Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Nate vs Bud/Lou

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    437

    Nate vs Bud/Lou

    Time for new tires! Here in eastern PA we don’t have maintained, groomed trails to ride on, so fat biking usually involves riding through a couple inches of fresh snow which can range from powder to slush. I am not sure how much flotation actually helps versus just having big nasty treads that move the bike forward and keep it moving in a straight line through variable crap. I don’t really care much about rolling resistance on hard surfaces if I can blaze my own trails through a few inches of snow/slush/mud.

    I was planning on putting these on 80mm rims, but also have a set of 65mms.

    What say you? Would the Nate’s work fine given that the snow isn’t deep? Or does the Bud/Lou offer more traction AND float?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    83
    Nate offers great traction, kind of like a mini-Lou. Obviously Bud and Lou offer more float. I would say that Bud offers better lateral traction than Nate in the front (never ridden Lou in the front). Not that Nate really lacks for traction, but Bud is pretty exceptional in loose corners. (Note: I haven't tried Edna)

    Assuming you can fit a 4.8 in the back I prefer Bud/Lou to Nate in most snowy or loose conditions. But I weigh 240 plus all my gear so I tend to sink.

    I know a few riders running Bud front and Nate rear on their 170/177 rear axle bikes.

    Good luck choosing!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BIGHORN LEW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    830
    Edna 4.3 gets nate traction, but more float. Might be perfect for you?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    437
    Thanks! Did not know about the Edna.

    The B/L combo is heavily discounted right now.

  5. #5
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,039
    I have not tried Edna but I consistently mount up Bud and Lou when the snow flies. They do no wrong.
    I like turtles

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    301
    I've tried several tires and I haven't been able to beat the Bud/Lou in snow. Awesome winter tires.

  7. #7
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,395
    IME Lou is a bigger/heavier Nate.

    Similar traction.

    Depends on what you prefer : flotation vs lighter weight ( Lou vs Nate )


    I run Bud & Lou in winter and JJ 4,8 / 4,4 in summer
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    518
    I picked up two 120tpi nates a month ago for $69 a piece. Theyve been good in the traction department and pretty fast rolling, but one of them leaks sealant at the bead all over on both sides while the other is bone dry. Seems to be holding pressure, but is just leaking sealant all the time.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    509
    Given your situation, I don't see a reason why you need to go to a 5" tire. I'd stick to 4" Nates, personally. (Or Van Helga).

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by pOrk View Post
    I picked up two 120tpi nates a month ago for $69 a piece. Theyve been good in the traction department and pretty fast rolling, but one of them leaks sealant at the bead all over on both sides while the other is bone dry. Seems to be holding pressure, but is just leaking sealant all the time.
    What rim and tubeless system? What sealant?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    518
    Whisky carbon no9 70mm, whisky tape, stans, about 4.5oz.

    Interesting fact, one nate is different than the other. One says 3.8 and the other says 4.0, both 120tpi, just different sidewall text. You can see the seapage all yhe way around the bead on both sides. Set the bead at 25psi. Rode it 15miles yesterday and did a few chunky descents at speed woth about 10psi.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by pOrk View Post
    Whisky carbon no9 70mm, whisky tape, stans, about 4.5oz.

    Interesting fact, one nate is different than the other. One says 3.8 and the other says 4.0, both 120tpi, just different sidewall text. You can see the seapage all yhe way around the bead on both sides. Set the bead at 25psi. Rode it 15miles yesterday and did a few chunky descents at speed woth about 10psi.
    Try switching to Orange Seal Subzero. I find the latest Stan's sealant to be useless...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,810
    The system seems spot on. I'd agree on the post above regarding Stans.

    I bought a Nate recently when they went on sale, but it is still in the box. Can't comment on what its sidewall says. Have they modified the molding (ridges and hidden font) along the beads?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    518
    Quote Originally Posted by bme107 View Post
    What rim and tubeless system? What sealant?
    Quote Originally Posted by bme107 View Post
    The system seems spot on. I'd agree on the post above regarding Stans.

    I bought a Nate recently when they went on sale, but it is still in the box. Can't comment on what its sidewall says. Have they modified the molding (ridges and hidden font) along the beads?
    Im going to see about getting somenorange seal this week but tonight im going to setup a JJ 4.0 i have lying around.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    104
    I run Bud / Lou in winter and a Nate in back in summer - for our riding here in CO I would not run a Nate in snow. There will be times you’d be wanting the Lou no doubt. Lou has gnarlier knobs and better flotation. And since you said you don’t care about rolling resistance - that seals the deal. Lou.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    261
    Quote Originally Posted by CObikeman View Post
    for our riding here in CO I would not run a Nate in snow.
    Why?

    Plenty of us here in the CO mtns running Nates during winter and perfectly happy with them.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Sloth View Post
    Why?

    Plenty of us here in the CO mtns running Nates during winter and perfectly happy with them.
    I’m just a state over from you and happy with Nate/VH as well. I had Lou/XXL/etc 5”+ tires. But in the end, Nate’s at low psi worked just fine without the weight/RR penalty getting to the trails or on the fast sections.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    104
    Because many of the snow rides I do require max floatation and max traction. Would a Nate suffice? Maybe. But I want a tire that is awesome - doesn’t just suffice.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dilligaff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    440
    Go with the Bud/Lou. I have Nates and love them, but they're no match for the traction and girth of the B/L. For winter, why settle.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Nothing to see here, move along folks.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    518
    I run nates and vanhelgas before that because I cant fit the 5” tires otherwise i would. but i can fit an edna and probably dunderand flow. Not much feedback on edna in the snow, but it looks like a good compromise for the 177 folk. Kind of like a bigger nate

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: calzonical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by pOrk View Post
    I run nates and vanhelgas before that because I cant fit the 5” tires otherwise i would. but i can fit an edna and probably dunderand flow. Not much feedback on edna in the snow, but it looks like a good compromise for the 177 folk. Kind of like a bigger nate

    Edna review

    With 197mm frame I run Bud/Lou when snow is 5+ inches. Usually run 27.5 x 4.5 the rest of the time.

    I have run Lou/Lou and that's a whole lot of work.

    Back in the 170mm frame dayz I ran Bud/Nate and Nate was OK but it's no Lou. Swapped the Nate out for Lou on a Marge Lite - ding! ding! ding!

    *disclaimer: Above experience on CO snow.

Similar Threads

  1. winter tire setup: nate/nate or nate/bud?
    By Rodney in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-18-2016, 11:07 AM
  2. Bud and Bud, or Lou for sand?
    By letitsnow in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-02-2016, 04:02 PM
  3. Rolling Resistance- Nate F & R vs Bud/Lou
    By nitrousjunky in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-22-2014, 04:15 PM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 10:16 PM
  5. Bud and Lou and OD Crank Yeay!
    By MasterOMayhem in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-15-2012, 06:30 AM

Members who have read this thread: 151

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.