weighs in at 6-7 pounds lighter

  19. #19
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    Don't clog up good threads with your crap, hardly serious as I don't come here so much any more, just had a slack night and a few beers and find your nonsense on every thread.
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  20. #20
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Ding ding ding winner winner chicken dinner. So many people see the weights of these carbon complete bikes and get the gotta have googly eyes. Your right the frame helps some but in the end it's the crap ton of money in parts they stick on the carbon frames that makes just as big of difference as the frame. Not many can see this, it's impossible to replace a 5 pound frame with a 3 pound frame and the bike automatically weighs in at 6-7 pounds lighter
    so what rims should i consider?

  21. #21
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Ding ding ding winner winner chicken dinner. So many people see the weights of these carbon complete bikes and get the gotta have googly eyes. Your right the frame helps some but in the end it's the crap ton of money in parts they stick on the carbon frames that makes just as big of difference as the frame. Not many can see this, it's impossible to replace a 5 pound frame with a 3 pound frame and the bike automatically weighs in at 6-7 pounds lighter
    ^^^ spot on Bob, carbon forks, carbon cranks, carbon wheels (tubeless), carbon bars, post, seat, 1 x something and down to the little things like brakes, grips, rotors and all that stuff.

    IMO the wheels and tyre choice make the biggest difference.

    A 36lb bike will only be 2lb heavier than a carbon bike given all the above.
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  22. #22
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    i would probably need new hubs too, which ones? i am thinking it be a good time to upgrade the cassette to an 11sp too and go 1x for some more savings.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    230
    This would be an interesting link to check out...
    http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/wor...uk-943531.html

  24. #24
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    i already have carbon bars on the bike, i do run a thudbuster though which is pretty heavy, but needed, hurts my back to much to ride without it.

  25. #25
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,111
    You can buy a set of Nexties, decent spokes and Hope Fatsno hubs for less than $1000.
    Santa Cruz Hightower LT Evil Following Trek 9.9 Superfly SL IndyFab Deluxe 29 Pivot Vault CX Cervelo R3 Disc

  26. #26
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    so what rims should i consider?
    It really depends what and how you ride, do you need/want wide rims or a in the middle 65mm width? Even though you are a little bigger feller I would prolly look at the 65's being you don't get much snow and you want a lighter bike but just my 2 cents. Also as ozz has stated take a peep at the Neties, they have their little flaws but overall a good rim for the cash.

  27. #27
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by tjdog800 View Post
    This would be an interesting link to check out...
    http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/wor...uk-943531.html
    nice read, the guy ended up with a new bike in the end though! sounds like he lives where there is more snow then i have. a lot of the advice given was also talking about not having through axles. What is the difference and should i be concerned with that too?

  28. #28
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    It really depends what and how you ride, do you need/want wide rims or a in the middle 65mm width? Even though you are a little bigger feller I would prolly look at the 65's being you don't get much snow and you want a lighter bike but just my 2 cents. Also as ozz has stated take a peep at the Neties, they have their little flaws but overall a good rim for the cash.
    we do get snow, but not tons of it. most of the time it's 2-3 inches, we may get a 5-6 inch snow a couple times a year too. Most of the riding i do is off the beaten path. I ride fairly hard and love tech stuff. we don't have many rocks around here but lots of logs. i know my current rear rim has a dent in it which is assume is from hitting logs at speed with probably too low of psi.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    568
    I run whiskey 9s are am assured they are bulletproof

    I do plan on running my yampa with HED all summer though not in the Rocky rooty in part because i can't run a bluto on a medium, though I might think of a lefty at some point but it means rebuilding wheels

    I brought the mutz from 38 to 32 pounds and its a different bike with lighter wheels. Carbon and steel and totally different feels, and I am starting to learn how much

    Nothing like a good test ride! Though I personally like to jump in first, then adjust and tinker

    Lamere makes some really nice light weight lefty fatties
    Might be next if my yampa is sold

  30. #30
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by blidner View Post
    I run whiskey 9s are am assured they are bulletproof

    I do plan on running my yampa with HED all summer though not in the Rocky rooty in part because i can't run a bluto on a medium, though I might think of a lefty at some point but it means rebuilding wheels

    I brought the mutz from 38 to 32 pounds and its a different bike with lighter wheels. Carbon and steel and totally different feels, and I am starting to learn how much

    Nothing like a good test ride! Though I personally like to jump in first, then adjust and tinker

    Lamere makes some really nice light weight lefty fatties
    Might be next if my yampa is sold
    borealis told me i would break an hed rim in 2 weeks!

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    568
    That unfortunate on the HED

    The Whiskey 9s are much stronger, and i have no concern running them hard in the rock gardens near me

    Definitely check out the Foes Mutz, is an absolute blast to ride. If you live in the boston area I'm more than happy to let you try mine out, and then you can call Dan up at likin bikin and have him built you one

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,001
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    3rd red chicklet given simple1.
    4th

    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I want to upgrade from my mukluk to something much lighter with a bluto fork.
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    yes, i do love the way the muk rides and handles. i just don't know about spending almost as much on wheels as i did the whole bike?

    I would like to get the bike under 30lbs. my muk weighs 38.8lbs with frame bag full of tools, inner tube, saw, etc
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I had always had it in my head to get a higher end bike rather then dump a bunch in the current one though.
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    I am thinking it be a good time to upgrade the cassette to an 11sp too and go 1x for some more savings.
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    nice read, the guy ended up with a new bike in the end though! sounds like he lives where there is more snow then i have. a lot of the advice given was also talking about not having through axles. What is the difference and should i be concerned with that too?
    OK, here's my $0.02.

    Buy a new bike. You are way to far away from what you want with your current ride (which sounds like a sweet ride).

    You're looking to drop serious weight, be able to run fatter tires, a Bluto, 11 speed and thru axles.

    There's no point doing all that to your current bike (even if you could).

    I suggest you take the $1500 you have saved, sell your bike, and start new.

    Buy a complete with as close to the specs that you like, then change what you want over time.

    If you can afford the Borealis but don't like the wheelset, then sell it new, or have your LBS swap them out for you.

    I was in a similar position, i bought a KHS 3000 as a first fatty (dip the toe in the water) to see if i liked it.

    I thought about upgrading it (carbon fork, wheels etc), but would still have wound up with a straight stereer, a rear QR, and unable to run the fattest tires.

    I cut bait and just picked up a Mayor Bluto....gets me to a starting point MUCH closer to desired end product than the KHS did, for not too much price difference.

    What about something like a Framed Alaskan (pick your model) then add a nice set of wheels?

    Chinese Carbon? Full builds start around $2000 USD with carbon wheels.
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6
    2017 Diamondback Haanjo Trail Carbon
    2016 Scott Solace 10 Disc

  33. #33
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    chinese carbons don't do the bluto do they?

    i was looking at rim options:

    current wheel=1.9lb
    whiskey no=1.2lb
    nextie 65=1.1

    That doesn't seem to be much savings for the amount of money. I guess i would be able to lose the split tube though, so thats almost another 1/2 pound per wheel.
    I guess it all adds up, so by that token if you start with a frame thats over a pound lighter.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    568
    There is also some potential saving for weight depending on the tires you are running.

    When i went from Mulefoots, with tubes running 27tpi Nates, to Whiskey, tubeless 120tpi Van helgas it was a 6 pound difference (same hubs so that is not a factor)

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blown240's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,028
    W
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    my muk weighs 38.8lbs with frame bag full of tools, inner tube, saw, etc
    How much does it weigh without the extras?

    I personally would start with the weight of just the bike. Then figure the weight savings be doing the wheels, tires, fork, etc. If that cost is more than 60-70% the cost of a new bike, then consider your bike options. If it's less, then upgrade the muk.

    OTOH I'm 235 lbs. My main bike could easily be 4-5 lbs lighter, but it's nice knowing the extra weight goes into stronger parts....

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,001
    Quote Originally Posted by simple1 View Post
    oooooh this innanet is serious bidness for ya ozzy! find the culprit! find the imposter! lol
    and banned.
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6
    2017 Diamondback Haanjo Trail Carbon
    2016 Scott Solace 10 Disc

  37. #37
    ebnash
    Guest
    A few thoughts on some posts made here.

    Not hard to have a sub 30lb fat bike when you combine carbon frame/fork and go tubeless.

    I have a Pivot Les Fat (26-27lbs. including bottle cages and spare pump) with only changes made below:
    Schwalbe Jumbo Jim 4.8 Tubeless with 300ml of Stans
    75mm Loaded Stem
    Specialized Henge Expert Seat
    Stem mounted bottle opener
    XTR Race pedals

    Agreed that Carbon frameset alone does not shed many lbs but when combined with tubeless weight conscious tires, carbon bars and post, it's pretty easy to get under 30lbs.

    I weigh 250lbs and have ridden this set up hard over boulder strewn singletrack at speed and nothing has blown up.

    I can't comment on Carbon wheels cause I don't have them but HED rims do concern me being single wall and all. I have heard stories of flexiness and they are really expensive.

    The reality, though, is that my bike above is in the 5K range so the OP'will have to spend considerably more money to go full carbon as I am running the stock Mulefut/Salsa Hub wheels.

  38. #38
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    i'm getting analysis paralysis!

  39. #39
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by ebnash View Post
    A few thoughts on some posts made here.

    Not hard to have a sub 30lb fat bike when you combine carbon frame/fork and go tubeless.

    I have a Pivot Les Fat (26-27lbs. including bottle cages and spare pump) with only changes made below:
    Schwalbe Jumbo Jim 4.8 Tubeless with 300ml of Stans
    75mm Loaded Stem
    Specialized Henge Expert Seat
    Stem mounted bottle opener
    XTR Race pedals

    Agreed that Carbon frameset alone does not shed many lbs but when combined with tubeless weight conscious tires, carbon bars and post, it's pretty easy to get under 30lbs.

    I weigh 250lbs and have ridden this set up hard over boulder strewn singletrack at speed and nothing has blown up.

    I can't comment on Carbon wheels cause I don't have them but HED rims do concern me being single wall and all. I have heard stories of flexiness and they are really expensive.

    The reality, though, is that my bike above is in the 5K range so the OP'will have to spend considerably more money to go full carbon as I am running the stock Mulefut/Salsa Hub wheels.
    whether i upgrade what i have or go all new, i want solid carbon wheels. as i said earlier, i have had two flat due to thorns going out the rim holes.

  40. #40
    ebnash
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    whether i upgrade what i have or go all new, i want solid carbon wheels. as i said earlier, i have had two flat due to thorns going out the rim holes.
    Understood. Not to be argumentative, but thorns like you've described in your original post will most likely still flat a tire when mounted on any solid type rim.

    Either way, if you have the funds, I think you will always be happier with a full build of your own choosing. Good luck and have fun with it.

  41. #41
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    not with stans. i have only had flats then the thorns go through the tire and out the rim holes

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    372
    I sold my Ti Muk and got an Echo and am very happy with the new ride. The Turnagain rims are heavy and don't play well tubeless. I've decided to ride them for a while, until (I hope) we have more selection / cheaper options for tubeless ready rims. I ride in snow at least 4 months a year, so the Turnagains will become my winter only wheels and I'll probably get a 50mm 29+ wheelset for summer riding.
    Even with the boat anchor wheelset, it is a blast to ride. My other bike is a Ti El Mariachi that weighs considerably less and is a great bike, but it sits in the garage, largely unused these days.

  43. #43
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by ghood View Post
    I sold my Ti Muk and got an Echo and am very happy with the new ride. The Turnagain rims are heavy and don't play well tubeless. I've decided to ride them for a while, until (I hope) we have more selection / cheaper options for tubeless ready rims. I ride in snow at least 4 months a year, so the Turnagains will become my winter only wheels and I'll probably get a 50mm 29+ wheelset for summer riding.
    Even with the boat anchor wheelset, it is a blast to ride. My other bike is a Ti El Mariachi that weighs considerably less and is a great bike, but it sits in the garage, largely unused these days.
    both my skinny bikes are for sale. the fatty is just too much fun! so, i assume you like the echo more then the muk you had? What stands out on it over the muk?

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    both my skinny bikes are for sale. the fatty is just too much fun! so, i assume you like the echo more then the muk you had? What stands out on it over the muk?
    It's lighter than the muk (although I did have a Rohloff on the Muk, so that made the back wheel ridiculously heavy) and will fit a 5" tire in the rear. Also, the muk would not take a Bluto. I also like the Echo's geometry - longer top tube, slacker HA, short stem, wide bars.

  45. #45
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by ghood View Post
    It's lighter than the muk (although I did have a Rohloff on the Muk, so that made the back wheel ridiculously heavy) and will fit a 5" tire in the rear. Also, the muk would not take a Bluto. I also like the Echo's geometry - longer top tube, slacker HA, short stem, wide bars.
    you must have had an older muk. mine will fit the bluto, the ha on my muk is slacker then the echo too, 68.5 vs 69.8. top tube is the same.
    i guess what i need to determine is if i would have that much more fun on an echo then i do my current bike. i have a ton of fun on the muk, only time it holds me back is on longer hill climbs - which is why i was wanting to drop weight. i think the bluto would add to the enjoyment too.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    you must have had an older muk. mine will fit the bluto, the ha on my muk is slacker then the echo too, 68.5 vs 69.8. top tube is the same.
    i guess what i need to determine is if i would have that much more fun on an echo then i do my current bike. i have a ton of fun on the muk, only time it holds me back is on longer hill climbs - which is why i was wanting to drop weight. i think the bluto would add to the enjoyment too.
    I had an older Muk. I love the Bluto - it simply allows me to go faster on rowdier sections of trail downhill. If you're not riding in snow the 5" tire in the rear doesn't make that big of a difference. It makes a huge difference for me though as I'm frequently riding horribly soft snow. My buddy was the guy who started the thread on whether or not to get a new bike, or put gucci wheels on his older Muk, and I know that the 5" tire compatibility was a big part of his decision to get a new one.

  47. #47
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    starting to sound more and more like i should just upgrade current bike. our average yearly snow total is around 20" and it's rare that we get snow and it sticks around for more then a few weeks. i have had the muk for 2 winters now and the tires got me by pretty good.

  48. #48
    rth009
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    738
    Quote Originally Posted by rda View Post
    starting to sound more and more like i should just upgrade current bike. our average yearly snow total is around 20" and it's rare that we get snow and it sticks around for more then a few weeks. i have had the muk for 2 winters now and the tires got me by pretty good.
    If you only have 20" of snow annually and you have the newer generation Mukluk with alternator dropouts and bluto compatability, you should keep the Mukluk you have and get some nexties, expertly-laced to quality hubs and a Bluto (or wait a bit and see if a next generation Bluto is announced). Later generation Muks with alternators have good clearance for a 170mm frame.

  49. #49
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    based on advice here and also from my lbs i am going to upgrade the muk. i am getting whiskey rims laced to industry 9 hubs and a bluto. i am going to put an xt 10 speed cassette on (has a 9 speed now) and either a new 1 x crank with 28t or just get a 28t to run on the stock inner spider. zee der and xt brakes.

    I sold both skinny bikes and will be able to do all these upgrades and still have money left over for some new summer type tires

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DualRollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    428
    Just out of curiosity, why do you NEED the Bluto? Maybe I haven't been on fatbike long enough, but I feel like once you get your tire pressure dialed in you don't really need travel in the front as long as you're not descending super technical stuff at a high speed. Not saying anyone is wrong for wanting one, but if I were extremely concerned with weight I would be doing anything I could to talk myself out of a Bluto.

  51. #51
    rda
    rda is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    182
    i am hoping it will help the tire follow the trail better in the rough stuff instead of bouncing. i know a guy who is full fat around here, he actually switches between rigid and bluto depending on the trail he is riding.

  52. #52
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    Quote Originally Posted by DualRollers View Post
    Just out of curiosity, why do you NEED the Bluto? Maybe I haven't been on fatbike long enough, but I feel like once you get your tire pressure dialed in you don't really need travel in the front as long as you're not descending super technical stuff at a high speed. Not saying anyone is wrong for wanting one, but if I were extremely concerned with weight I would be doing anything I could to talk myself out of a Bluto.
    Best part I ever put on my fat bike hands down. Fat tires do not equal suspension and adjusting air pressure is for traction and float not for cush. Sure the fat tires smooth out the trail some but the uncontrolled rebound can get bouncy. I run my front around 12psi in the summer and let the fork do what it is there for, very fast and corners like it's on rails.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DualRollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Best part I ever put on my fat bike hands down. Fat tires do not equal suspension and adjusting air pressure is for traction and float not for cush. Sure the fat tires smooth out the trail some but the uncontrolled rebound can get bouncy. I run my front around 12psi in the summer and let the fork do what it is there for, very fast and corners like it's on rails.
    I wouldn't count on tire pressure acting as suspension, but I got rid of most of the bounce and chatter on singletrack type riding by dialing in my tire pressure... There seems to be a sweet spot between bouncy and too low where it affects your handling on fast stuff...

    Like I said, not saying anyone is wrong. I've never ridden a Bluto before, just looking at it from a weight perspective. I can't talk myself into wanting one because most of my local trails are techy rock garden style riding and that thing weighs a ton. My arms are too weenie to be lifting a 20lb front end all day long.

  54. #54
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    My bike only weighs 26 pounds with a Bluto. Oh and I don't have an arm issue

  55. #55
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,068
    Quote Originally Posted by DualRollers View Post
    Just out of curiosity, why do you NEED the Bluto? Maybe I haven't been on fatbike long enough, but I feel like once you get your tire pressure dialed in you don't really need travel in the front as long as you're not descending super technical stuff at a high speed. Not saying anyone is wrong for wanting one, but if I were extremely concerned with weight I would be doing anything I could to talk myself out of a Bluto.
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    Best part I ever put on my fat bike hands down. Fat tires do not equal suspension and adjusting air pressure is for traction and float not for cush. Sure the fat tires smooth out the trail some but the uncontrolled rebound can get bouncy. I run my front around 12psi in the summer and let the fork do what it is there for, very fast and corners like it's on rails.
    i just added a Lefty and I'll echo BOb's sentiments: adding 100mm of travel is the best mod I've done to my 9:Zero:7, hands down, better than tubeless, even. my rigid fork weighed 1240g, my lefty weighs 1420. My bike is still under 32#s. My trails are super techy, with tons of logs and rocks. Rigid, I could gingerly pick my way through them, but there was always a lingering fear of ending up in an oral surgeons's office if i went OTB into a pile of rocks. with a shock up front, 67.5 of rake and 100mm of travel, going through rocky descents is a completely different experience.
    this is an easier descent:

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blowery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantic View Post
    i just added a Lefty and I'll echo BOb's sentiments: adding 100mm of travel is the best mod I've done to my 9:Zero:7, hands down, better than tubeless, even. my rigid fork weighed 1240g, my lefty weighs 1420. My bike is still under 32#s. My trails are super techy, with tons of logs and rocks. Rigid, I could gingerly pick my way through them, but there was always a lingering fear of ending up in an oral surgeons's office if i went OTB into a pile of rocks. with a shock up front, 67.5 of rake and 100mm of travel, going through rocky descents is a completely different experience.
    this is an easier descent:
    x3 my lefty upgrade made a HUGE difference in the bike.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,001
    I think using the fatty as a year round bike (rather than just for snow/sand) justifies the Bluto.

    I'm trying to sell my HT 29'er and plan to use the Mayor year round.

    Bluto for summer/trails, carbon fork for winter.
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2017 Trek Farley 9.6
    2017 Diamondback Haanjo Trail Carbon
    2016 Scott Solace 10 Disc

  58. #58
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Swerny View Post



    Bluto for summer/trails, carbon fork for winter.
    That was my plan as well but after running bluto in wi winter its staying on for all seasons.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    That was my plan as well but after running bluto in wi winter its staying on for all seasons.
    I feel the same way. Rigid is fine when the trails are smooth, but the hikers tend to make the singletrack bumpy until the bikes have time to smooth it out. Control and comfort is worth the weight to me.
    Laziness Breeds Efficiency

  60. #60
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,068
    I'm selling my rigid fork, i'm not going back.

Similar Threads

  1. help a complete bike noob make his first bike purchase
    By that0neGuy in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-16-2015, 08:57 AM
  2. Fat Bike purchase
    By Bryan1113 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-08-2014, 03:53 PM
  3. Need input on high end cassette purchase
    By madsedan in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-03-2013, 11:32 AM
  4. help with a bike purchase
    By sinfony78 in forum Women's Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-26-2013, 12:26 PM
  5. Help with bike purchase, thanks for looking!
    By Sprezzatura in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-25-2012, 03:08 PM

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.