Turner King Khan- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 50 of 50
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    8

    Turner King Khan

    I was throwing all my loose change (and some much heavier loot!) into y piggy bank in the hopes of scoring a King Khan. Then Turner killed it .

    What alternative FB's should I be looking at? I was jonesing for the KK for it's double sus, wide color pallet, Cane Creek options and it's sheer brutishness!

    Ideas? Suggestions?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    400
    Look at a foes Mutz, with a Wren fork up front.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,053
    Or, the Fox 34 27.5+ fork fits 3.8" fat tires

  4. #4
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    I wish the KK would have been offered in a carbon version, kind of like a super-versatile Czar. Then I might have had to get one...skinny wheels and light weight for summer, fatties for winter...
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,875
    Foes Mutz and Lenz Fatillac are "bigger" bikes.
    Salsa Bucksaw is a "smaller" platform.
    Waltworks and maybe others are doing customs that could be dialed to your spec.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ducman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    289
    I love my TKK, if for some reason I had to get something else. I think it would be the Lenz. Although I have not tried a Bucksaw, i feel the 100mm travel is just not going to be enough. My 100mm blizzard blows thru travel much easier than I like, where my 120mm rarely bottoms out and feels plushier

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Mutz or Fatillac.

    Turner is a good builder, but the frame was overpriced and now it's off the table.

    It really depends on your style of riding.

    I like the Mutz, it climbs like a beast, it's super stable, no complaints in any way, it's "bonified"

    The Lenz Fatillac has a few users, so far the reviews are good, Lenz builds good frames and the suspensions seem to work well. The Fatillac has a much tighter rear end, so likely more agile, but there's always a trade off.

    What do you ride now and why do you want an FS Fatty? If you don't really need a fat bike or you already have a hardtail fatty, considering the less intense terrain that a FS fatty will see in winter use, why would you not be considering an FS plus bike of which there are a multitude of choices?

    If I wasn't committed to a single platform and multiple wheels sets, I'd ride a lightweight hardtail fatty with a Lauf, an FS Plus bike like the Foes Alpine or Mixer, and a Ventana El Jefe tandem fat/plus.

    As to the BS, it's a fine bike, but it's not a big hit bike (only 100mm travel) so it's utility is limited no matter how well it rides.

    For me, a 140-150mm travel bike that climbs well is all I need, and some extra wheels, and a tandem, and a few unicyles

  8. #8
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    26,590
    I really like my Bucksaw. No complaints. I've ridden it in some seriously chunky situations, but it's true, it's not a big hit bike.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Yeah, I'm no Bucksaw hater, for a while it was the only choice. Credit to Salsa who upped the game, it's them and SRAM that made this thread reality.

    Just like with non fat bikes, there are a range of users, so short and long travel suspension, even hardtails, just depends on what you prefer.

    If Specialized and SRAM took the next step and came together for a 140mm fat platform, taking an existing plus frame and reworking it for a 4" tires, then SRAM said yes to a fat Pike, well damn, that would be the ticket!

    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    I really like my Bucksaw. No complaints. I've ridden it in some seriously chunky situations, but it's true, it's not a big hit bike.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ducman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Mutz or Fatillac.

    Turner is a good builder, but the frame was overpriced and now it's off the table.
    I would say its the other way around. For an extra $200 you could get a DW link instead on a single pivot

  11. #11
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    26,590
    Even if I had to make the decision now, with the Mutz and the Fatillac on the market, I'd probably still choose the Bucksaw.

    I like riding technical terrain, but I am not someone who seeks out opportunities for air, and I avoid big air, for sure. I am more likely to roll big, chunky stuff than I am to drop or huck it. I like a stable bike, and I want something that just takes the edge off. I'm going to start doing a bit of bikepacking on it this year, and I think it's a good platform for a FS bikepacking bike, too.

    But as has been discussed by mikesee (who has ridden more FS fatbikes than anyone I'm aware of) and others, the Bucksaw is not the most playful bike out there. It's playful enough for me, but if a playful bike is a high priority for you, you should look elsewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Yeah, I'm no Bucksaw hater, for a while it was the only choice. Credit to Salsa who upped the game, it's them and SRAM that made this thread reality.

    Just like with non fat bikes, there are a range of users, so short and long travel suspension, even hardtails, just depends on what you prefer.

    If Specialized and SRAM took the next step and came together for a 140mm fat platform, taking an existing plus frame and reworking it for a 4" tires, then SRAM said yes to a fat Pike, well damn, that would be the ticket!

  12. #12
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    26,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducman View Post
    I would say its the other way around. For an extra $200 you could get a DW link instead on a single pivot
    I'm going to venture that the difference in actual performance of various suspension designs these days is muted by the improved quality of shock dampers. Especially as compared to 10-15 years ago.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Sorry, I'm gonna disagree, single pivots can work very well, I've ridden both and for my money I look first at how a bike fits and performs. I don't look at bikes because of advertising.

    Consider this: If DW, VPP, etc... were so great, why does Lenz and Foes still use a single pivot AND why do the users of those bikes rave about their performance?

    You'd be doing a disservice to your self if you only looked at bikes through that lens.

    Me, I like red apples

    Quote Originally Posted by Ducman View Post
    I would say its the other way around. For an extra $200 you could get a DW link instead on a single pivot

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ducman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    289
    Not sure what bike fit has to do with suspension design.

    Consider this: if single pivot was so great why do so few manufacturers use them.

    I don't like single pivot with no pivot at the back wheel so the mutz is not a option for me. You do...so yay for you

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    400
    I have owned Bullits, Hecklers, Superlights, Sugars, and Foes. I have been able ride as my friends search for linkage bolts, or deal with seized bearings. Its a very simple, reliable, and predictable suspension design, putting the platform completely on the rear shock. Using something like the CCDB CS allows my Foes to be the best pedaling bike I have ever thrown a leg over. This is comparing is against the Nomad, the Trek Slash, the Stinky, and a Blut LT.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Bike fit is bike fit. If a bike doesn't fit, well, it doesn't fit.

    I think single pivots don't get as much play because they are generic, which doesn't sell as well as advertising your bike as having a named "performance suspension".

    To each their own, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is silly.

    It's interesting that you'd say yes to Lenz and no to Foes, not having ridden either one, but you ride a Turner.

    To the OP, don't choose based on heresay and advertising. If you're gonna drop a big bag of coin on a bike, do yourself a favor and find one to demo, even if it means taking a trip or finding a forum user for a meet up.

    I'll admit that I got the Mutz because my buddy said he was ordering them for his shop, knowing all along that if I didn't like it he'd work with me. I fell in love, the Mutz is my favorite riding bike of all time. I am now a huge Foes fan all because I tried the Mutz and found the suspension design to work.

    I've now built three Mutz and a 275, Foes knows what they are doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ducman View Post
    Not sure what bike fit has to do with suspension design.

    Consider this: if single pivot was so great why do so few manufacturers use them.

    I don't like single pivot with no pivot at the back wheel so the mutz is not a option for me. You do...so yay for you

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    432
    Like Nurse Ben, I fell in love With the Foes Mutz, and did just after a few rides..... For me it was a revolution rigid frame where you actually can feel the power from your pedalling transferred to the rear Wheel. It was like the first time you tried a really well built wheel set for the first time. First few months with the Mutz I used it with a 120mm Bluto, but 2 months ago I got the Wren fork with 150mm travel. The bike just got complete with the wren fork.
    Coming to a point where I was tired of bikes, after killing 4 seat stays on my two previous skinny FS bikes, together with a lot maintenance. I think most of the reason for killing the frames is my weight of 250lbs. I am riding in really muddy and wet condition during the year, so I need to change a lot of bearings in complicated FS designs. Now it seems that the bearings are holding out much longer, what I think has to do with the more rigid frame design of the Mutz. And of course it is fewer bearings…..
    Some People think you cannot do fast and agile riding with a long travelled suspension, but with the Mutz you can Climb and do agile riding for sure.... I did almost buy a Bucksaw and for sure it is a good bike, but I know I am just tons more happy with the Mutz, It is just a more versatile bike for me!!

  18. #18
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Bike fit is bike fit. If a bike doesn't fit, well, it doesn't fit.

    I think single pivots don't get as much play because they are generic, which doesn't sell as well as advertising your bike as having a named "performance suspension".

    To each their own, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is silly.

    It's interesting that you'd say yes to Lenz and no to Foes, not having ridden either one, but you ride a Turner.

    To the OP, don't choose based on heresay and advertising. If you're gonna drop a big bag of coin on a bike, do yourself a favor and find one to demo, even if it means taking a trip or finding a forum user for a meet up.

    I'll admit that I got the Mutz because my buddy said he was ordering them for his shop, knowing all along that if I didn't like it he'd work with me. I fell in love, the Mutz is my favorite riding bike of all time. I am now a huge Foes fan all because I tried the Mutz and found the suspension design to work.

    I've now built three Mutz and a 275, Foes knows what they are doing.
    Well, here's my Foes experience:

    "Single pivot" is a little misleading, there are linkage-controlled single pivots, and non-linkage controlled single pivots, where eiher the lack of linkage, or the linkage function itself, does not affect the shock rate.

    Back in the older days, the Foes bikes were either single pivot, or single pivot with a linkage that did not affect the shock rate. What foes did well was build stiff frames, and every aspect of the frame was designed to make it as stiff or short as possible. The linkage was there to significantly boost the lateral rigidity. That part of the bike was good, but:

    The suspension was bad, very bad. I "upgraded" to the curnut shock and it was still bad, the shock had some inherent problems, but 3 trips back to Foes and a total rebuild couldn't sort it out. One of the problems was the rate control IMO, the "progressive" shocks got very harsh on high speed choppy stuff, as they were giving as much resistance as the shock would give on a big hit. Eventually, a DHX was a decent upgrade, but it was still pretty poor. At times, going through rough stuff, it felt like the bike was literally trying to break itself in half. Of course, a large part of the decision to run these shocks was to provide the "pedaling platform" and rely on shock technology, not suspension design/pivot placement, for pedaling action vs suspension action. Luckily, this idea died out years ago, mostly due to the extremely poor suspension action. I had multiple SPV shocks and they all sucked, never providing anything close to a properly designed bike's action.

    There were some other design issues too, the bike utilized a "scissor-link" to actuate the shock, but maintain zero-influence on the rate. Unfortunately, this had a long 4-5" bolt that ran though the entire assembly, but this is bike design 101 and a bolt that long connected to the shock is a huge lever arm, so the bike would constantly bend the shock bolt, despite it being a pretty "beefy" bike. From early on, companies using rocker linkages like Turner and Rocky Mountain realized you want to use the shortest bolt possible, to make that leverage as minimal as possible.

    But then, a few years ago, something interesting happened. Foes started making bikes that used the linkage to change the shock rate. This effectively made them function just like any other linkage single pivot bike, like Kona, Trek, etc. This design can be quite good with a single ring, and even with two it's not bad. Foes also moved away from designing bikes with the sole intent to run the curnut shock. These two changes are huge. Maybe not enough to make me want to buy another Foes again, but IME there is a huge difference between a single pivot bike that uses a linkage to vary the shock rate, and what Foes was trying to do a few years back. Your Mutz isn't "just a single pivot", it's a pretty good single pivot due to it being linkage driven and having the proper kinematics. They know what they are doing "now", it seems, but before? Seemed more like hoping by random chance for a good design...

    But, as I said, all of this is not enough to make me want to buy one again, the suspension on bikes like the giant and DW links allows you to "have your cake and eat it too" to a large extent, not squatting and bogging down like many bikes do on the climb, while sucking up square hits effortlessly. That was the attraction of the Kahn to me, but moreso if it was a light carbon bike, then I could have one bike for all seasons and switch out the wheels.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  19. #19
    aka bOb
    Reputation: bdundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    8,683
    fixed it.

  20. #20
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post

    Consider this: If DW, VPP, etc... were so great, why does Lenz and Foes still use a single pivot AND why do the users of those bikes rave about their performance?
    You know, people are funny. Close friends and co-workers can't seem to grasp that my BMW (with adaptive suspension, no less) is nowhere near as good-handling as my 2010 camaro. The steering, the brakes, the shocks, etc, all far better, than on my BMW. It's as if people think there is some sort of magic fairy-dust that comes with the BMW that allows it to vastly outperform it's actual skid pad, acceleration, braking, and other stats. I got the BMW for other reasons, to increase the practicality and get some better all-weather capability, but when it comes to performance, it's amazing how people seem so stuck on one thing, it almost doesn't matter what the actual performance is, they'll rationalize whatever they experience.

    Again, not trying to claim the foes is anything but a good bike, I think they've come a long way, but the answer to the question posted above should be somewhat obvious: because people are people.

    Back when lenz was making concentric pivot DH bikes, they were some of the worst designs out there, now, there were a lot of bad designs from that era, but right from the get-go they weren't getting off to a good start. Luckily, the one thing the concentric design DOES excel at is a single-speed, due to the chain torque.

    All that said, I'd rather have a good single pivot linkage bike than just about any horst-link. There are lots of bikes that a good single pivot is better than.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,053
    What still amazes me is how few people have actually ridden more than one FS fatty.

    Everyone likes theirs best, yet hasn't ridden the others.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    There are only four, Turner is gone, Lenz is new, but I've ridden the other two.

    I'm pretty sure you can decide how a bike rides by comparing it to other bikes you've ridden, an FS fatty is still a bike.

    I prefer the Mutz with 27+ over any other bikes I have ridden, demoed/borrowed and any bikes I've owned.

    I buy and sell gear without a second thought, but I'm not selling the Mutz...unless I like the Fatillac better

    All I was trying to say is you can't judge a book by it's cover. A bike demo is like reading an exerpt from a book, it gives you an idea as to whether it's the kind of ride/read you like.

    Quote Originally Posted by matto6 View Post
    What still amazes me is how few people have actually ridden more than one FS fatty.

    Everyone likes theirs best, yet hasn't ridden the others.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    432
    Actually there are a few more FS fatbike manufacturers out there.....2 german brands, Maxx Huraxdax (i think it is Taiwan made frames but it can take 5" tires, 197mm rear hub spacing) and Alutech Fat Fanes (aluminum German made frames, I am not sure if the model exists any more), and there is 11nine (i think US brand with Taiwan made frames). Btw is the Lenz Fatillac taking more than 4" tires in the rear frame??
    Last edited by Rumblefish2010; 02-13-2016 at 01:12 PM.

  24. #24
    parts leftover
    Reputation: schlim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    994
    +1 on this sentiment. A light carbon DW fatbike from Turner would have been hard to resist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    I wish the KK would have been offered in a carbon version, kind of like a super-versatile Czar. Then I might have had to get one...skinny wheels and light weight for summer, fatties for winter...

  25. #25
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    13,373
    Quote Originally Posted by RiverRat68 View Post
    I was throwing all my loose change (and some much heavier loot!) into y piggy bank in the hopes of scoring a King Khan. Then Turner killed it .

    What alternative FB's should I be looking at? I was jonesing for the KK for it's double sus, wide color pallet, Cane Creek options and it's sheer brutishness!

    Ideas? Suggestions?
    The Foes Mutz is probably closest in geo to the Turner, if that matters.

    I wanted to get to the opposite end of the spectrum from that geo, so I chose the Lenz Fatillac. Actually got to have a hand in the design.

    Incredibly capable bike.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    568
    11 9 also has two fatbikes in their line up

    If you have your heart set on a kk you should reach out to turner

    They may have one or two for sale. I reached out a few months ago and they were incredibly responsive and did have one available

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    The Foes Mutz is probably closest in geo to the Turner, if that matters.

    I wanted to get to the opposite end of the spectrum from that geo, so I chose the Lenz Fatillac. Actually got to have a hand in the design.

    Incredibly capable bike.
    Can you explain what the opposite end of the Spectrum the Lenz is from Turner KK and Foes M? I see from the data sheet that a Large frame from Lenz and Moes is pretty Close in top tube length. The Chain stay is 1,5" Shorter on the Lenz so the WB is acordingly Shorter on the Lenz, since the head tube angel is the same?? The Bottom bracket height is 0.75" lower on the Mutz. That is good on the mutz when getting longer travelled forks on it, like the Wren!

  28. #28
    bigger than you.
    Reputation: Gigantic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,068
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Can you explain what the opposite end of the Spectrum the Lenz is from Turner KK and Foes M?
    The foes and the Turner KK have really long chain stays, close to 18" long. The Lenz has really short stays, close to 16.5". It ought to be infinitely more maneuverable and playful.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    432
    Okay I see. Otherwise it is not so far from each other. Never had a better bike for climbing than the Mutz, so for me longer WB and chain stay is better. Having had a few bikes with short chain stay, but I have never found that to be the thing for me. The main reason I think is the shorter the wheel base the weight shifts. There is difficult in steeper climbs to get the weight to hold the front of the bike to the ground. This is even more crucial when having a longer fork. Of course a good rider will overcome this but for me it is better with a forgivable frame.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,742
    This is the first I've heard of it- any reasons given why they killed it off?
    "Wait- I am confused" - SDMTB'er

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Yes, therein lies the choice, long LWB for climbing or SWB for agility. The Mutz is not a wheelie king, it takes work to manual, it climbs great and it is a good handling bike for tech, but if you want a Honzo or Screamy handling fattty the Mutz ain't it.

    The BS and the KK are in the same LWB category, only the Fatillac is a SWB.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Okay I see. Otherwise it is not so far from each other. Never had a better bike for climbing than the Mutz, so for me longer WB and chain stay is better. Having had a few bikes with short chain stay, but I have never found that to be the thing for me. The main reason I think is the shorter the wheel base the weight shifts. There is difficult in steeper climbs to get the weight to hold the front of the bike to the ground. This is even more crucial when having a longer fork. Of course a good rider will overcome this but for me it is better with a forgivable frame.

  32. #32
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    Quote Originally Posted by deuxdiesel View Post
    This is the first I've heard of it- any reasons given why they killed it off?
    The bubble burst.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    The bubble burst.
    or they weren't selling or they have too many other projects or they didn't believe the fork situation will improve or the Mutz was just as good and less expensive

  34. #34
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    or they weren't selling or they have too many other projects or they didn't believe the fork situation will improve or the Mutz was just as good and less expensive
    No offense, but I see companies like Foes, Ventana, Elsworth, Titus and others on "lifelines" right now. A few of them have legit good products, like the Mutz or El Gordo, but I think they are down to just a trickle of frames based on what I see people riding and the activity (or lack thereof) of owners on the internet and it worries me that they may suddenly close their doors.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  35. #35
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    26,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    No offense, but I see companies like Foes, Ventana, Elsworth, Titus and others on "lifelines" right now. A few of them have legit good products, like the Mutz or El Gordo, but I think they are down to just a trickle of frames based on what I see people riding and the activity (or lack thereof) of owners on the internet and it worries me that they may suddenly close their doors.
    Considering that both Ellsworth and Titus are now owned by other companies, I think you're partially correct. That spot in the marketplace, the smaller-than-big-but-bigger-than-custom has always been a difficult place to be. Companies come and go there. New competitors pop up and steal market share. The question is that are these companies nimble enough to innovate and bring in new customers? It seems to me that they lose out on some nimbleness, but they're too small to have big R&D departments and too small to be conservative when it comes to changing consumer attitudes.

    All of these companies kinda built their reputations on aluminum FS bikes (and in the case of Titus, Ti FS bikes). They were so heavily invested there and not nimble enough to adapt when the carbon FS came out. IIRC, they also lagged a bit when new wheel sizes came along. Companies like Niner and Pivot fill the roles that those other brands held previously. Will Niner and Pivot be nimble enough to adapt in the future or will they in turn lose market share to a new brand that comes along early in a new trend and draws people away? Evil is a newer company that's generating a lot of interest with its bikes, too, further pulling customers away from the more established brands.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,855
    I made a climb this weekend on my 35 lb Mutz that Ive never made on my 28 lb Intense Carbon Tracer. I've been riding the same trail for 15 years and have never made it on any bike Ive owned except the Mutz.

  37. #37
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    Considering that both Ellsworth and Titus are now owned by other companies, I think you're partially correct. That spot in the marketplace, the smaller-than-big-but-bigger-than-custom has always been a difficult place to be. Companies come and go there. New competitors pop up and steal market share. The question is that are these companies nimble enough to innovate and bring in new customers? It seems to me that they lose out on some nimbleness, but they're too small to have big R&D departments and too small to be conservative when it comes to changing consumer attitudes.

    All of these companies kinda built their reputations on aluminum FS bikes (and in the case of Titus, Ti FS bikes). They were so heavily invested there and not nimble enough to adapt when the carbon FS came out. IIRC, they also lagged a bit when new wheel sizes came along. Companies like Niner and Pivot fill the roles that those other brands held previously. Will Niner and Pivot be nimble enough to adapt in the future or will they in turn lose market share to a new brand that comes along early in a new trend and draws people away? Evil is a newer company that's generating a lot of interest with its bikes, too, further pulling customers away from the more established brands.
    True, the only constant in business is change. You have to continually develop/improve/innovate/reach out to new markets/make things more efficient/produce things more efficient/etc. If you don't do these things, someone will be along shortly that can. There are just a couple niches where people can sit on their hands and wait for the world to come to them, but the majority of bike companies ain't it, there's way way too much competition out there. I think these smaller manufacturers CAN be successful, but it takes a lot of work, continual work. I don't think it's so much about going carbon, but innovating and changing, which doesn't require carbon per see.

    Niner is a good example of this genre, came out with a bunch of stuff, hit the market running, XC hardtails, FS bikes, a "big hit" bike, etc. Lots of breakages actually too, but they soldiered on through it. Now fizzling out because many manufacturers do what they do and do it better. Meanwhile, no noteworthy new bikes/innovations.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  38. #38
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,426
    Quote Originally Posted by deuxdiesel View Post
    This is the first I've heard of it- any reasons given why they killed it off?
    Dave Turner dropped the KK due to poor sales. They were a limited run to begin with and weren't moving.
    A little insider convo with Mr. Turner recently...
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    I made a climb this weekend on my 35 lb Mutz that Ive never made on my 28 lb Intense Carbon Tracer. I've been riding the same trail for 15 years and have never made it on any bike Ive owned except the Mutz.
    I can also add to that experience, using a carbon FS from Cube 140/150mm even lighter than Your Intense. With the Mutz I have climbed sections I have struggled with the past 5-6 years.
    Yesterday was a good example of how the strength of the Mutz frame shines. I hit a slope of naked rock climbing, but found out in the middle of the section, that I had started with to high gear. Almost missing it and lost all speed. My only bail out is to use all my weight (250lbs) and using all power in feet and body, including pulling with my arms on the handlebars, standing on one pedal arm, to force traction to the rear wheel. Afterwards I do get surprised, because nothing brakes! It is so good to feel the power getting transferred to the wheel!
    On my previous bikes, these situations have ended with missing the climbs, since the power has not been going to the ground. There have been tires hitting the frame, and of course it has also been broken frame parts. And of course you loose control over the situation when the energy transformation is going into moving all kinds of frame parts…….

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I can also add to that experience, using a carbon FS from Cube 140/150mm even lighter than Your Intense. With the Mutz I have climbed sections I have struggled with the past 5-6 years.
    Yesterday was a good example of how the strength of the Mutz frame shines. I hit a slope of naked rock climbing, but found out in the middle of the section, that I had started with to high gear. Almost missing it and lost all speed. My only bail out is to use all my weight (250lbs) and using all power in feet and body, including pulling with my arms on the handlebars, standing on one pedal arm, to force traction to the rear wheel. Afterwards I do get surprised, because nothing brakes! It is so good to feel the power getting transferred to the wheel!
    On my previous bikes, these situations have ended with missing the climbs, since the power has not been going to the ground. There have been tires hitting the frame, and of course it has also been broken frame parts. And of course you loose control over the situation when the energy transformation is going into moving all kinds of frame parts…….
    Full suspension was slow to gather momentum in the early days of biking; some folks still stubbornly refuse to ride anything but hardtails. The same is probably going to happen with fatbikes, folks will no longer think of fat tires as being "suspension", they'll begin to see how rear suspension not only improves agility and performance, but also softens the ride.

    I do see the value of having a hardtail, but only so far as weight and cost are important.

  41. #41
    PCT
    PCT is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    177
    VanHelga on a 65mm rim fits fine. Maybe could squeeze a Dunderbeist 4.6 in there but would have no mud clearance.

    Switched from the Bucksaw to the Fatillac and am quite pleased. Better geo for technical riding imho, more travel and easier to manual. Excellent climber and maneuverable. Mostly snow riding so far. Interested in that Wren but might try the Fox 34 27.5 Boost Plus first.

    Gonna try a plus setup on it soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Actually there are a few more FS fatbike manufacturers out there.....2 german brands, Maxx Huraxdax (i think it is Taiwan made frames but it can take 5" tires, 197mm rear hub spacing) and Alutech Fat Fanes (aluminum German made frames, I am not sure if the model exists any more), and there is 11nine (i think US brand with Taiwan made frames). Btw is the Lenz Fatillac taking more than 4" tires in the rear frame??

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    No offense, but I see companies like Foes, Ventana, Elsworth, Titus and others on "lifelines" right now. A few of them have legit good products, like the Mutz or El Gordo, but I think they are down to just a trickle of frames based on what I see people riding and the activity (or lack thereof) of owners on the internet and it worries me that they may suddenly close their doors.
    If a small company is making it, this often due to the folks running them, so kudos to Sherwood at Ventana and Brent at Foes, for producing great bikes year after year that are made in the USA.

    I have bikes from both manufacturers, a Ventana El Jefe fat tandem and a Foes Mutz.

    Ventana is way more broad based than the El Gordo, but most folks would not realize this because one of their big market segments is tandems. Ventana makes the best full suspension tandem on the market: The El Conquistidor do Los Montanas. Ventana is also pushing the envelope for fat forks by building a kit that allows the MRP Groove to be widened to 150mm (TA axle adaptors and double crown kit). Rumor has it that Ventana may be working on an FS fat bike.

    Foes is also far more than the Mutz, producing excellent trail and enduro bikes, as well as a successful DH bike. Foes is pushing the limits in a variety of ways including the development of the Mixer (27/29) as well as contributing to the development and adoption of the Wren fat bike fork.

    If we waited on Specialized, Trek, and Cannondale to do the above, we would be waiting a long, long, time.

    For this ^^I am happy to pay a little extra and support homegrown innovation.

    My next bikes will be a Foes Mixer or Alpine, a Ventana El Gordo, and "dreaming" of a full suspension fat or plus tandem.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    31
    Anybody mentioned the Salted Rock Candy or the Sandman Indus-FS yet (same frame I think)? Apart from the flex in the Bluto my Rock Candy is doing the job nicely so far.
    Turner King Khan-14538833482250.jpg

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,053
    Quote Originally Posted by BansheeRune View Post
    Dave Turner dropped the KK due to poor sales. They were a limited run to begin with and weren't moving.
    A little insider convo with Mr. Turner recently...
    I dunno. Didn't it sell out reasonably quickly? Doesn't the bucksaw sell like hotcakes?

    The kk had older geo (chainstays and head angle), came with funky wheels, was sold as complete bike only, and was expensive. I'm not ready to declare FS fatties dead yet just because the kk didn't bring home the bacon.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ducman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by matto6 View Post
    I dunno. Didn't it sell out reasonably quickly? Doesn't the bucksaw sell like hotcakes?

    The kk had older geo (chainstays and head angle), came with funky wheels, was sold as complete bike only, and was expensive. I'm not ready to declare FS fatties dead yet just because the kk didn't bring home the bacon.
    What was funky about hope hubs and 80mm rims?
    It was sold as a frame only too and was in the same price range as every other fat bike

  46. #46
    Rippin da fAt
    Reputation: BansheeRune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5,426
    Quote Originally Posted by matto6 View Post
    I dunno. Didn't it sell out reasonably quickly? Doesn't the bucksaw sell like hotcakes?

    The kk had older geo (chainstays and head angle), came with funky wheels, was sold as complete bike only, and was expensive. I'm not ready to declare FS fatties dead yet just because the kk didn't bring home the bacon.
    I wouldn't say that FS fat are anywhere near "Dead". Nor was the KK offered only as a complete. Dave and I had conversations regarding the KK on several occasions. In fact, I was amazed that he remembered the 3 Turners in my collection as well as model/year. Fact is that the KK was limited production. The other item on the list is the fact that a bike with the Turner name is expensive. The Turner trade in program is still going as well. $600 for the trade in of any Turner frame in any condition toward the purchase of a new frame. Not too shabby.
    Get fAt, Stay fAt, Ride fAt
    Doctor recommended...

  47. #47
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post

    If we waited on Specialized, Trek, and Cannondale to do the above, we would be waiting a long, long, time.

    For this ^^I am happy to pay a little extra and support homegrown innovation.

    My next bikes will be a Foes Mixer or Alpine, a Ventana El Gordo, and "dreaming" of a full suspension fat or plus tandem.
    The other thing I got burned on (besides the poor curnut performance) was the foes "low leverage" fad, where Brent was trying to claim 2:1 leverage was an "advantage", but in reality, it magnified bearing friction by giving the rear suspension less leverage to overcome it and caused big problems in specing the right spring, because when you are 3:1, springs in 50lb increments is usually good enough. When you go 2:1, you have to spec springs in 15 or 25lb increments to get fitted on the right spring, which is beyond the capability of most spring manufacturing quality control, so besides these issues, it also requires a massive shock that weighs 3lbs, so in the end, you get worse suspension and more weight. While it's cool that Brent tried to push new technology and ideas, doing so with absolutely no benefit is what really irked me. Give me something that does it better/faster/lighter/efficient/etc.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducman View Post
    What was funky about hope hubs and 80mm rims?
    First it was spec'd with 50mm rims, and when people complained Turner said narrower is better than 65 on a bike designed for trail riding. Then after people had placed orders it switched to 80mm rims (wider than many would prefer for a trail bike) that aren't super easy to run tubeless. It's wasn't a great story in the rim department.

    It was sold as a frame only too and was in the same price range as every other fat bike
    Well I tried to buy a frame only and was denied so I'm not sure what to say. I was told complete bike or nothing. This was early on so maybe at the end frames were available but I checked the web several times and never saw it as an option.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    432
    I do not see what the old bad design has to do With the New Foes Bikes? Other than stating that manufacturers have had more or less successful designs. I can imagine that all of them have had more or less some kind of flaws in their history?




    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    The other thing I got burned on (besides the poor curnut performance) was the foes "low leverage" fad, where Brent was trying to claim 2:1 leverage was an "advantage", but in reality, it magnified bearing friction by giving the rear suspension less leverage to overcome it and caused big problems in specing the right spring, because when you are 3:1, springs in 50lb increments is usually good enough. When you go 2:1, you have to spec springs in 15 or 25lb increments to get fitted on the right spring, which is beyond the capability of most spring manufacturing quality control, so besides these issues, it also requires a massive shock that weighs 3lbs, so in the end, you get worse suspension and more weight. While it's cool that Brent tried to push new technology and ideas, doing so with absolutely no benefit is what really irked me. Give me something that does it better/faster/lighter/efficient/etc.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I do not see what the old bad design has to do With the New Foes Bikes? Other than stating that manufacturers have had more or less successful designs. I can imagine that all of them have had more or less some kind of flaws in their history?
    Yeah, I recently sold a ten year old Specialized FS bike, in contemporary terms, the handling was terrible, but in 2006 it was the shite.

    You can't critique a bike outside of the context in which it was developed. Suspension has come a loooong way in the past decade.

Similar Threads

  1. turner king khan has arrived
    By Lee b in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-13-2015, 07:53 AM
  2. turner king khan any good?
    By Lee b in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-30-2015, 06:56 AM
  3. King Khan in XXL ?
    By Surfdog93 in forum Turner
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 05:45 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-07-2013, 01:49 PM
  5. 2011 Turner 5-Spot with Chris King?
    By jmv83fromdudley in forum Turner
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-22-2011, 07:38 PM

Members who have read this thread: 3

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.