Pugs Component Choice Questions- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Fragile
    Reputation: Mountain_Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    253

    Pugs Component Choice Questions

    I'm building up a 2013 Pugsley right now, and I'd like to validate a few components since my lack of fat bike experience could be getting in the way. After it's built, It'll be ridden mainly on non-snowy single track, but will see limited snow use.

    A few things I'm thinking of:

    Fork: Offset Moonlander

    Front Rim: Clown Shoe
    Front Hub: Phil Wood 135 mm KISS-Off free wheel / disk brake
    Front Tire: Knard 3.8

    Rear Rim: Holy Rolling Darryl
    Rear Hub: Phil Wood 135mm cassette
    Rear Tire: Nate 3.8

    Crankset: Surly OD 175mm
    Chain Rings: 22 / 36
    Cassette: Shimano 10 speed 11-36

    I've tried to do my homework as much as possible, but with so many different standards, choices, sizes, and offset / non-offset options, it's hard to get it all straight. Any validation or comments are appreciated.

    A few specific questions:

    Am I correct that I'll be able to swap the wheels front to rear and the backup drivetrain will clear the Clown Shoe / Knard?

    Is using a wider rim in the front an OK decision? I know for the snow, ideally you would put the extra float in the rear, but I don't want to limit my gear choices on the Pugs. I'm thinking the wider front rim will fill out the 3.8 tire nicely for non-snow riding and give me the option of the larger tires for the front if I want to explore that space.

    Should I really just stick with the Surly Pugsly fork that came with the bike (it'll be color matched to the frame that way!) and build a Clown Shoe (or Rolling Darryl) front wheel on Phil's 135 mm snow front hub (i.e., no option to swap wheels if something happens to my rear free hub)? I believe this will fit with a 3.8 Knard, but I'll be limited to this as the max tire size.

    Anything else I might not be thinking about?

    Thanks for any comments. . .now to track down the rest of the components. The rims in general seem to be limited.
    "It's easy to grin, when your ship comes in, and you've got the stock market beat; but the man worth while, is the man who can smile, when his shorts are too tight in the seat.'"

    -- Judge Smails

  2. #2
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,683
    I myself would go with the standard non offset fork and stick with RDs or ML's front and back. If you want fatter and doing a frame up get the Moonlander frameset.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,801
    A few comments:

    - With a Moonlander offset fork and Pugsley frame, you can not swap front and rear wheels. ML offset is 28 mm and Pugsley offset is 17.5 mm.
    - 100 mm rims with a 3.8" Knard sounds like a strange combination if you're not riding snow or otherwise soft surfaces. 100 mm is primarily a rim for 4" and larger rubber on snow. If you want a wide rim for 3.8" tires with room to explore other sizes, 82 mm (Rolling Darryl) is better.

    If you decide to build a Moonlander offset wheel with a Clown Shoe rim anyways, a regular cassette hub is the best choice even if you run singlespeed, because you get even spoke lengths and tension on both sides. With 28 mm hub offset and 20 mm spoke bed offset, the spoke bed sits perfectly in between the flanges. A single speed hub would have the drive side flange further outboard, which means reduced spoke tension on that side.

    My recommendation would be Rolling Darryl front and rear (plenty wide, flexible choice of tires) and a Pugsley offset fork if you want to swap wheels. With the Pugsley SS hubs work better than with the Moonlander.

    EDIT:

    Checked the deal with SS hubs and spoke tension: With a Clown Shoe, Surly disc rear hub and 28 mm offset, you only get 57% tension on the drive side while left side is 100%. With a Rolling Darryl and 17.5 mm offset the ratio is 100% / 68%.

  4. #4
    Fragile
    Reputation: Mountain_Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    253
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    I myself would go with the standard non offset fork and stick with RDs or ML's front and back. If you want fatter and doing a frame up get the Moonlander frameset.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    A few comments:

    - With a Moonlander offset fork and Pugsley frame, you can not swap front and rear wheels. ML offset is 28 mm and Pugsley offset is 17.5 mm.
    - 100 mm rims with a 3.8" Knard sounds like a strange combination if you're not riding snow or otherwise soft surfaces. 100 mm is primarily a rim for 4" and larger rubber on snow. If you want a wide rim for 3.8" tires with room to explore other sizes, 82 mm (Rolling Darryl) is better.

    If you decide to build a Moonlander offset wheel with a Clown Shoe rim anyways, a regular cassette hub is the best choice even if you run singlespeed, because you get even spoke lengths and tension on both sides. With 28 mm hub offset and 20 mm spoke bed offset, the spoke bed sits perfectly in between the flanges. A single speed hub would have the drive side flange further outboard, which means reduced spoke tension on that side.

    My recommendation would be Rolling Darryl front and rear (plenty wide, flexible choice of tires) and a Pugsley offset fork if you want to swap wheels. With the Pugsley SS hubs work better than with the Moonlander.

    EDIT:

    Checked the deal with SS hubs and spoke tension: With a Clown Shoe, Surly disc rear hub and 28 mm offset, you only get 57% tension on the drive side while left side is 100%. With a Rolling Darryl and 17.5 mm offset the ratio is 100% / 68%.
    Thanks, Gents.

    Saul, this is exactly the type of info I was hoping an expert could confirm for me. I'd been looking at the offsets between the Pugs and the Moonie, but I never picked up on the fact they were different, or noticed but didn't put 2 and 2 together.

    Soooo. . .sounds like this is where I need to be:

    Fork: Moonlander centered fork

    Front Rim: Holy Rolling Darryl
    Front Hub: Phil Wood 135 mm Snow Bike Front Hub w/ Rear Disk Spacing
    Front Tire: Knard 3.8

    Rear Rim: Holy Rolling Darryl
    Rear Hub: Phil Wood 135mm cassette
    Rear Tire: Nate 3.8

    Crankset: Surly OD 175mm
    Chain Rings: 22 / 36
    Cassette: Shimano 10 speed 11-36

    Doing more research, I just noticed the 2013 Pugs frames actually ship with the Moonlander centered fork. . .not the Pugs fork as I had assumed. I thought the Moonlander fork was an upgrade for the Pug Ops. However, there is conflicting info on the Surly site as to if the fork is front or rear brake specific. I'll give Surly a buzz tomorrow and sort it out with them unless anyone chimes in here with a definitive answer.
    "It's easy to grin, when your ship comes in, and you've got the stock market beat; but the man worth while, is the man who can smile, when his shorts are too tight in the seat.'"

    -- Judge Smails

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    The Surly blog confirmed this a while back.
    If you are buying a 2013 frameset the option of swapping wheels is gone.
    This is not a bad, I have never even once tried to do such a thing so I upgraded to a centered fork.

    With the centered fork you now can have a front wheel with equal spoke tension (using a front hub), in most ways it won't matter as the offset did work, but it should be stronger.

    1 Knard and 1 Nate is a great idea, reading through the Nate owners thread you may want to try swapping Nate/Knard to see what suits your riding condidtions, desired speed, etc..

    Yes to RD, unless you get alot of deep snow or soft sand. That said, I run 47mm trials rim in the summer and 80mm in winter.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,133

    Re: Pugs Component Choice Questions

    Go with Marge Lites. They are lighter, and make for a better handling bike with 3.8s. A clown shoe up front is ridiculous, but even Rolling Darryls wouldn't be a good choice for a singletrack machine. The wider rims adversely affect handling in dry singletrack situations. The Marge Lites will make for a quicker bike in the dry and are still wide enough for winter use.

    I've tried both.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    9
    I went through the exact dilemma this summer as I was putting my "dream" machine with the able help of the guys at Bikeman in Maine. After calling Surly, I was disappointed to learn that they were no longer making the Pugs in yellow... After calling all over the country, I found the last 18" yellow frame on the planet. The guys at Bikeman had the matching yellow offset fork, but agreed to substitute the moonlander symmetrical for me. I also made a couple of other substitutions... Since most of what we ride are hard packed trails or asphalt, I opted for the Black Floyd tires. Most folks run them at higher psi, so I wanted to get the solid (no cutouts) Large Marge rims... I could imagine the bulges growing over time with the increased pressure.
    I like the way the solid rims look also. There are two types of solid marge... I got the ones that have been machined to reduce weight. Zach did a great job with the wheels too.
    The advantage of getting the symmetrical Moonlander fork is that you can eventually put a larger tire up front if you want to. Most MTB downhill riders go for the larger up front and for snow, I hear that you want the increased flotation up front also. I don't see myself needing to swap front to rear in the wilderness to make it home anytime soon, so that is a non issue for me.
    The 3.8 rear is as far as you can go in the rear if you still want three gear rings in the front, which is a really big deal for me...
    The long and the short of it, I LOVE my new bike! I will probably have a set of wheels with Nates for the times I go offroad, but for now... I'm good to go.
    Enjoy

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    919
    It's been mentioned a bit already but get Marge Lites, Rolling Darryl's are not the right tool for single track. As to wheel swapping (in case of drivetrain failure etc.) there's only a handful of people who ever need to be set up for this and riding single track is not it.

    Not sure if I understand why you want to go and buy a moonlander fork if you have one with the frame (if you must grab another fork go get a carbon carver for $300 it's 1/2 the weight and is actually an upgrade).

    Onto tyres.........Nate (traction) upfront / Knard (faster) in rear, that being said it's single track mostly so a Nate's probably way too much tyre anyway. Go buy two Knard's instead and if you want to try something with more traction pickup an On-one Floater as well(saving you approx 200g and $30). Now you got to decide between 120tpi and 27tpi.........

    Finally do you really need that front derailer? With 28T and 30T chainrings available than require no retention system and a 11-36 cassette your getting into the sweet spot for fatbike gearing (IMHO of course). Have a play around here Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Gear Calculator

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    233
    For riding singletrack, you will get the best performance with Marge Lite rims and 120tpi Knards front and rear.

    Super duper fun.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    9
    Hi Offcourse,
    I didn't have to buy the Moonlander fork, they switched it out for free. It does offer the option of going fatter on the front (which is why I'm considering the Darryl up front).
    I think you are right about the Marge lites for a second set. Since I have the Floyds for street and hard pack trails (today I even rode them on a bit of sand), the Knards seemed like they would be almost too similar... that's why I've been thinking Nate or Husker Du or something that is enough of a departure to justify building another set of wheels. What do you (anyone) think of the difference of running those on the 65mm vs the 80mm as far as shape, float, performance?

Similar Threads

  1. Mud and Pugs tire questions
    By Coloradogoose in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-25-2013, 08:28 PM
  2. Component questions
    By cycle alaska in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-10-2012, 01:50 PM
  3. Color choice for Pugs...
    By eredinger in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-19-2012, 11:31 AM
  4. Fork and Component questions!
    By activ3 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-13-2012, 07:45 AM
  5. Build component questions
    By big_slacker in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-17-2011, 11:55 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.