Surly XL 4.5" larry Tire rumour?- Mtbr.com
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 200 of 242
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,126

    Surly XL 4.5" larry Tire rumour?

    is it true?
    a larger tire (or tyre here in the UK ) up front would be cool for dune surfing
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by coastkid71 View Post
    is it true?
    a larger tire (or tyre here in the UK ) up front would be cool for dune surfing
    I've heard the rumour as well. It is supposed to be made for the new fatter Pugsley.
    My outdoor blog: www.yetirides.com

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    123
    Oh god, a fatter pugsley? Yst another bike to blow my hard earned cash on.
    "Get busy living or get busy dying, that's god damn right"

  4. #4
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,683
    I'ts going to tick me off when I have to start calling my 907 semi-fat

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,512
    There is already a 4.5 tire on the market. Schwinn stingray 4.5 guys on my forum are rocking it. I am sure it will be based of it's carcass. here it is, http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com...ead=250&page=1

    Step way off the grid UGV
    Last edited by bighit; 06-16-2011 at 04:52 AM.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SteveRice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    112
    From Surly's facebook post - "Big news...but you're going to have to wait until tomorrow." I wonder if this has anything to do with a bigger tire and bike?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,512
    the tire has been around for years in the 20" version.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  8. #8
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    4.5" + 100 mm will give an amazing flotation for sure!

    fatter pugs? where did you guys hear that? ... as bdundee said, now our bikes will be semi-fats?

    fatter pugs = non-offset pugs?

  9. #9
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,137
    Someone going to be making some 120mm wide rims? Haha, yah it is pretty bad if you are running a 4" tire & it's only semi-fat biking
    I am fat & happy enough right now, no upgrades for me.

  10. #10
    hispanic mechanic
    Reputation: sslos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,516
    Ho.
    Lee.
    Carp.

    Los
    Whiskey is my yoga.

    dongerparty.com

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    381
    Wow

  12. #12
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit View Post
    There is already a 4.5 tire on the market. Schwinn stingray 4.5 guys on my forum are rocking it. I am sure it will be based of it's carcass. here it is, http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com...ead=250&page=1

    Step way off the grid UGV
    Vastly different diameter, which has been the limiting factor for bicycle tires. Except for the Nimbus and Coker 36" tires, nobody has had the equipment to make bicycle tires taller than the Surlys or 29ers. It is not a coincidence they are about the same diameter.

    If bigger machines are now available, that is great news for many reasons.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  13. #13
    Full Tilt Boogie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,650
    I'd buy some. I don't even think they would fit in my current bike. A Super Pug crawler would be in order.
    I sell bikes here. Check out the Blog here. Facebook.

  14. #14
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    I was thinking, "What is the point of making a super-fat bamboo frame if there are no super wide tires to go with it (other than the small diameter tires a la Hanebrink)?"

    If this pans out to be true, I'm going to change that thought.

  15. #15
    hispanic mechanic
    Reputation: sslos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,516
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    Vastly different diameter, which has been the limiting factor for bicycle tires. Except for the Nimbus and Coker 36" tires, nobody has had the equipment to make bicycle tires taller than the Surlys or 29ers. It is not a coincidence they are about the same diameter.

    If bigger machines are now available, that is great news for many reasons.
    Outside diameter is the limiting factor... but what if someone made a wider tire, more of a horizontally oriented oval than a circle.
    I wouldn't think that would be great for all around use, but might make a major difference for flotation in soft conditions.
    I think a wider , "circular' profile tire would bump into diminishing returns very quickly beyond the Larry's size.

    Los
    Whiskey is my yoga.

    dongerparty.com

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    I'm so pleased I hadn't started putting the CF frame together yet. Slight mods are now called for.

    You all know this has got to end up at 6" after a bit of evolution. Peatbog surfing, here I come!
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  17. #17
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by sslos View Post
    Outside diameter is the limiting factor... but what if someone made a wider tire, more of a horizontally oriented oval than a circle.
    I wouldn't think that would be great for all around use, but might make a major difference for flotation in soft conditions.
    I think a wider , "circular' profile tire would bump into diminishing returns very quickly beyond the Larry's size.

    Los
    Could create other handling issues for a two wheeled vehicle. Though, I guess it would be more like a huge chopper rear tire. Belts required to change the shape, changes to suppleness. Even more sensitive to rim width (narrower effective range).
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  18. #18
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    As per Surly on Facebook, the reveal has been delayed and all the guesses are wrong, including wider tires.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Would be awesome in the soft sand!!! Then we'd need a 120mm rim to go with it...

  20. #20
    Tigard, Oregon
    Reputation: clayman29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by MiniTrail View Post
    please go the other way with a 3.0 light weight larry for summer
    please
    I was thinking the same thing!
    2011 Salsa Mukluk / 2006 KTM 400 EXC

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Quote Originally Posted by clayman29 View Post
    I was thinking the same thing!
    Or maybe just kevlar beaded versions of the Larry and the Endo...

  22. #22
    M8 M12 M15 deez nuts
    Reputation: Leopold Porkstacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    8,163
    Quote Originally Posted by ward View Post
    Or maybe just kevlar beaded versions of the Larry and the Endo...
    I’d buy some! They’d be a royal bitch to mount up at first (seeing as Kevlar beaded tires are all floppy), but I would be totally OK with a lighter tire. Surely (Surly?) they’d cost more.
    Don’t frail and blow if you’re going to Braille and Flow.

  23. #23
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    I wish Continental would make a 4" tire, with Kevlar bead.. maybe under 1000g.

  24. #24
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Borgschulze View Post
    I wish Continental would make a 4" tire, with Kevlar bead.. maybe under 1000g.
    Under 1000g? Maybe for snow only. It would be as thin as tissue paper and have little tread.

    Kevlar beads are only ~30g lighter than wire bead, all else being the same.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  25. #25
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    I guess I hadn't considered how thin the tire already is.

    Kevlar bead would be nice though. Easier to store spares.

  26. #26
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,683
    Quote Originally Posted by Borgschulze View Post
    I guess I hadn't considered how thin the tire already is.

    Kevlar bead would be nice though. Easier to store spares.
    And shipping them would be nicer especially for our overseas friends.

  27. #27
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by bdundee View Post
    And shipping them would be nicer especially for our overseas friends.
    True that
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  28. #28
    bikeboatbrewski
    Reputation: scottybinwv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,396
    I heard that Crispy Creme is working an edible fat tire.








    Yes I am drinking.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by scottybinwv View Post
    I heard that Crispy Creme is working an edible fat tire.








    Yes I am drinking.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    As per Surly on Facebook, the reveal has been delayed and all the guesses are wrong, including wider tires.
    My guess is that it has something to do with packs. I'm hoping for Surly frame packs...

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    I just wish someone would make a kevlar bead. It's tough packing a spare carcass with wire beads
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jfkbike2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,046
    Quote Originally Posted by MiniTrail View Post
    please go the other way with a 3.0 light weight larry for summer
    please
    Ditto

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: VT Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    4.5" + 100 mm will give an amazing flotation for sure!

    fatter pugs? where did you guys hear that? ... as bdundee said, now our bikes will be semi-fats?

    fatter pugs = non-offset pugs?
    A few google searches turned up some info. Looks like three new items, Big Fat Larry 26x4.5 due out Sept 30th, Moonlander frame (the tire is listed "for Moonlander only", I'm assuming that is a frame reference), and Moonlander crankset.

    The crankset is listed as 175mm 21-33. My guess is that the 21t ring is placed where the middle ring usually goes and the 33t ring will be where the big ring would normally be. That will move the chain out away from the tire, and give more room for the chainstays to move out on the Moonlander frame. I guess the crank arms could spread the pedals a little further apart too if the space is needed.

    A centered 170 rear or an offset 135 rear will put the cassette in the same place. They could drop a few cogs and put a spacer behind the cassette to move the chain out. They could also do a 170 rear with a slight offset too run a full cassette.

    It will be interesting to see how it shakes out over the next three months.

    http://www.ison-distribution.com/eng...?part=TYSUL63K
    http://www.nrgenterprises.com/dealer...y&target=MOON2

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    I'm going to place my order today. They'll be like hens teeth when they first come out.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  35. #35
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    geez... yeap my lms will be so skinny now

    I guess you would want a sym 170 or similar to allow wheel removal easy with a 120mm rim+Big Fat Larry config.

  36. #36
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    I still need to get some Rolling Darryl rims if my rims ever crack.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,042
    It will be interesting to see if any of the current production fat frames will clear the new 4.5" tires on 80 or 100 mm rims. It will be also interesting to see if they come up with a wider-than-100 rim to go with the new tires.
    Either way, it probably means another bike to buy, darn it.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    as bdundee said, now our bikes will be semi-fats?
    They would be called Chubby Bikes not semi-fat. When someone comes out with a 5.0" tyre then those will be called Obese Bikes and the 6.0" tyres will be used on Morbidly Obese Bikes.

  39. #39
    R.I.P. Pugsley.
    Reputation: Rabies010's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,706
    I already am starting to put some penny's in a jar......
    (and my Pugs isn't even completed yet...)

  40. #40
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    As per Surly on Facebook, the reveal has been delayed and all the guesses are wrong, including wider tires.
    So much for the official "big news", which is Pugsley completes are in stock.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  41. #41
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy FitzGibbon View Post
    It will be interesting to see if any of the current production fat frames will clear the new 4.5" tires on 80 or 100 mm rims. It will be also interesting to see if they come up with a wider-than-100 rim to go with the new tires.
    Either way, it probably means another bike to buy, darn it.
    Clearances look interesting. Hard to tell without having a tire to measure/fit but I am optimistic.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  42. #42
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    I'm going to place my order today. They'll be like hens teeth when they first come out.
    How are you doing that, exactly? I don't see a place to order via the links VT Mike posted, am I having bricks-for-eyes?

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Get my lbs to ring ISON, and then put me on the phone to explain what I want. It's now s.o.p. at my lbs because of all the esoterica I want.

    That way when they come in, I get a pair.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  44. #44
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    The Surly Moon Lander sounds like it will be THE soft conditions bike if it`s running 4.5" wide Fat Larrys !

    Wonder if they will fit my Pug Fame on Large Marges
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  45. #45
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    Just been to Tcheesy`s excellent comapo and lifted this -


    Frame-Tire Clearance
    Both the Ti frames definitely had the advantage here, with the Ti 907 coming out on top. I am hopeful that in the future someone might offer a ~4.5” tire, and I personally would like the option of running 100 mm rims. Both the Ti 907 and Ti Fatback had ample room between the tire sidewall and the stays to accommodate the largest current common tire/rim combo (100mm/Endomorph) and possibly even have a bit of room for the tire to grow. The Alu 907 was awfully tight when shod with the 100mm rims and the Spider tires. Where the tire passed through the chainstays I could see the ano was getting polished, and while riding and watching the wheel flex there was scant daylight between the sidewall and chainstay at times. If you weren’t planning on running a 100 mm rim in back however, then this would not be a concern and the Alu 907 offers plenty of clearance with the more standard 65-80mm rims, and is certainly comparable to the Wildfire and Pugsley in terms of clearance. It’s true that 100mm rims are pretty extreme at this point, and they are heavy enough most folks would not want to run them unless the conditions really demanded them. But I would not be surprised if in the future someone came out with a heavily drilled single wall rim wider than the current 70-80 mm offerings that would open the ~100 mm rim class up to mere mortals. The Wildfire offered plenty of frame-tire clearance with the 70 mm rims mounted up and would certainly take 80’s with aplomb.

    Here are the widths in millimeters at the point where the widest part of the tire casing passes through the stays (chain stay / seat stay):
    Ti 907: 121 / 125
    Ti Fatback: 119 / 122
    Alu 907: 111 / 111
    Wildfire: 111 / 116
    Pugsley: 112 / 115

    Looks like it will be verrry tight for the Pug

    Promising for some of the others though !
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    I presume this means the feelygood metal melter will be in action on your bike's backend...
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Surly must be hunting down all the people who have listed this - the info has disappeared from the sites.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604
    my pugs might have to become an obese front fat back!
    assuming i can sneak it into the fork.
    or maybe an enabler...?

  49. #49
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    I presume this means the feelygood metal melter will be in action on your bike's backend...
    Or maybe a but of `gentle` bending may be in order........steel is (after all) real

    Good Grief VB, I see what you mean, all the references from Ison`s site have disappeared
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  50. #50
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    I`m sure Shiggy has this in hand ,so I would hope that On Ones Proto Fat will be able to handle Fat Larrys extra girth
    Last edited by Dr Feelygood !; 06-20-2011 at 01:05 PM.
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  51. #51
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Feelygood ! View Post
    I`m sure Shiggy has this in hand ,so I would hope that On Ones Proto Fat will be able to handle Fat Larrys extra girth
    Maybe. Need an actual tire on rim to know. Fitting and still having snow clearance is another matter.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    ...Fitting and still having snow clearance is another matter.
    Nothing a hacksaw and duct tape couldn't fix
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  53. #53
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Nothing a hacksaw and duct tape couldn't fix
    Now that IS a can do attitude
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2

    moonlander

    big fat larry 4.5"
    clownshoe 100 mm wide rim
    surly moonlander
    dig into your wallets!!

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,042
    It's a clever marketing strategy by Surly. Next year, they will come out with 5.5" wide MonsterEndos and the Surly Super Big-A$$ Fat Double Wide frame and fork set. They will keep going until we are running 35" Super Swampers...

  56. #56
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    It might be worth waiting for the ULTRA STEAM ROLLER tyre they are developing
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  57. #57
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    I could see this:

    Surly: Bigger tires!
    Velobike: I can't ride peat bogs.
    Surly, year later: Bigger tires!
    Velobike: I can't ride peat bogs.
    Surly: We got into the bicycle hovercraft business!
    Velobike: SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    Wow! Lots of goings on here!

    Not being on FB, or able to otherwise verify anything, hope that there is a grain of truth
    among all of the good natured BS.

    If true, it would seem easy to believe that SURLY has been listening to the wishes and
    offbeat expressions that sometimes make their display on this fourm.

    So it is MOONLANDER and BIG FAT LARRY tires, now is it? Well...

    Anyone up to a little good natured fun with Surly; Like maybe get them to nickname their
    new Larry tire after someone (in some way) on this fourm, while keeping within their
    MOONLANDER concept? (or not)

    As some examples: 'Moonboggers' - Velobike 'Dr Moons' - Dr Feelygood
    'Mooncats' - Martinsillo 'Moonfloaters' - Coastkid71

    or... 'Sandcrabs' - Sandsquid 'SnowSpyders' - Damnitman

    You get the idea...

    As a personal aside, a story from long ago.

    Many years ago my wife and I sent off an idea to "McDonalds"...long story short...you now
    drink your coffee through a lid idea concieved by my wife. Can't prove it, but about 6 months latter,
    it first appeared on their product, and from there... Never did hear anything back.

    Just to say, you never know...

    If this thought goes anywhere I will gather them up and make a formal list from which everyone
    could place a vote of somekind.

    As this is all in jest, should Surly look kindly upon any ideas expressed, they are free to apply
    them. By submitting any idea for a nickname we hold nor retain any 'rights'. In that light, if any
    whom I have used as examples wish otherwise, let me know and it shall not appear on any
    official list for consideration should this progress.

    Any takers?

  59. #59
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,683
    We need snow!!!!

  60. #60
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Ya know......

    If they wanted a better name for their fatter tire, they should call it "Moe"

    Just sayin'
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jfkbike2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,046
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    Ya know......

    If they wanted a better name for their fatter tire, they should call it "Moe"

    Just sayin'
    They probably thought of that but in this day and age some lawyer would get all over them for their violation of the Three Stooges brand... With just Larry they cannot connect the dots but a Larry & a Moe or Curly I think that would be too obvious.

  62. #62
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,683
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    Ya know......

    If they wanted a better name for their fatter tire, they should call it "Moe"

    Just sayin'
    Or maybe Joe? But like I said we need snow!!

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,738
    I kinda would like a tire like the Larry but with a little more of a knobby tread, that's all

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,512
    Did anyone actually see a photo of said larger items.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    Nope; no photos...no anything

    This is all just a big put on by the Scotts.

    PS, I am 1/4 Scotch and the rest of me is full of Blarney.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Toni Lund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    125
    I just wonder where this rumour have been originating. Haven't found anything from Surly (blog, Twitter, Facebook). A little disappointing that Surly didn't give any clue in their new The Official Intergalactic Surly Regional HQ Facebook page, even thought people where asking and commenting this matter there.

    Anyway, if we keep speculating with this, the 4-4.5" is probably close to the "limit". After that a bike surely comes too heavy and too wide, at least for longer adventures and so on. But there is a huge amount of space for developing new frames and components for the current "standards", so let's hope that the Fat Revolution continues and grows.
    "Cycling is not the whole life, it's much more."
    www.tonilund.fi - Facebook - Twitter - Google+

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Don't think it's a rumour.

    ISON had it on their website.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Toni Lund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Don't think it's a rumour.

    ISON had it on their website.
    Yeah, that's pretty interesting. So should we put pressure and and demand answers from Surly or just wait and see? You know, this is like a disease, and the only cure is to have it.
    "Cycling is not the whole life, it's much more."
    www.tonilund.fi - Facebook - Twitter - Google+

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,512
    If they were smart they would steal from the already proven Salsa soft tail and put us all on our butts in a nice soft 1" kinda way
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  70. #70
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,576
    Somewhere in Surlyville a marketeer is having a good laugh.

  71. #71
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by pursuiter View Post
    Somewhere in Surlyville a marketeer is having a good laugh.
    Or grating his teeth over leaked info.........
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Here's an option that get's the "Frankenbike" wheels turnin'! this tire is super light (for a motorsports tire) and supple at 2 ply and comes in a 23" tall, 7" wide version. Douglas makes a super light 1/8" thick ALU rim for "light duty" use that would work fine IMO. Just need to fabricate axle assemblies to except a cassette and bicycle disc brakes... then build a frame around 'em... I'm thinking a high jack-shaft up under the seat, like that one from the Oregon Coast on the history "sticky"... Not sure yet about the BB configuation, but theres been a lot of brain stormin' on the subject right here on this forum to consult for ideas...

    http://www.motorcycle-superstore.com...Sand-Tire.aspx

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    And, at 23", that gives you 7" to work with over our current 29" units for "peddling clearence" keeping the same or similar contact patch... hmmmm...

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Oops, 3.5"... only the radius effects peddling clearance/contact patch, not the diameter...

  75. #75
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    ward, in their size selection, what does the last number signify?

    23 (rolling diameter) x 7 (width) x 10 (??)

  76. #76
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    Probably rim diameter.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Yes, rim diameter. And the Douglas rims are two piece and they can configure them "centered" in just about any width you can imagine.

  78. #78
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by ward View Post
    Yes, rim diameter. And the Douglas rims are two piece and they can configure them "centered" in just about any width you can imagine.
    Douglas web site/info?
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Here you go, this is they're "Blue Label" line; 1/8 inch Alu... very light! They suggest using only for sand and very light quads/Razors/etc. (motorsports wise)

    http://www.dwtracing.com/products/at...ite/blue+label

  80. #80

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    I came across them researching parts to restore an old Hanebrink Big Bike I purchased a few years ago. One of his earlier "jack-shaft" units (actually one of the units he made for the Army), It needs new axle assemblies w/ updated brake mounts & etc. anyway so I figured why not improve wheel/tire wise as well. Not a priority project now though, would be more exited to start from scratch on a 23" "Frankensand" bike

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    That 1st one is the one I mentioned that's an the History Sticky. He used a Nexus hub for his "jack shaft"... real cool! looks a little steep and short in the front end though...

    Slow day at work today... can you tell?

  83. #83
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Yeah, motorcycle rim/tire size is the bead seat diameter. So a 23" M/C tire is 23" diameter at the bead, not tread.

    I note that 559 bsd (mtb 26) is 22" bead seat diameter. I'm actually running 21" regular weight dirt bike tubes as "thornproofs".

    That AMS whipsnake tire:

    If that's a 21" rim, that is a huge tire. Note the weights:
    Part Number O.D. S.W. Size Weight - lbs.
    0321-0001 21.78 7.60 21x7-10 10
    0321-0002 22.74 7.97 22x8-10 9.4
    0321-0003 23.45 7.60 23x7-10 9.71
    0322-0009 27.28 8.85 27x9-12 12.12

    Don't know what the 7-10 is. Maybe rim widths? Oooops - found it:

    ATV tire sizes are listed in general like this: 20x11x9. No matter what the numbers are, they are always listed in the same way. Only the numbers change.

    The First Number: As confusing as 20x11x9 might seem, it's really not. The first number (20) is the outside diameter, or "ride height," measured in inches. It is simply how tall the tire is from the ground to the top. This number can range in most cases from 18 to 27 inches.

    The Second Number: Sticking with 20x11x9 as an example, the second number is related to the width or "foot-print" of the tire. In this case, 11 means the tire measures 11 inches from side to side.

    The Third Number: The third and final number stands for the rim size. This is essentially the diameter of the "hole" in the center of the tire. A 20x11x9 number means the tire is designed for a 9-inch rim or wheel.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    As of 4:24pm PDST 6-22-11

    If you do a search for a Big Fat Larry Tire on the NRG website
    you get: Surly Big Fat Larry 26 X 4.5 120 tpi

    If you click on their list to the right under tires, it does not come up, just
    the Endo and Larry (std)

    Will be interesting to see how this all comes out, and how they will work as
    a extra fat front. Lets hope they kept the same diameter.

  85. #85
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Sand Rat View Post
    As of 4:24pm PDST 6-22-11

    If you do a search for a Big Fat Larry Tire on the NRG website
    you get: Surly Big Fat Larry 26 X 4.5 120 tpi

    If you click on their list to the right under tires, it does not come up, just
    the Endo and Larry (std)

    Will be interesting to see how this all comes out, and how they will work as
    a extra fat front. Lets hope they kept the same diameter.
    It can not get wider without being taller unless the casing is belted like a road moto tire. That would also make it way less supple and heavier than conventional bicycle casings.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    It can not get wider without being taller unless the casing is belted like a road moto tire. That would also make it way less supple and heavier than conventional bicycle casings.
    I agree. A minimal thickness and uniform, supple casing is part of what makes "High Floatation" work... you don't see allot of "low profile" high floatation set-ups out there. IMO, a wider yet rim would be needed as well to optimize floatation of a bigger tire in soft sand & snow... Problem is, as "rolling hight" or overall diameter gets bigger, the contact patch has to move back at the rear (and forward up front). I think at this point, to improve on the fat bike's we already have, that 29" is plenty tall enough to manage, maybe we need to reduce the actual wheel diameter as we widen the rim and increase the volume. Imagine a 24" rim w/ a 29" (or even 28" which would allow us to shorten the chain stays a bit) Tire, 4.5" or even 4.75" wide... floatation plus traction... stronger,lighter (or the same 'cause they're wider) wheels... And then there's what to do with the bottom bracket... hate to say it, but if the CS's are going to stay short, the BB's got to get wider, maybe 120mm... or go the direction of the recumbent and get out of the way altogether... and a recumbent position is not what I'm looking for in an FB.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    "I kinda would like a tire like the Larry but with a little more of a knobby tread, that's all" - XJaredX

    Dude, that's funny...I want exactly the opposite...less knob...somewhere between the endo and the larry

    Ward, you're really onto something...
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    I've been thinking about this too. Ultimately I think it's got to go to 6" for really soft going.

    We'll probably have to bend the drive around the tyre or jackshaft it, but the overall diameter of the tyre will have to be kept within a reasonable size otherwise chainstays will be too long.

    We went through this evolutionary process with motorbikes in the 70s and 80s. They didn't have a BB issue to contend with though.

    One thing I know for sure, 4" isn't enough.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  89. #89
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by ward View Post
    Problem is, as "rolling hight" or overall diameter gets bigger, the contact patch has to move back at the rear (and forward up front). I think at this point, to improve on the fat bike's we already have, that 29" is plenty tall enough to manage, maybe we need to reduce the actual wheel diameter as we widen the rim and increase the volume. Imagine a 24" rim w/ a 29" (or even 28" which would allow us to shorten the chain stays a bit) Tire, 4.5" or even 4.75" wide... floatation plus traction... stronger,lighter (or the same 'cause they're wider) wheels.. .
    The rumored tire size is 26", so dreaming of a 24" diameter, while making sense from the argument of diameter resulting from a really high volume tire, isn't going to be the reality, .....or rumored reality.....or whatever!

    That said, a lesson from 29 inch wheels here. Contact patch for a 26 inch tire versus a 29" tire of the same/similar width is approximately equal in area at the same pressures. What does happen with the change in diameter to a larger size is the contact patch actually gets longer and slightly narrower.

    Now, if there is a Big Fat Larry, and if it has a larger overall diameter, then we might assume that the contact patch will be a bit longer, and due to the extra width, also a bit wider than an Endo or Larry.

    In effect, a bigger snow shoe, if you will.

    Will the chainstays need to be longer? Maybe, but the contact patch will be longer as well, (plus wider), if the assumptions here prove true. I don't see the issue becoming a negative from that standpoint.

    I do see that this sort of tire will make steering and maneuverability a bit more difficult from the standpoint of the larger contact patch, but that isn't what a bike like the rumored Moonlander would be about anyway.

    In the end, I think a bike like the Moonlander becomes a very terrain/condition specific bike with such a tire as a Big Fat Larry. Want maneuverability? Want shorter chain stays? Want all terrain crushing fatness? We've got that already. This bike would be at the extreme of being good for mainly really soft sand and snow going on pretty open trail.

    That's my take.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    Would a change from a wire bead to folding in itself, allow for a little
    more suppleness? Also, if the sidewalls remain the same height, does
    this not permit them to flex 'inward' more easely as width increases?

    If Ward, GT and others are on the right track, it would seem that Surly is
    investing alot in a risky project. New tires = new frame = narrowed focused
    bike.The smell of Big Fat $$ is in the air.

    Without question there is a market, but if Surly is to make it pay, the result
    of what we see, may be harder to come by than what we would like, and less
    practical for most riders.

    It would seem that any change in hight would fall under what is found among
    29er tire sizes, not much, when you divide by 2.

    Could it be that Surly put this out there to get us to think this through on our
    own, come up with the problems, and off their back?

    Still like someone here said, the only cure is to get the disease, lets have it.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    I've been thinking about this too. Ultimately I think it's got to go to 6" for really soft going.

    We'll probably have to bend the drive around the tyre or jackshaft it, but the overall diameter of the tyre will have to be kept within a reasonable size otherwise chainstays will be too long.

    We went through this evolutionary process with motorbikes in the 70s and 80s. They didn't have a BB issue to contend with though.

    One thing I know for sure, 4" isn't enough.
    Hello folks! I've been lurking for about 6 months but this is my fist post.

    There’s an important safety issue to consider here. It would be dangerous to be able to ride into places that you couldn’t walk out of. If a bike has enough flotation to be able to ride deep into a field or meadow covered with a moderate snow crust, for example, but once in there you then have to put a foot down and find yourself sinking into deep snow, that would be a problem. There would be other ways to deal with that situation, like taking a pair of snowshoes with you, but you’d have to know the snow conditions and remember to take the snowshoes with you. My basic point is that if a bike has much more flotation than you do, you could unexpectedly get into some serious trouble riding in certain snow conditions.

  92. #92
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Wow. Holy innovation thread Batman!

    Some of the parameters:

    Our bogmeister, Velobike, is certain that for his terrain a 6" width will be necessary.

    Tires are made flat (google tire manufacturing process: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5cx_72EjnA ) - and unless more structure is added, they assume a circular cross section. So wider is taller - on the same width rim. I run Larry's on 100's to widen my contact patch and the sidewalls are barely wider than the rim, so a 6" wide tire would need a 6" rim to minimize height. But would still be taller than a Larry. 36er anyone?

    I recall the contact patch discussion back when 29er's were at the cutting edge. Their contact patch does not get larger - but it does change shape. This is assuming that the tire pressure/load remain the same. We get a bigger CP by running lower pressures. Put 35 psi in a fattie and you should have the same CP area as on any other tire/wheel size at the same pressure.

    Rims. Hey, you can get a 24x4 rim from USChoppers right now. Or a 20x4. A 4.5" tire on a 24x4 is a possible wider but not taller option. I note that Surly offered the LargeMarge in a 24" (but never an Endo)

    Chainline. My Fatback with 100BB/170Hub/100Rim - just barely clears for a 3x9 drivetrain. Wider means limitations on a "standard" derailer drivetrain, which would limit sales to us wild innovators. Pushing the chainline over another 15mm creates a whole new set of components - and at least the 100BB was already around (kinda) as a DH option vs a 115BB - fatties only BB? 170 Hubs are still rare after how many years? You can run a jackshaft, but that's another proprietary thing - that adds weight/complexity. Maybe a GBOX?
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Toni Lund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted View Post
    In the end, I think a bike like the Moonlander becomes a very terrain/condition specific bike with such a tire as a Big Fat Larry. Want maneuverability? Want shorter chain stays? Want all terrain crushing fatness? We've got that already. This bike would be at the extreme of being good for mainly really soft sand and snow going on pretty open trail.

    That's my take.
    Guitar Ted, very well said. Pretty much why I like my 907 with 3.8" Larrys. With different tire pressures it is year-round bike.

    And the rumoured 4.5" Big Fat Larry could work with current fatbikes as a winter/soft front only. It should clear easily with Salsa Enabler fork, and possibly with other fat forks too.
    "Cycling is not the whole life, it's much more."
    www.tonilund.fi - Facebook - Twitter - Google+

  94. #94
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Sand Rat View Post
    Would a change from a wire bead to folding in itself, allow for a little
    more suppleness? Also, if the sidewalls remain the same height, does
    this not permit them to flex 'inward' more easely as width increases?
    Bead material has ZERO affect on the tire suppleness.

    With a bicycle tire the width can not increase without the sidewall height also increasing.

    With car or road moto tires one of the main reasons to have a low profile is to decrease sidewall flex.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Wadester, Guitar Ted, my reference to "contact patch" has to do with it's location, not it's size. As the overall dia. of the tire gets bigger, the contact patch has to move back on the rear to fit the tire in the frame, resulting in a loss of traction... and forward in the front to clear the peddles. using a 24" super wide rim (imagine 6" for Velobike) would (in theory) allow us to design a tire with roughly (or possibly just a little less) overall hight with a huge increase in volume and footprint, keeping with the current supple, high floatation tire construction. So the cross section would look similar in shape to Endo's on 100's, just bigger w/ much improved floatation, without a longer yet wheelbase and unmanageable giant tire/wheels. It all works fine in theory, rolling along with massive floatation over big dunes & etc... but the fact is we still have to be able to peddle them. And if we were to go as wide as 6", that's going to require a BB that's 145mm or so... might have to design some peddle wedges to tilt the footbed inward a bit (like canting ski boots) to handle that. And, since 145mm BB's don't exist, it would have to be a custom... maybe like our old Kleins had- very simple shaft w/ press in bearings...

    The more we brainstorm about it, the more I'm liking the 7" wide, 23" tall "Whipsnake's" on Douglas ALU rims... at least they exist. And the shorter overall tire hight does give us a little room to work with for BB/ peddle clearence ... gonna be heavy, gonna need gears thats's for sure!

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,512
    This whole thread should be locked and thrown in the trash for too much tech talk for the Fat forum. A clear violation of the "mo Fat mo Fun" statute.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Speaking of BB width and peddle clearence, looks like the "sand project bike" from Moe's Bike Shop in Coos Bay OR gained alot of space (possibly as much as 2") by doing away with the conventional chain stays... that guy was thinkin'! And his Nexus Hub "jack-shaft" is wicked cool!

  98. #98
    R.I.P. Pugsley.
    Reputation: Rabies010's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by ward View Post
    Speaking of BB width and peddle clearence, looks like the "sand project bike" from Moe's Bike Shop in Coos Bay OR gained alot of space (possibly as much as 2") by doing away with the conventional chain stays... that guy was thinkin'! And his Nexus Hub "jack-shaft" is wicked cool!
    The IGH jack-shaft is a real good solution, but leaving out the chainstays in a way like that gives me a lot of doubt about carrying a 240 pound person....

  99. #99
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Rabies010 View Post
    The IGH jack-shaft is a real good solution, but leaving out the chainstays in a way like that gives me a lot of doubt about carrying a 240 pound person....
    Not much different than a fork. There is room to beef it up if needed.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  100. #100
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    The one thing that bugs me about an IGH jackshaft is that you wind up with left hand drive on the rear hub. Picky me, but then you get into a whole 'nuther world of proprietary.

    Note for fatforum puristas: I rode my Fatback around a nice little 8 mile loop Tuesday night, and had a grand time. Plus, yesterday my riding buddy called - and his Pugs complete will hit the LBS next Tuesday. Now I'll have a fatriding buddy, and we can go arroyo cruising! WooHoo!
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    The one thing that bugs me about an IGH jackshaft is that you wind up with left hand drive on the rear hub. Picky me, but then you get into a whole 'nuther world of proprietary.

    Note for fatforum puristas: I rode my Fatback around a nice little 8 mile loop Tuesday night, and had a grand time. Plus, yesterday my riding buddy called - and his Pugs complete will hit the LBS next Tuesday. Now I'll have a fatriding buddy, and we can go arroyo cruising! WooHoo!
    Good point! Keeping it "right side" and traditional gearing's probably the way to go... simple and easy to get parts.

  102. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by BowHopper View Post
    ...There’s an important safety issue to consider here. It would be dangerous to be able to ride into places that you couldn’t walk out of. If a bike has enough flotation to be able to ride deep into a field or meadow covered with a moderate snow crust, for example, but once in there you then have to put a foot down and find yourself sinking into deep snow, that would be a problem...
    I'm fairly confident that anyone riding a fatbike has enough sense to be dressed and equipped for the mountain, not the trail park.

    I don't think a jackshaft would be necessary. The chain could be bent round the tyre if a 9 or 10 speed chain was used. Obviously this would involve pulleys and additional transmission losses, but probably similar to a jack-shaft. It would be a horrible kludge, but then people have been riding bikes with horrible kludges for gear changers for years. It would need to be fully enclosed.

    To keep diameter within bounds it would have to be 24" rims with a 6" tyre.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    The Moonlander has got to be a response to Salsa's Mukluk 2. A simple "how dare you out-fat me in my own house?!" thing. Salsa will then have to do a Mukluk 3 with wider tires. Then Surly will come out with a "Your Mom", and reclaim their crown.

    Kids these days. Sheesh.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  104. #104
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Here's something else to think about: (Pure Speculation Alert )

    Surly likes versatility.

    Surly likes single speed capabilities.

    So: Does something like a Moonlander, (whether real, or "bicycle unicorn"), come out with a 170mm front and rear wheel config to keep the same versatility as a Pugs?

    Does a Moonlander come with track ends to allow for an IGH/single speed set up? In fact, will it come with a derailleur hangar at all, and maybe be aimed at using a modified Alfine or NuVinci hub for 170mm?

    Would it need to be 170mm at all if that's the case?

    Certainly, a single speed drivetrain set up running an IGH would alleviate much of the issues with a chain driven geared drivetrain.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted View Post
    Here's something else to think about: (Pure Speculation Alert )

    Surly likes versatility.

    Surly likes single speed capabilities.

    So: Does something like a Moonlander, (whether real, or "bicycle unicorn"), come out with a 170mm front and rear wheel config to keep the same versatility as a Pugs?

    Does a Moonlander come with track ends to allow for an IGH/single speed set up? In fact, will it come with a derailleur hangar at all, and maybe be aimed at using a modified Alfine or NuVinci hub for 170mm?

    Would it need to be 170mm at all if that's the case?

    Certainly, a single speed drivetrain set up running an IGH would alleviate much of the issues with a chain driven geared drivetrain.
    Yep, a 135 mm IGH does not require as much frame offset as a 135 mm cassette hub. I think that the Rohloff-specific Wildfire frames were 8 mm offset.
    It's a neat idea, but my wild guess is that they will stick with a standard derailleur drive train. Some people are scared of internal gearing. It would be easy enough for Surly to pump out hubs and a Mr. Whirly axle in any width they need, with the added advantage that we'll all have to buy their stuff to hang off of their new frame
    Either way, can't wait to see what they come up with.

  106. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    I am not getting this wider = taller thing.

    In the past, the idea of increasing the width of a Larry tire by applying
    Herculiner to do so has crossed my mind. Not doing a thing to the tire
    height.

    Larry Tire = Round Crown and steering type tread.
    Endo Tire = Flat Crown for performance in sand and snow, traction tread.
    Fat Larry Tire = Mushroom Crown = the best of both with an increase in
    width/float over the existing Endo.

    What are we looking at; +1/4" per side? On what rim? Surly got a 100mm
    RD in the works?

    Yes, I have looked at some of the 4.25 X 24 offerings, and have questioned
    the the sidewall height. And yes, it is common to note that as tires get wider
    they also get taller, but by necessity for a Fat Larry?

    If a DIY project could get it done, (on paper anyway) what would stop Surly?

    Got to admit; this thread has got to rank way up there on the interest scale!
    Looking forward to see what comes next.

  107. #107
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    I love all the speculation regarding this "Unicorn"

    Just as the US government brings the Space Shuttle programme to a close.......Surly decides to go to the MOON !!!

    Personally as a 'Sandbiker' I`m hoping for literal Clownfeet footprints with BFL,a relaxed cockpit for comfortable cruising, DEFINATE IGH rear compatibility (I really miss this on the Klein) and personally a Silver frame (after all most of the Moon stuff was Silver !) .

    Whatever finally appears will, I`m sure, be both BONKERS and Wonderful

    Fat Bikes do set us free, to ride anywhere and everywhere
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Feelygood ! View Post
    I love all the speculation regarding this "Unicorn"...
    I think we'll be seeing a big tough rhinoceros instead

    Keep in mind that a 170mm hubgear exists. It's a 3 speed Sturmey-Archer, but there's plenty room inside for more gears - in fact I was wondering if the guts of a 5 speed could be fitted as it stands. Maybe I should try

    (I can't remember if the 3 speeds use the same axle cutouts as the 5 speeds these days.)

    Even so a 3 speed allied with a Hammerschmidt or a Schlumpf at the front would give a very wide range.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  109. #109
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    I think we'll be seeing a big tough rhinoceros instead

    Keep in mind that a 170mm hubgear exists. It's a 3 speed Sturmey-Archer, but there's plenty room inside for more gears - in fact I was wondering if the guts of a 5 speed could be fitted as it stands. Maybe I should try

    (I can't remember if the 3 speeds use the same axle cutouts as the 5 speeds these days.)

    Even so a 3 speed allied with a Hammerschmidt or a Schlumpf at the front would give a very wide range.
    Yes please ! Do have a try if you would like to
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  110. #110
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    The one thing that bugs me about an IGH jackshaft is that you wind up with left hand drive on the rear hub. Picky me, but then you get into a whole 'nuther world of proprietary.

    Note for fatforum puristas: I rode my Fatback around a nice little 8 mile loop Tuesday night, and had a grand time. Plus, yesterday my riding buddy called - and his Pugs complete will hit the LBS next Tuesday. Now I'll have a fatriding buddy, and we can go arroyo cruising! WooHoo!
    Rear hub is (or can be) fixed so it does not really matter.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  111. #111
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Sand Rat View Post
    I am not getting this wider = taller thing.

    In the past, the idea of increasing the width of a Larry tire by applying
    Herculiner to do so has crossed my mind. Not doing a thing to the tire
    height.

    Larry Tire = Round Crown and steering type tread.
    Endo Tire = Flat Crown for performance in sand and snow, traction tread.
    Fat Larry Tire = Mushroom Crown = the best of both with an increase in
    width/float over the existing Endo.

    What are we looking at; +1/4" per side? On what rim? Surly got a 100mm
    RD in the works?

    Yes, I have looked at some of the 4.25 X 24 offerings, and have questioned
    the the sidewall height. And yes, it is common to note that as tires get wider
    they also get taller, but by necessity for a Fat Larry?

    If a DIY project could get it done, (on paper anyway) what would stop Surly?

    Got to admit; this thread has got to rank way up there on the interest scale!
    Looking forward to see what comes next.
    Try it. Please.

    "On paper" does not mean it will work as you think it will.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  112. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,631
    Let's not forget the the 2 speed "kick-back"... Mine was a Bendix (stolen a long, long time ago)...... Had a fun time as a young fella with that back in the day! All my buddy's strugglin' up a hill and I'd just "kick-back" into low and climb the $hit outta things. We may go off on a tangent once in a while... but we sure cover some open minded, innovative, free thinkin', lunatic fringe ground here on the fat bike forum don't we! If it has peddles... I love it!

    -Cheers!

  113. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    What do you mean Shiggy?

    If done, the tire will grow by magic in diameter by...how much?

    To get where I need to be, what would you suggest I start with...
    a 4.25 X 24?

    Some thoughts on aspect ratio growth would be most helpful.

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Word is September for the Big Fat Larrys.

    I'd suggest getting an order in now, they'll be like hen's teeth.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    September?

    But whatever the tire result is, it will not prove nor disprove the
    difference in paradigm between Shiggy and I.

    It will only be a statement of fact of what was done.

    May the result could make both of us content.

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted View Post
    ...
    ...
    In the end, I think a bike like the Moonlander becomes a very terrain/condition specific bike with such a tire as a Big Fat Larry. Want maneuverability? Want shorter chain stays? Want all terrain crushing fatness? We've got that already. This bike would be at the extreme of being good for mainly really soft sand and snow going on pretty open trail.

    That's my take.
    Don't forget us taller/bigger guys. The additional floatation would be useful in certain snow conditions, and the manouverability/chainstay aspects are partly handled by the leverage of a taller body. A tall rider on a XL sized Moonlander is just as proportionate as a short rider on a size S Pugsley.

    That said, a traditional fatbike is still more versatile.
    My outdoor blog: www.yetirides.com

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    For those who are interested in experimenting with motorbike tyres on bicycle rims before I get round to it:

    16" m/bike rim is nominally 410mm but calculates at 406.4 = 20" bike at 406mm
    19" m/bike rim calculates at 482.6 = nearly 22" bike at 484mm or 489mm
    20" m/bike rim calculates at 508mm = nearly 24" metric bike at 507mm
    23" m/bike rim calculates at 584.2 = 650b bike at 584mm

    Wide 20" bicycle rims are commonly available. There is a wide 24" available but I'm not sure which version of 24" it is (probably 507), and I am not aware of any wide 650b rims.

    Motorbike tyres are heavy, but they can be lightened with a sharp knife and a few hours. The casings would be pretty stiff, but maybe a trials tyre would be more supple. A road tyre could give 6" or more easily, and a dirt tread could be carved into it because they have a fair depth of tread anyway.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Outsider View Post
    Don't forget us taller/bigger guys. The additional floatation would be useful in certain snow conditions, and the manouverability/chainstay aspects are partly handled by the leverage of a taller body. A tall rider on a XL sized Moonlander is just as proportionate as a short rider on a size S Pugsley.

    That said, a traditional fatbike is still more versatile.
    Around here, there are very few snow machines or groomed trails, so I need all the float I can get. I'm not too concerned with handling in the snow, as long as it floats.

  119. #119
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Outsider View Post
    Don't forget us taller/bigger guys. The additional floatation would be useful in certain snow conditions, and the manouverability/chainstay aspects are partly handled by the leverage of a taller body. A tall rider on a XL sized Moonlander is just as proportionate as a short rider on a size S Pugsley.

    That said, a traditional fatbike is still more versatile.
    I'm with you there. A Moonlander type rig is extremely interesting to me. We have miles and miles of snowmobile trails around here. Trouble is, the cleats of those machines tend to break down the snow by churning it up in many a place. My Larry/Rolling Darryl combo could barely get by on some of it, and not at all on a lot of it.

    I could tell that if I could squeeze out just a bit more float, maybe 50% more of what I couldn't make it through would have been rideable. A Big Fat Larry on Clownfeet rims in a Moonlander? Wow.... Maybe I could ride darn near everything.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Im supposed to be getting ready for a 12 hour tomorrow. Instead I keep coming back to this thread to see what else has been dreamt up

    Snowmobiles are not common where I am, so the trail is usually broken by me. I'm sure 6" should be enough but there are m/bike tyre around 10" wide.

    The Larry's break through the crust of fresh snow and although I can pedal with them, it's very sustained work to travel very slowly.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Toni Lund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Outsider View Post
    Don't forget us taller/bigger guys. The additional floatation would be useful in certain snow conditions, and the manouverability/chainstay aspects are partly handled by the leverage of a taller body. A tall rider on a XL sized Moonlander is just as proportionate as a short rider on a size S Pugsley.

    That said, a traditional fatbike is still more versatile.
    I have been thinking about the same. The Moonlander would definitely be very useful for a big guy like you... I can already see that you don't have to re-paint your Pugsley...

    But the versatility of traditional fatbike is really fantastic. I honestly think that the perception of snow/sand-only-bike is not right. Fatbikes are truly all-terrain bikes. I have had a plan to build a 29er wheelset for my 907 but I'm not so sure if I really need them. My crankset has 44/32/22 chainrings, and honestly, I can cruise quite comfortably with the 44 in favorable wind conditions and maintain a speed of 25-30 km/h.
    "Cycling is not the whole life, it's much more."
    www.tonilund.fi - Facebook - Twitter - Google+

  122. #122
    M8 M12 M15 deez nuts
    Reputation: Leopold Porkstacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    8,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    For those who are interested in experimenting with motorbike tyres on bicycle rims before I get round to it:

    16" m/bike rim is nominally 410mm but calculates at 406.4 = 20" bike at 406mm
    19" m/bike rim calculates at 482.6 = nearly 22" bike at 484mm or 489mm
    20" m/bike rim calculates at 508mm = nearly 24" metric bike at 507mm
    23" m/bike rim calculates at 584.2 = 650b bike at 584mm

    Wide 20" bicycle rims are commonly available. There is a wide 24" available but I'm not sure which version of 24" it is (probably 507), and I am not aware of any wide 650b rims.

    Motorbike tyres are heavy, but they can be lightened with a sharp knife and a few hours. The casings would be pretty stiff, but maybe a trials tyre would be more supple. A road tyre could give 6" or more easily, and a dirt tread could be carved into it because they have a fair depth of tread anyway.
    I did a calculation of my own, and it seems as though:

    26" m/bike rim calculates to the size of a 22.5" semi rim:



    Just have to cut/weld together about 8 or 9 Large Marge rims to fit a semi tire!

    Don’t frail and blow if you’re going to Braille and Flow.

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Porkstacker View Post
    ...26" m/bike rim calculates to the size of a 22.5" semi rim...
    Mmm, fat motorbikes....
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Velobike View Post
    Mmm, fat motorbikes....
    Yamaha Big Wheel:




    Rokon Trail Breaker:




    Custom




  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    What could you do if you did an asymmetric offset on a 170mm hub a'la wildfire / pugsley / 907 ?
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    Andy

    your last pic; that thing must have rode like hell!

    LOL!

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by MiniTrail View Post
    please go the other way with a 3.0 light weight larry for summer
    please
    x1!
    I'd need four of them for my two "semi-fat" bikes.
    If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!

  128. #128
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SteveRice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    112
    Just saw the Surly blog too. Looks like we might be getting close. Any idea as to what the picture is?

  130. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveRice View Post
    Just saw the Surly blog too. Looks like we might be getting close. Any idea as to what the picture is?
    a vintage video game... looks like a lander to me.


  131. #131
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    so...moon-lander it is?

    what was the game about?..

    Edit: I just play a bit here!

  132. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    so...moon-lander it is?

    what was the game about?.
    trying to land on the moon...

  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Toni Lund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    125
    At first I had some doubts about the rumours but the names Moonlander, Clownshoe and Big Fat Larry are so cool and so so Surly, that they had to be true!
    "Cycling is not the whole life, it's much more."
    www.tonilund.fi - Facebook - Twitter - Google+

  135. #135
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    the dates show my ignorance...born in 81 my Atari days were too short

  136. #136
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    the dates show my ignorance...born in 81 my Atari days were too short
    Youngster
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  137. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    the dates show my ignorance...born in 81 my Atari days were too short
    ha, i was born same year that game came out...

  138. #138
    R.I.P. Pugsley.
    Reputation: Rabies010's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,706
    Hahaha...
    I still have my old 2600 laying around in my parents basement.
    Maybe one of these days i should go and reclaim it.
    Nothing like a good old fashioned low-bit game.

  139. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Toni Lund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    125
    By the way, interesting to see how other manufacturers (Salsa, 9:ZERO:7 and Fatback) will react. Will they follow or invent something else...
    "Cycling is not the whole life, it's much more."
    www.tonilund.fi - Facebook - Twitter - Google+

  140. #140
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveRice View Post
    ...Any idea as to what the picture is?
    Kinda like that old Beetle's album cover where they're all walking across the street barefoot. Everyone claimed it was proof Paul was dead. (Beetles was the band Paul was in before Wings )

  141. #141
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni Lund View Post
    By the way, interesting to see how other manufacturers (Salsa, 9:ZERO:7 and Fatback) will react. Will they follow or invent something else...
    They've already got a good product, so I expect "normal" fat to continue on. The new über fett stuff will be in addition. I could see adjusting existing frames to take the bigger tires, but kinda like folks running LargeMarge's on a 1x1. I'm still interested in the drivetrain options to clear 4.5's on 100's - or mo'better to clear 6's on 130's.

    PS: https://www.pinion.eu/en/index.html
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  142. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    They've already got a good product, so I expect "normal" fat to continue on. The new über fett stuff will be in addition. I could see adjusting existing frames to take the bigger tires, but kinda like folks running LargeMarge's on a 1x1. I'm still interested in the drivetrain options to clear 4.5's on 100's - or mo'better to clear 6's on 130's.

    PS: https://www.pinion.eu/en/index.html
    that looks like a pedal powered belt sander...

  143. #143
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni Lund View Post
    By the way, interesting to see how other manufacturers (Salsa, 9:ZERO:7 and Fatback) will react. Will they follow or invent something else...
    Surly/QBP has the power ($) to try new things... today 907 Alus and Pugsleys can only take 80mm rims + Endos or Larrys on the rear as maximum flotation combos (please correct me if I'm wrong).... Fatbacks (alu and ti) and even 907 Tis can take 100mm rims with Endos or Larrys that will be enough for a lot of people....So Surly and 907 Alus are (were?) a bit behind on this subject...now that I put a couple of neurons to work...the idea of Surly making this happen isn't that crazy after all.... and we can't forget the idea that some rider may be involved in all this either
    .
    .
    .
    I can see me (230 lbs) on a "Big CAT" and the wife (125 lbs) on a Small "Pugsdozer" cruising around

    Flotation for everyone!

  144. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,042
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    Appropriate response, I think...

  145. #145
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    Surly/QBP has the power ($) to try new things... today 907 Alus and Pugsleys can only take 80mm rims + Endos or Larrys on the rear as maximum flotation combos (please correct me if I'm wrong).... Fatbacks (alu and ti) and even 907 Tis can take 100mm rims with Endos or Larrys that will be enough for a lot of people....So Surly and 907 Alus are (were?) a bit behind on this subject...now that I put a couple of neurons to work...the idea of Surly making this happen isn't that crazy after all.... and we can't forget the idea that some rider may be involved in all this either
    .
    .
    .
    I can see me (230 lbs) on a "Big CAT" and the wife (125 lbs) on a Small "Pugsdozer" cruising around

    Flotation for everyone!

    Lightweight !!!
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  146. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    886
    HEY SURLY !!!

    Thanks for reading.

    Great U-Tube Video also!

    We are like little kids at Christmas time...pokeing
    and proding at the wrapings...waiting...for Big Fat Larry
    to arrive.

  147. #147
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo
    I can see me (230 lbs) on a "Big CAT" and the wife (125 lbs) on a Small "Pugsdozer" cruising around
    I just told the wife and the excitement about owning La Pugdozer was so big I just couldn't believe it ...well yes, we know anyone who sees how we enjoy our bikes so close would have that hidden desire for one

    I don't know if I can justify that much flotation in a no snow no sand land though

    If I had to ....For the wife I would need a Small Pugsley frame, a new saddle, a new crankset and perhaps a new stem...she would be rolling super fast!...me on the other hand ...

    I think a Complete Moonlander would facilitate things a lot!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Feelygood !
    Lightweight !!!
    235 actually

  148. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    576
    The reason I went from the Larry/ 80mm rim to Larry/46mm rim in the spring/summer was because of too many pinch flats. The larry/80mm has a very flat profile with the tire not really protecting the rim because it's stretched too thin. My larry/46mm is great in the dirt and has never pinch flatted on me yet. This new larger tire sounds like it will round out an 80mm or maybe even a 100mm rim nicely, kind of like the larry/46mm does.

    I know it won't fit on the DUC32 but the possibilities for the rear to get more float is welcomed-year round! The chainline and possible frame rub is my only concern at this point.

    Thanks Surly for giving us more options, keep them coming.

    I also heard a rumor that Cheng Shin is developing a "fat" mtb tire as well.

    -Nolan

  149. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jddjirikian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    459
    Here's a google cache link to a listing for a crankset, allegedly for the Moonlander:

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...www.google.com
    "Ride what you love, love what you ride"

  150. #150
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by nolan17 View Post
    The reason I went from the Larry/ 80mm rim to Larry/46mm rim in the spring/summer was because of too many pinch flats. The larry/80mm has a very flat profile with the tire not really protecting the rim because it's stretched too thin. My larry/46mm is great in the dirt and has never pinch flatted on me yet. This new larger tire sounds like it will round out an 80mm or maybe even a 100mm rim nicely, kind of like the larry/46mm does.
    That is consistent with my experience on some 47mm V!Z rims. They at first seem scary given the very loose bead seating (takes some practice to get it reasonably straight), but I've run air pressure as low as makes sense on hardpack, and have flubbed bunny hops such that I land the rear rim directly on the obstacle I was trying to avoid. I've had enough rim strikes that I stopped being concerned, and will be surprised if I get a single pinch flat this season.

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    47

    what if?

    Any chance of the moonlander being a recumbent?

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,501
    moonlander; 21/33 rings? that's major wall-crawling gearing and with not even a hint of a big gear? I figure a fat dummy.
    If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!

  153. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    51
    Fat dummy... droooool. With huge tires like that I don't think they are going for any speed records though. This thing will be a monster, whatever it is.

  154. #154
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,623
    I`ve just got off the phone to Billy`s in Cambridge UK.

    They made some `enquires` and it looks like the RUMOURS are true

    Ison UK and the Surly Canadian distributors got a leg slapping (from Surly) for letting the FAT Cat out of the Bag !

    Big Reveal is due at end of August/ early September at Interbike in the USA.

    WooHoo !
    Life IS a Beach and then you Corrode :)

  155. #155
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by byknuts View Post
    moonlander; 21/33 rings? that's major wall-crawling gearing and with not even a hint of a big gear? I figure a fat dummy.
    With tire this tall 33T is a big ring. I use 32/22 on several of my 29ers
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  156. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Coastkid and his beach abusers won't even bother waiting for the tide to go out now
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  157. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    Aww come on Skip, I see you lurking Are we even close?

  158. #158
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    With tire this tall 33T is a big ring. I use 32/22 on several of my 29ers

    I was thinking the same thing. Folks cry foul all the time about not having a 20T for their granny on 29"ers.

    If Moonlander cranks are made with a standard BCD, and they come with a 21t granny, the 29"er folks will be standing in line for after market rings.

    But at any rate, this is exciting news. I can't wait for Interbike now!
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    Moonlander cranks will probably just be Mr Whirly's with a new spindle. I already run a 20t on my Pug.

  160. #160
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker View Post
    Moonlander cranks will probably just be Mr Whirly's with a new spindle. I already run a 20t on my Pug.
    Probably will....but my thought was, what if it is a 4 hole 64BCD granny? Then the 21T becomes much more interesting. A 20T is pretty tough to keep round on a 64BCD pattern, so the 21T may be a clue to it being the more common 64BCD and not the old, five hole, 58BCD
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  161. #161
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    So - let's say that a moonlander crank is just another Mr. Whirly, with perhaps a longer axle or maybe a different drive crank.... Mr Whirly has that good old 5 bolt 58mm bcd as it's one basic hole pattern, and all of it's various spiders attach to that pattern. IIRC, the spiders also act as a spacer for the granny ring.

    Perhaps Senor Moonlander will be a drive crankarm with 58/94 steps a la' XTR using existing axle and left crankarm? This has a more.....Surly flavor to it, but who am I to say.

    Pure speculation. Whatever Surly has, it's already being made.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  162. #162
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    ...with 58/94 steps a la' XTR...
    please explain. Has XTR ever used 94/58BCD?
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  163. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    please explain. Has XTR ever used 94/58BCD?
    Nope.
    M900 XTR was 110/74. M950 was with the removable spider (you could get a 94/58 spider aftermarket). M960 has 102. M970 has 104.

  164. #164
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker View Post
    Nope.
    M900 XTR was 110/74. M950 was with the removable spider (you could get a 94/58 spider aftermarket). M960 has 102. M970 has 104.
    That is what I thought, plus the proprietary big ring/spider version.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  165. #165
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker View Post
    Nope.
    M900 XTR was 110/74. M950 was with the removable spider (you could get a 94/58 spider aftermarket). M960 has 102. M970 has 104.
    The one I referred to was the M960 - where each chainring had its own little shelf with threaded mount hole. Altho - didn't each ring have its funky little BCD as well? Ah, the granny was normal: 64/102/146.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  166. #166
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    The one I referred to was the M960 - where each chainring had its own little shelf with threaded mount hole. Altho - didn't each ring have its funky little BCD as well? Ah, the granny was normal: 64/102/146.
    That was the proprietary ring/spider with funky BCD rings.

    In practice it is not much different than the Mr. Whirly spiders except the latter is more versatile.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    Think this will be a special edition thing like the Rat Ride was? Or will this be a replacement for the Pugsley? Could they both exist in the lineup?
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  168. #168
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Yes. I had thought the WhirlySpider was thicker:

    But it looks like leaving it out would only give you about 5mm - so you either move the standard crankarm out with spacer/wider spindle, or you make a custom crankarm with shorter 58 pads and pads for the "big" ring.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  169. #169
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    Yes. I had thought the WhirlySpider was thicker:

    But it looks like leaving it out would only give you about 5mm - so you either move the standard crankarm out with spacer/wider spindle, or you make a custom crankarm with shorter 58 pads and pads for the "big" ring.
    still have no idea what problem you are trying to solve.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  170. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    still have no idea what problem you are trying to solve.
    I think he's thinking that having a different spider with the same 100mm spindle will give you the chainline needed to clear the bigger tire. He seems to be forgetting that the cranks won't clear the wider frame.

  171. #171
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker View Post
    I think he's thinking that having a different spider with the same 100mm spindle will give you the chainline needed to clear the bigger tire. He seems to be forgetting that the cranks won't clear the wider frame.
    Actually, I'm lusting after some BFL's for my Fatback - I believe they would clear the frame, but the chainline is gonna hafta change.

    If the Moonlander has room for the next step of wideness - yes. Whole new chainline, with changes in hub and BB spindle width. That's where the intermediate shaft talk comes in.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  172. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    Well, the chainline problem can be solve on existing frames that will clear it with running less gears. Run a 6spd (from a 9) cassette with a spacer would be the most extreme, but you could probably get away with just 8spd out of a 9.

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Now if Sturmey-Archer came to the party by sticking more gears in their 170mm hub, they could have a monopoly.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  174. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    930
    latest surly blog post indicates something is incoming

    http://www.surlybikes.com/blog/

  175. #175
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by zombinate View Post
    latest surly blog post indicates something is incoming

    http://www.surlybikes.com/blog/
    An acknowledgment of the leaked info and statement that no further comment will be made until the official release date.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  176. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: backcountryeti's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    642
    It will probably be something like the Biomega Brooklyn. Super fat BMXish single speed. I like all the ideas though...

  177. #177
    M8 M12 M15 deez nuts
    Reputation: Leopold Porkstacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    8,163
    Quote Originally Posted by zombinate View Post
    latest surly blog post indicates something is incoming

    http://www.surlybikes.com/blog/
    For sure a lunar lander moment.
    Don’t frail and blow if you’re going to Braille and Flow.

  178. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,501
    SO.... "moonlander"
    anyone laying money on it being the pugsley replacement, meant for 4.5's, probably symmetrical rear hub.
    since the mukluk's taking a lot of the sales momentum from the pugs, seems they'd want to regain a bit of that surly "WTFUFNGUYS?!" factor...

    (still hoping for a travel bike version)
    If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!

  179. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1
    I think it has something to do with a Pugsley/Winter specific messenger bag

  180. #180
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    Surly about Moonlander

    close up on the Moonlander:

    Surly XL 4.5" larry Tire rumour?-p1020438.jpg

    that thread on the tires doesn't look too larrysh to me... another leak?
    looks great btw!
    Last edited by martinsillo; 07-11-2011 at 11:05 AM.

  181. #181
    No, that's not phonetic
    Reputation: tscheezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,313
    Now we're talkin.

  182. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: motorman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    553
    Yep.....i'll be having one of those......

  183. #183
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    Surly about Moonlander

    close up on the Moonlander:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	P1020438.JPG 
Views:	2541 
Size:	239.5 KB 
ID:	625084

    that thread on the tires doesn't look to larrysh to me... another leak?
    looks great btw!
    I was thinking the same thing. That tire looks pretty knobby.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  184. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    Umm. Ummm. Uh. Wow.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  185. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by martinsillo View Post
    that thread on the tires doesn't look to larrysh to me... another leak?
    You're very right, I like the look of that tread way, way better. Almost looks like a Nobby Nic actually.....but, you know, man-sized. I'm thinking there are going to be a lot of super-fat-front fat bikes out there when this hits the market. Would a 4.5 F / 3.8 R be a super-half-fat then?
    "I applaud your stupid idea because it is genius." - Eric Sovern, Surly

  186. #186
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Sportin' wood indeed!

    4.5" wide tires
    100mm wide rims
    135 symmetrical "front" front hub
    Offset double ring crank (sounds like 100mm BB with special right crank)

    28mm offset frame. Wow. Symmetrical equivalent of 191mm OLD. Sounds like room for some wider tires than 4.5", but not necessarily 6"

    BFL got some decent knobs. Reminds me of Maxxis Ignitor.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  187. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: NOBBY605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by Outsider View Post
    I've heard the rumour as well. It is supposed to be made for the new fatter Pugsley.
    Here it is from there blog.
    http://www.surlybikes.com/blog/

  188. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,604
    wow.
    i won't share this with my pugs. don't want to make it feel inadequate.

  189. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    30
    The tires don't look wider than a normal Larry to me. I am wondering if those are the 3.8" Black Floyds and we have yet to see the 4 point 5er.

  190. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by commutebybicycle View Post
    The tires don't look wider than a normal Larry to me. I am wondering if those are the 3.8" Black Floyds and we have yet to see the 4 point 5er.
    I thought the same.

    I figure if they're using the same name (Larry) then the pattern will be similar.

    Of course they could be changing the tread patterns for 2012.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 57º36' Highlands, Scotland

  191. #191
    a lazy pedaler
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,761
    you guys are probably right... Moonlander on Black Floyds!

    Those threads would be awesome for my rocky rides!

  192. #192
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    I thought that tread looked like a Panaracer Smoke tire? And I'm not even that old school.

  193. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jfkbike2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,046
    Quote Originally Posted by commutebybicycle View Post
    The tires don't look wider than a normal Larry to me. I am wondering if those are the 3.8" Black Floyds and we have yet to see the 4 point 5er.
    I think that may be a good guess. Certainly a lot different than a Larry tread. Should have gone to Interbike!

  194. #194
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    Just noticed that photo looks like they have the Rolling Darryl with the dual row holes, not the single row of holes like they have now.

  195. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Borgschulze View Post
    Just noticed that photo looks like they have the Rolling Darryl with the dual row holes, not the single row of holes like they have now.
    That's probably the clownshoe. The blog post mentions colored rim tape, which suggests the clownshoe rim has cut outs.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountfargo.com

  196. #196
    Moon Child
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    148
    Just please tell me they are not going to release this bike in pea soup green. Doesn't Surly know space vehicles are always WHITE. Surly: the artic WHITE on the Pug is perfect, go with WHITE.

  197. #197
    Moon Child
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    148
    Whats up with the double bars? I havent seen that before.

  198. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    113
    What are the chances there is enough clearance to run a BFL on a mukluk? Anyone with a Mukluk see an extra half inch on each side of their endo or Larry?

  199. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by Fresno View Post
    Whats up with the double bars? I havent seen that before.
    They are probably Jones Loop H-Bars.

  200. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coastkid71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,126
    This bike is gonna be ace

    will be ordering ASAP
    plan it...build it....ride it...love it....
    http://coastkid.blogspot.com/

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Floatation & Chatter - Endo/Larry vs 2.5" 29er
    By JimInSF in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-29-2011, 01:22 PM
  2. Larry as a rear tire?
    By chrisgardner73 in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 01-10-2011, 06:46 PM
  3. rumour mill...?
    By PUBCRAWL in forum Eastern Canada
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-05-2008, 02:46 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-21-2004, 10:21 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.