2020 Trek Fuel ex- Mtbr.com
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 200 of 581
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895

    2020 Trek Fuel ex

    Starting up this thread as quite a few of is are waiting in anticipation for the release of this bike.

    Nothing has been announced yet but based on what trek has released already and what other manufacturers are doing with similar bikes here are some assumptions on what the bike could be.

    Rumored for August release

    135mm or 140mm rear travel, 140mm front Travel, compatible with 150mm front fork

    Full Carbon frame for 9.7, 9.8, 9.9 models

    Price increase on 2019 model

    Sram NX eagle on 8 and 9.7, GX eagle on 9.8

    No full floater, same design as Top Fuel and Remedy

    Slacker head angle, steeper seat angle, longer top tube, longer reach, short stem, wide bars, shorter seat tube

    2.5-2.6" tires



    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    Last edited by VERT1; 07-01-2019 at 10:49 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    15
    [QUOTE=VERT1;14173029]Starting up this thread as quite a few of is are waiting in anticipation for the release of this bike.

    Sram NX eagle on 8 and 9.7, GX eagle on 9.8

    If there's a price increase on the FEX8 and they spec it with Sram NX that will be a downgrade to the 2019 model. I'm holding out for the 8 but will look else where if they spec it with the crappy NX.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,362
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Slacker head angle, steeper seat angle, longer top tube, longer reach, short stem, wide bars
    and shorter seat tube!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    and shorter seat tube!


    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    [QUOTE=aaroncob;14173173]
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Starting up this thread as quite a few of is are waiting in anticipation for the release of this bike.

    Sram NX eagle on 8 and 9.7, GX eagle on 9.8

    If there's a price increase on the FEX8 and they spec it with Sram NX that will be a downgrade to the 2019 model. I'm holding out for the 8 but will look else where if they spec it with the crappy NX.
    I'm hoping they dont too, but that's what they did with the Top Fuel. Hopefully we dont see SX on any of the bikes!

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    I'd be thrilled with basically the current Fuel EX, "stretched" to 135 or 140 in the back, with similar treatment up front.

    Hey Fox, how about debuting a 34 fork with the fabulous Grip2 damper on the 2020 Fuel EX?!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Starting up this thread as quite a few of is are waiting in anticipation for the release of this bike.

    Nothing has been announced yet but based on what trek has released already and what other manufacturers are doing with similar bikes here are some assumptions on what the bike could be.

    Rumored for August release

    135mm or 140mm rear travel, 140mm front Travel, compatible with 150mm front fork

    Full Carbon frame for 9.7, 9.8, 9.9 models

    Price increase on 2019 model

    Sram NX eagle on 8 and 9.7, GX eagle on 9.8

    No full floater, same design as Top Fuel and Remedy

    Slacker head angle, steeper seat angle, longer top tube, longer reach, short stem, wide bars, shorter seat tube

    2.5-2.6" tires



    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    I don't see a reason for slacker HA or a larger travel increase The current 27.5+ is 66.6* and 29er is around 67.5 * the current slash is 65.6* (HA is just one listed number off their site. I know there is 2)
    140 in the rear 150 front? your 10mm short of it being a remedy or slash.

    The Yeti SB130 is a 150/130 trail bike.
    Too Many .

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,362
    Lots of people pulling the spacer out of the DPX2 and essentially making it a 150/138mm trail bike too.

    I don't disagree that 150/130 is/would be rad, it's what I'm running on my current bike (with 27.5" wheels) but Trek don't seem as sold on the "reverse mullet" as the likes of Yeti, Transition etc. With the hype and popularity of bikes like the Hightower/Offering/Ripmo/etc etc that "goldilocks" zone between enduro and trail is becoming a pretty hotly contested part of the market so a slight bump in travel for the Fuel EX kinda makes sense. 140/140 stock with the option to run 150/140 would be the go, and because of that I'd be disappointed to see a 34 up front as AFAIK it can't be bumped up to 150mm travel with a simple change of internals.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    With the hype and popularity of bikes like the Hightower/Offering/Ripmo/etc etc that "goldilocks" zone between enduro and trail is becoming a pretty hotly contested part of the market so a slight bump in travel for the Fuel EX kinda makes sense.
    It does seem that the media hype is around long travel trail bikes these days. The fuel Ex 9 in 2016 130mm front/120mm rear travel guise seemed to be a swiss army knife bike that just did everything from XC marathon to almost enduro.

    I actually think that the 2019 Top fuel was not replaced, it was killed. Its actual real XC racer replacement is the as-yet unreleased flex-stay supercaliber.

    Trek has realised that its too hard for a FEX bike to do so many things different things well. So, the 2017-2019 FEX has really become 2 bikes in 2020:
    Short travel Top Fuel
    Long travel (unreleased) FEX.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    My biggest hope is the geo does not get too extreme. I have ridden the Pivot T429 with a STA of 74.6 and got along with it well. Then bikes with 76 STA ---say Ripley/HT and it just does not work------puts too much pressure on my hands and aggravates my arthritis.
    And they shorten the seated ETT too much for my long legs---

    The slacker HT angles do not seem to be as noticeable----anything from 66-67 seems to feel the same

    So hoping Trek does not go full west coast geo--even while I can see the Pacific ocean

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    My biggest hope is the geo does not get too extreme. I have ridden the Pivot T429 with a STA of 74.6 and got along with it well. Then bikes with 76 STA ---say Ripley/HT and it just does not work------puts too much pressure on my hands and aggravates my arthritis.
    And they shorten the seated ETT too much for my long legs---

    The slacker HT angles do not seem to be as noticeable----anything from 66-67 seems to feel the same

    So hoping Trek does not go full west coast geo--even while I can see the Pacific ocean
    You hope Trek makes a perfect custom bike for you're aging body?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Of course I hope for this-and you are right I am aging at 65--hopefully slowly--just a different take than some others. Honestly I suspect they will follow the geo trends to the max like the new HT but we will see.

    At this point my best choices are the Pivot T429 and the Arktos ST (due to the stack) and we will see on the SC TB in August.

    In the meantime I just ride my Pivot Mach 429 Trail and most days wonder what is wrong with me in trying to get another bike as it has few faults for where I ride----primarily Santa Cruz

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,362
    It's a lot easier for you to add a set-back post and a few more spacers or high-rise bars than it is for other people to increase the STA or lower the stack height....

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    125
    I'm looking forward to a 140/140 Fuel EX. I had an 18 Fuel EX 8 that I loved, but it was out gunned at the bike park. I moved on to a Slash 8. Its a great park bike but I feel like i'm beating the crap out of it there. Its more than I need (heavy & too much travel) for my daily trails. I think a dedicated downhill bike and a mid travel 29 will be the perfect combo for my riding.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    It's a lot easier for you to add a set-back post and a few more spacers or high-rise bars than it is for other people to increase the STA or lower the stack height....
    David for sure one can do this but it would move your weight significantly rearward--not where the bike was designed to have it-----fixes fit but the new geo requires more of a bias to weighting the front end---surely results in poor handling. Getting too much weight on the hands --along with tight cockpits is becoming more common feedback in these threads even with those more spry or at least they should be.

    Anyhow looking forward to the new bike---most of august I am backpacking in the Sierra's so hopefully it is released when I return---along with the Santa Cruz TB4

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    124
    Bringing back the Remedy 29 finally.... just calling it the Fuel EX.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    ^^^ totally.

    I've been looking for a new trail bike and see the new Top Fuel it's close but a slightly longer and slacker than my '16 FEX. So, they're bringing back the '16 FEX and calling it a Top Fuel.
    Do the math.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by j-t-g View Post
    Bringing back the Remedy 29 finally.... just calling it the Fuel EX.
    I think they already pretty much did that?

    When the 2017 FEX 29er was announced, I recall that it was longer, lower, slacker than the 16 Remedy 29er. Only difference was that it had 10mm less travel. But German bike magazine worked out it real life it actually has almost 146mm of rear travel anyway!

    https://www.bike-magazin.de/mountain...98/a37921.html

    2020 Top fuel = 2016 Fuel EX
    2020 Fuel Ex = 2016 Remedy 29er?

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    398
    Heres my prediction/wishlist (some will hate this):

    - No frame travel increase, except maybe the fork to 140 for 27.5+
    - Modern geo updates: +20mm reach, ~66 HTA, 76į STA

    IMO geo dictates capability nowadays more than travel. Keep it efficient with shorter travel and light but let it party with modern geo. Essentially on trend with the Giant Advanced Pro 29, Ripley V4, etc.

    No sense in adding travel as you start to encroach on slash territory. And then the top fuel retains current Fuel Ex numbers and thus more separation.

    As an "Ex Fuel Ex owner" I was happy with the efficiency and quality of travel, yet unhappy with the geo (slack STA, wandering front end, steep head angle).

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    605
    What's all this constant demand for longer reach? If a current model frame size fits you and then they increase the reach by 20mm won't it then not fit/be too big?

    I've not been following the trends the last few years and now that I'm reading about new models this seems to come up a lot? Just curious?
    2013 Scott Scale 970 (Reba fork)
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8 (with added RS dropper post)
    2019 Trek Remedy 8

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 619er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    70
    So itís an enduro bike now.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    A father is only as happy as his saddest child...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    My detail-devoid prediction is that it will be a single, logical step "up" in capability from the new Top Fuel.

    We should know some specifics soon!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by gfourth View Post
    Heres my prediction/wishlist (some will hate this):

    - No frame travel increase, except maybe the fork to 140 for 27.5+
    - Modern geo updates: +20mm reach, ~66 HTA, 76į STA

    IMO geo dictates capability nowadays more than travel. Keep it efficient with shorter travel and light but let it party with modern geo. Essentially on trend with the Giant Advanced Pro 29, Ripley V4, etc.

    No sense in adding travel as you start to encroach on slash territory. And then the top fuel retains current Fuel Ex numbers and thus more separation.

    As an "Ex Fuel Ex owner" I was happy with the efficiency and quality of travel, yet unhappy with the geo (slack STA, wandering front end, steep head angle).
    New geometry is already posted in the "Trek 2020 My" thread

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    From Trek 2020 thread

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Geo thoughts-----being very long legged I would like more stack---typical issue with all the new geo bikes for me as it coupled with the STA puts pressure on the hands---common issue-----otherwise looks nice---very near identical to the new Ripley. Like the slightly high BB.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi_GR_Biker View Post
    What's all this constant demand for longer reach? If a current model frame size fits you and then they increase the reach by 20mm won't it then not fit/be too big?

    I've not been following the trends the last few years and now that I'm reading about new models this seems to come up a lot? Just curious?
    2017ish was the "longer and lower" year for modern geometry from major manufacturers. But they largely neglected seat tube angle and chain stay length. So you had a longer reach but if you were taller the slack STA coupled with short chain stay length put you awkwardly over the rear axle. It's harder to pedal, the bike wants to wheelie on climbs, and less comfortable (IMO). So no, the current model frame size didn't fit me.

    So 2018/2019 is the great awakening when frame designers wised up and took a page from the smaller experimental bike brand. Steeper STA puts you more centrally on the bike in an upright position, and in doing so you can (must?) increase the reach. Longer chain stays helps also with putting you more centrally, also away from rear wheel movement. It is stable at speed now with a longer wheelbase, and a shorter offset fork helps with steering.

    Bigger bike brands have to take incremental steps as they have customers who buy the bikes year after year and expect the numbers on the geo chart to be the same as last year.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    Geo thoughts-----being very long legged I would like more stack---typical issue with all the new geo bikes for me as it coupled with the STA puts pressure on the hands---common issue-----otherwise looks nice---very near identical to the new Ripley. Like the slightly high BB.
    Similar to the new Ripley besides the fact that this new Fuel's seat tube lengths are ridiculously long compared to most new trail bikes that have been coming out in the last year. C'mon Trek...

    Ripley seat tube
    S - 368
    M - 368
    L - 418
    XL - 470

    Fuel EX seat tube
    S - 395 (+27 mm vs Ripley)
    M - 420 (+52 mm!! vs Ripley)
    L - 450 (+32 mm vs Ripley)
    XL - 500 (+30 mm vs Ripley)

    That's a lot of dropper you're not able to run on the Fuel EX, a bike that has 10 mm more travel out back than the Ripley.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    472
    I feel like unless you're sizing up a lot, the seat tube thing isn't a big deal. Reach numbers are pretty good; my current ride has a 470mm seat tube and I've got a bikeyoke 180 and at least half an inch of exposed post... I'm 6ft, not quite 32" inseam, so I'm not so leggy monster

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenngineer View Post
    I feel like unless you're sizing up a lot, the seat tube thing isn't a big deal. Reach numbers are pretty good; my current ride has a 470mm seat tube and I've got a bikeyoke 180 and at least half an inch of exposed post... I'm 6ft, not quite 32" inseam, so I'm not so leggy monster
    I guess my point is that the shorter the seat tube the better. With OneUp, PNW, and 9point8 having 200 mm or longer dropper posts currently, and more manufacturers sure to join that group, if I can run a longer dropper post I'm absolutely going to do it.

    So when most other manufacturers rolling out new trail bike models in the last year have bikes with shorter seat tubes, sometimes significantly so, Trek seems to be behind the curve.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    seat tube is not as short as the ripley but still shorter than the Trance and T429 and Arktos---for once my long inseam works-----I probably could run 200 on a large so no issue for me--current bike is 483 and running 150 with a good 35MM left

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    63
    ......

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    472
    I could probably run a 200 on a large, too. 450 ain't bad.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    I am gone for a month next week in the sierra and a long road bike trip----hope to demo the new Fuel ex and SC TB4 when I am back------still the Pivot t429 is my top pick---we will see in September who gets the cash---or maybe I just keep riding my Pivot Mach429T---still a great bike

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    43mm fork offset...???


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    Pivot T429 being super boost is a weird thing.
    Do the math.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Agree the super boost is odd but it makes no diff to me as I do not have other wheels I would want to use---more bothersome is the frame weight. But so far I have gotten along with the Pivot the best in demo's----and the impending TB4 is possible but geo looks a bit extreme for me given I did not like the Ripley -----hoping the Fuel works well----time will tell,

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    ----and the impending TB4
    ??????????

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    TB4----Santa Cruz Tall Boy 4-----seems release is imminent------fuel competitor for sure

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    TB4----Santa Cruz Tall Boy 4-----seems release is imminent------fuel competitor for sure

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1
    https://www.instagram.com/p/B0wcvVeg...d=hkqexc70s4we

    Lšhetetty minun Nokia 7.1 laitteesta Tapatalkilla

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Before it gets taken down

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    2019 vs 2020

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    My biggest hope is the geo does not get too extreme. I have ridden the Pivot T429 with a STA of 74.6 and got along with it well. Then bikes with 76 STA ---say Ripley/HT and it just does not work------puts too much pressure on my hands and aggravates my arthritis.
    And they shorten the seated ETT too much for my long legs---

    The slacker HT angles do not seem to be as noticeable----anything from 66-67 seems to feel the same

    So hoping Trek does not go full west coast geo--even while I can see the Pacific ocean
    Try the GA3 grips from Ergon. Or even their larger, more standard version like GP1. I use both and they make a major difference for me after a couple of wrist and hand surgeries. I can use the GA3 in bike parks, all my trail rides, etc and actually think they provide a bit more control overall. I have the GP1 for bike packing but do trail rides with them just fine, though less aggressively.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    273
    Seat tube kind of looks weird IMO. Other than that and no full floater it looks really similar to the previous Fuel EX
    Patrick

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by pjames12 View Post
    Seat tube kind of looks weird IMO.
    Might allow for more seatpost insertion?

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,362
    Quote Originally Posted by squeakymcgillicuddy View Post
    Might allow for more seatpost insertion?
    Most likely, especially if the seat tube length has been shortened for each frame size [as it should be]. Overall I think it looks better, has the geo/travel been confirmed yet?

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by pjames12 View Post
    Seat tube kind of looks weird IMO. Other than that and no full floater it looks really similar to the previous Fuel EX
    Might look a little odd in the ST but I would bet it helps get more post insertion for longer droppers which IMO is much more valuable

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeInPA View Post
    43mm fork offset...???
    Does that mean the famous G2 geometry is finally dead? amazing!

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    Does that mean the famous G2 geometry is finally dead? amazing!
    Not just yet, apparently, because the 2020 Slash has a 51mm offset.

    It will be interesting to learn how this new FEX geometry compares to the 2017-19 geo on slow, technical climbs. Slacker and less offset might make it more of a handful on some of the sick climbs we do around here, but maybe Trek figured out how to improve it everywhere (?)

  50. #50
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,062
    Disappointing to see the reaktiv shock still standard. Putting a DPX2 on my 2017 EX9 completely transformed the bike into a much more comfortable, capable, and controlled ride.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by squeakymcgillicuddy View Post
    Might allow for more seatpost insertion?
    For sure, the kink is lower so that is probably the reasoning for it.
    Patrick

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeInPA View Post
    Not just yet, apparently, because the 2020 Slash has a 51mm offset.

    It will be interesting to learn how this new FEX geometry compares to the 2017-19 geo on slow, technical climbs. Slacker and less offset might make it more of a handful on some of the sick climbs we do around here, but maybe Trek figured out how to improve it everywhere (?)
    I think it will lose climbing ability with the lack of full floater too, but maybe the steeper seat angle will make things easier

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    More pics

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Photos include alloy models, possibly the 7 and 8 models, looks like there is a Shimano groupset in there too

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1
    Thanks for the pics. Do they have 140 mm at the back? And on the bottom one there seems to be a 150 mm fork?

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    28
    Edit* 140 Front and 130 Back.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeyb64 View Post
    140 Front and Back
    Are you sure, for 29 inch? I would rather expect 140 front and 130 rear?

    Does at least not match the post of mikeyb64 on Trek MY 2020 where it says 130mm travel on the rear:
    2020 FUEL EX 9.8
    FRAME OCLV Mountain Carbon main frame & stays, BITS internal storage, tapered head tube, Knock Block, Control Freak internal routing, Carbon Armor, ISCG 05,
    magnesium rocker link, Mino Link, ABP, Boost148, 130mm travel

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by gerard29er View Post
    Are you sure, for 29 inch? I would rather expect 140 front and 130 rear?

    Does at least not match the post of mikeyb64 on Trek MY 2020 where it says 130mm travel on the rear:
    2020 FUEL EX 9.8
    FRAME OCLV Mountain Carbon main frame & stays, BITS internal storage, tapered head tube, Knock Block, Control Freak internal routing, Carbon Armor, ISCG 05,
    magnesium rocker link, Mino Link, ABP, Boost148, 130mm travel
    Sorry, thanks for calling me out. Total pre-coffee brain fart. I have the 2020 dealer pdf. All 2020 Fuel EX models list 140mm travel forks and 130mm travel in the rear.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeyb64 View Post
    Sorry, thanks for calling me out. Total pre-coffee brain fart. I have the 2020 dealer pdf. All 2020 Fuel EX models list 140mm travel forks and 130mm travel in the rear.
    Oh haha I didn't even realised it was your own post ;-) At least clear now :-) Thanks!

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113

    2020 Trek Fuel ex

    Quote Originally Posted by moonraker View Post
    Disappointing to see the reaktiv shock still standard. Putting a DPX2 on my 2017 EX9 completely transformed the bike into a much more comfortable, capable, and controlled ride.
    #Trek, if youíre listening, youíll be rewarded by offering DPX2 options on your Fuel EX and other select gnarly bikes (at a reasonable price.)
    Thank you


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  61. #61
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeInPA View Post
    #Trek, if youíre listening, youíll be rewarded by offering DPX2 options on your Fuel EX and other select gnarly bikes (at a reasonable price.)
    Thank you


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    26
    Looks like a couple models have Fox 36s? Unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    What's the advantage of doing away with the full floater ? When will they be up on the website ? Thanks
    2019 Trek Fuel EX 8

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    84

    Fox36

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtizzle View Post
    Looks like a couple models have Fox 36s? Unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.
    All pictures I could see show FOX36, so don't they all have FOX36? also makes sense for 140mm forks (and being extendable to 150mm).

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeInPA View Post
    #Trek, if youíre listening, youíll be rewarded by offering DPX2 options on your Fuel EX and other select gnarly bikes (at a reasonable price.)
    Thank you


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    This. 100% agree.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by gerard29er View Post
    All pictures I could see show FOX36, so don't they all have FOX36? also makes sense for 140mm forks (and being extendable to 150mm).
    Looks like a combination of both 34's and 36's on the carbon bikes. The photo with the red bike shows both with 36's, the carbon grey has 34's Then I can see a RS Recon on one of the alloys bikes and a Rockshox 35 on another

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Looks like a combination of both 34's and 36's on the carbon bikes. The photo with the red bike shows both with 36's, the carbon grey has 34's Then I can see a RS Recon on one of the alloys bikes and a Rockshox 35 on another

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    Guessing maybe 36s on the 9.8 and 9.9 and 34s on the lower models?

    We should know fairly soon!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    Quote Originally Posted by johnD View Post
    What's the advantage of doing away with the full floater ? When will they be up on the website ? Thanks
    FWIW: Full floater does nothing. What matters is the leverage curve irrespective of how and where a shock is mounted. Full floater is an expedient design and manufacturing means of fastening the lower end of the shock...extend the chainstays rather than add tabs and reinforcement to the frame somewhere else.
    Do the math.

  69. #69
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    August 15th I can answer any and all Qs about the new FEX.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone Rager View Post
    FWIW: Full floater does nothing. What matters is the leverage curve irrespective of how and where a shock is mounted. Full floater is an expedient design and manufacturing means of fastening the lower end of the shock...extend the chainstays rather than add tabs and reinforcement to the frame somewhere else.
    But doesn't the full floater change the leverage curve compared to a fixed mounting point, all else being equal? I'm not sure how much real benefit that provides, but the shock is going to go through its travel differently when both mounting points are moving.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    Quote Originally Posted by prlundberg View Post
    But doesn't the full floater change the leverage curve compared to a fixed mounting point, all else being equal? ....
    Yes, all else equal, the FF has a slightly less overall leverage ratio in this case, but if you're changing from FF to down tube shock mount, why leave all else the same? You can change the length of the rocker slightly to get the same leverage ratio back if that's what's desired. The shape of the curve will remain effectively the same. A bigger change to the linkage can change the leverage curve, anti-squat and anti-rise.

    I guess now that FF is gone, that "Bottomless Feel" goes out the window. They'll probably come up some marketing spin to make its demise seem more graceful.
    Do the math.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    ???


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    8
    XXL looks great.... But is that standover for real? Only marginally lower than the 890 of my 7 year old XXL hard tail......

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    843
    Standover does not matter.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    978
    I'll be sticking with my 19' EX8.
    2019 Trek Fuel EX 8

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    8
    Standover makes it a bit easier to bail safely without taint smashing on steep stuff....

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    8
    I'm guessing here, but assuming the 8 and up start with reaktiv

    .... white and black in top pick is the 5 with a recon (no reaktiv)

    directly behind that is the 7, with the new rockshox 35 (no reaktiv)

    purple/black grey/black in pic 4 is the 8? with the fox 34....

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    35
    Thinking Of getting a EX 8 plus as they are on sale, and have the 140 fork. Then switching to 29er wheelset. Is there any drawback to this?
    Also yes, waiting until the 15th to see 2020 updates first.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Straydawg View Post
    Thinking Of getting a EX 8 plus as they are on sale, and have the 140 fork. Then switching to 29er wheelset. Is there any drawback to this?
    Also yes, waiting until the 15th to see 2020 updates first.
    EX8 plus with a set of Ibis 938 ($499 retail) is an excellent place to start.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  80. #80
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,168
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    I'd be thrilled with basically the current Fuel EX, "stretched" to 135 or 140 in the back, with similar treatment up front.

    Hey Fox, how about debuting a 34 fork with the fabulous Grip2 damper on the 2020 Fuel EX?!
    Hey Kosmo any reason to go 9.9 over a 9.8 for a weekend warrior? Asking for a friend. Hes waiting for the 9 to come down more, admits the 8 is already less, hoping the 9 gets down in same pricerange.
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    Ripley V4 UpDowncountry rig

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    Does that mean the famous G2 geometry is finally dead? amazing!
    It's looking likes about anything very Fisher is Gary relegated to e-assist bike promotion. I know die hard friends bring up wheel size but bike makers and Henry Ford did that a long time ago. It's probably a big challenge for marketing people but in reality most all bikes are really good these days. It's wonderful to have so many choices including the fork offsets.
    ƃuoɹʍ llɐ ʇno əɯɐɔ ʇɐɥʇ

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by JMac47 View Post
    Hey Kosmo any reason to go 9.9 over a 9.8 for a weekend warrior? Asking for a friend. Hes waiting for the 9 to come down more, admits the 8 is already less, hoping the 9 gets down in same pricerange.
    Very hard to justify the 9.9 over the 9.8 on a bang for buck basis, not to mention the blindfold test ride comparison between the two being likely to fail miserably.

    A good shop will even work with you on switching out a few key components, and you can end up with a 9.8.5, and live happily ever after.

    Says the guy holding out for a 9.9. But it's a milestone birthday thing, dang it!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  83. #83
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,168
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Very hard to justify the 9.9 over the 9.8 on a bang for buck basis, not to mention the blindfold test ride comparison between the two being likely to fail miserably.

    A good shop will even work with you on switching out a few key components, and you can end up with a 9.8.5, and live happily ever after.

    Says the guy holding out for a 9.9. But it's a milestone birthday thing, dang it!
    Thanks. Yeah i mentioned I put an inquiry into you here while on our ride today. He admitted he was really looking for carbon wheels more than the extra bling which works for me as I can get the new(er) ones off his bike when he switched back to the stock ones when he sells it. 😁👍

    Not sure what milestone bday you're holding out for but stay firm, get that .9!😏😎👍
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    Ripley V4 UpDowncountry rig

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    84
    Can anyone confirm the carbon XXL is still in the plans? Or shall I just patiently wait until tomorrow? ;-)


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    30
    Boing to Order a 9.8 in red tomorrow. Currently use Nicolai Helius AM from 2012 with 26íí and 160mm front and rear. Before the Nicolai I had an top fuel in 2011. The 2011 top fuel was too racy for me and I had issues with the small front and rear suspension. The Nicolas helium am was too heavy for me. Did not use the 160mm. So hopefully the fuel ex will be the sweet spot for me. Iím going for XL with 1.88m. Had the fuel and Nicolai in L but was recommended XL for this bike - any thoughts?

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Okk1980 View Post
    Boing to Order a 9.8 in red tomorrow. Currently use Nicolai Helius AM from 2012 with 26íí and 160mm front and rear. Before the Nicolai I had an top fuel in 2011. The 2011 top fuel was too racy for me and I had issues with the small front and rear suspension. The Nicolas helium am was too heavy for me. Did not use the 160mm. So hopefully the fuel ex will be the sweet spot for me. Iím going for XL with 1.88m. Had the fuel and Nicolai in L but was recommended XL for this bike - any thoughts?
    I know my 2018 is not an extremely long bike. Have they increased reach since then? Also, with the not-so-steep seat tube, when I drop the seat it definitely gets shorter.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    August 15th I can answer any and all Qs about the new FEX.
    It's been the 15th all day today in New Zealand, just saying (and waiting with baited breath)

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    For those who cant wait

    https://www.summitbicycles.com/artic...ikes-pg528.htm

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    71

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11
    Does the Frame weight include the stem, cage, and hardware?
    EDIT: On trek chat, I was told it only includes the hardware. Not the stem and bottle cage.

    Site lists it at 3.0kg. Almost 500g heavier.


    Bike radar https://www.bikeradar.com/news/2020-trek-fuel-ex/

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    84

    No good

    No carbon XXL on the list! Bummer

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    627
    Pinkbike review is up btw.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
    Pinkbike review is up btw.
    Levy ain't loving that shock. Not shocked my 17 ex 9.9 was terrible with it. They should of just put a dpx2 on their with the grip2 36

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by jpec29 View Post
    Levy ain't loving that shock. Not shocked my 17 ex 9.9 was terrible with it. They should of just put a dpx2 on their with the grip2 36
    Totally agree. DPX2 (and Pike) on my 2017 EX8 make it fly. Probably enough that Iíll skip this round of ďupgrades.Ē Doesnít sound like a game-changer


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    978
    I'll skip it too. I like the paint job but that's about the extent of it...Do away with the knock block , throw a dpx2 on , and I'll bite.
    2019 Trek Fuel EX 8

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    627
    MBR and Bike Mag both have vid reviews up. Both liked it quite a bit. Sounds like shock was valved to be a close match to the old floating set up. I'm a pretty big guy and I hit things reasonably fast and I could not set up the old FEX to suit me when I test road it. However the 2019 remedy shock tune was great for me. I was hoping the FEX with the fixed mount would get that more supportive tune.

    FEXs seem to be a great match as is for the vast majority of bikers though.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    843
    Everyone loves the DPX2, but are most people willing to pay the price difference at retail? I kind of doubt it. It is already an expensive bike.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11
    2020 Trek Fuel ex-tk19_fuel_ex_family_10.jpg

    Is there an option somewhere to get the Super Deluxe and Pike? I haven't found the fuel ex on project one.

  99. #99
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by balake777 View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	TK19_Fuel_EX_Family_10.jpg 
Views:	275 
Size:	785.2 KB 
ID:	1271927

    Is there an option somewhere to get the Super Deluxe and Pike? I haven't found the fuel ex on project one.
    Project One MTBs have yet to be pushed to P1 but they will soon. I can't speak for the complete list of options though.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11
    The weight for the 9.9 appears to be wrong. It's listed at 12kg (26.45lbs) but reviewers have it at 13kg (28.6601).

    If true, that'd put it lighter than the 2019 9.9 @12.19 kg / 26.87 lbs.

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
    Pinkbike review is up btw.
    I got the feeling the reviewer doesn't like this bike and didn't like the previous one either.

    Surprised they said they thought the previous one didnt climb that well, I thought it was one of the best climbing trail bikes out there and I've ridden a lot of bikes.



    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  102. #102
    TOP TIER LURKER
    Reputation: Hawgzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25,101
    It may have already been asked here, but why ditch the Full Floater design? In what way is having the shock directly mounted to the down tube an improvement?
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,362
    Quote Originally Posted by balake777 View Post
    Is there an option somewhere to get the Super Deluxe and Pike? I haven't found the fuel ex on project one.
    I'd have thought the Pike would have been a better match for this bike that a 36, at least for the average punter.

    Looks like a pretty good all round package though. Pinkbike review was interesting, good thing there's not a drinking game where you take a shot each time the reviewer says "capable" or "forgiving".

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgzilla View Post
    It may have already been asked here, but why ditch the Full Floater design? In what way is having the shock directly mounted to the down tube an improvement?

    They dont need it anymore to get the performance from the shock. Before shocks werent as good and needed to be finessed more. Mounting to the frame like that makes the bike stiffer too. probably.

  105. #105
    TOP TIER LURKER
    Reputation: Hawgzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Blake.is View Post
    They dont need it anymore to get the performance from the shock. Before shocks werent as good and needed to be finessed more. Mounting to the frame like that makes the bike stiffer too. probably.
    I really cannot disagree with what you've said but mounting the shock to the frame is a design idea that other frame manufacturers use. In other words, what remains that makes Trek unique?
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  106. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,974
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgzilla View Post
    I really cannot disagree with what you've said but mounting the shock to the frame is a design idea that other frame manufacturers use. In other words, what remains that makes Trek unique?
    Thru- Shaft?

    Knock-Block?

    Bontrager wheels & tires?

    ;-P

    Sent from my Nokia X6
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  107. #107
    TOP TIER LURKER
    Reputation: Hawgzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25,101
    Quote Originally Posted by targnik View Post
    Thru- Shaft?

    Knock-Block?

    Bontrager wheels & tires?

    ;-P

    Sent from my Nokia X6
    I do like the idea of less friction with thinner shafts but it might also seem weaker and this is supposed to be a burlier bike.
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgzilla View Post
    I do like the idea of less friction with thinner shafts but it might also seem weaker and this is supposed to be a burlier bike.
    Shock is not holding the bike together

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    24
    And what about head angle in low and high position.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  110. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    15
    Anyone else notice that the aluminum models don't look as clean as the outgoing Fuel EX 2019? The 2019 had no visible welds around the seat tube & top tube but this isn't the case with the 2020 models.


    Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    42
    I have been waiting for the new Fuel Ex to be released (as many have), as I am looking to get a new bike. 3 years ago, I bought a Marlin 5, then 2 years ago I upgraded and got a Stache 5. I have decided on the the FEX because of where and how I ride and want to have one bike to handle everything.
    I'm debating between the 2020 Fuel Ex 8 v 9.7. The 9.7 is $650 more, but includes a full carbon frame (this year). Buying the frame alone is a $1200 difference. The 9.7 also has the 4 piston brakes,, but the 8 has the full GX drive train, but both 12 speed. The 9.7 is 0.6 lbs lighter and has the internal frame storage. Everything else is the same on both bikes.
    I could see myself with either bike, but i'm leaning towards the 9.7 and just been done with it. I feel that if I got the 8, then i would always still be wanting the carbon. I will be getting the grey/black color on either model.
    Any thoughts or options on the matter, thanks.

  112. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by TrekWarMachine View Post
    I have been waiting for the new Fuel Ex to be released (as many have), as I am looking to get a new bike. 3 years ago, I bought a Marlin 5, then 2 years ago I upgraded and got a Stache 5. I have decided on the the FEX because of where and how I ride and want to have one bike to handle everything.
    I'm debating between the 2020 Fuel Ex 8 v 9.7. The 9.7 is $650 more, but includes a full carbon frame (this year). Buying the frame alone is a $1200 difference. The 9.7 also has the 4 piston brakes,, but the 8 has the full GX drive train, but both 12 speed. The 9.7 is 0.6 lbs lighter and has the internal frame storage. Everything else is the same on both bikes.
    I could see myself with either bike, but i'm leaning towards the 9.7 and just been done with it. I feel that if I got the 8, then i would always still be wanting the carbon. I will be getting the grey/black color on either model.
    Any thoughts or options on the matter, thanks.
    Buy nice, or buy twice!

    Ha, easy to help spend other people's money.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  113. #113
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by TrekWarMachine View Post
    I feel that if I got the 8, then i would always still be wanting the carbon.
    You Pretty much answered your own question. With the 9.7
    you can eventually replace the original drivetrain as it wears out (cassette, XD driver, chain, crank and shifter) to make it full GX as well.

    Edit: Just noticed both bikes come with the Truvativ Descendant 6k Eagle, DUB crank.
    2020 SC Hightower

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by mlx john View Post
    You Pretty much answered your own question. With the 9.7
    you can eventually replace the original drivetrain as it wears out (cassette, XD driver, chain, crank and shifter) to make it full GX as well.

    Edit: Just noticed both bikes come with the Truvativ Descendant 6k Eagle, DUB crank.
    I figured, I have read on these forums many times that it's easier to upgrades parts instead of the frame.

    Also, FWIW, the 8 comes with a 30T and the 9.7 comes with a 32T crank.

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    125
    delete

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    990
    If I'm assuming correctly... since they upped the front to a 140mm fork decreasing reach (but still they added 5-10mm of reach to the new frame) and with a steeper seat angle now... seems it will feel EXACTLY like the last model (like my 2018) in the seated position? Wonder if people will size up or down with this. I'm on a 18.5(ML) now at just under 5'10"... wondering if going the same size will feel the same or bigger or smaller in the new model?

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Buy nice, or buy twice!

    Ha, easy to help spend other people's money.
    Absolutely - especially the other people's money part...

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: roughster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,047
    Anyone know if the new Fuel Ex 8 will fit a 29x3.0 tire? I see Pinkbikes review says tire clearance is only 2.6" so I am going to assume its a no go... but would be nice to know for sure. BUMMER!
    2019 Canyon Strive CF 8
    2018 Trek Farley Ex 8
    2015 Salsa Bucksaw 2

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    Project One MTBs have yet to be pushed to P1 but they will soon. I can't speak for the complete list of options though.
    Get a DPX2 / Super Deluxe option on there and Iíll buy a fuel immediately...

  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    I'd have thought the Pike would have been a better match for this bike that a 36, at least for the average punter.

    Looks like a pretty good all round package though. Pinkbike review was interesting, good thing there's not a drinking game where you take a shot each time the reviewer says "capable" or "forgiving".
    I dunno. I love that it comes with a short travel 36. Wish more trail bikes specced them.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    42
    Hey [email protected],

    Can you confirm that this years 2020 Fuel Ex 8 / 9.7 Line Comp 30 wheel has the 54T Rapid Drive like last years model, since it is not listed under the website spec? I do see it listed under the new 9.8 and 9.9 model though. I like that Trek has moved to the thru axle on all the models, but hope that they didnít downgrade the hub on the 8 / 9.7 instead. Thanks.

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    27
    Why no xxls in carbon? Seems Trek is happy connceding that segment when they could own it.
    Last edited by Tytlynz; 08-24-2019 at 07:54 AM. Reason: Spelling

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by irck View Post
    I dunno. I love that it comes with a short travel 36. Wish more trail bikes specced them.
    I like the idea too, since I really like the 2019 36 I have on my Slash, but I think for the price of the 9.8 it should be Performance Elite...

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by bjeast View Post
    I like the idea too, since I really like the 2019 36 I have on my Slash, but I think for the price of the 9.8 it should be Performance Elite...
    Agreed. Black stanchion Grip2 on that 9.8 would be the tits.

  125. #125
    Happy Trails
    Reputation: Scott In MD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,187
    Hi from Arizona. Anybody have any insight to add about choosing one of the few remaining MY19 FEX 9.9's versus the new MY20 9.9? I'm in the market for an XC Marathon-Trail bike, and 50% of my riding is uphill, and I don't like crashing, so I think maybe the new MY20 FEX with Fox 36X140 fork is a little too big for me, but the new TF is not enough. I have a 2015 Cannondale 130mm travel Trigger, and a 2016 Trek TF 29 9.8 (with the SID 32X100mm fork) so I have a good sense of what the FEX will be Ö but I've never ridden a FEX except for a lap around the trailhead parking lot to confirm I'm an XL size. My list of considerations currently keeping me up at night...
    - MY20 bike has much better dropper
    - MY20 geometry stack is better fit for me (~12mm higher stack plus 12.5mm higher riser bar will fit me better....won't have to spend $150 on a new 30mm handlebar).
    - MY20 bike has 44mm fork offset, which sort of makes the 51mm offset fork on the MY19 bike an orphan.
    - MY20 shock has a few tweaks (heat-sink, etc) that I assume are beneficial.
    - MY20 2.6 tires.
    - MY19 bike is 130mm travel front and back, which might lean it towards marathon XC - which is what I want it in a bike... versus the MY20 bike is big-ass 140mm fork, which might lean towards Enduro Ö which I'm not going to ride if I need a full face helmet!
    - MY19 bike is PROVEN and TESTED as one of the most versatile rigs on the trail. (This means a lot, especially given the relatively untested new shock linkage).
    - On sale, the MY19 FEX 9.9 is $700 cheaper than the MY20 9.9

    My goal is beating my PR in the Whiskey Off-Road race in April. Sedona Chuck Wagon and Javelina is about as big as I go. And yep - this is first-world problem for sure. Anybody else think the MY19 bike might be better choice?

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    24

    2020 Trek Fuel ex

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott In MD View Post
    Hi from Arizona. Anybody have any insight to add about choosing one of the few remaining MY19 FEX 9.9's versus the new MY20 9.9? I'm in the market for an XC Marathon-Trail bike, and 50% of my riding is uphill, and I don't like crashing, so I think maybe the new MY20 FEX with Fox 36X140 fork is a little too big for me, but the new TF is not enough. I have a 2015 Cannondale 130mm travel Trigger, and a 2016 Trek TF 29 9.8 (with the SID 32X100mm fork) so I have a good sense of what the FEX will be Ö but I've never ridden a FEX except for a lap around the trailhead parking lot to confirm I'm an XL size. My list of considerations currently keeping me up at night...
    - MY20 bike has much better dropper
    - MY20 geometry stack is better fit for me (~12mm higher stack plus 12.5mm higher riser bar will fit me better....won't have to spend $150 on a new 30mm handlebar).
    - MY20 bike has 44mm fork offset, which sort of makes the 51mm offset fork on the MY19 bike an orphan.
    - MY20 shock has a few tweaks (heat-sink, etc) that I assume are beneficial.
    - MY20 2.6 tires.
    - MY19 bike is 130mm travel front and back, which might lean it towards marathon XC - which is what I want it in a bike... versus the MY20 bike is big-ass 140mm fork, which might lean towards Enduro Ö which I'm not going to ride if I need a full face helmet!
    - MY19 bike is PROVEN and TESTED as one of the most versatile rigs on the trail. (This means a lot, especially given the relatively untested new shock linkage).
    - On sale, the MY19 FEX 9.9 is $700 cheaper than the MY20 9.9

    My goal is beating my PR in the Whiskey Off-Road race in April. Sedona Chuck Wagon and Javelina is about as big as I go. And yep - this is first-world problem for sure. Anybody else think the MY19 bike might be better choice?
    IMHO go with FEX 2019 (my current bike) or top fuel 2020. From the specs and pink bike review I am not a fan of new fex. It isnít definitely XC bike. I just place order for remedy 9.8 my2020



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott In MD View Post
    Hi from Arizona. Anybody have any insight to add about choosing one of the few remaining MY19 FEX 9.9's versus the new MY20 9.9? I'm in the market for an XC Marathon-Trail bike, and 50% of my riding is uphill, and I don't like crashing, so I think maybe the new MY20 FEX with Fox 36X140 fork is a little too big for me, but the new TF is not enough. I have a 2015 Cannondale 130mm travel Trigger, and a 2016 Trek TF 29 9.8 (with the SID 32X100mm fork) so I have a good sense of what the FEX will be Ö but I've never ridden a FEX except for a lap around the trailhead parking lot to confirm I'm an XL size. My list of considerations currently keeping me up at night...
    - MY20 bike has much better dropper
    - MY20 geometry stack is better fit for me (~12mm higher stack plus 12.5mm higher riser bar will fit me better....won't have to spend $150 on a new 30mm handlebar).
    - MY20 bike has 44mm fork offset, which sort of makes the 51mm offset fork on the MY19 bike an orphan.
    - MY20 shock has a few tweaks (heat-sink, etc) that I assume are beneficial.
    - MY20 2.6 tires.
    - MY19 bike is 130mm travel front and back, which might lean it towards marathon XC - which is what I want it in a bike... versus the MY20 bike is big-ass 140mm fork, which might lean towards Enduro Ö which I'm not going to ride if I need a full face helmet!
    - MY19 bike is PROVEN and TESTED as one of the most versatile rigs on the trail. (This means a lot, especially given the relatively untested new shock linkage).
    - On sale, the MY19 FEX 9.9 is $700 cheaper than the MY20 9.9

    My goal is beating my PR in the Whiskey Off-Road race in April. Sedona Chuck Wagon and Javelina is about as big as I go. And yep - this is first-world problem for sure. Anybody else think the MY19 bike might be better choice?
    I don't think you can judge the 2019 a better potential XC mount just because of the 10mm shorter front end travel, and I don't think the frame works well on sustained out-of-saddle efforts. You might want to ride a 2020 and check only that: how does it feel out of the saddle. If it's better, then the $700 "savings" would be insignificant, because no amount of $$ will fix a 2019 and make it a close-to-Top Fuel ride.

    For what it's worth, a talented young man in our area rides a 2019 Top Fuel with a longer Fox Factory SC on it and he shreds everything we all do, plus rides it on mtb centuries and races....he's insane!....but it shows how capable any of these steeds can be with some thoughtful set-up specific to your needs (and a good dose of riding talent.)

    I would just caution the MY19 for anything approaching XC....I think that is the one bit of Trek marketing that is a real stretch. I love my MY17 EX and it IS amazingly versatile, but I wouldn't try to race it against guys on real XC bikes.

    My $.02

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott In MD View Post
    Hi from Arizona. Anybody have any insight to add about choosing one of the few remaining MY19 FEX 9.9's versus the new MY20 9.9? I'm in the market for an XC Marathon-Trail bike, and 50% of my riding is uphill, and I don't like crashing
    2020 Top Fuel. It will be a far "snappier" pedaler than either version of the Fuel EX.

    Consider swapping the 120 fork out for a 130 at time of purchase?
    Whining is not a strategy.

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by ejewels View Post
    If I'm assuming correctly... since they upped the front to a 140mm fork decreasing reach (but still they added 5-10mm of reach to the new frame) and with a steeper seat angle now... seems it will feel EXACTLY like the last model (like my 2018) in the seated position? Wonder if people will size up or down with this. I'm on a 18.5(ML) now at just under 5'10"... wondering if going the same size will feel the same or bigger or smaller in the new model?
    On the XL reach has increased 15-20mm depending whether itís set up in high or low. Seat tube angle has steepened by 1 degree. Add the 140 fork to these 2 moves and you SHOULD have to move the saddle BACK slightly and use a SHORTER stem, compared to the previous model. On paper compared to the previous model, if should feel BIGGER...or really better, but you gotta ride the bike. No mystery there.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  130. #130
    Gogoggansgo
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    24
    Iím late to this thread but to be honest, i feel like trek could of done more idk. The weight has gone up across the board, even though they said last year dropped full floater saves weight. If they want to go after the trail, all mountain guys. Like YT does with the Jeffsy then do it, donít half ass it on the lower end models. Right now Iíd Buy a top fuel before the new fuel ex the weight is what kills it for me

  131. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by gogoggansgo View Post
    Iím late to this thread but to be honest, i feel like trek could of done more idk. The weight has gone up across the board, even though they said last year dropped full floater saves weight. If they want to go after the trail, all mountain guys. Like YT does with the Jeffsy then do it, donít half ass it on the lower end models. Right now Iíd Buy a top fuel before the new fuel ex the weight is what kills it for me
    Im not too concerned about weight but 100% agree with conservative geo. I'll be keeping 2019 9.8 FEX with 140mm fork. 2019 model will have considerable discounts soon and are so much more bang for buck compared to 2020 FEX.

  132. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by gogoggansgo View Post
    Iím late to this thread but to be honest, i feel like trek could of done more idk. The weight has gone up across the board, even though they said last year dropped full floater saves weight.
    I suspect the main culprits of weight gain are the 2.6 tires and the 36 fork. Also, in general, the bike has taken a baby step away from the old FEX towards the Slash.

    Gutsy spec move on Trek's part. I'm sure they knew the keyboard warriors would crucify them for weight gain.

    For my local riding, 2.4s are fine. I'll save the burlier 2.6s for trips to Moab and the like.

    But the 36 fork, for my purposes, is flat out MONEY!
    Whining is not a strategy.

  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by gogoggansgo View Post
    Iím late to this thread but to be honest, i feel like trek could of done more idk. The weight has gone up across the board, even though they said last year dropped full floater saves weight. If they want to go after the trail, all mountain guys. Like YT does with the Jeffsy then do it, donít half ass it on the lower end models. Right now Iíd Buy a top fuel before the new fuel ex the weight is what kills it for me
    Wow, the weight went up?? And I thought the 2018 was overbuilt and heavier than it should have been. I donít think these bikes need to be any stiffer than they are.

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    I suspect the main culprits of weight gain are the 2.6 tires and the 36 fork. Also, in general, the bike has taken a baby step away from the old FEX towards the Slash.

    Gutsy spec move on Trek's part. I'm sure they knew the keyboard warriors would crucify them for weight gain.

    For my local riding, 2.4s are fine. I'll save the burlier 2.6s for trips to Moab and the like.

    But the 36 fork, for my purposes, is flat out MONEY!
    The 2019 frame weighs 2.54kg and the 2020 frame weighs 3.0kg. So about a pound more just from the frame. The website claims the 9.9 is 12kg, but the reviews I've seen put it at about 13kg or 28.6 lbs. About a pound lighter than the 9.8.
    Last edited by balake777; 08-19-2019 at 04:46 AM.

  135. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by gogoggansgo View Post
    Iím late to this thread but to be honest, i feel like trek could of done more idk. The weight has gone up across the board, even though they said last year dropped full floater saves weight. If they want to go after the trail, all mountain guys. Like YT does with the Jeffsy then do it, donít half ass it on the lower end models. Right now Iíd Buy a top fuel before the new fuel ex the weight is what kills it for me
    Wow, the weight went up?? And I thought the 2018 was overbuilt and heavier than it should have been. I donít think these bikes need to be any stiffer than they are.

  136. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    627
    The additional weight of the frame appears to me to be frome the new storage area.

    You now include a water bottle holder in treks listed frame weight which wasn't included before, plus the plastic cover with latching mechanism that has to be heavy enough to withstand MTB abuse, plus the insert into the frame with additional bolts and gaskets. I would also guess that they had to reinforce the frame a bit since they were putting a 3inch by 5inch hole in it.

    The 2.6 tires are significantly heavier than 2.4s too. Between the tires, the fork, and the storage, it's pretty easy to see where it would be a pound or 2 heavier, even ditching the full float (which is only about 100g savings based on other bikes)

  137. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    42
    Yes, this (as MrIcky says above).
    If you closely at the pics of the frame where the bike is laid down (post #98), the down tube is wider for the storage area and also the top top seems wider. Also, the head tube looks really large, where the top tube and down tube meet. A bit disappointed, but not surprised with the weight increase.

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgzilla View Post
    I really cannot disagree with what you've said but mounting the shock to the frame is a design idea that other frame manufacturers use. In other words, what remains that makes Trek unique?
    Waiting till nearly all the other bike makers have released their next year line ups before Trek releases theirs.
    Making some things people want and not updating things a lot of people want.
    Staying 1-2 years behind on designs and when they update something, they think its a break through in design for them.
    Too Many .

  139. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott In MD View Post
    Hi from Arizona. Anybody have any insight to add about choosing one of the few remaining MY19 FEX 9.9's versus the new MY20 9.9? I'm in the market for an XC Marathon-Trail bike, and 50% of my riding is uphill, and I don't like crashing, so I think maybe the new MY20 FEX with Fox 36X140 fork is a little too big for me, but the new TF is not enough. I have a 2015 Cannondale 130mm travel Trigger, and a 2016 Trek TF 29 9.8 (with the SID 32X100mm fork) so I have a good sense of what the FEX will be Ö but I've never ridden a FEX except for a lap around the trailhead parking lot to confirm I'm an XL size. My list of considerations currently keeping me up at night...
    - MY20 bike has much better dropper
    - MY20 geometry stack is better fit for me (~12mm higher stack plus 12.5mm higher riser bar will fit me better....won't have to spend $150 on a new 30mm handlebar).
    - MY20 bike has 44mm fork offset, which sort of makes the 51mm offset fork on the MY19 bike an orphan.
    - MY20 shock has a few tweaks (heat-sink, etc) that I assume are beneficial.
    - MY20 2.6 tires.
    - MY19 bike is 130mm travel front and back, which might lean it towards marathon XC - which is what I want it in a bike... versus the MY20 bike is big-ass 140mm fork, which might lean towards Enduro Ö which I'm not going to ride if I need a full face helmet!
    - MY19 bike is PROVEN and TESTED as one of the most versatile rigs on the trail. (This means a lot, especially given the relatively untested new shock linkage).
    - On sale, the MY19 FEX 9.9 is $700 cheaper than the MY20 9.9

    My goal is beating my PR in the Whiskey Off-Road race in April. Sedona Chuck Wagon and Javelina is about as big as I go. And yep - this is first-world problem for sure. Anybody else think the MY19 bike might be better choice?
    2020 Top Fuel.
    Go to the new Trek store in Estrella that rents bikes. They have a few 2020 Top Fuels to rent. super fun bike. They should have the Supercalibers in a month or so also to demo
    Too Many .

  140. #140
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by TrekWarMachine View Post
    Hey [email protected],

    Can you confirm that this years 2020 Fuel Ex 8 / 9.7 Line Comp 30 wheel has the 54T Rapid Drive like last years model, since it is not listed under the website spec? I do see it listed under the new 9.8 and 9.9 model though. I like that Trek has moved to the thru axle on all the models, but hope that they didnít downgrade the hub on the 8 / 9.7 instead. Thanks.
    Hey, just got back in town today! Both models would have the 54t Rapid Drive hub capable of being 108 by adding springs and pawls.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  141. #141
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgzilla View Post
    It may have already been asked here, but why ditch the Full Floater design? In what way is having the shock directly mounted to the down tube an improvement?
    From what we've gained with Boost spacing and modern day shock tech, the Full Floater design was able to be removed to increase stiffness, tire spacing, chainring clearance, and reduce frame weight ~100g.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  142. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 04 F2000SL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    624
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    From what we've gained with Boost spacing and modern day shock tech, the Full Floater design was able to be removed to increase stiffness, tire spacing, chainring clearance, and reduce frame weight ~100g.
    What's the max chainring clearance on the new EX and the Super cal?

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    125
    It's interesting the XS and S have a 52.5mm stroke on the shock and the M and up have a 55mm stroke on the shock. I'm wondering if the smaller frames have a different rocker link to make the travel the same, or if the larger bikes actually have more travel. If you put a 55mm shock on last year's fuel ex you would get about 136mm of travel. Are the larger bikes underrated for rear wheel travel?

  144. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smartyiak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
    Pinkbike review is up btw.
    Quote Originally Posted by jpec29 View Post
    Levy ain't loving that shock. Not shocked my 17 ex 9.9 was terrible with it. They should of just put a dpx2 on their with the grip2 36
    Interesting how different reviewers see things:
    https://enduro-mtb.com/en/first-ride...l-ex-9-9-2020/

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    From what we've gained with Boost spacing and modern day shock tech, the Full Floater design was able to be removed to increase stiffness, tire spacing, chainring clearance, and reduce frame weight ~100g.
    but no model is offered in 27.5+ nor does sit say it can be ran with that tire size

    sad times.
    Too Many .

  146. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    63
    @[email protected], when are the 9.9s available?

  147. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by brent701 View Post
    but no model is offered in 27.5+ nor does sit say it can be ran with that tire size

    sad times.
    Meh.

  148. #148
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by 04 F2000SL View Post
    What's the max chainring clearance on the new EX?
    36T for the Fuel EX
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  149. #149
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by lemon View Post
    @[email protected], when are the 9.9s available?
    ETA is end of September to early October.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  150. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    27
    Hey #[email protected] will the FEX 8 XT be available in the US? They are up on the Great Britain site.

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brent701's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Quote Originally Posted by PoshJosh View Post
    Meh.
    Meh. some like plus tires.
    Too Many .

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    ETA is end of September to early October.
    Thanks. Also, fuuuuuuuu....

  153. #153
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Tytlynz View Post
    Hey #[email protected] will the FEX 8 XT be available in the US? They are up on the Great Britain site.
    I don't have any confirmation for that model in the US yet. We will offer 12 speed Shimano grouppos in Project One, but no details for a complete model such as the 8 yet.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Looking forward to a demo ride---spec looks good except for the low stack which irritates the long legged crowd as the bars are hard to get where you want them.
    currently I have ruled out the Ripley as it killed my hands (STA pretty steep) and the cockpit was too short----
    liked the Pivot 429T-(ride OG Pivot Mach 429 Trail)-only issue is it felt too still with carbon wheels but fit was good.
    New TB4---looks like the cockpit is even shorter than the Ripley-and the STA is even steeper than the Ripley so could be an issue--620 ETT but need to ride--luckily the Santa Cruz factory is near.

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    151
    project One ETA?

  156. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Tytlynz View Post
    Why no xxls in carbon? Seems Trek is bappyconceding that segment when they could own it.
    No XXL in the new Trek carbon models means I'm going to Santa Cruz. My son and I are both 6'6". XL is just too small.

  157. #157
    TOP TIER LURKER
    Reputation: Hawgzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25,101
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    From what we've gained with Boost spacing and modern day shock tech, the Full Floater design was able to be removed to increase stiffness, tire spacing, chainring clearance, and reduce frame weight ~100g.
    There's an answer I can accept. Thanks.
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  158. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    8
    Any thoughts on the distance of chain to chainstay...? The PB article said it was easily fixable... How?

    This, the new tall boy, and jeffsy 29 are my 3 bikes of choice... In XXL... Tough choice...

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by jsbend View Post
    No XXL in the new Trek carbon models means I'm going to Santa Cruz. My son and I are both 6'6". XL is just too small.
    Looks like I am in the same boat, als 6í6Ē and was waiting for the carbon XXL but the new XL has a reach of 500mm and i was surprised and gets close and makes it manouvre well but probably the Santa Cruz Tallboy is an even better fit.
    Did you also already ride the new Fuel EX in XL?


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  160. #160
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by crohnsy View Post
    project One ETA?
    MTB P1 goes live in September
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  161. #161
    Gogoggansgo
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
    The additional weight of the frame appears to me to be frome the new storage area.

    You now include a water bottle holder in treks listed frame weight which wasn't included before, plus the plastic cover with latching mechanism that has to be heavy enough to withstand MTB abuse, plus the insert into the frame with additional bolts and gaskets. I would also guess that they had to reinforce the frame a bit since they were putting a 3inch by 5inch hole in it.

    The 2.6 tires are significantly heavier than 2.4s too. Between the tires, the fork, and the storage, it's pretty easy to see where it would be a pound or 2 heavier, even ditching the full float (which is only about 100g savings based on other bikes)
    Itís a 4-500 gram increase across the whole carbon range. That is completely unacceptable

  162. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    874
    Quote Originally Posted by gogoggansgo View Post
    Itís a 4-500 gram increase across the whole carbon range. That is completely unacceptable
    I could understand if it was for a performance gain....but not for a goofy trap door contraption in the frame. What a waste.

  163. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smartyiak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Haymarket View Post
    I could understand if it was for a performance gain....but not for a goofy trap door contraption in the frame. What a waste.
    As a bike nerd: t goofy trap door contraption is fantastic (on a Spec and no reason to think itís not equally great on a Trek).

    As a non-enginerd, I donít get why it takes an extra pound to make up for a hole in the down tube. I could see 100-150g....but a pound???

    I guess Iím torn, but Iíd accept it on the Fuel....but not the TopFuel b/c of the bikes purpose.

  164. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Seems most bikes around this category are gaining weight----Pivot 429T was hammered for this on this site-Pivot 429 SL gained a pound---the new TB4 has also gained but seems to be avoiding the hate-have not looked at the HT but suspect the same--Ibis Ripley may be the only one which has not -----

  165. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    They're getting more optimized for descending (longer, lower, slacker), so stronger and heavier is in line with that. New trail bikes are like enduro bikes from a few years ago.
    Do the math.

  166. #166
    TOP TIER LURKER
    Reputation: Hawgzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25,101
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    Seems most bikes around this category are gaining weight----Pivot 429T was hammered for this on this site-Pivot 429 SL gained a pound---the new TB4 has also gained but seems to be avoiding the hate-have not looked at the HT but suspect the same--Ibis Ripley may be the only one which has not -----
    It's not about weight anymore, it's about functionality. The "weight weenie" days are gone. Any trail bike under 30 pounds is "light".

    Bikes of yesterday keep moving up into the next category. They have to be a little more burly to handle it.
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veloborealis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawgzilla View Post
    It's not about weight anymore, it's about functionality. The "weight weenie" days are gone. Any trail bike under 30 pounds is "light".

    Bikes of yesterday keep moving up into the next category. They have to be a little more burly to handle it.
    Couldn't agree with you more Hawg, but that won't stop the pissing and moaning.
    Veni vidi velo!

  168. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    734
    Has anybody actually rode this bike yet???


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  169. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by veloborealis View Post
    Couldn't agree with you more Hawg, but that won't stop the pissing and moaning.
    So what you're saying is today's Fuel Ex is yesterday's Remedy and today's Top Fuel is yesterdays Fuel Ex and soon they'll be bringing out a new lightweight 100mm travel XC bike to replace the old Top Fuel for those weight weenies who still want a lightweight XC bike? Or is that market dead? XC racing (vs trail riding) is still popular isn't it?
    2013 Scott Scale 970 (Reba fork)
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8 (with added RS dropper post)
    2019 Trek Remedy 8

  170. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veloborealis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi_GR_Biker View Post
    So what you're saying is today's Fuel Ex is yesterday's Remedy and today's Top Fuel is yesterdays Fuel Ex and soon they'll be bringing out a new lightweight 100mm travel XC bike to replace the old Top Fuel for those weight weenies who still want a lightweight XC bike? Or is that market dead? XC racing (vs trail riding) is still popular isn't it?
    Some of that is true to a point, but XC racing is obviously not dead. Though anyone who is serious about XC racing will not be buying a Fuel EX. For those who appreciate the capability of an FEX, and the abuse it can take on the trail, a few hundred grams isn't deal breaker. The FEX seems to be designed for serious trail bike enthusiasts. It's not a race bike, although a talented rider could race with one.

    I've no idea about Treks plan for a new XC whip, and I wouldn't be a customer, but sounds like a good idea. Everyone appreciates a light bike. But comparatively few people race. Vastly more riders would benefit from more functional, durable,
    albeit slightly heavier bikes. Blah, blah.
    Veni vidi velo!

  171. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by veloborealis View Post
    Some of that is true to a point, but XC racing is obviously not dead. Though anyone who is serious about XC racing will not be buying a Fuel EX. For those who appreciate the capability of an FEX, and the abuse it can take on the trail, a few hundred grams isn't deal breaker. The FEX seems to be designed for serious trail bike enthusiasts. It's not a race bike, although a talented rider could race with one.

    I've no idea about Treks plan for a new XC whip, and I wouldn't be a customer, but sounds like a good idea. Everyone appreciates a light bike. But comparatively few people race. Vastly more riders would benefit from more functional, durable,
    albeit slightly heavier bikes. Blah, blah.
    Me neither but thought I had read a couple of times about some new Trek XC full suspension bike that's been seen on the XC race circuit but is yet to be released.
    2013 Scott Scale 970 (Reba fork)
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8 (with added RS dropper post)
    2019 Trek Remedy 8

  172. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    Quote Originally Posted by veloborealis View Post
    ...Though anyone who is serious about XC racing will not be buying a Fuel EX. ...
    A couple a three years ago a top local racer running a Top Fuel bought a '16 FEX 9.9 as a trail/play bike. He started racing that and sold the TF. Of course the 16' FEX is pretty nearly identical to the '20 TF.
    Do the math.

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    ETA is end of September to early October.
    This just answered my question.

  174. #174
    Off the back...
    Reputation: pinkrobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,158
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi_GR_Biker View Post
    Me neither but thought I had read a couple of times about some new Trek XC full suspension bike that's been seen on the XC race circuit but is yet to be released.
    That would be the Supercaliber. It's coming end of November-ish. I vaguely recall 60mm rear travel, no pivots, and Knock Block.

  175. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone Rager View Post
    A couple a three years ago a top local racer running a Top Fuel bought a '16 FEX 9.9 as a trail/play bike. He started racing that and sold the TF. Of course the 16' FEX is pretty nearly identical to the '20 TF.
    The 2016 FEX is the fastest, least fatiguing endurance race bike I've ever owned. And it was a blast to ride!

    I think the new Top Fuel might be even faster. Too soon to tell, but the fun factor is certainly there.

    FWIW, the fastest endurance racer in the PNW prefers to race on longer travel bikes, and says he's faster up and down on them. Last year he was racing a 150 mm bike. This year I think he moved down to 130.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  176. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,107
    I've got to say that for a lot of the riding I do here in BC, a 2010 Fuel EX would be a nice ride. But, at least with regard to the 9.8, I wish that Trek would spec XT brakes like my 2017, and would spec performance elite instead of performance for the fork. Oh and I really don't like Bontrager droppers, unless they've improved a lot!

  177. #177
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by bjeast View Post
    Oh and I really don't like Bontrager droppers, unless they've improved a lot!
    If you haven't tried one since the first generation of Bontrager dropper posts, you'll be happy to hear the newer models are much improved and are very easy to service with the one-tool nylon cartridge.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  178. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    If you haven't tried one since the first generation of Bontrager dropper posts, you'll be happy to hear the newer models are much improved and are very easy to service with the one-tool nylon cartridge.
    That's good to know, because the dropper on my 2017 Fuel EX is acting up again, and wasn't that responsive even when it was new. :-)

  179. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veloborealis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    If you haven't tried one since the first generation of Bontrager dropper posts, you'll be happy to hear the newer models are much improved and are very easy to service with the one-tool nylon cartridge.
    Mitch the dropper on my 2018 FEX still works well. My only complaint is it's a bit slow to return and I can live with thst. Is mine the newer or older version? If it's an older one, will the new cartridge work as a replacement?
    Veni vidi velo!

  180. #180
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by veloborealis View Post
    Mitch the dropper on my 2018 FEX still works well. My only complaint is it's a bit slow to return and I can live with thst. Is mine the newer or older version? If it's an older one, will the new cartridge work as a replacement?
    You probably have the newer Line dropper. A few ways to help the return:

    1) Service it (seals, bushings, etc)
    2) Upgrade the cable and housing (I run a buttery smooth teflon cable for my droppers)
    3) New cartridge
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  181. #181
    Gogoggansgo
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    24
    My 2017 fuel ex dropper was total trash it never came up right from day one. Just threw a fox transfer in and never looked back

  182. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    482
    I've had 3 of the older generation Bontrager Line droppers and they all worked perfectly. I now have 2 of the newer generation and they are just as good, but with a snappy fast return speed.

  183. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by ejewels View Post
    If I'm assuming correctly... since they upped the front to a 140mm fork decreasing reach (but still they added 5-10mm of reach to the new frame) and with a steeper seat angle now... seems it will feel EXACTLY like the last model (like my 2018) in the seated position? Wonder if people will size up or down with this. I'm on a 18.5(ML) now at just under 5'10"... wondering if going the same size will feel the same or bigger or smaller in the new model?
    Probably feels the same.
    2019 Trek Fuel EX 8

  184. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by moonraker View Post
    Disappointing to see the reaktiv shock still standard. Putting a DPX2 on my 2017 EX9 completely transformed the bike into a much more comfortable, capable, and controlled ride.
    That has to be an individual taste situation. That shock on Remedy frames with and without it and on the last generation Fuel EX were much of the sell for our Fuel EX and Remedy 29. After testing VPP, DW, Horst & the Treks the "Reaktiv" left me feeling I'd get the best of all.

    Overall the new iteration of the bike looks good - especially most or all of them being reverse mullet now.
    ƃuoɹʍ llɐ ʇno əɯɐɔ ʇɐɥʇ

  185. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11
    2020 Fuel EX 9.9 got updated to M - 13.19 kg / 29.07 lbs (with tubes).

    Think I'm going to have to go w/ the 2020 Genius 910. Full XT 8100 drivetrain/brakes, Fox Transfer Dropper, Fox 36 Elite for $4,999. 29.54 lbs 150 travel front and rear. Seems like a better deal.

  186. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    The 2016 FEX is the fastest, least fatiguing endurance race bike I've ever owned. And it was a blast to ride!

    I think the new Top Fuel might be even faster. Too soon to tell, but the fun factor is certainly there.

    FWIW, the fastest endurance racer in the PNW prefers to race on longer travel bikes, and says he's faster up and down on them. Last year he was racing a 150 mm bike. This year I think he moved down to 130.
    Who's that?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  187. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,994
    Quote Originally Posted by jpec29 View Post
    Who's that?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    PM sent.

    I don't know him well enough to throw his name around mtbr.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  188. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by bitflogger View Post
    That has to be an individual taste situation. That shock on Remedy frames with and without it and on the last generation Fuel EX were much of the sell for our Fuel EX and Remedy 29. After testing VPP, DW, Horst & the Treks the "Reaktiv" left me feeling I'd get the best of all.

    Overall the new iteration of the bike looks good - especially most or all of them being reverse mullet now.
    Perhaps, but everything is left to taste in the end. One issue many of us have or had with ReAktiv shocks was that using the so-called "climb" position -- middle compression setting -- caused an annoying 'clunk' when pedaling that mimicked a loose suspension linkage bolt. As such, most people I know left it in the Open position almost exclusively, using either that or Lockout for fire roads, but never the middle position. Mine started doing the "clunk" after about a month. Trek said it was normal. Fox said it was perhaps normal, but that they would try to fix it but made clear there was no guarantee the shock would return any different.

    So, with that as background, I decided to skip all the monkey motion and just upgrade to DPX2. Speculate all you want about personal preference, but I can't imagine a novice-or-better rider not appreciating the extra control and support of the the DPX2 over what comes stock on the 2017-19 EX8. For me, along with a 140mm Pike up front, it transforms the bike into a near-enduro mount. It absorbs waaaaay more punishment on rocky descents or drops, but remains as supple as the stock setup ever was.

  189. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slomtbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    228
    What's the smallest chainring that will work on the 2020 Fuel EX?
    Almost = Didn't

  190. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    871
    Does anyone know when the bike will actually be at dealers ? My LBS says one can order but they have nothing yet.

  191. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by slomtbr View Post
    What's the smallest chainring that will work on the 2020 Fuel EX?
    I saw a video review that implied 30t was the minimum.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  192. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    ^^^ what would be the limitation? A smaller ring yields more anti-squat but that's not a hard limitation.

    The limitation for the largest usable ring is generally clearance with the chainstay.
    Do the math.

  193. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slomtbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    228
    One review said the chain is very close to the chainstay when on the lowest cog. I'm running a 28t on my 27.5, and I think going to a 32t on a 29er might be too much of a jump for me.
    Almost = Didn't

  194. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slomtbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeInPA View Post
    I saw a video review that implied 30t was the minimum.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thank you. I could live with a 30t.
    Almost = Didn't

  195. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,314
    Quote Originally Posted by slomtbr View Post
    One review said the chain is very close to the chainstay when on the lowest cog....
    I see that now. The chain is way closer to the chainstay on the '20s than on the '19s and earlier.

    Attached Images Attached Images   
    Do the math.

  196. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    71
    Hi guys,
    So I am looking to buy the 2020 trek fuel ex 8 in the black on black but canít wait u til mid October for it. I live in ct and my local dealer canít get it before then. Anywhere around that can or can get it shipped to me? Thanks!

  197. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    314
    Hows the spec on the 9.9- GX chain and cassette! Have been offered a super deal on a 9.9 as the 9.8 not available until at least November, but it barely seems worthwhile. Id happily run GX and just swap the crank and cassette over on the 9.8 and you've got basically the same bike for way less

    Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk
    2019 Trance 29
    2018 Epic
    Procaliber- sold
    ASR-C- sold
    ARC Carbon- sold
    SB-95C- play bike- sold

  198. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    MTB P1 goes live in September
    Mitch, when in September does it go live?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  199. #199
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by mjshaw130 View Post
    Hi guys,
    So I am looking to buy the 2020 trek fuel ex 8 in the black on black but canít wait u til mid October for it. I live in ct and my local dealer canít get it before then. Anywhere around that can or can get it shipped to me? Thanks!
    Unfortunately dealers wouldn't be able to ship bikes - but reach out to our Ecom team on live chat and they can check to see if there is the bike you want in a store (who reports inventory to us) in your state or another state.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

  200. #200
    Community Manager at Trek
    Reputation: Mitch@Trek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by TermiLVR7 View Post
    Mitch, when in September does it go live?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    ETA is mid September once we have frames in stock for FEX

    *edit* LIVE TODAY
    Last edited by [email protected]; 09-05-2019 at 12:24 PM.
    Community Manager | Trek Bicycle Corporation | www.trekbikes.com

    Need help? Send me a message!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Any rumors on the 2020 Fuel EX 5 plus ??
    By Juancts in forum Trek
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 4 Weeks Ago, 06:52 PM
  2. 2020 Top Fuel 9.7 vs 2019 Fuel EX
    By yarbrough462 in forum Trek
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 07-29-2019, 01:26 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-08-2014, 10:46 AM
  4. Trek Fuel Ex 8 vs. Fuji reveal 2.0 vs. Trek Fuel Ex 6
    By WilliamM10 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-15-2012, 06:19 AM
  5. 2010 Trek Top Fuel 8 vs 2011 Trek Fuel EX 8
    By David S - Sydney in forum Trek
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 07:08 PM

Members who have read this thread: 693

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.