I know people have been riding fat bikes for years but was there one thing that flicked the switch and made them 'mainstream'? Or was it just a steady trickle of increasing info, options, etc.

No reason for posting other than a genuine interest, it just seems a fairly odd concept to have captured the imagination of so many people, many of whom are often portrayed as quite conservative in their buying / riding choices.

EDIT: Actually, I should say ... maybe you don't consider that there's been one?

Surly.

They did all the groundwork by getting the Pugsley into production. Even then, it took a long time for the low impact concept to be appreciated. Guys like Coastkid and hus blog, others buying them for "natural" trails, then all the modern research about how we've been misunderstanding tyre pressures and widths. Of course there are always some folk who would have bought one just to be niche.

Plus they are just a lot of fun and many owners see them as a bit of an antidote to the need for complex suspension etc

This doesn't answer your question but,
A friend of a friend was curious about the fat bike thing. So last weekend we swapped bikes, he rode my Salsa and I rode his 26" HT. We rode a nice natural 15 miler over a mixture of surfaces. The thing is I know I've not rode my own HT for 18 months since I got the fat bike but whilst riding his, I felt like the bike was so unsteady, unpredictable and I had no confidence what so ever in the traction!!
The fat bike gives me so much confidence that I didn't realise until riding that one.

Personally,I've followed the 'fatbike' trend develop for quite a few years,
I've always watched the Iditarod when it's been covered on the telly,in
My early days of Mtb'ing (very early 80's), we strived for fat/tyre and rim combo's,
As I've got older and got back into cycling as the family grows up, Surly and
Salsa were on the scene,my Mukluk gives me a comfy,simple platform to
Enjoy my cycling on

There's always someone somewhere trying something different. Bigger, longer, lower, fatter, whatever. Sometimes in falls on it's arse and sometimes captures the imagination of others and grows from there. I wouldn't call fat bikes mainstream just yet, far too many people who have never ridden one, dismissing them as a fad, not a proper bike etc etc.

Now that the big players have sniffed out some sales potential, their popularity is sure to pick up momentum and then the aforementioned manufacturers can milk it with ever more expensive models. I won't apologise for my cynicism.

On a personal note, I was a dismisser but found myself fat curious last October so purchased an On-One Fatty, thinking that at £800, if I didn't like (which I obviously wasn't going too, because they're slow and heavy and low tech) then I could probably sell it on and not lose too much.

Of course there is a danger that cheap versions of new ideas are so flawed in other departments, frame material, geo, components, that the overall experience is negative and the very part that you are trying out gets the blame. I think this happened a lot when sceptical people dabbled in 29ers.

Anyway, no such experience with my Fatty, I absolutely loved it, save for Floater tyre/rim issues and I'm now thinking that "fat", is the one bike that is truly versatile enough to use everywhere and in all conditions.

To cut a very long story very short, I got refunded on my Fatty and are now waiting for delivery of my Canyon Dude, scheduled for June.

McGroo wrote: Now that the big players have sniffed out some sales potential, their popularity is sure to pick up momentum and then the aforementioned manufacturers can milk it with ever more expensive models.

QBP (Salsa/Surly) are one of the big players and what we are actually seeing is prices coming down as there is more competition and more players enter the market. Tyres are probably the best example.

Canyon Dude vs Salsa Beargrease?

I was particularly referring to Spesh and Trek, after all, Specialized were the first to introduce the $10,000 DH bike and when you charge for a bicycle, more that what some people pay for a brand new car, I consider that milking it

Mine was bought out of necessity 4 years ago to make riding from my front door possible. Today's ride is testament as to "why"



Popular these days because they are much cheaper than they were 4-5 years ago, and you don't have to import all the nice stuff from Alaska yourself

Coastkid (Bruce) from East of Edinburgh was the first person over in the UK to start shouting about them.

Andy Chadwick soon bought a Salsa Pug, I rode it and loved it but was put off from buying it because it's steel and 90% of my Fat Bike riding is on local beaches.
As soon as Salsa launched the Aluminium Mukluk out I ordered on and got one of the first 3 mark 1's into the country in 2009 and I've never looked back.

I've had an On One Fatty and sold it, I say good bye to the Mukluk at the end of the month to make room for a 5" Ti Fat Bike

Cheaper tyres from vee and others, more options for bikes at reasonable prices followed. Like 650b, it just took the 2 big fork makers offering the parts to switch it on.

Pugsley sure helped, but I reckon Surly having production wheels and tyres - and making them readily available - was a critical piece of the puzzle. And by available, I mean as OEM for other brands outside of the QBP stable.

Frame builders could've made fat frames whenever, but ready access to the costly wheels and tyres was a sticking point.

Bit like 650b has been around for donkeys - anyone with kids racing track or road will have seen it long before it got "enduro-ed" and suddenly cool in the last few years, cos of the availability.

My short-arse self looked at a 650b MTB in '09, as 29ers were taking hold and everyone was crowing about 'big' wheels; but only really pacenti doing wheels and tyres, would need a custom frame etc and so $$$$$ - especially here in Australia! So, 26" it was. Today, I could walk in to any shop and walk out with a complete 650b bike a few mins later. Whilst not every store (yet!), there are a number I can now do that with RE: Fatbikes, too.

s8tannorm wrote:I know people have been riding fat bikes for years but was there one thing that flicked the switch and made them 'mainstream'? Or was it just a steady trickle of increasing info, options, etc.

No reason for posting other than a genuine interest, it just seems a fairly odd concept to have captured the imagination of so many people, many of whom are often portrayed as quite conservative in their buying / riding choices.

EDIT: Actually, I should say ... maybe you don't consider that there's been one?

I wouldn't say that fat bikes are 'mainstream'. More common than say last winter but not mainstream.

I was out with alaistair from this forum in january around the very busy pentlands, and people hikers/cyclists honestly were stopping and pointing at him. Fat bikes are niche bikes, used in certain conditions that in this country makes travel easier but in other snowy countrys the only viable way to ride trails in the winter.

What sparked the revolution is a different question altogether.

Justchris wrote: I was out with alaistair from this forum in january around the very busy pentlands, and people hikers/cyclists honestly were stopping and pointing at him.

That was nothing to do with the bike though...

Not so much about the latest trend but more about the history of the fat bike

http://www.adventurecycling.org/resourc ... -fatbikes/

My own personal quest for one was started by reading Shaggy's article on the rovaniemi150 in singletrack. Bought one for the race but love riding it, very versatile bikes

Fat bikes are additive.... so much so that I have now sold (nearly) all my other mountain bikes. Now I tend to worry between fat bike or fortitude adventure for bike packing duties. All depends on how much road will be evolved obviously but I tend to just reach for the fat bike all the time now.

Why the revolution.... from the folks i have spoken too... fat bikes have the simplicity of hard tail without the harshness of a hard tail and 500% more traction in all conditions.

But what is a "mountain bike" now anyway... hard tails are for the poor (sell loads of sub £300 HT bikes) or nice rich having expensive steel HT built up, FS in what format now... a 29er, 650B or with 100mm or 120 or 140 or 160mm...... in aluminum or carbon...

The market has changes so there is no longer a "fixed" selection of bikes, it now a wide, wide selection of bike and fat bikes are but a part of it.

I agree, the wheels and tires becoming "of the shelf" items expanded the market.

At the end of the day a fat bike is..... a huge smile before, during and after a ride. As i said, its additive.

No revolution, just evolution.

I guess it all comes down to it being a rather new thing for many in europe, even those not shy of the unconventional, and how the market evolved, making the balloons available and affordable for everybody. It looks different. People want to be different. It's special. People want to be special. It funny in a way a clown is funny, the sheer funniness of the riding behaviour is exhilarating.
And for me the most important part: I can ride on (not in) snow and thus go anywhere. Literally.

Funnily, many believe fat bikes to be cheap.
By far not. Most rims still are double/thrice the price of regular 15-30 mm wide rims. Tires 4-5 times the price of regular MTB tires. People come up with cheap Vee Rubber tires in that discussion. Well, then you need to throw in cheap 2.1 - 2.4" tires too. There's still a huge difference.
All the other parts are simply the same.
I'm not going to start on the rubbish dirt performance, bad cornering (grip and precision) and rough ride, due to be sh*t load of bouncing going on at higher speeds on real trails.

Having said that, I just had two fantastic days out in (well, on) the snow in the Jura. I love my fat bike for that kind of stuff and yet I'm really looking forward to getting onto my sussed 29er tomorrow for snow free trail riding.
Every bike has it's place. But then that wasn't part of the initial discussion...

All interesting stuff, however I'm slightly surprised that no one has mentioned the introduction of the On-One Fatty in relation to the original question. I'm guessing here but I imagine it's the most common fat bike in the UK. Also, On-One pushed it very much toward general 'trail' riding rather than snow, sand, etc, which I'm sure when combined with the pricing, tempted a lot more people to try a fat bike?

stu mcgroo mentioned it stu, and johnclimber both got rid but for different reasons

stu mcgroo mentioned it stu, and johnclimber both got rid but for different reasons

Well spotted Mart, although I believe John already had a Mukluk when he bought his fatty?

s8tannorm wrote:All interesting stuff, however I'm slightly surprised that no one has mentioned the introduction of the On-One Fatty in relation to the original question. I'm guessing here but I imagine it's the most common fat bike in the UK. Also, On-One pushed it very much toward general 'trail' riding rather than snow, sand, etc, which I'm sure when combined with the pricing, tempted a lot more people to try a fat bike?

Definitely. Breaking the 1k barrier, appearing lighter and useful for something other than beach plodding or snow (even if that wasn't really the case before then) and the promise of consumables being available at normal prices must have helped. Certainly for me before the OOF the idea of spending £1500+ and £100 a tyre killed the idea.

The question was "what sparked the fat bike revolution". I don't think there's any way you could credit On One with that. What they did do was see an opportunity to tap into that revolution.

ScotRoutes wrote:The question was "what sparked the fat bike revolution". I don't think there's any way you could credit On One with that. What they did do was see an opportunity to tap into that revolution.

There can't be any doubt that they sped up the revolution then. Joe Public was never going to get fired up as quickly when it was only QBP offering what seemed very poor vfm on paper and a bunch of other Fat only manufacturers that you won't stumble across like you would a mainstream firm.

Getting Jason Miles to ride a Fatty at Mayhem in front of X thousand people can't have hurt either.

I think the increasing cost and complexity of suspension has played a big part given the number of people who buy fat bikes and then ride them mainly on normal trails. In the late '90's Orange and Santa cruz along with marzochii invented the perfect susser set up - single pivot, coil over shocks and a fork with steel coil springs and oil. Totally idiot proof and near zero maintenance. 15 years on and suddenly suspension means multiple pivots that fall apart in no time (and cost a bomb to replace) and forks that need servicing after every ride = a strong desire to go with something simple. Fat bikes mean you get the benefits of riding rigid but with more comfort (and speed) than a trad rigid 29er etc. with the added benefit of being able to ride it anywhere