Originally Posted by
HerrKaLeun
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.
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.
Originally Posted by
HTupolev
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.
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.
Originally Posted by
revcp
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.
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
Originally Posted by
RickShelton31
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.
i hear ya. Just have to wait and see.
Originally Posted by
prj71
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
All good points. Thanks.