Page 1 of 3
If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:18 pm
by Bearbonesnorm
... would you consider buying one?
I love the look of them but my heart tells me if I had one then it wouldn't get used enough to justify owning it. The prototype On One Fat frame looks nice and if it goes into production will no doubt be a lot cheaper than anything else ... so , if I'm correct, would you consider buying one?
No reason for the above, just curious :)
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 4:45 pm
by Taylor
I'd love one for the week of snow we have but I'll never actually get one.
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:16 pm
by Ian
I think they have an application beyond snow. Very rocky terrain, soft upland stuff - both of which we have aplenty around here - are more easily dealt with with added tyre volume. I was impressed by how much quicker I could ride rocky stuff, still with a rigid fork on. It would depend on price, but given I have the front end already, I'm some of the way there.
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:03 pm
by valleydaddy
I like the idea of Ian's half fat bike but a 29er Rubber Queen 2.4 if they bring that out won't be far off, I saw the the Conti RQ in 29er flavour on the Orange Strange 29er from pics of eurobike so maybe they will be out in-readiness for the snow, lets hope the Swift rigid forks have enough clearance to take it and they will stay on Stans Crests
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:26 pm
by didnothingfatal
I think my next bike has to be a fat bike, and the totally mental looks of the Surly Moonlander is so tempting!
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:30 pm
by Ian
Where have you been DNF - best part of two weeks without you?
I was thinking of starting a poll:
Has DNF...:
a) got lost
b) got blown off a Welsh hilltop
c) sunk into a Welsh Bog somewhere NE of Nant-y-moch
d) been eaten by midges
e) sustained severe burns from an exploding gas stove
f) something else
:)

Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:48 pm
by thomthumb
i had the chance to have a lap of the campsite on my mates new jones with a larry up front at the weekend.
what surprised me is the lack of drag - i had expected it to feel like riding on a flat downhill tyre but it had similar rolling resistance to a normal xc tyre (i normally run racing ralphs for reference)
to me that makes it a bit more viable although i would like to have a proper try on a fatty before deciding.
there are also several bikes that might be on the 'dream bike list' before a fat bike including a dedicated bikepacking bike...
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:32 pm
by didnothingfatal
Let's just say the weather in Wales is wet, and I fail to see how anybody can live in such damp conditions! I came I got drowned and thought sod this came home and played local.
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:37 am
by Bearbonesnorm
I fail to see how anybody can live in such damp conditions! I came I got drowned and thought sod this came home and played local.
Bless ... did the nasty man make it rain
Ideal conditions for a fat bike from the sounds of it!
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:10 am
by valleydaddy
oh well just makes the trails quieter for us Welsh dwellers if everyone thinks it's too damp to ride here
now what do we need to make a half fat 29er like Ians??
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:20 am
by Bearbonesnorm
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:36 am
by valleydaddy
Very tempting indeed, I could sell my mint 29er reba fork and fat bike the front of the Swift at near zero cost.
do I really need it????
You lot are a bad influence to my bike collection :D
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:41 am
by Bearbonesnorm
You could do it cheaper if you wanted ... a 48mm trials rim can be had for about £35. It won't give you the massive looking front end but it'll certainly look big
http://www.tartybikes.co.uk/26_inch_rear_rims/c25.html
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:33 am
by valleydaddy
they only come in 26" flavour though??? :?
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:38 am
by Bearbonesnorm
they only come in 26" flavour though???
It's a 26" rim you want ... the fat tyre on a 26" rim will pretty much be the same O/D as a 29er, so the 26" front with fat tyre matches the 29er rear

Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:01 pm
by Stevemorg
I can see why Fat bikes work - what I'm not sure about is what advantages there are to having a fat front on a normal 29er - it'd be great to try it with my Surly KM - but I'm not sure why
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:26 pm
by Ian
I could sell my mint 29er reba fork...
To me, perhaps?
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 2:01 pm
by valleydaddy
It's a 26" rim you want ... the fat tyre on a 26" rim will pretty much be the same O/D as a 29er, so the 26" front with fat tyre matches the 29er rear
I did think that but wasn't sure
@Ian - I haven't even ridden the Swift with the Reba's on yet due to my knee injury so they are not for sale until I decide if I am happy enough with the rigid forks or a FAT set-up
In fact I haven't ridden the Swift at all much :(
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:50 pm
by Bearbonesnorm
To me, perhaps?
I've got a set of 29er Dual Air Rebas I'd part with. Not mint but work fine, at present living on the front of my Carver.
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:15 pm
by didnothingfatal
s8tannorm wrote:Ideal conditions for a fat bike from the sounds of it!
I was thinking pack raft. Was thoroughly miserable and I've got a week in Scotland in a few weeks, wondering how wet that will be!
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:51 pm
by Ian
now what do we need to make a half fat 29er like Ians??
You need to be a bit careful with the list Stu posted ^^ there, as the enabler fork is spaced to take a rear caliper (the offset from the mount to the disc is different from front to rear). Thus, if you went the enabler route, you would need a wheel built up onto a rear hub.
My system is a bit different, in that it uses a Phil Wood 135mm hub, spaced for a front caliper. Pauls Comp also do one, the WHUB. My rim is a Speedway Cycles UMA 2, and the fork a Speedway Cycles steel fork. To preserve the head angle as much as possible, I've also got a +5mm crown race for the headset. All this means that it takes only 10 mins to swap my front end over, as the brakes etc stay the same.
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:20 am
by Bearbonesnorm
You need to be a bit careful with the list Stu posted ^^ there, as the enabler fork is spaced to take a rear caliper
Enabler fork takes a STD front brake caliper. Pug' fork takes a rear.
Enabler is spaced at 135mm though, so a rear hub is required.
Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:51 am
by Ian
I'm sure there was a reason why I couldn't use an Enabler with my Phil hubbed wheel :?
So, in summary, it's all a bit complicated so if you want to go half fat, do your research thoroughly

Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:13 pm
by valleydaddy
I don't think I will be trying to do it soon Ian just concentrating on getting back on the bike at the moment.
As I said higher up if Conti make the Rubberqueen 29er tyre in 2.4 flavour that maybe big enough

Re: If fat bikes were cheaper ...
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:37 pm
by Ian
Except that you probably won't get a 2.4" tyre in the back of your swift. I struggled with a 2.4 Ardent for a while, before switching to a 2.2", but I've got a Pegasus and I can't recall how they differ in terms of mud clearance.
http://twitpic.com/5faose