Any one here in the Uk have aFatback or 9zero7 Ti fatbike. How do they ride? Any problems importing them from the US?
Bike Forum
[closed]
Fat Bikes
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Dont think one has landed here yet but they will import here to UK and Europe, nice frame with good reports
Posted 1 year ago # -
was looking at an alu fatback but mtbr forums were reporting the prices have doubled since whats on their site.
love the non steelness and the mottled orange finish !
im sure 9zero7 have a good reason but their headtube looks to me to be very steep and the wheel base very short. Anyone got a good reason for that ?
Posted 1 year ago # -
A Sandman Gobi would be a fair bit cheaper than an alu fatback and quicker to receive as made in Belgium... just another option really...
no offset rear end just straight up 165mm wide
Posted 1 year ago # -
i have emailed sandman already paul
No reply
the gobi is the one i was looking at - you might know does it have track ends for SS ?
the 165 is a pain for me - as i have a rohloff id have like to have put in for winter then probably try and aquire an alfine BUT im resourceful and could get it on there if i set my mind to it
ps my connection doesnt let me see that picture
Posted 1 year ago # -
Unfortunately no track ends.. i'm gonna run a tensioner.
Pretty sure you could get a new axle and spacers made for an Alfine as they are solid axle anyway... don't see major stresses being involved with fat bikes so extra width axle should be fine.
Keep trying Conrad at Sandman and i will point him towards this forum as there seems to be alot of interest in Fat Bikes at moment.
Posted 1 year ago # -
aye just saw a photo on a dutch forum that confirmed it -
Posted 1 year ago # -
Paul78 have you got any price info on the Sandman frames ... I've just looked at the website and am liking ... lots
Stuart
Posted 1 year ago # -
Pricing you are better to contact him direct... I know he can be a little slow getting back to people but its worth the wait... I mailed him and have told him to get involved with this forum so hopefully he will be along soon
Posted 1 year ago # -
trail_rat - Member
...im sure 9zero7 have a good reason but their headtube looks to me to be very steep and the wheel base very short. Anyone got a good reason for that ?I used to modify my dirtbikes to steepen head angles plus adjust their trail to suit. This was back in the days when they were flexy fliers. It improved their high speed safety without taking anything away from their low speed - usually improved it - and allowed a shorter (less flexy) fork. It also improved their ability to climb out of ruts - very handy when the rut is leading towards doom
Basically the steep head angle with an appropriate amount of trail gives nice sharp handling with the fat tyre.
That's why I'm running a short homemade fork - it's to bring down the front of the Scandal frame to sharpen up the head angle. (It also allows me a certain amount of adjustment to offset and hence trail). It feels very good on the trails at the moment. I haven't tried it in deep snow/sand yet, although I expect it would be better than slacker angles.
I also used to stretch out the rear end on the motorbike, but I'm not sure that that works on a bicycle where the ability to shift the CoG has a lot to do with the handling. I suspect in this case it is purely to get the tyre far enough back to not interfere with the chainstays.
IMO Brant is the designer to watch. He is already an exponent of the need for long toptubes - which allows for steeper headangles without toe strike. He's already got the chainstay bridge design that would allow for a close coupled rear end on a fatbike. A fatbike frame from him should be really good.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Come on Brant - build us a Fatbike!
Posted 1 year ago # -
We have a Ti Fatbike first sample in production right now. We are looking at other Fat-aspects as you can see here - http://www.shedfire.com/2010/08/23/whats-your-bike-look-like/
Posted 1 year ago # -
ha im not buying a ti fat bike too - one ti bike is enough for me !
Posted 1 year ago # -
I already have a Jones - a Ti fatbike would be pushing divorce territory. With respect Brant a 3" 26" tyre is more semi skimmed compared to a full cream fatty
I'm sorry - but that Sandman is just too hideous for words
Posted 1 year ago # -
still think a nice cheapish priced steel frame would be ideal for the UK market
offset will keep hub gear options available and regular hub prices down for building...though you still have to buy offset rims so no trails rims,
need a British rim manufacturer aswell now Posted 1 year ago # -
Why does the hub need to be offset?
Posted 1 year ago # -
At the risk of upsetting the purist ideal, I think a semi-skimmed would be ideal 99% of the time and would save the expense of new wheels and the prohibitive tyre cost.
All it would need is a lightish set of 2.8-3.0 tyres with a 'flat' footprint that would fit on standard wide rims and it would open a much bigger market with only a tyre swap needed to change from semi-fat to standard mtb. The only other change might be a longer b/b axle to run single ring up front but even that shouldn't necessary as there would probably be enough clearance on the outer ring.
Just my thoughts as it would be a very limited market over here and I for one would struggle to justify the cost of a frame and necessary parts (£1k + minimum) that I may (realistically) only use +/- 20 times a year.
Posted 1 year ago # -
needs a rear offset if using a 135mm wide hub and a 100mm BB for chain clearance on a rear 4"endomorph.
on the pugsley its the same for the front to allow spare rear for emergency, not really needed here in the UK unless you want multiple SS options ,though i like it as running an Alfine incase i kill it,
see here;
Note surly sell a regular 100mm (non offset) fatbike fork if you want a lighter regular or dynamo front hub
Posted 1 year ago # -
Woody, i run 37mm rims with Ardents or 2.55 WTB weirwolves on my 29er and kinda know what your on about,
if i didnt ride the beach with the pugsley then the 29er would be fine except going riding soft (sensitve area) trails in wet weather,
if your looking for a semi fat 29er then 50mm speedway Una rims with big tyres would be a cheap option. cheaper but heavier would be 47mm Kris Kolm 29er rims,Posted 1 year ago # -
I can see how that would be necessary if you were truly in the wilderness and using it regularly. How many in the UK can say that I wonder?
I'm leaning more towards trying to build/buy something with standard front and rear spacing which could accommodate Alfine/Sturmey or even s/s gearing to give something usable all year round. The Pugsley is almost ideal with f+f at around £400.
Coastkid, thanks for the info re rims/tyres. Are you in the middle or outer ring in the pic as with the offset it looks like the chain will have quite a bend to reach the smaller cogs?
Edit - I'm trying to achieve the same effect with 26" rims
Posted 1 year ago # -
Woody - Member
...I for one would struggle to justify the cost of a frame and necessary parts (£1k + minimum) that I may (realistically) only use +/- 20 times a year.
Your idea of doing it front only is how I am set up right now.The transformation has been good enough to convince me to go all the way and go fat at the rear too.
I don't see it as an occasional bike, it would be for most mountainbike use - which is why I am trying to ensure good handling characteristics for that use.
Up here in the north of Scotland where we have the right to go anywhere you'll often find that the track either peters out or becomes soft. It's good manners not to leave deep ruts (leave that to the toffs in their Landrovers
).On a bike primarily used for armoured paths like trail centres the fat tyre is unnecessary. It does make a joke out of lots of technical stuff though.
Posted 1 year ago # -
NOT occasional - I use my fat front wheel all the time - my normal 29er front wheel hardly gets a look in
I'd rather see a non offset type rear setup, using 150, 165 or 170mm hubs.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Only issue with non offset rear is the limited availability of reasonably priced hubs.... well there isn't any... Hadley, Chris King etc
Noticed Salsa is a 170mm but also available is a 135mm offset adaptor ... interested to see this.
Posted 1 year ago # -
it will just be a spacer
in the middle age when 150s were surfacing of dh we used to run 150 frames with 135 hubs - a 15mm spacer between the locknut and the frame and between the caliper and the frame also
I live in a large forest in the arse end of no where where i am going to have snow related issues
soft ground also i remember the 3.0 inch tire days of dh and they werent that bad unless you lived in the south of england where it was flat - shrewsbury mud fest comes to mind - what was it called again ? was damn near flat !
Posted 1 year ago # -
paul78 - Member
Only issue with non offset rear is the limited availability of reasonably priced hubs.... well there isn't any... Hadley, Chris King etc...Don't forget Sturmey-Archer make a 3 speed hub with a 170 OLD. (Disk mount too).
1 gear for trundling along, 1 for trundling downhill, 1 for uphill trundling.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Noticed Salsa is a 170mm but also available is a 135mm offset adaptor ... interested to see this.
Posted 1 year ago # -
So Salsa do a 170mm Qr ???.. thats awesome.. Sandman has been modding some XT hubs to 165mm but producing Qr's was a pain in the arse.. looks like an off the shelf solution
Posted 1 year ago # -
woody, sorry i have been out (biking!)
the chainline on a pugsley is ok in the lowest gear,im building up a Kona Humu frame as a multi wheel bike,it takes a 3" rear tyre so ideal,
the frame was £75 and the total build will be £500 max
bars ,stem,seat etc already lying about,
will have non offset pugsley forks regular pro2 hubs and 47mm Kris holm rims,
i have the rear hub and mechs and shifters sans pugsley now it is Alfined,
so i will run a 3.0 Vredestien Black Panther up rear with an Endo front for the beach and other soft stuff,can run it 2x9 gearing using a DMR chain tug with mech hanger and wont run a front mech, just pull the chain over!, and with another chain and SS kit i can run SS,
also can fit with ice spikes if we get another proper winter or just regular mud tyres,
wont be quite as good as an endo rear but will be fun and folk can ride the pugsley on the beach if there interested in maybe buying a fatbike Posted 1 year ago # -
Your idea of doing it front only is how I am set up right now.
The appeal of that is the 'try before you buy' aspect for a smaller cost and at least the money won't be wasted if I go the full hog. I've been looking at trials wheels with a 37mm rim width and a Pugsley non-offset fork. I'm assuming a Larry would be ok on that rim as the Nokian 3.0 seemed ok on a standard width mtb rim??
Posted 1 year ago # -
proberly be best with a 47mm rim for a surly tyre woody, they seem to work ok with them, and theres quite a pysical size between an endo tyre and a 3" tyre because of the wall height,
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yes, I can see that on your pics but even with the increased height on a narrower rim there looks to be a bit of room on the Pugsley fork. Are you thinking more about rolling off the rim with low pressure?
Posted 1 year ago # -
think with a narrow rim the wall could roll off or the handling may feel (even more) wierd!
Posted 1 year ago # -
Managed to pick up not 1 but 2 Surly forks today!
1 is a standard Pugsley but the other is a '1 off' designed for another application and appears to be non-offset 130mm axle with 405mm axle to crown measurements.
I'll try them both with a Nokian 3.0 to see how the geometry works but I think the shorter version may be better geometry wise (it's going on a Kona Stuff designed around a 100mm fork) for when I get a proper front wheel and possibly a Larry with the Nokian going on the back.
Any recommendations re the wheel and tyre source ?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Haha that looks amazing
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
