Old and Fat can't go back?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 26 of 26
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    93

    Old and Fat can't go back?

    I've been riding a Spesh Fat Boy for 4 years now. Initially it was just for snow then I tried dirt and sold my 26" wheeled FS mountain bike. Last winter a friend basically gave me a nice carbon Salsa Pony Rustler for some party money he needed. My god this is a nice bike. Things have really advanced in the mountain bike world since I took a break. But here's the thing... it scares the shit out of me. Those skinny tires... sure they roll nice, but they do not feel safe. (note: I'm old at this point which may play into it). I'm thinking of putting a set of 27.5" rims with 2.8" maybe 3" tires. Has anyone else had this experience trying to go back to skinny tires and been reluctant to return?

  2. #2
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,383
    With my collection including three plus bikes, there is no intention of going back to 2.eww tires and road rims!
    The pleasure of going into places that 2.nvm tires cannot traverse and a pair of 4.8's don't blink is amazing. The plus bikes are an amazing component of my collection as well. A plus full suspension has been to many great places and has been awesome. My plus singlespeed is a joy on many of the same trails.

    Go out and take a plus bike for a ride and see for yourself if it doesn't fill a void. If possible, rent one for a week and give it a proper shakedown.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ADKMTNBIKER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    727
    I have a 2015 Stumpy 29er. Got it new in the fall then got an ICT and a Mayor. When I take out the 29er. It feels like a ferrari compared to the fat. I still enjoy it at times. Just like I enjoy driving fast sometimes. I mostly ride my fatbikes though. I don't have the need for speed all the time. Plus the rocks and roots sucks ass on the skinny bike. I feel like there's a tool for every job.

  4. #4
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,255
    I consider 2.2" tires road tires these days.

    I run 2.8"ers for buff, smooth singletrack.

    3.5" tires for chunk.

    4.5"ers for off piste.

    And 5.2" for snow.

    Vive le fat.

  5. #5
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,352
    I only ride 29+ and 4.8 fat. My 29" Stumpjumper fully was in the basement apart for years now. I'm revamping it because my son wants to try it out.
    I feel like this is a fool's errand though... This past Monday, the bikeshop ride I always participate in was also going to be a trial day. They brought Transition bikes for everyone. My son asked if there was one he could ride but they were all spoken for so I gave him mine, I'd rather ride my Krampus.
    My son is 14, 6'2" and has only ridden 29+ for the last five years. After the ride I asked him how he liked the Transition. It was a carbon, full suspension 27.5 bike. The Sentinel, I believe. He said he didn't care for the skinny tires and he had pedal strikes. I said yeah, that happens with FS. You have to train yourself how to ride them and not do that. It was his first ride ever on a bike with rear suspension.
    I have a feeling the Stumpjumper is going to be short lived again.
    I like turtles

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: roughster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    704
    29 x 3.0 is the perfect "skinny" for us fatties!
    2018 Trek Farley Ex 8 - One bike to rule them all!
    2015 Salsa Bucksaw 2 - Also pretty frickiní sweet!

  7. #7
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,255
    Quote Originally Posted by NYrr496 View Post
    he had pedal strikes. I said yeah, that happens with FS. You have to train yourself how to ride them and not do that.

    Nothing about FS mandates pedal strikes. That's just the direction the hipster-chasing parts of the industry have gone.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    253
    "Nothing about FS mandates pedal strikes. That's just the direction the hipster-chasing parts of the industry have gone."

    Huh?

  9. #9
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,352
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Nothing about FS mandates pedal strikes. That's just the direction the hipster-chasing parts of the industry have gone.
    True. His last two bikes have been 907 fat frames with 29+ wheelsets. I guess the bottom bracket is significantly higher. He said this was the first time he's ever had that happen.
    I like turtles

  10. #10
    rth009
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Xylx View Post
    ILast winter a friend basically gave me a nice carbon Salsa Pony Rustler for some party money he needed. My god this is a nice bike. Things have really advanced in the mountain bike world since I took a break. But here's the thing... it scares the shit out of me. Those skinny tires... sure they roll nice, but they do not feel safe. (note: I'm old at this point which may play into it). I'm thinking of putting a set of 27.5" rims with 2.8" maybe 3" tires. Has anyone else had this experience trying to go back to skinny tires and been reluctant to return?
    What rims/tires came with the pony rustler. While the frame will accept both, that was sold as a 27.5 x 3"

  11. #11
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,255
    Quote Originally Posted by ddoh View Post
    "Nothing about FS mandates pedal strikes. That's just the direction the hipster-chasing parts of the industry have gone."

    Huh?

    Bottom brackets have gotten crazy low. That's why people have problems with pedal strikes -- not because they're on FS.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: letitsnow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    257
    After riding adult sized tires for years now, my semi-retired 2006 Trek Top Fuel (26x2.1 tires) is what I use as a road bike. The Trek still sees the occasional trip to ride buffed singletrack, as it is still FAST!!! in that setting, anything tougher, and my Bucksaw is the preferred bike.

    I try not to sell any bikes these days, as they always seem to be good at something else down the road. The Pony Rustler (if I had one) would stay in my fleet.

  13. #13
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,157
    At an awe inspiring 5'3", I tried a 29+ Krampus. LBS questioned my choice. I moved forward anyway.
    Now, I am cursed. Any tire less than 3" 29+ feels like riding a cross bike (and I hate that!)

  14. #14
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,352
    I like turtles

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    93
    The Pony Rustler I have is 29" wheeled with 2.35" tires. My understanding is I can put on a set of 27.5" Boost-spaced rims (40 mm or bigger) and some 2.8" or 3" tires. I posted the question a few months ago on the 27.5 forum and got no responses. My LBS later confirmed I could make the conversion.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,871
    Quote Originally Posted by NYrr496 View Post
    He said he didn't care for the skinny tires and he had pedal strikes. I said yeah, that happens with FS. You have to train yourself how to ride them and not do that. It was his first ride ever on a bike with rear suspension.
    I have a feeling the Stumpjumper is going to be short lived again.
    Low bottom bracket issue. Not a full suspension issue.

    The price you pay for lower, longer slacker or whatever it is they call it these days.

    All in the name of claiming to "Lower your center of gravity" which is 4 ft. off the ground anyway. Lowering the bottom bracket has zero effect on stability, but has a major effect on pedal strikes.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    947
    Sometimes I think back to when I ran Ritchey Z-Max 1.8 and laugh, at myself.

    2.6 and up for me, from now on. 2.8-3.0 is my preferred size though. 3.0 if I could only have one.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by prj71 View Post
    Low bottom bracket issue. Not a full suspension issue.

    The price you pay for lower, longer slacker or whatever it is they call it these days.

    All in the name of claiming to "Lower your center of gravity" which is 4 ft. off the ground anyway. Lowering the bottom bracket has zero effect on stability, but has a major effect on pedal strikes.
    The lower the bottom bracket is, in relation to axle height, the more stable it is.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,871
    Quote Originally Posted by KThaxton View Post
    The lower the bottom bracket is, in relation to axle height, the more stable it is.
    Myth.

  20. #20
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,383
    Quote Originally Posted by KThaxton View Post
    The lower the bottom bracket is, in relation to axle height, the more stable it is.
    Pfft!

    The lower the BB typically loads the front more. For some a high BB makes a bike feel twitchy and unstable.
    Either way, I am always more content with a higher BB than one that gets stuck on the speed bump in front of the neighborhood package store.

    Old and Fat can't go back?-image.jpg
    This is an example of a high BB.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  21. #21
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,255
    Quote Originally Posted by KThaxton View Post
    The lower the bottom bracket is, in relation to axle height, the more stable it is.

    There's a marginal difference here, but the increase in pedal strikes makes it not remotely a worthwhile compromise.

    Besides -- we can lower our center of gravity by anywhere from 4 to 7" using a dropper post these days. Which is orders of magnitude more effective at increasing stability and cornering speed/confidence.

    Compared that to the ~inch of range in BB heights.

  22. #22
    turtles make me hot
    Reputation: NYrr496's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,352
    3.0 is my skinny tire bike.
    I like turtles

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by prj71 View Post
    Myth.
    Physics.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,871
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    There's a marginal difference here, but the increase in pedal strikes makes it not remotely a worthwhile compromise.

    Besides -- we can lower our center of gravity by anywhere from 4 to 7" using a dropper post these days. Which is orders of magnitude more effective at increasing stability and cornering speed/confidence.

    Compared that to the ~inch of range in BB heights.
    ^^^So much this.

    But the bike industry would like people to believe otherwise and sell you their bike claiming that it's more stable with a lower BB.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,862
    Don't think I'll ever ride less than 2.8s ever again.

    Re BB heights: I've never ridden a bike with a BB between 11"-14" and thought either: "man, this thing is stable" or "this thing is tippy" Have thought: "[email protected]#$! so many pedal strikes." and "this ain't fun to ride clipping my feet on everything".

    Saw a story about a pump track bike, years ago, where they build it up with both crank arms aligned so that you could ride with both feet in the low position for ultimate low CG. Don't recall the summary of their findings.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iliketexmex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    708
    My brother in law let me ride his pivot 429, it was the same feeling as the OP. It was fast, but I did not feel anywhere close to as confident. When the time came to buy a new bike, I bought another fat bike. I have not tried a 27+, but I figured I am not out to set course records so why not just stick with what I know I like. The added bonus is I don't need to send shocks in for regular service, worry about linkage bearings or any of that stuff. It's the simple life

Similar Threads

  1. Old Fat Guy and his new Fat Bike
    By Yetters in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-02-2015, 06:48 AM
  2. Old fat bike pic (really old!)
    By Jisch in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-04-2014, 01:11 AM
  3. Fat Skinny Fat Skinny Fat
    By Bob the Wheelbuilder in forum Surly
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-13-2007, 11:34 PM
  4. fat fat fatty fat fat fat
    By evilbeaver in forum Riding Passion
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 12-10-2006, 01:23 PM
  5. Fat rider, fat arse, fat saddle
    By GrumpySmurf in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-17-2006, 08:00 PM

Members who have read this thread: 167

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.