Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Fatbikes
Reload this Page >

Does the bike weight matter?

Fatbikes Designed for use in sand, mud or snow, Fat bikes are the right choice for true all-terrain riding. Check here for the latest on these fun, adventurous two-wheeled machines.

Does the bike weight matter?

Old 08-23-18, 01:01 PM
  #1  
IvyGodivy
Gravel Rider
Thread Starter
 
IvyGodivy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CT
Posts: 155

Bikes: 2019 Trek Checkpoint ALR5 | Trek Fuel EX5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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.
IvyGodivy is offline  
Old 08-23-18, 01:57 PM
  #2  
Dave Mayer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,799
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 7 Posts
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.
Dave Mayer is offline  
Old 08-23-18, 07:59 PM
  #3  
IvyGodivy
Gravel Rider
Thread Starter
 
IvyGodivy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CT
Posts: 155

Bikes: 2019 Trek Checkpoint ALR5 | Trek Fuel EX5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dave Mayer View Post
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.
I donít see how this can help when the two brands I am considering one is steel and the other aluminum and both are FBís.
IvyGodivy is offline  
Old 08-23-18, 09:09 PM
  #4  
HerrKaLeun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,367

Bikes: Giant Toughroad SLR1 and Motobecane Sturgis NX

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 662 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 23 Times in 19 Posts
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.
HerrKaLeun is offline  
Old 08-23-18, 11:23 PM
  #5  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1182 Post(s)
Liked 23 Times in 18 Posts
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.
HTupolev is online now  
Old 08-24-18, 08:02 AM
  #6  
revcp 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,119

Bikes: 2011 Surly Troll, 2015 Borealis Yampa, 1985 Trek 720

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times in 12 Posts
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.
revcp is offline  
Old 08-29-18, 08:10 PM
  #7  
RickShelton31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Woodstock, Ga
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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.
RickShelton31 is offline  
Old 08-30-18, 10:35 AM
  #8  
prj71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 878 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
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
prj71 is offline  
Old 09-07-18, 06:53 AM
  #9  
IvyGodivy
Gravel Rider
Thread Starter
 
IvyGodivy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CT
Posts: 155

Bikes: 2019 Trek Checkpoint ALR5 | Trek Fuel EX5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HerrKaLeun View Post
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 View Post
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 View Post
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 View Post
Iíve ridden carbon, aluminum, and steel fat bikes. I love steel. Iíve 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 View Post
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.
IvyGodivy is offline  
Old 09-07-18, 07:48 AM
  #10  
revcp 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,119

Bikes: 2011 Surly Troll, 2015 Borealis Yampa, 1985 Trek 720

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by IvyGodivy View Post
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.
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.
__________________
Don't complain about the weather and cower in fear. It's all good weather. Just different.
revcp is offline  
Old 09-09-18, 05:03 PM
  #11  
IvyGodivy
Gravel Rider
Thread Starter
 
IvyGodivy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CT
Posts: 155

Bikes: 2019 Trek Checkpoint ALR5 | Trek Fuel EX5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by revcp View Post
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.
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

  1. It's an introductory model, but fully capable of taking on daily winter rides, fat bike races, and even summer trails
A $1700 bike is introductory???
IvyGodivy is offline  
Old 09-10-18, 08:10 AM
  #12  
revcp 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,119

Bikes: 2011 Surly Troll, 2015 Borealis Yampa, 1985 Trek 720

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by IvyGodivy View Post


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 itís 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???
I know some people who've had carbon frames repaired. Pics in the link below tell it all.

https://calfeedesign.com/carbon-repair-faq/
__________________
Don't complain about the weather and cower in fear. It's all good weather. Just different.
revcp is offline  
Old 09-11-18, 06:14 AM
  #13  
IvyGodivy
Gravel Rider
Thread Starter
 
IvyGodivy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CT
Posts: 155

Bikes: 2019 Trek Checkpoint ALR5 | Trek Fuel EX5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@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.
IvyGodivy is offline  
Old 09-11-18, 06:40 AM
  #14  
revcp 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,119

Bikes: 2011 Surly Troll, 2015 Borealis Yampa, 1985 Trek 720

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by IvyGodivy View Post
@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.
Absolutely, fair enough. Cost is a concern. I just wanted to point out, not just for you but also for others tracking the thread, that if something happens to a carbon frame it doesn't have to go in the trash. An aluminum frame is much more problematic to fix than carbon, steel is pretty simple.
__________________
Don't complain about the weather and cower in fear. It's all good weather. Just different.
revcp is offline  
Old 09-18-18, 10:47 AM
  #15  
lurch0038
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Northern Mass
Posts: 214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
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!
lurch0038 is offline  
Old 09-24-18, 02:58 PM
  #16  
striker65
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 53

Bikes: Mongoose Dolomite

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I use mine for exercise so weight doesn't matter to me, sure I could spend more money and get a lighter bike.
striker65 is offline  
Old 09-26-18, 03:10 PM
  #17  
drowling23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 108

Bikes: R&M Delite GX Rohloff, Crescent Elgar 27,5 FS, Haibike SDURO HardFour 4.0

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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.
drowling23 is offline  
Old 10-15-18, 12:08 PM
  #18  
Ky_Rider
Senior Member
 
Ky_Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 178

Bikes: Surly Trucker, Wednesday, Trek Verve Plus

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
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.
Ky_Rider is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
NoRacer
Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling
9
05-12-08 09:10 PM
peripatetic
Bicycle Mechanics
12
08-06-06 07:28 AM
pimpjuiceballin
BMX
18
04-12-06 10:52 AM
RhinoRiot
Singlespeed & Fixed Gear
6
03-19-05 01:42 PM
steve617
Training & Nutrition
8
01-30-05 07:50 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.