Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 224
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    84

    Terrene Johnny 5

    Terrene has a new 5” studded tire. <iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fter renetires%2Fposts%2F1043610675803521&width=500" width="500" height="707" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    84
    Not sure how to get the link to work, but they have some info on their Facebook page.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    legit 5 inch tire with stud pockets.... going to need a new bike with a little more clearance.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    84
    Very excited for these, should work great on my Big Fat Dummy.

  5. #5
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,333
    " Aggressive, 320 studs, a true 125mm (5") width, and of course, tubeless and folding." "~1700g"
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Terrene Johnny 5-t4.jpg  

    Terrene Johnny 5-t3.jpg  

    Terrene Johnny 5-t5.jpg  

    Terrene Johnny 5-t2.jpg  

    Terrene Johnny 5-t1.jpg  

    --Peace

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    268
    This looks close to the tire many of us have wanted for several winters - what the Wrathchild should have been, a studded tubeless successor to Bud/Lou. I'd still like a studded 2XL-size tire, but at 4.9 inches this looks close to that size without the weight penalty of VEE's thick casing.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,474
    These look like a great match for the new ICT. I've been consistently impressed by Terrene's quality.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Willum View Post
    This looks close to the tire many of us have wanted for several winters - what the Wrathchild should have been, a studded tubeless successor to Bud/Lou. I'd still like a studded 2XL-size tire, but at 4.9 inches this looks close to that size without the weight penalty of VEE's thick casing.
    My thoughts exactly. The Wrathchilds perform exceptionally well. But everytime I stare at my bike I wonder "why aren't they a nice big full size tire like Bud & Lou?". The new Johnny 5 looks very tempting.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    These look like a great match for the new ICT. I've been consistently impressed by Terrene's quality.
    It’ll fit on the current ICT as well, which already fits the 2XL tire. The new ICT is interesting though, even more clearance than the old one with “plenty of room for a 5.1 inch tire” despite shorter stays. Hmmmmm, wonder if Surly has something up their sleeves!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    334
    Does anyone know how tall/deep the lugs are? Is the rubber the same as the other Terrene fat bike tires?

  11. #11
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,333
    Does Vee make Terrene tires? Also, how is the rolling resistance on other Terrene tires?
    --Peace

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    I like the looks of the tread pattern and that it comes with stud pockets. I’d love to see a side by side photo of this tire and a 2XL both mounted on identical 100mm wheels at the same pressure. The 2XLs are too heavy and too stiff but are the biggest things available and are what I run in the winter. If these are the same or bigger I’d probably buy them but because they say 5” and aren’t labeled as 5”+ I’m guessing they are smaller than the 2XL?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    21
    Johnny 5 Is Alive!

    Sorry Couldn’t Help Myself

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: solarplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,278

    Terrene Johnny 5

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    I like the looks of the tread pattern and that it comes with stud pockets. I’d love to see a side by side photo of this tire and a 2XL both mounted on identical 100mm wheels at the same pressure. The 2XLs are too heavy and too stiff but are the biggest things available and are what I run in the winter. If these are the same or bigger I’d probably buy them but because they say 5” and aren’t labeled as 5”+ I’m guessing they are smaller than the 2XL?
    They say a true 5” on instagram. Also says 26x5.0 on the side


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Fatbike, XC bike, Gravel Bike....

  15. #15
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    Does Vee make Terrene tires? Also, how is the rolling resistance on other Terrene tires?
    WTB makes the Terrene tire line.

    I dove in with the CakeEater, and had lackluster results. I will let someone else take the hit on the Johnny 5, and if it gets a good review, maybe I will try them myself.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    WTB makes the Terrene tire line.
    No. It's a startup company owned by 2 guys not associated with WTB.

    A friend of mine used the cake eaters this past winter. Can't say I was impressed because his tires kept washing out all the time.

  17. #17
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by prj71 View Post
    No. It's a startup company owned by 2 guys not associated with WTB.

    A friend of mine used the cake eaters this past winter. Can't say I was impressed because his tires kept washing out all the time.
    I can't imagine two guys in a garage making their own tire molds and compounds. There is some contract tire manufacturer doing the actual tire making and it's not the two guys who started the company.
    --Peace

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    146
    After listening to their last podcast, I sent a note to Fat-Bike.com's "Fatcamp" guys asking if they plan to test/review and Johnny 5. "Gomez" (the owner of the site?) replied that a test of the Johnny 5 by Ken Blakey-Shell is already "...in the works." I imagine that we may not hear/see the review for at least a couple of months (would be nice to find out how it performs in the snow), but Ken is a pretty smart and detail-oriented guy, so I'm sure we'll be getting a lot of new and interesting information about the tire. I asked that they try to include a comparison to the Vee Shoeshoe 2XL in the review, which he's already reported on. We can only hope!

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    73
    I completely understand not wanting to be the first early adopter of a pricey new product. But I'm not sure how the Cake Eater is relevant to the discussion. Low profile vs. big knobby. I've had multiple tires with different tread patterns from various companies. Vastly different experiences. A Knard is not a Bud; a Dillinger is not a Wrathchild; and a Mammoth sure ain't a Minion.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    I'd love to early adopt them, as one of the folks perpetually whining about the need for such a tire. It would be nice to get hands on them sooner than later, as cold as July has been in thinking October might be a snowy one.

  21. #21
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by CanmoreBruce View Post
    I completely understand not wanting to be the first early adopter of a pricey new product. But I'm not sure how the Cake Eater is relevant to the discussion.
    why is it relevant? Because i jumped on the tires when they first came out. the bead retention was sh!t. anything under 13psi would constantly burp from the sidewalls. tried on 3 different sets of rims. installed hodags, fbf, fbr, & gnarwhals on same rims, tires good to less than 2 psi. after multiple attempts, lackluster response from the company. emailed the president, he didn't care either. after getting frustrated, i sent the tires packing. i am done with the company, UNLESS someone else tries a new product and raves about it. then maybe, i will plunk down my $. /rant

    fyi: local terrene rep told me WTB makes the tires.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,474
    My Terrene Wazias have been great. Mounted and dismounted a few times, no issues with tubeless, never washing out (with proper pressure). I'd gladly try other Terrene tires...but these Wazias just won't die. If had a bike that could clear these Johnny 5s, I'd have ordered them already.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    84
    Can they be ordered yet? These are going to be great! The studded version will be perfect for riding on lakes.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    why is it relevant? Because i jumped on the tires when they first came out. the bead retention was sh!t. anything under 13psi would constantly burp from the sidewalls. tried on 3 different sets of rims. installed hodags, fbf, fbr, & gnarwhals on same rims, tires good to less than 2 psi. after multiple attempts, lackluster response from the company. emailed the president, he didn't care either. after getting frustrated, i sent the tires packing. i am done with the company, UNLESS someone else tries a new product and raves about it. then maybe, i will plunk down my $. /rant

    fyi: local terrene rep told me WTB makes the tires.
    Well fair enough! I had wrongly assumed your issue was as per the other poster: tires washing out or similar tread/performance related issues. Bead retention and customer service are a whole other kettle of fish.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kyttyra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    203
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    why is it relevant? Because i jumped on the tires when they first came out. the bead retention was sh!t. anything under 13psi would constantly burp from the sidewalls. tried on 3 different sets of rims. installed hodags, fbf, fbr, & gnarwhals on same rims, tires good to less than 2 psi. after multiple attempts, lackluster response from the company. emailed the president, he didn't care either. after getting frustrated, i sent the tires packing. i am done with the company, UNLESS someone else tries a new product and raves about it. then maybe, i will plunk down my $. /rant

    fyi: local terrene rep told me WTB makes the tires.
    I would be interested in hearing more about other Cake Eaters' bead retention (or Terrene tyres' bead retention in general) as my 4.6" Wazias (light) were tightest fit ever (on mulefut rims). I've dismounted them twice and it has been a real chore. Maybe you had a faulty pair?

  26. #26
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    763
    Great news, and I heard the rumors for a while, so happy to see these.

    With another 5''+ on the market, that could inspire other tire makers to join in.
    (The Chao Yang 5.5'' obviously never showed up for sale despite being shown at Taipei and Interbike in 2016).

    Will be good to see the true volume (ie. bead-bead width)

    Hopefully they use a thin and pliable casing. Listed weight is 1700g, but those block style knobs probably weigh quite a bit, which could indicate a light casing. (I know it says Light on the tire).
    I would like to see a casing like the Schwalbe Liteskin or Surly Light, or preferably even thinner, like the Juggernaut Pro or my proto 2XL.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    Any places taking pre orders?

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: flowby2wheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    57
    I heard from a local dealer that they are coming in October... no preorder was offered from them though... I was quoted $140 without studs, $260 with which is probably the MSRP.

  29. #29
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Great news, and I heard the rumors for a while, so happy to see these.

    With another 5''+ on the market, that could inspire other tire makers to join in.
    (The Chao Yang 5.5'' obviously never showed up for sale despite being shown at Taipei and Interbike in 2016).

    Will be good to see the true volume (ie. bead-bead width)

    Hopefully they use a thin and pliable casing. Listed weight is 1700g, but those block style knobs probably weigh quite a bit, which could indicate a light casing. (I know it says Light on the tire).
    I would like to see a casing like the Schwalbe Liteskin or Surly Light, or preferably even thinner, like the Juggernaut Pro or my proto 2XL.
    If only Vee would get their heads out of their asses and realize that we aren't taking our fatbikes to RedBull Rampage any time soon and prefer a lighter excessively supple tire for snow flotation that cannot be duplicated with a 28 ply tire. Yup, I'm not even remotely keen on Vee products these days.

    Hopefully the J5's will fill the need for the massively supple tires for the string bean riders cause not many of us are 400#'s or more! XD
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    Even those of us husky riders don't need crazy sidewall for a true winter tire. If these a bud Lou size/supple with stud pockets they will be 95% perfect for me. If they are bud/Lou supple and vee 2xl size with stud pockets.... exactly what I want.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    I need a side by side comparison photo of this tire next to a 2XL before I’d commit to ordering anything. It looks promising and I hope it is lighter and more supple than the 2XL but I’m unwilling to give up any width as I need as much float as possible.

  32. #32
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,113
    Frankly, a measurement of width and height is something I can relate to. Height being the edge of the rim.bead to the highest point of the crown of the tire.
    Width should be perfectly clear. Both width measurements taken while mounted on an 80 and then a 100mm rim at real world pressures, eg 6 psi, 4 psi etc.
    Then we get to sidewall heft (Reference, Vee Flubber) suppleness. A 120 tpi and a 150 tpi offering would be awesome. Where I ride snow, the ground under the snow is feet below the surface, so what is there to puncture a tire?

    The measurement of a 5" tire at 20 or 30 psi is absurd.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  33. #33
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by BansheeRune View Post
    The measurement of a 5" tire at 20 or 30 psi is absurd.
    No it's not. I have pumped my tires to that pressure every single winter at least a few times and every time I have ridden the Iditarod I have also gotten to those pressures at least a few times. Trails inevitably get compacted and/or icy and in those conditions hard tires roll better. That's just physics, nothing absurd about it. I need to know what a tire's size is when fully inflated, because I will inevitably fully inflate it.
    --Peace

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    I’d like to see the two tires side by side both inflated to 10psi as that’s as high as I’ve ever really run and that’s generally just for a long pavement section. But, I’m not particular what pressure they’d compare them at as long as they are both the same. The Johnny 5 looks to offer many great attributes that I’d love to have. I don’t like that I can’t run studs in my PSC 2XL’s.

  35. #35
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars_D View Post
    No it's not. I have pumped my tires to that pressure every single winter at least a few times and every time I have ridden the Iditarod I have also gotten to those pressures at least a few times. Trails inevitably get compacted and/or icy and in those conditions hard tires roll better. That's just physics, nothing absurd about it. I need to know what a tire's size is when fully inflated, because I will inevitably fully inflate it.
    Tungsten tires...
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    For me it is Bud/Lou on 90mm.
    I was chatting with a rep of the distributor in Quebec and she was saying Bud/Lou is old generation. Well they work.
    In my opinion their tires are too light.
    They sell 3 season tires with a patch.
    Putting studs on a tire does not make it a snow tire.
    We simply screw studs in our winter tires designed for snow and we feel secure at minus 40 that we will not hit a tree riding solo.
    First a winter tire that floats and climbs and avoids wash out then ice capabilities added. A light tire is not a winter tire it is that simple where i live. I want to ride daily not just when the conditions are nice.

  37. #37
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,113
    Bud/Lou are dandy for snow riding. Note, snow as opposed to a skating rink. Their draw back is the lack of a tubeless bead.
    Tire weight is not the only factor in a "winter" tire. For those who have never seen a snowmobile track, google can find images of them. They have lugs designed to propel and have sufficient surface area for the proper flotation of the machine and load.

    While a fatbike is fairly light the rider weight comes into play. With a stiff wall tire, less efficient floatation will be available. Are light/thin wall tires for everyone? Not likely. Some of us are very light, some moderate and some are heavy, not to mention riding style. What makes a tire "winter viable" for one does nothing for the next person. What is needed is choices for us to work with, now there is genuine simplicity.

    My winter fat snow rides occur at 10,000'+ elevation where there is well preserved snow sans ice capades. Thus, flotation and traction are required with tires soft and supple to gain the floatation necessary to go forward. At 165 #'s, I think choice is required.

    On topic, I think the Terrene looks interesting, indeed. There are stud pockets for the folks that live and ride where ice is prevalent. This gives us one choice.
    The ultimate question is will there be a super supple version available to the beanpole population? A heavy duty version for the folks that need a more durable tire in the region they live and ride? Perhaps the bloke behind Terrene can pop in and say a word...
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    199
    As much as I like the idea of a supple, thin, single-ply casing, I just don't think it'll work for my application. I ride through enough deep, fresh snow, but often in areas where twigs and sticks and other tire-hazards lurk beneath. I just can't afford to be replacing $200 (CAD) tires due to a torn sidewall from an invisible pointy stick. Also, I'm currently crushing it at a ponderous 190lbs, which seems to be enough to flex the sidewalls on my 2XL's!

    So... Yay for more options! But I'll probably stick with what I got... For now. ;-)

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    146
    Fat-Bikes CA is now taking pre-orders for the Johnny 5. They're reporting that it's a 120 tpi tire and made out of 62A compound with an aramid bead:

    https://fatbikes.ca/product/terrene-johnny-5-tire/

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by FitmanNJ View Post
    Fat-Bikes CA is now taking pre-orders for the Johnny 5. They're reporting that it's a 120 tpi tire and made out of 62A compound with an aramid bead:

    https://fatbikes.ca/product/terrene-johnny-5-tire/
    Do they certify that it fits your frame and fork?
    Where is the list of rims + bikes that will take them? Studded??
    Will they pay for the shipping for returned orders???

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    Do they certify that it fits your frame and fork?
    Where is the list of rims + bikes that will take them? Studded??
    Will they pay for the shipping for returned orders???
    Geez, if someone wants to pre-order them, that's up to them.

    One can see them mounted on the Fatback Corvus above. A little research into the Corvus's geometry and fork specs could give someone a reasonable idea. Guarantee? No.

    Want to live on the bleeding edge and be the first to order, then risking return shipping is the price of admission.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    Do they certify that it fits your frame and fork?
    Where is the list of rims + bikes that will take them? Studded??
    Will they pay for the shipping for returned orders???
    I have no idea. I'm just a rider like the rest of us passing on some information that I've seen. Some have shown an interest in knowing more about the specs on the Johnny 5, and this is the first time I can recall seeing the tpi and rubber compound mentioned. I'd still like to see the bead-to-bead measurement...

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    199
    I just had a look on Borealis Canada's site (which I think is the same as fatbikes.ca) and they show "available". Does this means that they are ready to ship...?

    https://borealisbikes.ca/collections...10226807046188

  44. #44
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    Want to live on the bleeding edge and be the first to order....
    been there, done that... :P

    Quote Originally Posted by FitmanNJ View Post
    I'd still like to see the bead-to-bead measurement...
    agreed. in the below pic it looks to be the same width (height in the pic) as their 4.5 tire. I would think it would be wider, no?


  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    been there, done that... :P



    agreed. in the below pic it looks to be the same width (height in the pic) as their 4.5 tire. I would think it would be wider, no?

    Well in Canada(where i live) they have the same retail price that my Bud/Lou had last year. Their weight is unknowned just like their performance so i will not even think about them for a while.
    If they fit my fatboy studded on my 90mm they are not 5.0 it is that plain simple.
    Most bikes are filled with 4.8.
    My guess is the front will not turn that well when it is winter up here.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    ...in the below pic it looks to be the same width (height in the pic) as their 4.5 tire. I would think it would be wider, no?

    I had the same sense. The early pics make it appear to be a "small" 5.0 tire. If so, it may not be much larger than Bud/Lou.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    WTB makes the Terrene tire line.

    I dove in with the CakeEater, and had lackluster results. I will let someone else take the hit on the Johnny 5, and if it gets a good review, maybe I will try them myself.
    Sorry man but there is no way WTB is big enough to have their own tire factory. Perhaps Terrene has some help from an ex WTB guy or something, but your statement is wrong.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    548
    where the heck did you get a 27.5 x 4.5 cake eater? they dont even list them on the website. are they new?

  49. #49
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    in the below pic it looks to be the same width (height in the pic) as their 4.5 tire. I would think it would be wider, no?

    Difference in perspective matters -- the one on the right is closer to the camera, making it appear larger.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    Mike, I really want to give you the penumbral image receptor effect.... but the distances don't appear to be that great.

    These are likely bud/Lou with stud pockets size, fatback tops out there in tire clearence as does the average fatbike. My guess is some derivative of tire dimension that does not alienate all but a select few frames.

  51. #51
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Comfisherman View Post
    Mike, I really want to give you the penumbral image receptor effect.... but the distances don't appear to be that great.

    Nope, not great, but IMO enough.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Difference in perspective matters -- the one on the right is closer to the camera, making it appear larger.
    To illustrate this I put a measure on it. (Note, scale was set to show relative difference). Either perspective matters or quality control sucks with the tire being 12.5% smaller a few inches away.

    Terrene Johnny 5-tires.jpg

  53. #53
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by alias View Post
    Sorry man but there is no way WTB is big enough to have their own tire factory. Perhaps Terrene has some help from an ex WTB guy or something, but your statement is wrong.
    So, my statement is wrong based on your guess? Sounds logical, this is the internet after all...

    Local Terrene rep told me WTB makes the tires. He had tire cutaways of WTB and Terrene tires. So, I will take more stock in his comments as factual vs internet guesses.

  54. #54
    Anchorage, AK
    Reputation: Lars_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    So, my statement is wrong based on your guess? Sounds logical, this is the internet after all...

    Local Terrene rep told me WTB makes the tires. He had tire cutaways of WTB and Terrene tires. So, I will take more stock in his comments as factual vs internet guesses.
    The contractual relationships of manufacturers can be pretty complicated. Sometimes it's almost impossible to determine who really makes something.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
    --Peace

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    been there, done that... :P



    agreed. in the below pic it looks to be the same width (height in the pic) as their 4.5 tire. I would think it would be wider, no?

    Thanks for posting the photo. I’m completely disappointed in the width and am sick and tired of tire manufacturers exaggerating their sizes. This tire definitely has potential but it looks like I’ll have to wait for their 6” version to be released as maybe then it’ll be the same size as a 2XL.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    Thanks for posting the photo. I’m completely disappointed in the width and am sick and tired of tire manufacturers exaggerating their sizes. This tire definitely has potential but it looks like I’ll have to wait for their 6” version to be released as maybe then it’ll be the same size as a 2XL.
    Did you not believe the earlier posts that showed how misleading the perspective on this photo is? In addition to what has already been mentioned, look at the center tread blocks on each tire, not the mold seam or the zip ties, they are higher on the J5 which would imply it is the wider tire.
    Latitude 61

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    I hope you are right but the angle doesn’t appear to be that great. We are talking 1/2” difference between marked sizes and shouldn’t have to play photo analyst to see the wider tire.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat-in-Fundy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    311
    Perspective, sometimes an inch makes all the difference.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Terrene Johnny 5-perspective1.jpg  

    Terrene Johnny 5-perspective2.jpg  

    '07 Spec Enduro
    '14 Salsa Mukluk 2
    '16 Salsa Bucksaw GX1

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    The idea it is a BIG tire is plain ridiculous.
    Most frames and most forks would not take it.
    LIES.
    Accept the facts.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    The idea it is a BIG tire is plain ridiculous.
    Most frames and most forks would not take it.
    LIES.
    Accept the facts.
    Have you seen the tire in person? Measured it? Have we seen it installed and compared side by side to another tire to see relative size? From what I have read above the answer is no. As such your claims are conjecture, not "facts".

    When the tire becomes readily available I am sure people will post actual measurements on various rim widths and then people can discern for themselves if it will fit their bike.
    Last edited by BlueCheesehead; 09-02-2018 at 05:59 AM.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    Dillinger 5 is the hard pack standard, but the bigger class tires helps my size float, and every little bit of height helps my waffle stompers with heel and toe strikes.

    Snow avalanche 4.8s were actually 4.3s, and possibly the most anti climactic tire purchase of my fatbike experience. Narrow, heavy and an odd compound combo.

    The snowshoe xls I had were hard, slow and heavy. Didn't bother me till I rode other tires, then down the line they went.

    If these are anywhere near a bud and Lou in supple and size, but with stud pockets I'll be one happy pre ordered camper.

    Generally it's probably best to use "LIES" in all caps for companies that delay shipping dates for years on end, or political promises.....

  62. #62
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    We are talking 1/2” difference between marked sizes and shouldn’t have to play photo analyst to see the wider tire.



  63. #63
    Squ-eti
    Reputation: mccartney7499's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    265
    It's a tire, for a fat bike. If it's not what your after don't buy it. The world will go on lol.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by mccartney7499 View Post
    It's a tire, for a fat bike. If it's not what your after don't buy it. The world will go on lol.
    Please go and order a pair site unseen and then let us know if they are truly 5” wide as labeled.

  65. #65
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    I’m completely disappointed in the width and am sick and tired of tire manufacturers exaggerating their sizes.

    Grab a clue, dude. They're free and dispensed pretty much everywhere around here.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    If CEOs where ladies they would pretend to be thinner

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    146
    For anyone who might want to pull the trigger on some big tires now, Vee is running a 35% off sale, with free shipping, on "everything" until Sept 9. Defeats the purpose of doing a thorough comparison with the Johnny 5, but you can't beat the price...

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    268
    Looks like the 26x5.0 has almost exactly the same bead-to-bead and tread width measurements as the 27.5x4.5

    Terrene Johnny 5-5b2cdea2-c00a-4ee7-8f4f-3eedbc1db701.jpeg

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by Willum View Post
    Looks like the 26x5.0 has almost exactly the same bead-to-bead and tread width measurements as the 27.5x4.5

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	5B2CDEA2-C00A-4EE7-8F4F-3EEDBC1DB701.jpeg 
Views:	75 
Size:	617.3 KB 
ID:	1215642
    Sure, except the inner edge of the outer lug on the Johnny 5 looks to be at the outer edge of the outer lug on the Cake Eater. It also looks like the lower bead on the J5 is closer to the edge of the picture than the Cake Eater while the top beads are similar distances...although as demonstrated pictures are deceiving. I reserve judgement until we see some actual measurements.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    I realize the average customer doesn't likely frequent a forum, but it does seem odd no measurements are given. If the October date of delivery is to be right, these have to be finalised versions nearly done with q.c. seems like a bead to bead measurement unstretched could placate the lot of us.

    It might not be worth it to them but could drum up some excitement pre launch.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,156
    Quote Originally Posted by FitmanNJ View Post
    For anyone who might want to pull the trigger on some big tires now, Vee is running a 35% off sale, with free shipping, on "everything" until Sept 9. Defeats the purpose of doing a thorough comparison with the Johnny 5, but you can't beat the price...
    Except that you then have to ride a Vee tire. The XL's at least are the slowest tire I've ever ridden, have only marginal lateral traction and have inconsistant stud pockets that swallow some studs while leaving others at the perfect height.
    Latitude 61

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Except that you then have to ride a Vee tire. The XL's at least are the slowest tire I've ever ridden, have only marginal lateral traction and have inconsistant stud pockets that swallow some studs while leaving others at the perfect height.
    One thing is certain.
    If it is light it will run into trees.
    If it is heavy it will not accelerate.
    Do you order the light version?
    Do you order the heavy version?
    Do you order the 1 that fits your frame and fork?
    Do you order the other 1?
    Who will start a poll thread?

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Except that you then have to ride a Vee tire. The XL's at least are the slowest tire I've ever ridden, have only marginal lateral traction and have inconsistant stud pockets that swallow some studs while leaving others at the perfect height.
    Are you referring to a "Silica/Black" Vee Snoeshoe XL, or a "PSC/White" one? I ask because, having read a ton of posts on the 2XL tire, I'm pretty sure that the "too heavy, too stiff, too sluggish" comments definitely have been directed at the Silica/Black tire. I'm not as clear if the "PSC/White" version has been found to be equally unattractive in these areas, and I can't recall reading a review written by someone who's ridden both tires and can compare them directly.

    According to Vee's website, the "Silica/Black" 2XL version is 230 grams heavier per tire than the "PSC/White" version; it's also made out of 62 durometer rubber versus the PSC's softer 51 durometer rubber. So, without further information, it seems possible that the PSC 2XL could perform better (or at least differently) than the Silica tire. Can anyone out there address this possibility?

    I'll definitely grant you that Vee's quality control seems to have been called into question by a number of persons.
    Last edited by FitmanNJ; 09-09-2018 at 03:02 PM.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,156
    I have the black Snowshoe XL's.
    Latitude 61

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Willum View Post
    Looks like the 26x5.0 has almost exactly the same bead-to-bead and tread width measurements as the 27.5x4.5

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	5B2CDEA2-C00A-4EE7-8F4F-3EEDBC1DB701.jpeg 
Views:	75 
Size:	617.3 KB 
ID:	1215642
    Thanks for posting this photo. To the flat earth believers who keep bring up the photo perspective I think you need to give your head a shake. How many photos is it going to take to demonstrate the 5.0 size is exaggerated? Typical BS marketing with 5.0 stamped on the side when it isn’t even close.

    Maybe it was really cold out when the picture was taken and the Johnny 5 had just stepped out of the pool and experienced “shrinkage”?

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by FitmanNJ View Post
    Are you referring to a "Silica/Black" Vee Snoeshoe XL, or a "PSC/White" one? I ask because, having read a ton of posts on the 2XL tire, I'm pretty sure that the "too heavy, too stiff, too sluggish" comments definitely have been directed at the Silica/Black tire. I'm not as clear if the "PSC/White" version has been found to be equally unattractive in these areas, and I can't recall reading a review written by someone who's ridden both tires and can compare them directly.

    According to Vee's website, the "Silica/Black" 2XL version is 230 grams heavier per tire than the "PSC/White" version; it's also made out of 62 durometer rubber versus the PSC's softer 51 durometer rubber. So, without further information, it seems possible that the PSC 2XL could perform better (or at least differently) than the Silica tire. Can anyone out there address this possibility?

    I'll definitely grant you that Vee's quality control seems to have been called into question by a number of persons.
    I’ve got both models and rode both types of tires over two separate winters and the PSC versions are way better. The are much softer than the black ones, snow doesn’t stick to them, and they grip the ice better. Both versions of the 2XL provide excellent traction and flotation. The downsides are they are both very heavy, stiff, slow rolling, and take a lot more energy to ride than the bud/Lou combo. The knobs on the PSC tires are too soft to take grip studs (I tried). I have successfully studded the black versions. The black versions have a weird tendency to have snow stick to them like Velcro, it’s very odd and slows you down even more.

    I’d seriously consider buying a set of J5’s if they were actually 5” wide. The 2XLs work but leave much to be desired.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    I remember seeing on youtube short 10 sec videos of huge tires in 2 feet of snow.
    The problem is it was downhill
    coming at fullspeed
    and slowing every second
    The 26x4.8 is spot on.
    Just select knobs according to where you ride.
    I like Bud/Lou but if i was elsewhere an other choice might be my first.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    Thanks for posting this photo. To the flat earth believers who keep bring up the photo perspective I think you need to give your head a shake. How many photos is it going to take to demonstrate the 5.0 size is exaggerated? Typical BS marketing with 5.0 stamped on the side when it isn’t even close.

    Maybe it was really cold out when the picture was taken and the Johnny 5 had just stepped out of the pool and experienced “shrinkage”?


    Name:  j52.jpg
Views: 1418
Size:  37.1 KB

    For those that take the picture as Gospel:

    Casing on J5 appears 5% wider than the Cake Eater 4.5 and tread appears about 10% wider. Given both tires are not available and widths cannot be confirmed, I am not sure much other than relative width, when laid flat, can be gleaned.

    By the way, wouldn't the "flat earther" more appropriately be the one that insists in looking at things in 2D vs accepting the reality of the world in 3D perspective?

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    473
    After perusing this thread quickly it appears we have hit full roadie. Haha Hope you guys get out and enjoy riding your bikes today. :-)

  80. #80
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    For those that take the picture as Gospel:
    BUT BUT BUT what do they weigh? I am gonna go with 1550 grams.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,156
    Fatbike.com has 'em mounted up on HED 100's measured out to 4.85" @ 10 psi.
    Latitude 61

  82. #82
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,264
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Fatbike.com has 'em mounted up on HED 100's measured out to 4.85" @ 10 psi.

    Ridden/stretched?

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
    BUT BUT BUT what do they weigh?...
    The same as a



    DUCK

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    268
    So call it 4.9” stretched on 100mm rims - Sounds promising, even if it isn’t quite the “giant studded tire” that so many riders want.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,156
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Ridden/stretched?
    Didn't sound like either, yet.
    Latitude 61

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Fatbike.com has 'em mounted up on HED 100's measured out to 4.85" @ 10 psi.
    With studs that will fit in 5% of bikes that are out there?
    Who has 100mm 5%?

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    With studs that will fit in 5% of bikes that are out there?
    Who has 100mm 5%?
    How many bikes will it fit without studs? 5.5%?

    Q:Who has 100mm rims?
    A:Those who's main concern is maximum tire size. Those folks may also be interested in this as a studded tire. It sure looks bigger than a D5 and is more aggressive.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by sryanak View Post
    Fatbike.com has 'em mounted up on HED 100's measured out to 4.85" @ 10 psi.
    Thanks for this info. Just like the photos showed, it isn’t a true 5” wide tire. Swing and a miss.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    Thanks for this info. Just like the photos showed, it isn’t a true 5” wide tire. Swing and a miss.
    Still considerably larger than the other high-quality (read: not vee) studded options out there

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Willum View Post
    Still considerably larger than the other high-quality (read: not vee) studded options out there
    You call that a quality thing? Is it because it weights 1.1 K or because it weights 1.9 K?

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    You call that a quality thing? Is it because it weights 1.1 K or because it weights 1.9 K?
    Not sure what you mean, the Johnny 5 has a claimed wieight of neither 1100 or 1900 grams. Vee’s main quality issues seem to be rubber (thick, heavy, too stiff/not supple enough), non-round tires (hops when spinning) , durability (tread separates from casing), and widespread anecdotal reports of high rolling resistance. Low price, but you get what you pay for.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Willum View Post
    Not sure what you mean, the Johnny 5 has a claimed wieight of neither 1100 or 1900 grams. Vee’s main quality issues seem to be rubber (thick, heavy, too stiff/not supple enough), non-round tires (hops when spinning) , durability (tread separates from casing), and widespread anecdotal reports of high rolling resistance. Low price, but you get what you pay for.
    Well if you do not know the weight you cannot say it is quality.
    If they can mesure it why is the weight a secret?

  93. #93
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    763
    4.85 unstretched at 10psi sounds fairly promising.
    ''Industry standard'' is 20psi and they will grow somewhat with use/stretch.
    It can be argued that 5psi or even 3psi should be the industry standard for fat tires, but most companies rate them at 20psi.

    My own measurements for the Dillinger 5 (somewhat stretched, but unridden tire on 100mm Surly Clown shoe):

    4.35'' at 5psi
    4.45'' at 10psi
    4.55'' at 20psi

    I'm much more interested in the bead-bead width as that tells us more about the volume and potential footprint at low to super low psi.
    I'm guessing 270-275mm bead-bead.
    (Bud/Lou is typically around 260mm, Jumbo Jim 4.8 is around 265mm and the 2XL is just under 300mm)
    Last edited by Espen W; 09-13-2018 at 05:30 AM.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    475
    Here in Quebec we consider the D5 as a 4.5 with no weakness but kind of average do it all. So if we run our 4.8 at 5 PSI this ((bigger one)) should use 4 PSI. The problem is the 230 pounder wich would benefit from that big advantage will have the tire get to wide and create a chain problem.
    Other problem you buy, it fits
    it stretches, it fits no more.
    The stach full suspension has that problem, a bike way too heavy for a light weight like me but good on paper for heavy riders, except the chain detail, do you use a chain?

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowfat View Post
    Thanks for this info. Just like the photos showed, it isn’t a true 5” wide tire. Swing and a miss.
    Whatever you do, don't go to a lumber yard. None of their stuff measures advertised sizes either.

    Tire sizes should be taken as nominal. More often than not bike tires do not measure advertised size regardless of manufacturer, or bike segment (road, mountain or fat). Some measure closer than others.

    BTW, the photo showed nothing of width other than it was wider than a purported 4.5" tire.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: flowby2wheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    57
    This thread is amusing. The very first few posts start with the bike rumor article and show the tire inflated on a Fatback Corvus which has exactly 6” between the rear stays. The close up photo shows the space between the tire and the stay (stay width is 3/4”, gap is obviously less). The article calls it 5” and the photo shows it at fully 5” and calls out the weight of 1700 grams.

    The only thing I can figure is that the fat bike community on mtbr just has too much cabin fever waiting for the snow to fly...

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    I'm much more interested in the bead-bead width as that tells us more about the volume and potential footprint at low to super low psi.
    I'm guessing 270-275mm bead-bead.
    (Bud/Lou is typically around 260mm, Jumbo Jim 4.8 is around 265mm and the 2XL is just under 300mm)
    This is the most important take away from this thread. 4th quarter 2018, it has well been established what bead-bead width will yield what inflated widths. Several threads on here, elsewhere on the net, buy a couple similar tires and break out the tape measure- then inter/extrapolate, utilize the solidworks model which you already need for the tread mold CNC. There is absolutely no reason that a manufacturer should be significantly off in their claims, with no obvious way to backup the hot-stamp on the sidewall.

  98. #98
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,264
    Quote Originally Posted by flowby2wheels View Post
    The only thing I can figure is that the fat bike community on mtbr just has too much cabin fever waiting for the snow to fly...

    You're more generous than I.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    54
    Well, at 4.85 they will fit the vast majority of 150/190 bikes. Same me some money on a frame to fit them, I suppose that's a plus.

    At my size, going from dillinger 5 to bud/Lou is not a huge chasm in float but it is still noticeable. Last year did some comparisons and in some of the crust conditions it was the difference between rideable and not. With the shoulder seasons we go from needing float to bare ice back to float all in the same ride. These should be better tan current options, hopefully the pre order arrives before the ice does.

    Granted it's the warmest september I've ever seen in western Alaska, studs may be moot for a while. Fine by me, it was the coldest may/June in memory.



    Edit: just read the fat-bike.com article.... 1800 grams.... must be the tread blocks adding the weight. Basically they are studable Lou, not 2xl competition. The snow avalanches I got last year were 1850, and they went 4.3 so these should be better than those.

    Not as big as I'd hoped, but probably good marketing to err on the size they went with. Tremendous amount of frames will fit this tire, probably keep the dilly 5s for commuting, these might drag like the old snowshoe xls....
    Last edited by Comfisherman; 09-14-2018 at 01:55 AM.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCheesehead View Post
    Whatever you do, don't go to a lumber yard. None of their stuff measures advertised sizes either.

    Tire sizes should be taken as nominal. More often than not bike tires do not measure advertised size regardless of manufacturer, or bike segment (road, mountain or fat). Some measure closer than others.

    BTW, the photo showed nothing of width other than it was wider than a purported 4.5" tire.
    Same reason that Chicks don't like to date guys that drive Corvettes.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Bontrager Chupacabra 29x3.0 vs Terrene McFly 29x2.8
    By strikeir13 in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-09-2018, 01:10 PM
  2. New tire company, Terrene Tires
    By majack in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 02-06-2018, 05:08 PM
  3. 45Nrth Dillinger 4 versus Terrene Cake Eater 4.0
    By rjkowski in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-25-2018, 07:57 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-01-2017, 04:05 AM
  5. Johnny Cash
    By Squatcho in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-18-2011, 01:27 PM

Members who have read this thread: 433

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

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.