Brad and I saw this in the bike shop yesterday. I WANT ONE NOW! Anyone know anything about this bike?
Brad and I saw this in the bike shop yesterday. I WANT ONE NOW! Anyone know anything about this bike?
It's missing the seat, or it's for alternative lifestyles.
Evolution of the Pugsley, which is an awesomely useful bike.
That'll set you back a challenge car, though...
I talked to a bike shop owner about one.. he says it's fun for about 10 minutes. It's really more a "look at me" bike that is not very practical or easy to ride
Snow or sand and it's your friend. Otherwise you're moving a LOT of rubber round and round for no good reason. They do have their place. I want one.
I want one. I think it would be a hoot to ride on some of the trails I've ridden on for 2+ decades. Plus, may be a good bike for a strong rider doing a ride with... a less strong group...
And of course, if we ever get snow again...
That said, I need to finish building and/or upgrading a few other bikes in the quiver first.
Salsa makes a version as well which seems reasonably priced (to a XTR/Campy Record-riding bike snob like me).
fat bikes are awesome... they are becoming more "normal"
in fact my main rig i've got a big fat larry tire up front (same as whats on that bike above) with 80mm rims... went that way instead of a shock... the trails I ride don't need a full on suspension fork and the near 5" of tire running at 10psi is amazing
the big thing for them is like mentioned floating over sand or snow... they also float in water... there has been a big movment towards "adventure bikes".... no they aren't NORBA racing bikes... but more of bikes just to take WAY off the beaten path... more and more people are using them on trails... fat tires are a great suspension with tons of grip (with the right tread)... but they do weigh a lot.
the fat bike forum is the fastest growing area on MTBR http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/
an intresting thread is the "what do you use your fatbike for" thread http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/what-do-you-use-your-fatbike-777927.html
surlys web page has some basic info http://surlybikes.com/bikes/moonlander
surly web page said: Years ago, our Pugsley’s 3.8" Endomorph tires and 65mm-wide Large Marge rims introduced the cycling world to new riding possibilities. Our big tires, run at low pressures, get you over terrain that is difficult or impossible to ride on a ‘regular’ bike. That original Pugsley tire/rim format certainly changed the game, but there are places and conditions that beg for a larger tire footprint. So, to satisfy our cravings for increased traction action, we introduced the 82mm-wide Rolling Darryl rim. Darryl spreads out the tire more than Marge does, effectively presenting more tread to the trail and adding traction potential. Bigger can be better. Not wanting to be limited to using the 82mm rim/3.8" tire combo (the largest recommended for the Pugsley), we decided that it was time to raise the bar and develop higher-volume tires, wider rims and a frame to accommodate them. So, this year, we offer you the Big Fat Larry 4.7" tire, the 100mm-wide Clown Shoe rim and, of course, the Moonlander frameset. Like all of our framesets, the Moonlander is made of Surly 4130 CroMoly steel. It features 135mm-spaced, 28mm-offset, rear-loading Surly horizontal dropouts (track ends) with a derailleur hanger…meaning you can set it up as a singlespeed or geared bike, derailleured or internally geared. The bottom bracket height gives you clearance for bushwhacking and monster-trucking. The dropped and gusseted top tube maximizes standover height. And the tallish headtube allows you to set your rig up with a comfortable riding position for those long days grinding out miles in the saddle. Moonlander’s fork measures 447mm axle-to-crown...same as the Pug, so all of our fat forks are interchangeable between the two models. The disc mount allows you to use a front disc brake caliper with a 135mm O.L.D. rear hub…or with a 135mm-spaced Surly front hub. Mid-blade thru-eyelets and lower rack barrels are included for installing fenders and racks. We offer the Moonlander as a frameset and as a complete bike. The complete bike components were chosen for their durability and their suitability to the task at hand. We chose thumbshifters because they allow you to shift even when wearing mittens. To accommodate the Clown Shoe rim/Big Fat Larry tire spec, the frame design pushes the chainline even farther outboard than that of the Pugsley. So we spec’d Moonlander with our new MWOD crank system. The MWOD (Mr. Whirly Offset Double) ditches the big ring and moves the middle and granny ring outboard. The 2 x 9 drivetrain offers the gear ratios most applicable to a bike of this type while avoiding chain/tire interference. Works like a charm. If you’ve ever wanted a little more float and traction to get you over the hills and through the woods to Grandmother’s House of Ill Repute and Freestyle Taxidermy, consider the Moonlander.
also another more common thing happening with fat bikes is people using a 2nd wheelset with standard 29er wheels
here is my front fat/ half fat bike (whatever you want to call it)
er and if you want to try a fat bike out on a budget...
you can fit up to a 3" tire in a surly 1x1 frame... these are only 63mm rims with 2.4" tires... but more will fit lol... something i'm tempted to try in the future with my 1x1
donalson wrote: here is my front fat/ half fat bike (whatever you want to call it)
golf clap
I approve wholeheartedly, that's awesome.
I keep seeing these monster frames showing up all over the place. dang it, I want one!
No reason for a suspension fork with these tires
I see Surly fat tire bikes in Minneapolis fairly often, especially in winter (of course, they're built here.)
To ride one of those and not be a poser you need to do this.
http://www.alaskaultrasport.com/alaska_ultra_home_page.html
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Iditarod-Trail-Invitational/169964759708637
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirsten-dixon/a-humanpowered-race-throu_b_1304331.html
bah... we've got a number of them running around here and we haven't seen snow in years... although sand and the drivetrain aren't best friends... lol
having ridden my MTB in the snow.. I can see where something like that would come in handy.
A few years ago, when we had our version of snowmaggeden and everything shut down for a few days, I left the BMW at home and used my bike to get around.. did better than most of the cars that dared to venture out
If I lost all my current bikes (29er, 26" Commuter, High-end vintage road bike) and had to buy a new stable a fat bike would be among those chosen.
Commuter: Fat bike with two wheelsets, one for fatties another for 29" wheels. 1X9. Make it out of titanium and it'll be light enough for racing duties during summer and corrosion resistant during the winter. Rack tabs.
Road: Monstercrosser built with road geometry and enough space for 29x2.1 tires, disc brakes, rack tabs, and fenders. Maybe internal hub. Singular Peregrine.
Mountain: Since the commuter bike listed above will be light enough for race days, the mountain bike can be a little aggressive. 650b, full suspension, 160mm travel, 66º and shoot for 30lbs.
Wow, day dreaming is fun.
Ya know... every time I see a $2500 price tag on a weldable metal frame with some absurd new twist on the same old bicycle I think I should buy a decent TIG and pay a marketing firm for a cool logo to over hype on the internets. Maybe get a big shot celeb daredevil cyclist to jump it over a gorge or something if I have cash left over. Paint in flat versions of regular colors. Profit!
Bicycle people are even sillier than audio cable affecianados.
I built a(albeit crappy) frame jig a couple years ago from some scrap I had lying around, bought some decent tubing from Nova Cycle supply, and fabbed up a 26" trials frame. With my crappy flux welder I could only tack it together, so I took it to a friend with a decent mig.
Then I got a steal on a used Brisa, and never bothered to get my frame back and build it.
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
A local shop owner in Philly started making frames a few years ago. He does ok with it, but frame building is rather time consuming if you give a crap about what you're doing. Even at nearly $2000 for each frame (some more, some less depending on options), how much money he makes for each hour of work is frighteningly low - and that doesn't factor in the thousands of $$$ he has spent on tooling (jigs, bending fixtures, mill, lathe, utilities, etc.). He does build beautiful frames. He's won a couple of Hand Built Bike Show awards.
It's not as easy as it looks.
There are companies that build cheaper frames, but they do so by offering zero options, so the frame fixtures can easily produce a number of parts at once.
Ian F wrote: It's not as easy as it looks.
It depends on your perspective I guess - once you have scratch built a car chassis making a bicycle frame is pretty easy unless you make it out of composites or some titanium alloy that requires ninja magic welding skills. There is a lot of info out in the ether about proper sizing and geometry. It might be a fun project - but I'd have a hard time resisting the urge to add a 2 stroke motor.
Building a bike frame has always been something I want to do. I think I'd go with fillet brazing instead of welding. I really like the look of a brazed frame. If Schwinn could mass produce fillet brazed frames, it should be able to be done with minimal outlay. Seems like the building process should go like this:
Sounds easy enough.
The difference between a bike frame and a car chassis is that every millimeter of every weld is on display on a bike frame. Plus you're dealing with thinner walls to make things more interesting.
I look at those fat bikes and I just think they look sluggish. Weight in the tires is the absolute wrong place. I can see it for the Iditarod or the Poison Spider trail where you can use the floatation, but around town?
I used to commute through the winter in Ottawa. I actually had a set of studded Nokians for the bike that were great for dealing with the ice patches that were more prevalent than snow. I was also able to cut through the snow down to the pavement below instead of floating, which was more useful for what I was doing. Every spring, when I put the slicks back on the bike, the difference in acceleration was always a big kick in the pants.
You'll need to log in to post.
