|
Does the bike weight matter?
In terms of fat bikes only for the average joe, does the weight of the bike help or hinder the riding experience that much?
I ask for I love the Surly fat bikes and the Trek; but would love a Surly. But then again they are made out of steel and are heavier. I watched videos, read posts, articles and so on. I can test ride it and stuff but in the end you really don't know till you go on some serious rides. So asking those on here. |
Where are you riding? I ride a fatbike at -20 degrees on snow. Works great, considering that there is no other practical riding solution.
On pavement, a hardtail mountain bike is 3mph slower than a road bike. A fatbike will be 6mph slower than a road bike. This will be for the same level of effort. These differences are actually huge, as the power output required to maintain a certain speed goes exponential. |
Originally Posted by Dave Mayer
(Post 20523751)
Where are you riding? I ride a fatbike at -20 degrees on snow. Works great, considering that there is no other practical riding solution.
On pavement, a hardtail mountain bike is 3mph slower than a road bike. A fatbike will be 6mph slower than a road bike. This will be for the same level of effort. These differences are actually huge, as the power output required to maintain a certain speed goes exponential. |
Most fatbikes come with very knobby tires. tire friction is 100X more important than weight on pavement.
if you have a decent fatbike it only is maybe 5 lb heavier than an FS MTB, maybe even same weight if it is a cheap MTB. Compare to your own weight and you see unless you weigh 110 lb, it doesn't' matter much. Obviously lighter is always better., you decide how much you are willing to pay for a certain weight reduction. If you are a weight weenie, look at the Canyon Dude. |
Weight increases inertia and gravitational drag; it resists acceleration, and resists climbing. For a ~200lb bike+rider, a kilogram on the frameset will increase both of these resistances by around 1%. Which is to say, if you add a kilogram to your frame, and you go do a several-thousand-foot climb out in the mountains, don't be surprised if the time you spend climbing increases by the better part of a minute.
When riding steady on flat ground, it doesn't really matter. |
Well, what's your goal?
Do you want to get from A to B quickly, or do you just want to have as much fun between A and B as you can? If the former, you really don't want any kind of fat bike, but if the latter any frame material will do. I've had two aluminum fat bikes and I presently have a carbon fat bike. My "near fat," a Surly Troll, is steel. They've all been fun.
|
I’ve ridden carbon, aluminum, and steel fat bikes. I love steel. I’ve had a Pugsley and now have a Wednesday. The frame weight makes little difference, unless you are racing. The wheel weight is where you will see the biggest difference. |
Mostly only matters for climbing.
But who wants to buy a steel bike that rusts. Stick with Aluminum or Carbon. No rust and both are lighter |
Originally Posted by HerrKaLeun
(Post 20524431)
Most fatbikes come with very knobby tires. tire friction is 100X more important than weight on pavement.
if you have a decent fatbike it only is maybe 5 lb heavier than an FS MTB, maybe even same weight if it is a cheap MTB. Compare to your own weight and you see unless you weigh 110 lb, it doesn't' matter much. Obviously lighter is always better., you decide how much you are willing to pay for a certain weight reduction. If you are a weight weenie, look at the Canyon Dude.
Originally Posted by HTupolev
(Post 20524595)
Weight increases inertia and gravitational drag; it resists acceleration, and resists climbing. For a ~200lb bike+rider, a kilogram on the frameset will increase both of these resistances by around 1%. Which is to say, if you add a kilogram to your frame, and you go do a several-thousand-foot climb out in the mountains, don't be surprised if the time you spend climbing increases by the better part of a minute.
When riding steady on flat ground, it doesn't really matter. But I can say this, I won't ever be a Vegetarian let alone a Vegan (this I know for sure) and in short won't eat like a rabbit much like these ultra skinny riders. Besides I am naturally broad so it would look weird on me. Flat, rocky, climb whatever I encounter. I have tried paths over my ability but at least I tried. A test ride will be a big deciding factor.
Originally Posted by revcp
(Post 20524935)
Do you want to get from A to B quickly, or do you just want to have as much fun between A and B as you can? If the former, you really don't want any kind of fat bike, but if the latter any frame material will do. I've had two aluminum fat bikes and I presently have a carbon fat bike. My "near fat," a Surly Troll, is steel. They've all been fun.
1. If they crack there is no repairing them and that would just end the bike. 2. They are anywhere from $700 to $1000 more on the price in comparison to aluminum
Originally Posted by RickShelton31
(Post 20535944)
I’ve ridden carbon, aluminum, and steel fat bikes. I love steel. I’ve had a Pugsley and now have a Wednesday. The frame weight makes little difference, unless you are racing. The wheel weight is where you will see the biggest difference.
Originally Posted by prj71
(Post 20537049)
Mostly only matters for climbing.
But who wants to buy a steel bike that rusts. Stick with Aluminum or Carbon. No rust and both are lighter |
Originally Posted by IvyGodivy
(Post 20551972)
Good idea. But the mountain bike I currently have I am trying to sell and I have a few parties interested. In short this is replacing my MTB bike. I don't need a ton of bikes, I really just want my Gravel and FB. The FB is all the stuff the Gravel can't do. Will I do climbs and etc. maybe but not intentional. I just want to go on paths less traveled and being that it will be a FB I really want to try this area that I used to ride a DB (motorized) where it's large rocks next to a dormant train track that goes for a few miles. In short just want to have fun.
I am a big boy and while I would love to lose weight I don't have the dedication to take it to the extreme, well at least for now. I learned never say never for most of the times I say I won't do something I tend to do it later in life. But I can say this, I won't ever be a Vegetarian let alone a Vegan (this I know for sure) and in short won't eat like a rabbit much like these ultra skinny riders. Besides I am naturally broad so it would look weird on me. Flat, rocky, climb whatever I encounter. I have tried paths over my ability but at least I tried. A test ride will be a big deciding factor. Fun is the only goal here, that and taking areas/paths that are not ideal for my Gravel bike. The rust is a concern and a very good point, but for now I don't see me ever going Carbon Fiber for two main reasons: 1. If they crack there is no repairing them and that would just end the bike. 2. They are anywhere from $700 to $1000 more on the price in comparison to aluminum i hear ya. Just have to wait and see. All good points. Thanks. |
Originally Posted by revcp
(Post 20552056)
Two things. One, carbon can be repaired, so if a frame cracks it's not trash time. Two, I hear all the time about steel bikes rusting. Will you be dipping it in salt and and then leaving it in the rain for years at a time? If not, if you actually take care of your equipment even moderately, this is not a concern. It's kind of a "the sun is bad because if you look directly at you'll go blind" hyperventilating. Yes, that's true, so don't look at the sun and instead enjoy its many benefits. Seriously, it's not an issue. I've had many steel bikes, I've ridden with numerous friends who have steel bikes. It's not an issue.
Well the MTB has been sold as of today so now down to just my Gravel bike. So now the research is on up on full swing and took a closer look at the 3 I am considering and something is bugging me; in fact it’s actually turning me off or for a better word talking me out of buying this bike. Funny thing is the stuff I am reading is coming from those that make the bike; I am talking about the Trek Farley 5 https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/b...rCode=greydark
|
Originally Posted by IvyGodivy
(Post 20556173)
I hear different in terms of fixing carbon but whatever. Well the MTB has been sold as of today so now down to just my Gravel bike. So now the research is on up on full swing and took a closer look at the 3 I am considering and something is bugging me; in fact it’s actually turning me off or for a better word talking me out of buying this bike. Funny thing is the stuff I am reading is coming from those that make the bike; I am talking about the Trek Farley 5 https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/b...rCode=greydark A $1700 bike is introductory??? https://calfeedesign.com/carbon-repair-faq/ |
@revcp
It doesn't matter, carbon fiber as far as I am concerned is not an option. I will rather play safe than sorry not only if I am right but the extra cost to go fiber. Now if I was a pro rider with sponsors that is one thing, but as the rider who goes here and there so not worth the extra cost. This also leads me to another question but going to post a new thread there in General Discussion. |
Originally Posted by IvyGodivy
(Post 20558848)
@revcp
It doesn't matter, carbon fiber as far as I am concerned is not an option. I will rather play safe than sorry not only if I am right but the extra cost to go fiber. Now if I was a pro rider with sponsors that is one thing, but as the rider who goes here and there so not worth the extra cost. This also leads me to another question but going to post a new thread there in General Discussion. |
As a large man the bike weight does not mean a darn thing to me. I have enough fat in my thighs that probably weigh more than my bike does LOL!
|
I use mine for exercise so weight doesn't matter to me, sure I could spend more money and get a lighter bike.
|
I think it's worth noting how light fatbike frames are nowadays — and I'm not talking about alloy, even the alu frame on my cargo fatbike (Blackborow) is extremely light. The tires are reasonably heavy though, and this contributes to the amount of effort required to spin them up. So instead of worrying about frame weight, I'd worry more about the wheels — this is where you want carbon rims and a tubeless setup, assuming you can afford it, of course. Also, and purists will hate me for this, consider using 3.8" tires instead of 4.8" ones... yeah yeah I know the choice of tires is a lot more limited, but this tradeoff has very concrete advantages: apart from the slightly decreased weight, you can also run a front Fox 34 tire on a 65mm rim. The upside of this is you get a lighter, much better-performing Fox 34 fork instead of the canonical Bluto/Mastodon. It's lighter, the wheel is lighter. It's up to you whether you want a 4.8" or 3.8" rear but I find that 3.8" is 'big enough' for purposes of swallowing rocks. And yeah, sure, 4.8/5.0 tires will have more traction.
On a side note, if you have an electric fatbike, weight doesn't matter so you can go totally all-out on the wheels. Just make sure you get 203mm front and rear rotors (composite, preferably) and dual-piston calipers. |
I love my heavy steel Surly. It's not fast but it'll take me about any where. I've had friends that had to get off and walk when I could just keep pedaling. I also run a plus set up wheels when riding mostly gravel. It's slightly faster but who cares. I don't race btw. Enjoy whatever you decide.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:32 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.