Mutz setup 275+ vs...- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 54 of 54
  1. #1
    Front Range Colorado
    Reputation: Jpcannavo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    155

    Mutz setup 275+ vs...

    Tested Mutz set up 26 fat few weeks ago, very much liked it. Today had a brief try of Specialized FSR 6fattie ( I.e. 275+). Liked it enough that I am planning a 2day test ride in a few weeks. Unfortunately I likely won't have an opportunity to try the Mutz set up 275+. Wondering how Mutz with this wheel set will compare to the dedicated 275+ rigs that are coming out, including for that matter Foes Alpine Plus.
    :madman:

    "When debating a fool, retreat is the only option"
    Richard N Busternutt

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    789
    What did you think of the Mutz vs the 6fattie? Traction differences, rollover, nimbleness, speed, fun?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Front Range Colorado
    Reputation: Jpcannavo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    155
    They felt different, but different setups, hence the basis of the question this thread raises. I rode both on dry single track that included sandy sections, gravel and small rocks. Mutz was set up 26x3.8 (vanHelgas, nates). The Mutz had endless traction that exceeded my ability to break the tires loose, and in loose sections had me riding beyond my ability. It climbed better than I expected, but there was that constant sense of more tire than I needed, with me working a bit harder than seemed necessary - even on flat sections. Descending and doing small jumps and drops offs (1-2 feet), however, the mutz gave this feeling of suddenly coming alive, and felt very extremely stable, leaving me confident (love the 67 degree head angle) and riding beyond my pay grade. After a day on the Mutz, The 6 fatty surprised me. I still felt I had a lot of tire and traction, but the bike was noticeably quicker, more nimble (17.2" vs 18" chainstay) and climbed and rolled with significantly less effort. Descending it felt nearly as stable -again a 67 HA. The suspension also felt more lively and playful. As for FF (funfactor) they are close, with the Mutz have bit more of that monster truck, bushwack through anything feel. (The goat thorns out here though will take down all!)Given my brief impressions, and that I am only interested in dry riding conditions, I went with the 6 fatty, just got it (check out Mojo Wheels in CO!!)! And loving it. But I am left thinking that I never did the apples and apples thing, as I never tried the Mutz setup 275+ and with Fox 34 up front. Curious how that would have gone!
    :madman:

    "When debating a fool, retreat is the only option"
    Richard N Busternutt

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,844
    The Mutz could be that one bike that does everything. All you need is 3 or 4 wheel sets. You could have a 26" wheel set with DH tires for DH, 27+ wheel set, snow bike wheel set, and 29" for XC. The only thing is they need to come out with a better fork than the Bluto. It is a noodle.

    The Mutz is 4 bikes in one.

  5. #5
    Front Range Colorado
    Reputation: Jpcannavo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    The Mutz could be that one bike that does everything. All you need is 3 or 4 wheel sets. You could have a 26" wheel set with DH tires for DH, 27+ wheel set, snow bike wheel set, and 29" for XC. The only thing is they need to come out with a better fork than the Bluto. It is a noodle.

    The Mutz is 4 bikes in one.
    Would have loved to have demoed it 275+!
    :madman:

    "When debating a fool, retreat is the only option"
    Richard N Busternutt

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    789
    Sweet...thanks for the info! Am getting a custom frame built with the Mutz in mind and trying to decide whether to go 27.5+ or 26 fat to start. Gonna have it done with spacing to fit both for more options....


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Jpcannavo View Post
    They felt different, but different setups, hence the basis of the question this thread raises. I rode both on dry single track that included sandy sections, gravel and small rocks. Mutz was set up 26x3.8 (vanHelgas, nates). The Mutz had endless traction that exceeded my ability to break the tires loose, and in loose sections had me riding beyond my ability. It climbed better than I expected, but there was that constant sense of more tire than I needed, with me working a bit harder than seemed necessary - even on flat sections. Descending and doing small jumps and drops offs (1-2 feet), however, the mutz gave this feeling of suddenly coming alive, and felt very extremely stable, leaving me confident (love the 67 degree head angle) and riding beyond my pay grade. After a day on the Mutz, The 6 fatty surprised me. I still felt I had a lot of tire and traction, but the bike was noticeably quicker, more nimble (17.2" vs 18" chainstay) and climbed and rolled with significantly less effort. Descending it felt nearly as stable -again a 67 HA. The suspension also felt more lively and playful. As for FF (funfactor) they are close, with the Mutz have bit more of that monster truck, bushwack through anything feel. (The goat thorns out here though will take down all!)Given my brief impressions, and that I am only interested in dry riding conditions, I went with the 6 fatty, just got it (check out Mojo Wheels in CO!!)! And loving it. But I am left thinking that I never did the apples and apples thing, as I never tried the Mutz setup 275+ and with Fox 34 up front. Curious how that would have gone!
    Apples and oranges, you can't compare fat tires to midfats, that's like comparing a camaro to a miata.

    The Mutz is one the few bikes that do everything well, just need a second wheelset.

  8. #8
    Front Range Colorado
    Reputation: Jpcannavo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Apples and oranges, you can't compare fat tires to midfats, that's like comparing a camaro to a miata.

    The Mutz is one the few bikes that do everything well, just need a second wheelset.
    Read last sentences of forum posts much? Agreed though that Mutz is an awesome all around machine!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,844
    Has anyone tried the 27.5+ or 29+ on the Mutz? Any pics?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    Has anyone tried the 27.5+ or 29+ on the Mutz? Any pics?
    All I rode on my Mutz until December was 27+, then for winter I built a 26 x 4 wheelset and have ridden that since. I'm riding Trail Boss 3.0, great tires, highly receommended.

    Fat tires ride like fat tires, the bike handling changes because the tire weight and friction makes the bike harder to maneuver. Since the Mutz is also an excellent handling fat bike, it can be assumed that a lighter and narrower wheelset would make the Mutz more nimble.

    I love the Mutz as a 27+, so being about to ride it as a 26 x 4 is like icing on the cake.

    If I didn't live where there is snow, I'd go with a dedicated 27+ like the Alpine.

    The Mutz is my first Foes, but after riding the Mutz for the past six months, I would definitely go with an Alpine or a Mixer if we move to a warmer clime.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Jpcannavo View Post
    Read last sentences of forum posts much? Agreed though that Mutz is an awesome all around machine!
    No, I read everything you wrote, you just didn't do a fair comparison, so it's really meaningless to compare the two, hence my apples and oranges comment

    I ride the Mutz in both configurations, right now I'm riding 26 x 4" because our trails are snow covered. When I was in Seattle last weekend and didn't have time to swap wheels, I was "stuck" riding the fat tires on dirt and rock. It was fine, I had fun, but I didn't forget I was riding fat tires, and I wished I had time to swap wheels.

    The only reason to get a Mutz set up as a 27.5 is of you also want to run 4" tires, otherwise you should get a 27+.

    No one has mentioned this, but there are now 27.5 x 4" tires, so one wheelset might work, it just depends on bridge clearance. I'll investigate and report back

  12. #12
    Front Range Colorado
    Reputation: Jpcannavo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    No, I read everything you wrote, you just didn't do a fair comparison, so it's really meaningless to compare the two, hence my apples and oranges comment

    I ride the Mutz in both configurations, right now I'm riding 26 x 4" because our trails are snow covered. When I was in Seattle last weekend and didn't have time to swap wheels, I was "stuck" riding the fat tires on dirt and rock. It was fine, I had fun, but I didn't forget I was riding fat tires, and I wished I had time to swap wheels.

    The only reason to get a Mutz set up as a 27.5 is of you also want to run 4" tires, otherwise you should get a 27+.

    No one has mentioned this, but there are now 27.5 x 4" tires, so one wheelset might work, it just depends on bridge clearance. I'll investigate and report back
    "Meaningless"?And all this time I thought you had a nose for hyperbole Comparisons that can be elaborated in terms of speed, agility, climbing,descending, traction, tire stability, cornering etc.- or any other other relevant parameters - are more than a few shades away from meaningless.
    :madman:

    "When debating a fool, retreat is the only option"
    Richard N Busternutt

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    No, I read everything you wrote, you just didn't do a fair comparison, so it's really meaningless to compare the two, hence my apples and oranges comment

    I ride the Mutz in both configurations, right now I'm riding 26 x 4" because our trails are snow covered. When I was in Seattle last weekend and didn't have time to swap wheels, I was "stuck" riding the fat tires on dirt and rock. It was fine, I had fun, but I didn't forget I was riding fat tires, and I wished I had time to swap wheels.

    The only reason to get a Mutz set up as a 27.5 is of you also want to run 4" tires, otherwise you should get a 27+.

    No one has mentioned this, but there are now 27.5 x 4" tires, so one wheelset might work, it just depends on bridge clearance. I'll investigate and report back
    How is the bottom bracket height with the 27.5? I find Im hitting my pedals a lot with 26x4 Van Helgas. Maybe I need to run more air in the CCDB. I might be running too much sag.

    Im 190 and run about 185 psi. In the garage Im running about 25-30% sag, which feels awesome on the DH.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    How is the bottom bracket height with the 27.5? I find Im hitting my pedals a lot with 26x4 Van Helgas. Maybe I need to run more air in the CCDB. I might be running too much sag.

    I'm 190 and run about 185 psi. In the garage I'm running about 25-30% sag, which feels awesome on the DH.
    Yeah, the BB is a tad low on the Mutz, kinda reminds me of my Honzo, but I think that has more to do with having a low front end; ie 120mm Bluto. I didn't notice a huge difference in BB height between the 27+ and 26 x 4; I think they're close in height.

    I can't be sure, but I think when the Mutz was developed it was optimized for a longer travel fork that didn't yet exist, hence the rear travel being so much greater than the front travel. Since swapping from the Bluto 120mm to a Wren 150mm, my BB is much higher; ie clearance is what it should be.

    I'm dropping the Wren down to 140mm this weekend, not because 150mm is too much, but because I want a little less slack/stack, and I think 140mm will make for a more balanced ride overall.

    Honestly as much as I liked riding the Mutz as it came; 120mm Bluto, that was nothing compared to how it rides with a proper fork that matches the rear travel. No one should be riding the Mutz with a Bluto, it is does a disservice to the bike and the ride. Either get a Wren, Fox Float, or a twin crown DH fork.

    Another to thing to think about is you could run one set of 27+ wheels and swap tires from 3' to 4" and back as season and use dictates. There are a growing number of 27.5 x 4" tires, so in theory you could run a wider 27+ rim (50mm), swap tires to match the conditions, lower BB for better handling on dirt, higher BB for better clearance on snow.

    Check out the 27.5 x 4" thread on the Fat bike forum.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,844
    Anyone have pics of Mutz with 27.5?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    122
    Mutz setup 275+ vs...-imageuploadedbytapatalk1455047351.459705.jpg

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    Anyone have pics of Mutz with 27.5?
    Red Mutz 27+

    Green Mutz 26 x 4.5 (barely cleared)

    Mutz setup 275+ vs...-kimg1050%7E2.jpg

    My Mutz 27+ in the wild

    Mutz setup 275+ vs...-kimg1051-1.jpg

    My Mutz in winter form, JJ 4.0 and Wren 150mm

    Mutz setup 275+ vs...-20160207_145948_resized.jpg

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,176
    This is my mutz with 50mm light bicycle rims and 3.0 tires. I don't think the bb is any lower than with my 26x4.0 setup. The bike destroys everything in its path. It goes through rocks way better than with fat tires because the b+ tires don't bounce off of stuff. It's lighter. The suspension works way better, due to the reduction of mass. The cornering is out of this world. I really don't see any downside other than a small loss of snow traction.


    Mutz setup 275+ vs...-uploadfromtaptalk1455064084923.jpgMutz setup 275+ vs...-uploadfromtaptalk1455064100224.jpg

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,844
    1/2" difference in bottom bracket height from a 3.0x27.5 Dirt Wizard to a 5.0x26 Dillinger.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by rollertoaster View Post
    This is my mutz with 50mm light bicycle rims and 3.0 tires. I don't think the bb is any lower than with my 26x4.0 setup. The bike destroys everything in its path. It goes through rocks way better than with fat tires because the b+ tires don't bounce off of stuff. It's lighter. The suspension works way better, due to the reduction of mass. The cornering is out of this world. I really don't see any downside other than a small loss of snow traction.


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	uploadfromtaptalk1455064084923.jpg 
Views:	312 
Size:	180.6 KB 
ID:	1049008Click image for larger version. 

Name:	uploadfromtaptalk1455064100224.jpg 
Views:	181 
Size:	166.2 KB 
ID:	1049009

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
    You need a new fork

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    60
    Did you save any weight compared to 26x4"?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rollertoaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,176
    I went from carbon rimmed 26x4 with floaters, to 50mm carbon rimmed 27.5+ with purgatory 3.0. Honestly I don't think I lost any noticeable bb height, but I lost between 2-3lbs of bike weight.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Team _________

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    60
    Wow, 2-3 lbs on wheels is a huge difference. I'm at the point where I will either sell my Mutz or I need to go with a 27plus wheel set. It's a fun bike with 4" tires but they are overkill for summer especially when the rest of your riding buddies are on 28lb bikes. We ride some really technical, rocky trails so I have an advantage in spots but at the 10-12 mile mark I am wiped and end up pushing it up some of the really steep climbs.
    I really don't want to lower the bb since I already smash the crap out of my pedals and cranks but I guess it's a trade off for weight.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    38

    Mutz setup 275+ vs...

    Finished my 27.5+ summer setup and installed today .


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
    Finished my 27.5+ summer setup and installed today .


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    What is your bottom bracket height with the 27.5+ vs 26?

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    What is your bottom bracket height with the 27.5+ vs 26?
    I didn't measure with the 26 on but based on hub height of the 26 vs 27.5+ I lost maybe 5mm.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    74

    ... and if we just ... Finished mine today

    Quote Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
    I lost maybe 5mm.
    Seems about right I finished mine today and went for a spin, if there is any lost BB height it's negligible. Rear wheel lost 1# 8oz, Front was 1# 4oz over my 26 setup. I also went with a boost Pike RCT3. It's big fun, and feels like a dragster compared to my 26" setup. I beat one 2 mile climb PR by 30 seconds over my 26" wheels without really trying and on another, Cat 4 climb, I matched my PR set on my 29" carbon Trek Superfly. I was about to sell the Mutz and buy a "Real" regular bike because I rode the Mutz right about 2000 miles over the last 14 months and was looking for a change; but, I initially wanted to build the Mutz like this in the first place so I figured I'd try it and if I didn't like just get a new frame and rear hub. I really like this though and if we head to the beach I still have my 4" stuff
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Mutz setup 275+ vs...-wp_20160425_15_09_09_pro-1.jpg  


  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Nefariousd View Post
    Seems about right I finished mine today and went for a spin, if there is any lost BB height it's negligible. Rear wheel lost 1# 8oz, Front was 1# 4oz over my 26 setup. I also went with a boost Pike RCT3. It's big fun, and feels like a dragster compared to my 26" setup. I beat one 2 mile climb PR by 30 seconds over my 26" wheels without really trying and on another, Cat 4 climb, I matched my PR set on my 29" carbon Trek Superfly. I was about to sell the Mutz and buy a "Real" regular bike because I rode the Mutz right about 2000 miles over the last 14 months and was looking for a change; but, I initially wanted to build the Mutz like this in the first place so I figured I'd try it and if I didn't like just get a new frame and rear hub. I really like this though and if we head to the beach I still have my 4" stuff
    150mm Pike?

    I agree, the Mutz is a great bike, it just needs a few tweaks. I was also looking at getting a dedicated trail bike, but I'm gonna save some pennies, working on dropping the front end using an internal lower cup, reducing the Wren to 140mm, and I'm sourcing some different cranks/BB to get my stance as narrow as possible.

    I rode in the Southwest (Moab, Cortez, Sedona, St George) for a week over Spring Break, and to be honest I don't know that any other bike has better climbing prowess on slickrock, it made me into a super hero! The only thing that I'd change is shorter chainstays; it was some kind of work to manual over and over all day long.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    150mm Pike?
    No 140MM, Initially I was going to get a 140 to match the rear end. Then the Wren cam out in 150 so I thought about getting a 150 Pike. Then I read what you had to say about the 150 Wren feeling slightly choppered out and on some of the stuff I climb regularly I'm having enough trouble keeping the front end down with the Bluto so I opted for the 140 Pike and put on a slightly longer stem and that seemed to do the trick. This setup with the 9-44 out back and a 26 up front seems to be awesome. I'll probably switch to a 28 or 30 up front once I start venturing off my neighborhood loop; but, it has a lot of 16-18% stuff that kills my knees.

    I'm in Seattle now (well, Snoqualmie actually) but I'm from the southwest (Prescott AZ, about 30 minutes from Sedona) I've taken the Mutz back a few times to ride the granite "trails" (really just white dots painted on rocks) in 26X4 form. I liked it, though pedal strikes were regular and brutal.

    I thought about buying an Alpine+ and having two bikes; but, I just figured one would fall by the wayside and I'd have a $5500 dust collector in the garage at any given moment. I think dropping the coin on the plus set up whilst having the ability to go 4" whenever is the best use of resources. BTW YAY! Cane Creek for offering just the crown race for $10

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Nefariousd View Post
    No 140MM, Initially I was going to get a 140 to match the rear end. Then the Wren cam out in 150 so I thought about getting a 150 Pike. Then I read what you had to say about the 150 Wren feeling slightly choppered out and on some of the stuff I climb regularly I'm having enough trouble keeping the front end down with the Bluto so I opted for the 140 Pike and put on a slightly longer stem and that seemed to do the trick. This setup with the 9-44 out back and a 26 up front seems to be awesome. I'll probably switch to a 28 or 30 up front once I start venturing off my neighborhood loop; but, it has a lot of 16-18% stuff that kills my knees.

    I'm in Seattle now (well, Snoqualmie actually) but I'm from the southwest (Prescott AZ, about 30 minutes from Sedona) I've taken the Mutz back a few times to ride the granite "trails" (really just white dots painted on rocks) in 26X4 form. I liked it, though pedal strikes were regular and brutal.

    I thought about buying an Alpine+ and having two bikes; but, I just figured one would fall by the wayside and I'd have a $5500 dust collector in the garage at any given moment. I think dropping the coin on the plus set up whilst having the ability to go 4" whenever is the best use of resources. BTW YAY! Cane Creek for offering just the crown race for $10
    I'm in Wenatchee. Do you hit Tiger much?

    I just got back from a Southwest tour, hit Moab, Cortez, Sedona, and St George. The Mutz was solid, no complaints when clambering around on the rock, and downhill runs and air time were solid.

    Yeah, pedal strikes are a pita, the Mutz has a lowish BB and wide Q, so it can make things tight.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    I'm in Wenatchee. Do you hit Tiger much?

    I just got back from a Southwest tour, hit Moab, Cortez, Sedona, and St George. The Mutz was solid, no complaints when clambering around on the rock, and downhill runs and air time were solid.

    Yeah, pedal strikes are a pita, the Mutz has a lowish BB and wide Q, so it can make things tight.
    Oddly, I've never been to Tiger, the parking lot is three miles from my house and I've never gone. One, I have to use the car to get there (hate that, because I don't know if you're familiar with how packed every single trail access lot gets over here, but it's nuts, if you're no there by 06:30, the spaces are all gone) and two I was worried about getting lost but I just bought a Garmin 520 so I can load the trail maps on it and go explore.

    I like Tokul a lot ( I can ride there and the trip there is awesome) and the trail wizards are adding a bunch of trails ( rumor has it over 200 miles, I don't know if I buy that) on a good size hill just the other side of 90 ( find Snoqualmie point park on the map and the trails are on the hill next to it) that I'll be able to ride to.

    I miss the southwest and we still have a place in AZ as suicide prevention for the winters here so I go whenever I can spare a week.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    74
    Let me preface the following by saying that if I think something sucks, I will flat out say it sucks including my decisions about any particular thing. The following are my actual observations.

    I've now spent a week and about 80 miles on the plus setup, climbing steep stuff, bouncing around a pretty nice local bike park and blasting around my 12.3 mile neighborhood fitness loop with 1600 feet of climbing and some fun downhill sections that aren't technical but really fast. In no particular order here are the things that come to mind:

    1. I knocked 17 minutes off my 12.3 mile loop vs. the 26X4" tires. My Strava segments were slightly faster but the areas between the segments were much faster for a given effort.

    2. In comparison the plus tires even when aired down don't feel as comforting as the fat tires in turns and under braking. I figured this out after nearly throwing myself off a hill a few times when the combination higher speed and the tendency for the rear to lock up sooner made all my braking markers irrelevant

    3. while the plus tires aren't as "grippy" as the 4" tires which feel like a slug conforming to tree roots rocks etc. They still ride nicer?

    4. The Pike is a nice thing, after a couple rides and some fiddling it was sorted and works well

    Am I glad I spent close to $2k to change a year old bike that cost me around $5k to build in the first place? I think so. I was speaking with a friend about potentially buying the Alpine+ and selling the Mutz He said "Well, the Mutz is a very good full suspension fat bike that you can set up as a plus bike; whereas, the Alpine+ is just another plus bike and there are many of those with more sophisticated suspensions and lighter weights. The Mutz can basically do what the alpine+ can but the Alpine+ can't necessarily do what the Mutz can with the 4" tires"
    Although I was annoyed that he kinda bagged on Foes, he did have a point.

    Of course whether you should do it or not is your deal, I am allowed to have one bike and I really like the Mutz, Ive been riding it on average 60 miles a week since the day I finished it.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Next up, mixed wheelsets

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Next up, mixed wheelsets
    The whole set or just 29+ up front? This is what i would like to try.

  35. #35
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Nefariousd View Post
    Oddly, I've never been to Tiger, the parking lot is three miles from my house and I've never gone. One, I have to use the car to get there (hate that, because I don't know if you're familiar with how packed every single trail access lot gets over here, but it's nuts, if you're no there by 06:30, the spaces are all gone) and two I was worried about getting lost but I just bought a Garmin 520 so I can load the trail maps on it and go explore.
    Man, Tiger was a BLAST! Just did it a few weeks ago when I was down there on vacation...
    "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.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
    The whole set or just 29+ up front? This is what i would like to try.
    Just up front, that's how I'm riding now, works great!

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Just up front, that's how I'm riding now, works great!
    Do you have a build in mind? I am happy with my Nextie JFs so that is what I will probably get in 29. I have a new Hope 4 hub although I would rather use Onyx.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    What is your bottom bracket height with the 27.5+ vs 26?
    It depends on the tires, mine is 5mm lower with 27 + Trail Boss than 26 x 4 JJs. Less than a 1/4" = non issue.

    Try a 29+ on the front and it gets even better

    To be realistic, the pedal strike issue with the Mytz is more related to wide bb/cranks than low bb. Fat bikes are fat.

    Sag can play a big part in bb drop, might want to look at your pressure and adjust it higher on tech terrain, lower on flow.

    A long travel fork will.also bring things up...in more ways than one

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarecrow View Post
    Do you have a build in mind? I am happy with my Nextie JFs so that is what I will probably get in 29. I have a new Hope 4 hub although I would rather use Onyx.
    I like Scrapers, they're durable and not crazy expensive...like Onyx hubs.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    Just love the Foes With 27.5 and 3" Nobby Nic. So quick handling, and what a grip of these tires. I am running Procore from Schwalbe also to be able to go lower Down the air pressure. Love the Onyx hubs With nextie rims.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Mixed is where it's at!

    I know it sounds odd, but after a month on this set up, I won't go back, the carvability is amazing, the rear end tracks like a 27+, the front rolls over terrain like a 29+, I feel like I can get back on the rear wheel better for steep tech descending,but it still climbs like mad.

    I never would have tried it, but I had the wheels...

    The Mutz is a pretty cool bike, so many choices for set ups, it's tinkerers bike for sure.

    Lovin' the Wren, there's no need for anything else, so glad I went the beta tester route

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Just love the Foes With 27.5 and 3" Nobby Nic. So quick handling, and what a grip of these tires. I am running Procore from Schwalbe also to be able to go lower Down the air pressure. Love the Onyx hubs With nextie rims.
    I am also loving the Nextie Onyx combo. I am running Trail Boss 3.0 on front and Bomboloni 3.0 on back. Very happy with performance so far. I couldn't believe how easy they seated up as well. I am very happy with my Foes.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    There is really big difference in tires sizes of the 27+ categori. The latest I have tried now i actually 29"and1/8" and is taller then a 4" VanHelga tire?? The tire is a 3.25 Duro Crux and I have heard it is the second largest 27+ tire, after the Vee Trax Fatty 3.25.

    So if you want to make a sort of "Mixer"style Mutz you could use a 3.25 up front, so you will probably have a size in between 29" and 29"+ and then use a smaller 27+ tire rear, like a 2.8" or a 3".

    I will try to use he Nobby Nic 3" rear that is a 1" less in diameter. I think the stack height is Perfect With the 3.25" Duro Crux, the Down side is he rubber compound that probably is not up to it. It might be a solution to use he Vee Trax Fatty 3.25 in silica compound.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    Well I'm glad you you like it Ben as you seemed skeptical about the mixed wheel setup in the past. I still haven't built my mixer yet but should have it by summers end. main thing I'm having trouble with is deciding on what drive train...? 2x10 or 1x12 as in the new eagle by sram. Always been a Shimano fan and run a 3x now on my old fxr but have no experience with the new set ups.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    I was skeptical about an f's fattys, then I bought one, kinda goes with life, try it and see...

    I am still riding mixed, no plans to go back.

    Quote Originally Posted by fxr man View Post
    Well I'm glad you you like it Ben as you seemed skeptical about the mixed wheel setup in the past. I still haven't built my mixer yet but should have it by summers end. main thing I'm having trouble with is deciding on what drive train...? 2x10 or 1x12 as in the new eagle by sram. Always been a Shimano fan and run a 3x now on my old fxr but have no experience with the new set ups.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    I bought Vee Trax Fatty to test against the Duro Crux. I was told it should be bigger than the Duro but actually it is not so wide. It might have a larger diameter. The rubber compound is much better but less aggressive knobs. Safer on wet roots and rocks but not so good on the loose.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Swapped back to 27+ on both ends, I like the mixed ride for most things, but they limit agility in tight terrain and there is a certain awkwardness that comes with trying to throw around a 29+ front end.

    The same set up with a shorter swingarm or non plus wheels might be better.

    No noticeable disadvantage otherwise, worth the experience, might even try it on a non fat bike.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Swapped back to 27+ on both ends, I like the mixed ride for most things, but they limit agility in tight terrain and there is a certain awkwardness that comes with trying to throw around a 29+ front end.

    The same set up with a shorter swingarm or non plus wheels might be better.

    No noticeable disadvantage otherwise, worth the experience, might even try it on a non fat bike.
    Glad I did not rebuild my front Wheel then, since I have been in doubt if it should be necassery to have a 29" plus front Wheel. Of course I feel better roll over capability of the bigger diameter of the largest 3.25 Duro Crux than the Nobby Nic with 1 less diameter. But the bike is much more nimble with the Nobby Nic`s than the Duro Crux.
    If you want some from both worlds, just try a large diameter wheel in front (3.25), and a smaller, like a 2.8 in the rear.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Swapped back to 27+ on both ends, I like the mixed ride for most things, but they limit agility in tight terrain and there is a certain awkwardness that comes with trying to throw around a 29+ front end.

    The same set up with a shorter swingarm or non plus wheels might be better.

    No noticeable disadvantage otherwise, worth the experience, might even try it on a non fat bike.
    Did put on the Schwalbe tires yesterday, after some biking With 3.25 Duro Crux and Vee Tire Fatty Traxx 3.25. There is like you are saying NursBen, a trade off. You get roll over capability, but you have not som agile bike With the big diameter Wheels. The nimble feeling came back With the lower profile Scwhalbe Nobby Nick`s. It is also so much better tires then the other 27.5 I have used. Vee Tire have good rubber (soft enough), but poor knob pattern, Duro Crux have good profile but poor rubber (too hard).

    Conclusion is, what do you need the 29+ for??

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Did put on the Schwalbe tires yesterday, after some biking With 3.25 Duro Crux and Vee Tire Fatty Traxx 3.25. There is like you are saying NursBen, a trade off. You get roll over capability, but you have not som agile bike With the big diameter Wheels. The nimble feeling came back With the lower profile Scwhalbe Nobby Nick`s. It is also so much better tires then the other 27.5 I have used. Vee Tire have good rubber (soft enough), but poor knob pattern, Duro Crux have good profile but poor rubber (too hard).

    Conclusion is, what do you need the 29+ for??
    Need?

    It's rarely about need, mostly want or why the hell not.

    29+ is cool, I prefer the mixxer version to 29+ on both ends, the main reason I went back to 27+ on both ends is low speed agility in tight places.

    I've got the wheels, so for me it's just a quick brake adjustment and away we go.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Need?

    It's rarely about need, mostly want or why the hell not.

    29+ is cool, I prefer the mixxer version to 29+ on both ends, the main reason I went back to 27+ on both ends is low speed agility in tight places.

    I've got the wheels, so for me it's just a quick brake adjustment and away we go.
    Of course, no need just want....BTW have you tried the fork With 140mm setting, and how is it working?

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Of course, no need just want....BTW have you tried the fork With 140mm setting, and how is it working?
    Been running 140mm on the fork since the clip arrived, works great, perfect amount of travel with the rear set up at 5.5".

    BTW, I took a long hard look at my suspension pivots and there isn't any play, so I'm not sure what happened on your bike, but mine is just as solid now as it was when new..

    Just got back from riding lift served at Deer Valley in Park City Utah, great place to ride, ride all the big lines from the Tidal Wave to Alpine Slalom.

    Heading to Stevens Pass tomorrow for some after work lift served, gotta get it while the getting is good

    The Mutz kills it!

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Been running 140mm on the fork since the clip arrived, works great, perfect amount of travel with the rear set up at 5.5".

    BTW, I took a long hard look at my suspension pivots and there isn't any play, so I'm not sure what happened on your bike, but mine is just as solid now as it was when new..

    Just got back from riding lift served at Deer Valley in Park City Utah, great place to ride, ride all the big lines from the Tidal Wave to Alpine Slalom.

    Heading to Stevens Pass tomorrow for some after work lift served, gotta get it while the getting is good

    The Mutz kills it!
    That is great! Did you use a coil or a air shock? I will try the Mutz With a Cane Creek Coil w/CS now. I am also waiting for the 10mm Clip for the Wren, but I am a bit in doubt if it will bottom out more easy. How are Your running the air pressure compared to 150mm setting?

    The Wren seems to keep up With lift served riding also?

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,138
    Yeah, the Wren is plenty burly, more like a DH fork, no flex when dropping into gnar, or jumping.

    I'm 200#, I run 130-135 in the CC Inline and 60-65 top and bottom on the Wren. I don't remember the pressure I ran ar 150mm travel, maybe a little less, at 130mm travel I think I ran a little more.

    Bottoming out is really not something I have a problem with as I generally keep a close eye on the o ring and adjust pressure accordingly.

    I didn't get a coil, instead I'm building a trail bike for times when the Mutz is an overkill.

Similar Threads

  1. Foes Mutz
    By pit in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 668
    Last Post: 05-05-2019, 04:00 AM
  2. Mutz Tire and Wheel Compatability
    By JCHKeys in forum Foes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-11-2016, 05:37 PM
  3. Foes Mutz
    By Tripower in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 09-11-2015, 01:15 PM
  4. 2015 Mutz
    By JasonSauce in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 07-27-2015, 11:18 AM
  5. Putting the Foes Mutz through the paces
    By ban'd4life in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-20-2015, 04:09 AM

Members who have read this thread: 1

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.