Trek's SS Superfly vs. Stache- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 45 of 45
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39

    Trek's SS Superfly vs. Stache

    I am getting back into riding following about a 12 year break. During that time, I got older, and I sold all my equipment, including my burnt orange Santa Cruz Superlight FS bike . I recently paid $75 for a decent 2009 Gary Fisher Wahoo Disc, and I've gotten the MTB bug all over again. I live in the Ouachita Mountains of south central Arkansas. Our trails around here are abundant, but they are fairly rocky, lots of roots, and are of moderate technical difficulty. I am intrigued by the SS bikes, and want to give one a try. I am a little bit concerned about going "full rigid", so I am not against buying a SS bike with a front fork. On the other hand, I really like the idea of the simplicity of the rigid, SS bikes.

    I am curious if anyone has compared the SS Superfly to a Stache set up as a SS? I am also curious about the Kona Unit, as it seems to be well-liked, and is about $600 less, out the door. I am 53 years old, but in good shape (5' 8', 170 lbs, 32 waist, 32 inseam). To my surprise, I can ride my beater Wahoo using only the middle front sprocket, and the rear on the 4th (out of 8), without much difficulty, after just a few outings.

    I am about 100 miles from a decent Trek store, but I have no close access to try out any of the other rigid SS bikes that many of you guys ride. So, if I buy a Kona, Surly, On one, etc., it will have to be ordered on-line, without the benefit of a LBS to make suggestions and guide me. What do you guys think? I don't have a problem buying a $1.5-$2K bike, but see no reason to do so, if doing real fast, wild and crazy stuff is not on my menu. I see myself using platform pedals this time around, and walking or slowly pedaling around the real hard stuff...I had enough of that previously!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    128
    I own both bikes. 2015 Superfly SS and a 2016 Stache (Rigid fork). The Superfly is a faster bike. It accelerates super fast, and is an all around ripper.

    The Stache is a little slow getting up to speed, but rips once your moving. The added tire width lets you get a little more sloppy with your line. The short back of the Stache makes it more playful.

    I like them both for what they are.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Sweet! You own both?!! What about climbing? Do you prefer one over the other, assuming equivalent gear ratios?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    You can sort of have the best of both worlds with a 3.0 up front on the Superfly with the stock rigid fork. Ran mine like that for a while before I sold the bike and it was a nice setup. Didn't feel it really slowed the bike much, had awesome cornering grip, and really helped with the comfort factor.

    I'm on a Gnarvester with a suspension fork now. Not quite the same geo as the Stache but perhaps this can help. Certainly feels slower through the faster/smoother stuff and up the short punchy climbs, but there are other factors at play here...mainly getting my fit dialed in and my slow physical adjustment to the weather changes this year. Through more technical/chunky/whatever I'm faster on the Gnarvester, but much of that could be rigid versus a 120mm fork.
    Signature

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Wow, that Gnarvester is a SUPER NICE bike! I assume that you have it set up as SS, too, or did you go back to gears after selling the Superfly?? I like your suggestion of a 3.0 up front on the Superfly SS....food for thought.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    469
    I have both as well... Stache is sluggish compared to the Superfly, but the Stache is more capable on the rocky/rooty stuff, up and down. Kills it up the rocky and loose climbs.

    My Superfly has a 3.0 in the front, but found it too floppy with the stock fork. Could be better with a longer reach/bigger frame, but instead used a fork with a lower A-C and life is good.

    If I had to choose just one, that'd be tough... The Superfly SS can also be run geared, FYI...

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DualRollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    428
    I rode both and ultimately went with the Stache 5. The Superfly beat the hell out of me on our rocky terrain. The aluminum frame rides like garbage in my opinion... if you're on flat dirt track it's probably fine, but any chatter at all is going to be horrible. The Stache is a great bike though, I love mine. As far as fun goes, it's definitely the best bike I have ever owned. Tons of grip with the 29+, and short playful chainstays. I highly recommend it.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    505
    I'm not a doctor, but my experience as I get older is that I can still recover much or all of my endurance from a shorter time off than you described. However, stress injuries take forever to heal and the old I get the worse it gets. Wrists, back, knees, neck. These types of injuries also seem to build up sometimes rather than happen from a single event. If my legs are sore from a long hard ride, no problem just rest or ignore it. If my back starts hurting, I might struggle with it for a whole season.

    Based on the terrain you describe, I'd go for the 3.0 tires. You say nothing about racing, but mention SS and possibly rigid. With that extra 12 years on you as your frequency and mileage goes up on your new ride I think you will want the compliance. My Stache is a wonderful bike, but just like my fat bike it really takes the edge off without wrecking the fun.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    Wow, that Gnarvester is a SUPER NICE bike! I assume that you have it set up as SS, too, or did you go back to gears after selling the Superfly?? I like your suggestion of a 3.0 up front on the Superfly SS....food for thought.
    It is setup single with the essentially the same gearing with the taller tire...32x16 on Superfly versus 32x17 on Gnarvester.
    Signature

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Thanks for all the kind replies, guys. I will respond to your posts individually when I get a little more time this weekend. Keep them coming!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,494
    I've ridden all over Arkansas and have owned steel, aluminum, and carbon singlespeeds and also a fatbike.

    If you're not racing, I think a steel 29er with tires between 2.3 and 2.5 is the way to go.

    A lot of the trails are really rocky, and most plus and fat size tires don't have enough sidewall protection in my opinion. Some of the newer plus tires are stronger, but they are also heavy.

    The steel frame should be more compliant than an aluminum bike.

    From what you've described, the first bike I'd recommend would be a Niner SIR 9 with carbon fork. You should be able to build it fairly light with your budget. It's steeper than a lot of the newer bikes, but really like the niner geo for most trails in the area. A friend of mine who is 55 is on one and loves it. I ride a One 9 which is similar, and also have no complaints. The ebb is also really easy to adjust.

    I also recently saw a Salsa El mariachi for sale in ft. smith. It's a medium 2015 and I believe he was asking $850. I own one and they are a great bike for the money. It will be heavier than the SIR, but you could possibly try it out for a while and purchase a nice wheelset later on to lighten it up and still be within your budget.

    For gearing, 32x20 is a good place to start. You'll spin out on flats and downhills, but it should allow you to make most of the climbs.

    Flat pedals are fun, but they can be very difficult to ride on the rough trails around here when on rigid bikes. I rode flats for years and love the freedom, but when a rigid bike starts to buck, it can take a lot of effort to just stay in contact with the bike. Also when on rough trails, it's much more difficult to continually put down power flats. If you decide to use flats, I recommend gearing a little taller so you can ride with a lower cadence. Spinning slower will allow you to keep more force on the pedals in rough terrain.

    If you end up buying a rigid bike and don't like it at first, give it several weeks or even months before giving up. It will take your body a while to adapt to no suspension and only 1 gear. It takes a different riding style where you have to learn to relax and not fight the bike. Your upper body will also get a lot more work, and you'll have to just give it time to build in strength.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    ^ The Superfly is surprisingly very comfy. Certainly not a stuff jarring ride like many other alloy frames I have ridden.
    Signature

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
    I have both as well... Stache is sluggish compared to the Superfly, but the Stache is more capable on the rocky/rooty stuff, up and down. Kills it up the rocky and loose climbs.

    My Superfly has a 3.0 in the front, but found it too floppy with the stock fork. Could be better with a longer reach/bigger frame, but instead used a fork with a lower A-C and life is good.

    If I had to choose just one, that'd be tough... The Superfly SS can also be run geared, FYI...
    The Stache being more capable up and down in the rocky, rooty stuff sounds good to me. By sluggish, do you mean while accelerating, are under all circumstances, compared to the Superfly?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by DualRollers View Post
    I rode both and ultimately went with the Stache 5. The Superfly beat the hell out of me on our rocky terrain. The aluminum frame rides like garbage in my opinion... if you're on flat dirt track it's probably fine, but any chatter at all is going to be horrible. The Stache is a great bike though, I love mine. As far as fun goes, it's definitely the best bike I have ever owned. Tons of grip with the 29+, and short playful chainstays. I highly recommend it.
    So you don't find the aluminum frame to be "garbage" on the Stache 5? Did you add a front suspension fork, or does it just ride and feel that different, inherently, from the Superfly??

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by adaycj View Post
    Based on the terrain you describe, I'd go for the 3.0 tires. You say nothing about racing, but mention SS and possibly rigid. With that extra 12 years on you as your frequency and mileage goes up on your new ride I think you will want the compliance. My Stache is a wonderful bike, but just like my fat bike it really takes the edge off without wrecking the fun.
    A good thought. Do you have a Stache 7 or 9, with a front suspension fork, or do you mean that the 3.0 tires provide enough "compliance"??

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    469
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    The Stache being more capable up and down in the rocky, rooty stuff sounds good to me. By sluggish, do you mean while accelerating, are under all circumstances, compared to the Superfly?
    Sluggish acceleration for sure, but also slower on the simple stuff, like flats and fire road climbs. Excels in techy climbs and descents; no need to be picky with the lines. Low pressure with 3.0 tires make a huge difference.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by coke View Post
    I've ridden all over Arkansas and have owned steel, aluminum, and carbon singlespeeds and also a fatbike.

    If you're not racing, I think a steel 29er with tires between 2.3 and 2.5 is the way to go.

    A lot of the trails are really rocky, and most plus and fat size tires don't have enough sidewall protection in my opinion. Some of the newer plus tires are stronger, but they are also heavy.

    The steel frame should be more compliant than an aluminum bike.

    From what you've described, the first bike I'd recommend would be a Niner SIR 9 with carbon fork. You should be able to build it fairly light with your budget. It's steeper than a lot of the newer bikes, but really like the niner geo for most trails in the area. A friend of mine who is 55 is on one and loves it. I ride a One 9 which is similar, and also have no complaints. The ebb is also really easy to adjust.

    I also recently saw a Salsa El mariachi for sale in ft. smith. It's a medium 2015 and I believe he was asking $850. I own one and they are a great bike for the money. It will be heavier than the SIR, but you could possibly try it out for a while and purchase a nice wheelset later on to lighten it up and still be within your budget.

    For gearing, 32x20 is a good place to start. You'll spin out on flats and downhills, but it should allow you to make most of the climbs.

    Flat pedals are fun, but they can be very difficult to ride on the rough trails around here when on rigid bikes. I rode flats for years and love the freedom, but when a rigid bike starts to buck, it can take a lot of effort to just stay in contact with the bike. Also when on rough trails, it's much more difficult to continually put down power flats. If you decide to use flats, I recommend gearing a little taller so you can ride with a lower cadence. Spinning slower will allow you to keep more force on the pedals in rough terrain.

    If you end up buying a rigid bike and don't like it at first, give it several weeks or even months before giving up. It will take your body a while to adapt to no suspension and only 1 gear. It takes a different riding style where you have to learn to relax and not fight the bike. Your upper body will also get a lot more work, and you'll have to just give it time to build in strength.
    Thanks for the great synopsis of your experience on our trails! I will have to add the SIR 9 to my list of possibilities. Have you had a chance to try out the SS Superfly compared to the Niner frame bikes? I fear that the only bikes that I am going to be able to actually try out may be the Treks, at Chainwheel, in Little Rock. I am closer to the bike shop in Hot Springs (Parkside Cycle) but they don't have any SS bikes, or any Stache's in stock for me to test ride. The Niner SIR 9's certainly get stellar reviews, so perhaps just pulling the trigger on one sight unseen might be OK. Would I have to order one to be built custom, or can they be purchased ready to go, as a full production bike?

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by A1an View Post
    ^ The Superfly is surprisingly very comfy. Certainly not a stuff jarring ride like many other alloy frames I have ridden.
    More comfy than a Kona Unit and perhaps a Niner SIR 9??

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    Thanks for the great synopsis of your experience on our trails! I will have to add the SIR 9 to my list of possibilities. Have you had a chance to try out the SS Superfly compared to the Niner frame bikes? I fear that the only bikes that I am going to be able to actually try out may be the Treks, at Chainwheel, in Little Rock. I am closer to the bike shop in Hot Springs (Parkside Cycle) but they don't have any SS bikes, or any Stache's in stock for me to test ride. The Niner SIR 9's certainly get stellar reviews, so perhaps just pulling the trigger on one sight unseen might be OK. Would I have to order one to be built custom, or can they be purchased ready to go, as a full production bike?
    I haven't ridden the trek, but I know people who have owned and raced both the superfly and stache. I haven't heard complaints about either. Both are a lot of bike for the money. One put 30mm rims on the superfly with a chupacabra on the front,which resulted in a bike somewhere between the superfly and stache. Light, fast, lots of grip, and a little cushion up front.

    Niner sells complete bikes. Until recently there were lots available online, but seems like there aren't many deals on complete bikes at the moment.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Thanks, Coke. Certainly lots of food for thought. I wasn't able to find the Fort Smith bike you mentioned before...the ad has been removed. I am surprised that I haven't heard any love for the Kona unit. I presume most consider the Unit to be a different type of beast than the bikes most are discussing in this thread??

    Is there a certain, or recommended complete SIR 9 bike(s) that I should be searching for?

  21. #21
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,029
    The Unit is a bike that can be raced, but is more at home just having fun on.
    I'm racing mine next weekend at a 6hr XC.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    More comfy than a Kona Unit and perhaps a Niner SIR 9??
    Not sure as I haven't ridden either of those. Compared to my Gnarvester and some older Trek frames I have had in the past the Superfly felt much better on longer rides. I also preferred the Superfly to my steel rigid Redline.
    Signature

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    The Unit is a bike that can be raced, but is more at home just having fun on.
    I'm racing mine next weekend at a 6hr XC.
    Thanks for the reply. How would you compare your Unit to say, the El Mariachi? have you had the opportunity?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by A1an View Post
    Not sure as I haven't ridden either of those. Compared to my Gnarvester and some older Trek frames I have had in the past the Superfly felt much better on longer rides. I also preferred the Superfly to my steel rigid Redline.
    I was in my LBS this morning, and the only SS compatible bike in stock was an XL El Mariachi (but currently set up with 2 X 10 gears). I am going to need a medium bike, so there was no reason to crawl on the beast. But, while I was there, a 56 year old gentleman came in who owns a medium SS El Mariachi. His 19 Y.O. son also has a 17.5 2015 SS Superfly. He says the Superfly is exceedingly rough on the local mountain trails for him, and that he had to have a front suspension fork added to his El Mariachi, for the same reason. Otherwise, he highly recommended the Salsa over the Superfly with a rigid fork for a >50 year old man. He also prefers the steel frame over the aluminum frame, for the same reason...smoother overall ride on >50 Y.O. joints. They didn't have their bikes with them, but offered to let me ride both of them in about three weeks, when they are back in town. They both said the SS Superfly is a noticeably faster bike, but that the Salsa is an excellent all around bike, and a great climber, to boot.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    Guess it really boils down to personal preference. My cromoly Redline with matching fork is pretty flexy but I preferred the Superfly on long rides. Chose it over the Redline for a 170ish mile bikepacking weekend and it was incredibly comfortable on rough single track even loaded down with a bunch of crap on it (it had to be about 50lbs loaded).
    Signature

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    505
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    A good thought. Do you have a Stache 7 or 9, with a front suspension fork, or do you mean that the 3.0 tires provide enough "compliance"??
    It sounds like you have some other replies with content about your region which may be more useful. I have a Stache 7, that comes with the cheaper suspension Manitou fork. For me the 3.0 in the rear is enough. I rode a rigid fatty for a season, and in the front it wasn't enough so I'll guess the 3.0 would't be either. I don't have sensitive wrists. I dirt bike on single track trails (legal, not MTB), which is notoriously hard on wrists and hands and I have no problems. With just the carbon front my wrists would hurt for days sometimes. My trails are mostly roots with braking chatter on downhills, so its not even that demanding with drops and such. I suspect from a stress injury standpoint the high frequency stuff may be just as bad.

    Good luck on your quest for a new bike.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    Thanks, Coke. Certainly lots of food for thought. I wasn't able to find the Fort Smith bike you mentioned before...the ad has been removed. I am surprised that I haven't heard any love for the Kona unit. I presume most consider the Unit to be a different type of beast than the bikes most are discussing in this thread??

    Is there a certain, or recommended complete SIR 9 bike(s) that I should be searching for?
    Bike was listed on facebook. I sent you a message.

    If you're looking for a sir 9, I think the 2 star ss build is the only one around your budget.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by coke View Post
    Bike was listed on facebook. I sent you a message.

    If you're looking for a sir 9, I think the 2 star ss build is the only one around your budget.
    Thanks, Coke. Replied to your pm.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by adaycj View Post
    It sounds like you have some other replies with content about your region which may be more useful. I have a Stache 7, that comes with the cheaper suspension Manitou fork. For me the 3.0 in the rear is enough. I rode a rigid fatty for a season, and in the front it wasn't enough so I'll guess the 3.0 would't be either. I don't have sensitive wrists. I dirt bike on single track trails (legal, not MTB), which is notoriously hard on wrists and hands and I have no problems. With just the carbon front my wrists would hurt for days sometimes. My trails are mostly roots with braking chatter on downhills, so its not even that demanding with drops and such. I suspect from a stress injury standpoint the high frequency stuff may be just as bad.

    Good luck on your quest for a new bike.
    Thanks again for the detailed reply. I appreciate it!

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    445
    I now have a Stache 5 set up SS in addition to a Canfield Nimble 9 (thanks Thrawn) that is an uber blast to ride. I had a Superfly SS last year that I raced and even ran a 3.0 Chupacabra front tire. However it really jacked with the front end and was too floppy. Lastly, I also owned a SIR9 for about 6 months this year with a 100mm SID front fork that I also raced. All setup SS.

    In terms of flat, speedy race bike - no doubt the superfly just railed. Very fast bike but somewhat stiff and tough for an everyday bike. The Sir9 followed closely. Much more comfortable. It could still be raced but also ridden comfortably all day long. Great compromise.

    Smile factor? Right now it's a toss up between the stache 5 and the Canfield. For the mtns, I take the Canfield with a pike up front and lower gearing. For the local flow trails and XC stuff, the stache 5 is both fun and still pretty damn fast - and light. Setup tubeless and with a dropper post, stuff gets rowdy quick and man is it fun. With 12psi in front, I don't feel the need for a susp fork.

    Lastly, my most unfavorite thing about the stache and superfly is the strangehold dropouts. While they work well, they're a bit of a pain to adjust and almost impossible to adjust on the trail as it requires a 20, or 21mm socket (can't remember). Granted I never had one move or need adjustment, but it always concerned me when in the backcountry.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  31. #31
    WNC Native
    Reputation: nitrousjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,672
    Quote Originally Posted by mhopton View Post
    Smile factor? Right now it's a toss up between the stache 5 and the Canfield. For the mtns, I take the Canfield with a pike up front and lower gearing. For the local flow trails and XC stuff, the stache 5 is both fun and still pretty damn fast - and light. Setup tubeless and with a dropper post, stuff gets rowdy quick and man is it fun. With 12psi in front, I don't feel the need for a susp fork.
    Which do you think you would prefer out of the 2, if the Stache did have a suspension fork? I ask this because I've been debating a Nimble 9 or Honzo with i35 rims and larger volume 29" tires vs a Stache with squishy fork. FWIW I've owned a SS Yelli, Honzo, 2 Souls QH with 120-140mm forks and a rigid Krampus.

    Beardog - FYI the Stache 5+ is in high demand and hard to find at the moment as well.
    "I ride to clear my head, my head is clearer when I'm riding SS. Therefore, I choose to ride SS."~ Fullrange Drew

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by mhopton View Post
    I now have a Stache 5 set up SS in addition to a Canfield Nimble 9 (thanks Thrawn) that is an uber blast to ride. I had a Superfly SS last year that I raced and even ran a 3.0 Chupacabra front tire. However it really jacked with the front end and was too floppy. Lastly, I also owned a SIR9 for about 6 months this year with a 100mm SID front fork that I also raced. All setup SS.

    In terms of flat, speedy race bike - no doubt the superfly just railed. Very fast bike but somewhat stiff and tough for an everyday bike. The Sir9 followed closely. Much more comfortable. It could still be raced but also ridden comfortably all day long. Great compromise.

    Smile factor? Right now it's a toss up between the stache 5 and the Canfield. For the mtns, I take the Canfield with a pike up front and lower gearing. For the local flow trails and XC stuff, the stache 5 is both fun and still pretty damn fast - and light. Setup tubeless and with a dropper post, stuff gets rowdy quick and man is it fun. With 12psi in front, I don't feel the need for a susp fork.

    Lastly, my most unfavorite thing about the stache and superfly is the strangehold dropouts. While they work well, they're a bit of a pain to adjust and almost impossible to adjust on the trail as it requires a 20, or 21mm socket (can't remember). Granted I never had one move or need adjustment, but it always concerned me when in the backcountry.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
    I think I am more interested in the "smile factor"...I have no aspiration to be the fastest >51 year old dude on the trail!

    "If" you were going to put a front suspension fork on the Stache 5, what would be your choice?. And , thanks for the input!

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by nitrousjunky View Post
    Which do you think you would prefer out of the 2, if the Stache did have a suspension fork? I ask this because I've been debating a Nimble 9 or Honzo with i35 rims and larger volume 29" tires vs a Stache with squishy fork. FWIW I've owned a SS Yelli, Honzo, 2 Souls QH with 120-140mm forks and a rigid Krampus.

    Beardog - FYI the Stache 5+ is in high demand and hard to find at the moment as well.
    Hey, Nitrousjunky, looks like I asked mhopton your same Stache 5 suspension question before I got to your post! Great minds must truly think alike!

  34. #34
    WNC Native
    Reputation: nitrousjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    Hey, Nitrousjunky, looks like I asked mhopton your same Stache 5 suspension question before I got to your post! Great minds must truly think alike!
    Yep
    "I ride to clear my head, my head is clearer when I'm riding SS. Therefore, I choose to ride SS."~ Fullrange Drew

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    445
    I'd be on the Stache 5 with a squish fork. For that, I'd likely do a 120mm Pike, or one of the new Fox 34s. I'd also go boost on the front and relace the front wheel to a boost hub.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    469
    Quote Originally Posted by mhopton View Post
    I'd be on the Stache 5 with a squish fork. For that, I'd likely do a 120mm Pike, or one of the new Fox 34s. I'd also go boost on the front and relace the front wheel to a boost hub.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
    I concur... I've been riding the Stache 5 for about a year and rigid has been great! However, I wanted to try to slack it a touch with a squishy fork for the super technical trails. Two rides on a Fox 34 27.5 plus fork so far, and it's awesome! It's now even faster, up and down.

    Also, I just converted a Superfly SS to geared with a squish fork, but have yet to ride it. Another thing to compare, but I'm certain the Stache will win in the "smile factor"...

    mhopton, glad the N9 is treating you well...

  37. #37
    WNC Native
    Reputation: nitrousjunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
    I concur... I've been riding the Stache 5 for about a year and rigid has been great! However, I wanted to try to slack it a touch with a squishy fork for the super technical trails. Two rides on a Fox 34 27.5 plus fork so far, and it's awesome! It's now even faster, up and down.
    Which travel length Fox did you go with?
    "I ride to clear my head, my head is clearer when I'm riding SS. Therefore, I choose to ride SS."~ Fullrange Drew

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DualRollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    So you don't find the aluminum frame to be "garbage" on the Stache 5? Did you add a front suspension fork, or does it just ride and feel that different, inherently, from the Superfly??
    I don't think the Stache frame rides great either, however the 3.0 tires absorb a lot of chatter. The Superfly feels light and fast, but the skinny tires make for an extremely rough ride through just about everything... I generally run the Chupacabras around 12psi and most of the small chatter is non-existent.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    469
    Quote Originally Posted by nitrousjunky View Post
    Which travel length Fox did you go with?
    Fork purchased with 120mm travel and still has a shorter A-C than the Manipoo stock fork on the Stache 7 and 9. Thinking about dropping it too 110mm, but I need to ride it more and see. It's only floppy on the super steep stuff. I like the reach with the rigid fork, but it gets shorter with a squishy fork. Ideally, I'd size up to a larger frame, but a lower A-C squish fork should be a decent compromise.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by DualRollers View Post
    I rode both and ultimately went with the Stache 5. The Superfly beat the hell out of me on our rocky terrain. The aluminum frame rides like garbage in my opinion... if you're on flat dirt track it's probably fine, but any chatter at all is going to be horrible. The Stache is a great bike though, I love mine. As far as fun goes, it's definitely the best bike I have ever owned. Tons of grip with the 29+, and short playful chainstays. I highly recommend it.
    I love my Superfly, it stiff and light as hell. Its an alloy race bike, get tough.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    39
    By the time one puts a suspension fork on a Stache 5, wouldn't it be back into Stache 7 territory, cost wise??

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by Beardog View Post
    By the time one puts a suspension fork on a Stache 5, wouldn't it be back into Stache 7 territory, cost wise??
    Pretty much although you would be getting a fork comparable to the Stache 9.
    Signature

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DualRollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by RaleighX View Post
    I love my Superfly, it stiff and light as hell. Its an alloy race bike, get tough.
    It has nothing to do with "getting tough", it has to do with the type of trails I ride and the type of trails the OP said he rides... I didn't say the Superfly was a bad bike, I said the frame rode like shit over chatter. Which is not a lie.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: A1an's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by DualRollers View Post
    It has nothing to do with "getting tough", it has to do with the type of trails I ride and the type of trails the OP said he rides... I didn't say the Superfly was a bad bike, I said the frame rode like shit over chatter. Which is not a lie.
    Really a personal preference thing. I found the Superfly to do quite well through rooty/rocky chatter.
    Signature

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flat Ark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,646
    The Stache was designed so that one can run 27.5+, 29+ or just plain old 29" wheels. Hard to go wrong there!

    I saw some comments that were sort of discrediting steel frames as "race" bikes. Some of the fastest SSers across the U.S. are on steel frames. I am on a carbon frame myself right now. It's a nice frame but the carbon thing is mostly hype imo. I'll probably be back on steel before long.

    Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-30-2015, 12:28 PM
  2. Stache 7 or Superfly 6?
    By V8Interceptor in forum Trek
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-08-2014, 06:21 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-19-2014, 01:17 PM
  4. Trek Stache 8 or Superfly 8?
    By mitgrad93 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-11-2014, 06:26 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-14-2013, 11:19 AM

Members who have read this thread: 7

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.