Results 1 to 41 of 41
  1. #1
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131

    ICT vs. Wednesday

    I don't normally struggle wit this kind of choice.

    But...I am now.

    Either bike will be my main snow bike (Maine has a great snow season.)

    I want 4.6-4.8 tires. Both bike ship with MOBD 80 mm rims.

    I have been on my Pugsley for longer than I remember. (As a matter of fact, I have two Pugsleys). Love the ride, love the handling.

    Hmmmm.....a little help here. I've fallen and I can't get up.

  2. #2
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    i just went through this. Pugsley frames on closeout, great deal, very tempting. i really wanted an ICT though, modern geo/standards, bigger tires, but much more expensive to build even though the ICT frame was on sale too.

    did more reading, became aware of the Wednesday. my understanding is that the ICT frame is a bit more "overbuilt" and has a PF BB. that was the deal breaker for me. Wednesday has a threaded BB.

    just picked up my Wednesday frame yesterday. I'm going to try to get a 4.5" ish tire in the back with the shortest chainstay length i can. if it ends up being longer than i want i have a 4.0 i can swap in.

    my only other requirement was the ability for a second wheelset for 29+ which either will do. Black is a bit boring, really wish the robins egg blue was still available, but i can bling it up a bit. that red/burgundy color does nothing for me.

    the geo wasn't different enough to be a big factor for me. only real gripe is tire clearance, but i'm planning on going 1x so maybe it's not as big a deal as i think? haven't got that far yet, need to build wheels first.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  3. #3
    Yeet so hard
    Reputation: tims5377's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    678
    I bought my ICT over the Weds because it has the most tire clearance. With that, it has the widest hub spacing and BB, which drives the build price up a bit and can be a geo turn off. If you are a heavy dude and want to run some big ass rubber it might be something to consider. I rode a pugsley last season. It worked in the snow with vanhelgas on 65s, but the guys on 5in tires had a much better chance of getting through non-packed snow than me. I am thinking I will be in a much better spot this year. Also, i have also heard it is overbuilt so I plan on getting some nice carbon bars when my wallet heals a bit to soak the chatter.

    I've only had one ride on the ICT and it freaking ripped. Getting out Saturday to shake it down a bit more. No regrets on the ICT so far.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF
    Smash

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    235
    Where in Maine? I'm in the Portland area. Picked up a Wednesday last January to replace a Salsa Mukluk. We didn't get much snow last winter, so I only rode it on the snow a few times, but it's great. Dillinger 4 studded tires (the old ones with pointy studs) and a Bluto fork. Looks like the new 45Nrth snow tires might fit, too. If you want 5" tires, then the ICT is the way to go. When the snow is really dry and powdery (winter of 2014-2015 was too cold and the snow was too powdery for much fat biking), I wish for wider tires, but would that extra inch really make a difference? I don't know.

  5. #5
    Ambassador of Chub
    Reputation: Smithhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by cjbiker View Post
    ....but would that extra inch really make a difference? I don't know.
    You'd be surprised. An inch makes a big difference. If you live in a snowy place and want to ride more than just packed trails, 5" is really nice to have.

    I wonder if you could get a Dillinger 5 in the rear of a Wednesday? On an 80mm rim, it measures out around 4.5"
    "The only way we can truly control the outcome of a ride is not going on it, which is a choice I'm unwilling to make." -K.B.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by Smithhammer View Post
    You'd be surprised. An inch makes a big difference. If you live in a snowy place and want to ride more than just packed trails, 5" is really nice to have.

    I wonder if you could get a Dillinger 5 in the rear of a Wednesday? On an 80mm rim, it measures out around 4.5"
    Possibly. I was just over at the fat bike subforum, looking at Wrathchild thread. The new Wrathchild is actually wider than the D5.

    Is Surly ever going to produce Wednesday nuts? That would help. And yes, I'm aware of the ones Tomy is making. I'll probably just MacGruber my own if I decide to try and stuff a bigger tire on the back.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,115
    i love my ICT,with both a 26x4.8 and 29+ wheelset and a bluto is a super versatile set up....especially since i got the bike for 1089 to begin with,the 29+ wheels actually cost more than i paid for the bike!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TomiKoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    65
    This is interesting game which I've been also playing. I bought ICT before Wednesday existed. After Surly gave us Wednesday I have been thinking should I? I also had Instigator and Wednesday felt to have good sides of both ICT and Instigator. For me ICT's worst side is high Q-factor and I'm freaked of PF BB. Also it feel's bit too low and long but it's somethign I can live with.

    Past summer I bought 2nd hand Trek Farley 5 frameset and I had possibility to compare that to ICT. It had same PF BB but narrow Q-factor and it had shoter and higher geo. It really felt better and made me think Wednesday even more.

    My problem with Wednesday is tire clearance and geo which is bit wrong for me. I have problem to find short and high nowadays. Size S ICT has reach about 400, stack about 590 and ETT 590. That is something I can live with but Wednesday's 420/580/590 is wrong way. I mean r420/ett590 is ok but s580 is way too low for me.

    So after all these considerations my choise is going to be ICT anyway. I haven't just found any better. It is heavy but I love that firm feeling when riding. Once and while I just hate wide Q-factor and freak PF BB but I try to get over it. Maybe I get custom-frame some day...

    Pro's of ICT is definitely tire clearance. We have quite a lot snow here in winter and studded Bud/Lou is really minimum. It's nice to use wide tire's without thinking will they fit.
    Surly ICT
    Kona Raijin

  9. #9
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    The Wednesday thread shows that some 4.6-4.8 tires fit the rear. I have been riding my pugs with Nates and Huska du's for awhile now.
    I wanna go big. Yesterday the LBS screwed with my head with pricing on a Fatboy comp.
    ICT would be higher in price than the fatboy. Wednesday price almost the same.
    Hmmm...

  10. #10
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by 1spd1way View Post
    Yesterday the LBS screwed with my head with pricing on a Fatboy comp.
    did you just mention the big S in the Surly forum? worlds are colliding. you don't really want to be one of those people do you?
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  11. #11
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    I know, "the dark side"....heaven help me!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3
    I am having this very dilemma as well, I live In southern Wisconsin so we get some snow but not a ton, and most trails get ridden or groomed pretty quick. Ultimately I am looking for the bike that would be most fun year round. Would the ICT take it with the 1 degree slacker head tube and wider tires. Or the Wednesday with shorter chain stays and less tire to push around. Also, I'm 5'7" and coming from a medium pugsley, should I go medium with the ICT or Wednesday as well? Any input is greatly appreciated!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TomiKoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Corndoggy View Post
    Also, I'm 5'7" and coming from a medium pugsley, should I go medium with the ICT or Wednesday as well? Any input is greatly appreciated!
    For ICT sizing I can give my experience. I'm 5'6.5" aka 169cm. I have longish legs and short torso + long hands. For me size S ICT is ok, bit long and low but if you are normal proportioned then size S from ICT would be my choise. I think S from Wednesday also. I had size M Instigator and I can tell too big frame is difficult to get smaller.

    And just IMHO for your "problem" I would choose Wednesday with suspension fork.
    Surly ICT
    Kona Raijin

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,506
    The key if you want help is to describe the snow conditions you typically face and how you did on the Pugs with 4" tires.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the input tommikoo! And Vic, the snow conditions vary but we really don't get more than 4 or 5 inches at a time. The Pugs was just fine with nates most of the time. I'm more so looking for a bike that's going to be fun on the trails, as I just got rid of my hardtail and want a fattie that will handle winter and slay trails. I would ideally stay away from suspension for the time being.....decisions....not a bad problem to have, I guess.

  16. #16
    Ambassador of Chub
    Reputation: Smithhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Corndoggy View Post
    Thanks for the input tommikoo! And Vic, the snow conditions vary but we really don't get more than 4 or 5 inches at a time. The Pugs was just fine with nates most of the time. I'm more so looking for a bike that's going to be fun on the trails, as I just got rid of my hardtail and want a fattie that will handle winter and slay trails. I would ideally stay away from suspension for the time being.....decisions....not a bad problem to have, I guess.
    Sounds to me like you don't really have a true need for 5" tires, and that a 4" tire will be a better option for you for year-round riding. While there is no substitute for the added floatation when that's what the conditions call for, there is also no need to run a bigger/heavier tire when it's not what's needed. You'll 'slay trails' better on a comparatively lighter, more responsive tire paired with a bike that has good trail geometry.

    But if it was me? I'd rather have a bike that allows me to have the option to run a 5" tire if/when I want to. The ICT is a trail ripper that leaves your options open.
    "The only way we can truly control the outcome of a ride is not going on it, which is a choice I'm unwilling to make." -K.B.

  17. #17
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    Vic, (and others), My perceived need for 4.6+ tires comes from those time when we head out early morning when conditions are cold and firm, then, as the sun comes up, conditions turn to mashed potatoes.
    Or when the most remote section of the hut-to-hut trails have gotten no love from the groomers. Loose, unconsolidated snow.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    330
    I don't know the exact numbers, but it seems like 2/3rds of the control of a mountain bike is determined by the front tire.

    I run a 4.0 Juggernaut in the rear and 4.5 in the front in sandy Florida.

    Have you consider just running the Nate in the rear and a Bud in the front in the snow. I would think that the in heavier snow the rear wheel (Nate) followed would be packed down from a Bud up front.

  19. #19
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandman29 View Post
    I would think that the in heavier snow the rear wheel (Nate) followed would be packed down from a Bud up front.
    i wish, but that's not really how it works.

    there are literally dozens of types of snow. fluffy, packed, cold/dry, warmer/wet, ice, slush, etc. they all ride different. the depth of the snow and moisture content are probably the two biggest factors. (assuming virgin powder)

    point being, in the most challenging conditions, there's no replacement for a 5" tire with big knobs.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  20. #20
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,334

    ICT vs. Wednesday

    I run the Flowbeist/Dunderbeist on my Wednesday. They are labeled as 4.6". If you go on the 45NRTH site, they show width for their various tires on 65/82/100 mm rims. Dillinger 5 is actually a couple mm narrower than the Flow/Dunderbeists.

    Clearance is tight on mine. Chain grazes the tires in the top 42T cog (I run XT 11 speed rear derailleur, with XT 11-42 cassette). So "4.6" is about as big as you'll fit on a Wednesday. I'm actually thinking of sizing back down to a 4" (bike came with Nate 3.8's, which I quickly got rid of). For the fork, there is massive clearance, so no issues up front.


    Santa Cruz Hightower LT


  21. #21
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    Our snow up here in central Maine typically has a high moisture content. Early morning, after the groomer has gone through, it is firm and fast. As the sun rises and heats the surface, it gets softer and mealy. Add in the 100hp spinning-track, stinky-engine, sometime- drunk snowmobile pilot and the surface get all loosey-goosey.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3
    Hello, Iíve been using my brotherís old Pugsley for a couple months and now itís time to buy my own fat bike. I live in Minneapolis near miles of trails. Iím trying to decide between the new ICT or Wednesday. The $500 difference doesnít really matter. This will be my year round bike. We get snow but it seems even when I get out to the trails right away someone else has already beat me. Iím leaning Wednesday because it seems like everyone who has one loves it. Any recommendations?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    412
    No practal tire limitations and dropper compatibility made ICT an easy choice. almost as capable as a trail bike as the Krampus.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3
    Thank you. Iíve seen people trying to decide between the two but they all seem to be quite old.

  25. #25
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    I'm back to the same struggle a few years later.

    Bought the fatboy from the evil empire...like it, but....

    I went out and built a moonlander! Love the bike, but...

    Looking for some thing a little more playful. The moonie is hard to beat when loaded up for a picnic ride. Thermos of soup, thermos of hot chocolate (whiskey-tainted) and lunch.

    Bud and Lou has spoiled me on 4 inch tires.

    I am going to unload the evil-S, the instagator, and the crack-and-fail cross bike (all size small if anyone is interested) to make room for one more Surly.

    ICT or Wednesday?

  26. #26
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    Hahahha! I just realized I just said "one more Surly"!

    Is there really only "one more?"

  27. #27
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    I've got a couple seasons on my Wednesday now, still a killer bike, no regrets.

    Now that the ICT has been updated, primarily shorter chainstays and a threaded BB, there is no wrong choice between the two.

    I run a 4.6" 45NRTH Dunderbeast in the rear of the Wednesday. It's the best fat tire I've owned and I don't really feel the need for 5" tires because of it. If one were intent on running anything bigger than that get the ICT. You're not going to get a bigger tire in there with the axle all the way forward.

    Also the Wednesday has internal dropper routing too, not sure why someone above ^ said that only the ICT had it?

    ICT vs. Wednesday-img_7816.jpg

    ICT vs. Wednesday-img_7811.jpg

    ICT vs. Wednesday-img_7810.jpg
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    412
    My mistake... we thought the Weds was still a 27.2 era frame.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    330
    I agree with OneSpeed, there is no wrong choice between the Wednesday and the new ICT.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3
    Is there a big difference between stock parts other than the larger tires? I donít mind spending a little extra if it makes sense. For example, I looked at the Level brakes on the ICT but from the reviews they donít appear to be great. Being pretty new to this I just donít know what Iím missing out on.

  31. #31
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by BloomingtonMN View Post
    Is there a big difference between stock parts other than the larger tires? I donít mind spending a little extra if it makes sense. For example, I looked at the Level brakes on the ICT but from the reviews they donít appear to be great. Being pretty new to this I just donít know what Iím missing out on.
    The current ICT has "better" cranks, brakes, drivetrain, and tire clearance. (maybe some other stuff, I didn't look very closely). The Wednesday has shorter chainstays, but not by much.

    Full disclosure I am not a fan of Sram products so the brakes are not an "upgrade" in my book but instead just something that will be replaced. I also much prefer the Shimano drivetrain, so take the good with the bad.

    Really it comes down to minor differences in tire clearance and a degree or two of geometry. They're both excellent.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    46
    One other thing, the ICT is now cleared by Surly to run 140mm fork if you want. I just wish it had more crank options. Both great bikes though.

  33. #33
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by benmcgill View Post
    One other thing, the ICT is now cleared by Surly to run 140mm fork if you want. I just wish it had more crank options. Both great bikes though.
    It now has a 100mm BSA BB. What crank can't you use?
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    46
    Per the q and a under the ICT section on Surlyís website, they donít recommend Sram cranks due to narrow Q factor. They also said the race face aeffect cranks are the most narrow cranks they know of that will work. Iíd like to see more options if anyone knows them.

  35. #35
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131

    Wink

    "Now that the ICT has been updated, primarily shorter chainstays and a threaded BB, there is no wrong choice between the two. "

    Are you saying I should buy both?
    Yeah! win-win!

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    466
    I would love to see a picture of the ICT with a sram crank in it. . .

  37. #37
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    I am looking at buying an ICT frame and moving as many parts from the fatboy over. I know the cranks won't transfer.
    Front fork/wheel combo is a 100mm mastadon so that goes over.
    Rear wheel spacing may be a problem that a hub can fix.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,496
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    It now has a 100mm BSA BB. What crank can't you use?
    Race Face or Surly cranks are your only options on the new ICT, per Surly. The spacing is all funky with others.
    Jason
    Disclaimer: www.paramountsports.net

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    235
    The new ICT is pretty much like the Moonlander, takes a 100mm BB with extra wide bearing cups, right?

  40. #40
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,526
    Quote Originally Posted by benmcgill View Post
    Per the q and a under the ICT section on Surlyís website, they donít recommend Sram cranks due to narrow Q factor. They also said the race face aeffect cranks are the most narrow cranks they know of that will work. Iíd like to see more options if anyone knows them.
    Quote Originally Posted by JAGI410 View Post
    Race Face or Surly cranks are your only options on the new ICT, per Surly. The spacing is all funky with others.
    I agree there aren't a lot of fatbike crank options in general, but between RF and Surly there's good options. I really wish Shimano would get on board and join the party...

    Per Surly: the new 100mm threaded BB is to give the consumer more crank options. https://surlybikes.com/blog/move_over_push_pop

    So it seems you have more options now than you did with a PF.

    ICT vs. Wednesday-screen-shot-2018-12-25-9.32.59-am.png
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  41. #41
    Stubby-legged
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,131
    I just heard from Surly.
    Between the Fatboy and the Moonlander , I can swap parts and end up with one killer ICT!

Similar Threads

  1. Wednesday vs ICT
    By dcycleman in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-13-2016, 08:22 AM
  2. HGA THis Wednesday (5/20), 6PM
    By eburatti in forum Pennsylvania
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-18-2015, 11:39 AM
  3. Wednesday 10/24
    By JOEMTBR COLORADO in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 10-26-2012, 11:10 AM
  4. wednesday right
    By nickcarll in forum Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2011, 04:45 PM
  5. A Wednesday to myself....
    By eatdrinkride in forum Arizona
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-30-2011, 09:58 PM

Members who have read this thread: 89

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.