Forum menu
Now, I'm all for trying different things (I once went to see a musical) and when it comes to cycling, I can appreciate that people want to use the right tool for the job, or maybe not the right tool for the job, just because.
HOWEVER, I'm struggling to see the point of full sus fat bikes. Surely if you've got an inch or so of undampened-do-what-ever-it-wants travel, there's little point then having carfully controlled 'proper' suspension on top?
Maybe I'm wrong, but to me it seems a step too far? And how much must they weigh?
This [url= http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/09/25/ib14-11nine-introduces-long-travel-full-suspension-fat-bike-teases-27-5-ti-hardtail/ ]here [/url] shows a 150mm fatty. Built on an alloy frame with huge tyres it must be circa 40lbs at least?
I saw it and thought the same!
Well, I'll leave the matter of whether there's any point out of it but consider that motorbikes and cars have equally large tyres and still have use for suspension. Effectively, because the upward bounce from the tyres is acting up into the suspension it can be absorbed and controlled by the damping on the suspension so you should end up losing the majority of the uncontrolled bounce and just having really supple compliant tyres.
You get the same effect with normal MTB size tyres, I can feel the uncontrolled bounce from the rear tyre of my hardtail if the tyre is soft and I ride along sitting heavily on the saddle but yet, on my full suspension bike with larger softer tyres it's not there.
Your assertion that fat bikes are heavy is a bit off the mark. The new salsa fat full susser is <29lbs. The on-one hard tails come in at 34lbs, but that's because they're bargain basement. The frames themselves are very light it's the cheapo wheels and tyre combos that make them hefty.
The whole point about fat bikes is not that they don't need suspension (all vehicles do), its about getting as much tyre footprint on the ground as possible. This give stupendous amounts of grip and makes slidy roots and rock simply disappear.
Fun
noun
1.
enjoyment, amusement, or light-hearted pleasure.
"the children were having fun in the play area"
synonyms: pleasure, entertainment, enjoyment, amusement, excitement, gratification; More
antonyms: boredom, misery
a source of fun.
"people-watching is great fun"
synonyms: ridicule, derision, mockery, laughter, scorn, scoffing, contempt; More
playfulness or good humour.
"she's full of fun"
behaviour or an activity that is intended purely for amusement and should not be interpreted as having any serious or malicious purpose.
"the column's just a bit of fun"
adjectiveinformal
adjective: fun
1.
amusing, entertaining, or enjoyable.
"it was a fun evening"
synonyms: enjoyable, amusing, diverting, pleasurable, pleasing, agreeable, interesting More
antonyms: boring, serious
verbNORTH AMERICANinformal
verb: fun; 3rd person present: funs; past tense: funned; past participle: funned; gerund or present participle: funning
1.
joke or tease.
"no need to get sore—I was only funning"
Don't get me wrong, I'm not slating them or saying 'this is clearly rubbish, what a waste of time'. I'm just struggling to see the point.
The new surly fat full susser is <29lbs
Really? Sub 29lbs? For a Surly?
Not surly, salsa. Wrong beardie niche purveyor.
And I'm wrong. Stated weight is now 32lbs. 😳 I have seen 29lbs in print somewhere, suspect that would be tubeless.
Surly? Isn't that the Salsa Beargrease?
EDIT: beaten to it...
I'm on the fence, having made & ridden a FS fatty (and maybe another in a pipeline!) and a rigid. Not done many miles on either!
The point for me of FS is the almost rock-crawling stuff over rocks etc but this tends to be at low speeds, so OP may be right. Also I'm not likely to ride it that fast over rough stuff.
BUT I have at times found the "undamped suspension" a ****in' 'mare!
did quite well at Kamikaze in Mammoth
[img] 
[/img]
The point for me of FS is the almost rock-crawling stuff over rocks etc but this tends to be at low speeds, so OP may be right. Also I'm not likely to ride it that fast over rough stuff.BUT I have at times found the "undamped suspension" a ****' 'mare!
This.
Hitting rocks at speed is like being on a space hopper. If you're going to hit a lot of rocks at speed then a (current) fat bike isn't really ideal. However people like to push the envelope, and if technology can keep up, why not have the best of both worlds? I seem to remember similar discussions whn full suss became more effective 15 or so years ago.
I couldn't help but read this thread because of the sheer unavoidable attention whore it-looks-dumb-and-I-want-to-hate-it-but-can't-ness of the whole fat bike thing but...
I commute by bike, presently both my bikes are full suss (wrong tool) but at that point they have a purpose regardless of suitability, get from a to b.
At weekends or of an evening they are completely pointless, I use them to ride in big circles getting cold wet and tired achieving nothing but burning calories and time, there's no right tool for that, I could achieve the same on a treadmill, I do it for the enjoyment so the choice of tool is personal - others may say foolish, I did a cx race at new years on a 120mm full suss 29er, great fun was had but it was distinctly the wrong tool, a full suspension fat bike would I'm sure have been no worse suited.