ok, funds now permit a Fatbike purchase. Trail orientated and ‘lightish’ weight a priority. Any help in choosing much appreciated. Probably will want to run ss, at least most of the time.

There’s at least 4lb difference between an On One and a Mukluk.

Apparently, the On One has been designed from the ground up as a fat trail bike. The Mukluk started as a snow bike (though it has been tweaked a few times).

Thought about a 9:ZERO:7? 😉

Love the look of the 9:ZERO:7, but import tax and shipping sounds a handful, also build a set of wheels, cranks etc will really push the end price up, no?

Try asking over here… http://s436462119.websitehome.co.uk/index.php

I think we now have a UK Importer for 9:ZERO:7, but yes – acquiring all the bits might come a bit expensive. There’s a nice slidey-dropout frame though……

mukluk has black cat stylee adjustable dropouts so that wins for me….and it comes in prettier colours (the black and purple frame is ace)

and the mukluk has an enabler fork with loads of rack mounting options and it comes with nates. (the best fatty tyre by a country mile IMHO)

not as nice as 9zero7 in bright green or the polished version which makes me do a small sex wee.

the O-O is cheap-ish though, just a bit limited as they missed a few tricks, fingers crossed for version 2

I’m biased…. So don’t ask me.

… And i am doing a good intro deal on the mukluk… £100 off

It you are local to me, drop in, I am building a few mukluks this week.

druidh – thanks for that link, didn’t know it existed. Have just registered!

tazzy – I like the look of the Green complete build Muk, and yes the Alternetor drops-outs for neat ss looks good. Think the large Muk is bout 36lbs tho compared to 32 for the On One. Do you reckon thats a big deal?

Cheers Charlie, keep meaning to ‘pop’ by!

32 for the On One

that’s for the small!

Funny as I’m having the same dilemma ……going in favour of the mukluk at the moment as I want it as a bikepacking bike and would like to run it as single.speed.

druidh – Member

I think we now have a UK Importer for 9:ZERO:7,

We do…

It’s Tim @Sideways..

Tim…..

Where did you learn about the on one weight.
I’m surprised its lighter, and have been told its heavier than the mukluk. But we will find out in December when the on ones land.

Their prototype is light but then shaggy built it, and he no doubt hacked as much weight off as possible for that trans Provence race .

Cheers guys, please keep it all coming. Off to bed now to dream about Fat BIKES! 😉

Where did you learn about the on one weight.

Brant mentions it on the MTBR on one fat bike thread as 32lbs for the small

Charlie – last post before bed – thought I saw it on their website, but yes, as Tazzy says, that 32lb was for the small.

brant – Member
Neil our mechanic says our 16in small Fatty weights bang on 32lb

Cool, be interesting to see if the final production bike hits 32.
My old pugsley is 37 when fully muddy. I could put it on a diet but it would be big money for a small dent in the weight. And I don’t have a fat bike because of its lightweight racing-ness. I have it for its thunderous personality, and taking my fast dog to the dunes

I don’t know the details of the 32lb bike but I think that’s the one pictured on the website. All the frames are so low I think the differences between the sizes will be small.

Their prototype is light but then shaggy built it, and he no doubt hacked as much weight off as possible for that trans Provence race .

Hi Charlie! Quite the opposite really. Mine is built to last, and I’d think heavier than stock. 33lb IIRC. It’s exactly the same spec., baring pedals, as you saw last weekend. My frame and forks are very close to production spec. Wheels are the same as production but drilled rims, perhaps saving 200g. For the record, spec. as I rode at TP; a Nate front, Larry rear, both old 120tpi ones, with heavyish tubes. XT groupset with Zee rear mech, Surly cranks, Reverb post, Sunline 762mm bars. Works brilliantly though. I have ideas about dieting it, but for anything other than racing, it’s just not worth it.

If you ever felt the weight of a pugsley frame set then you would be suprised how light it is for a steel frame set and will find they are light enough and have all what your looking for.
My pugsley was 34 lbs when built with heavy 36h undrilled rims…
Folk get too hung up on weight on fat bikes – er they are fat bikes right? 🙂 a few pounds here and there won`t make much differance to 99% of us normal folk 🙂
Mukluk is nice esp the green model but boy are the head tubes/top tubes high on them.
Did like the Mk1 straight tube 907, felt nice when i rode the black one during the STW article and it had good frame bag room.
A pugsley has the best 3×9 chain/tyre clearance of the 3.7″ tyre fatties. It will take any drive chain set you want and has loads of rack mounts. Its the oldie in the pack but still a good un… I would buy another again if i had too with out looking around at others.
The new red frame set looks real nice 🙂

Here’s my cheap Mukluk from todays summer ride….. 8)

IMGP1136 by lipseal2012, on Flickr

IMGP1135 by lipseal2012, on Flickr

IMGP1141 by lipseal2012, on Flickr

IMGP1146 by lipseal2012, on Flickr

Lip seal…. Well, how is it? What do you think of the new mukluk?

And what beach is that? Looks great.

All that went through my mind all day was ‘Why didn’t I buy one years ago!’ I lived on the Southport coast for over 30 years and have had various bikes I have pushed round the dunes, but the Mukluk glided over the sand with grace. Still buzzing now!! 8)
The best cheapest bike I’ve bought 😀

Untitled by lipseal2012, on Flickr

There’s a nice slidey-dropout frame though…..

And it will take a belt drive.

charlie the bikemonger – Member

And what beach is that? Looks great.

It’s Formby, Merseyside why pop up for a dunes and beach ride one time Charlie?
http://s436462119.websitehome.co.uk/index.php?topic=89.msg922?