Fat Bike advice

[sethschmautz]

Hey all, recently a good deal has come up on a 2014 carbon Beargrease that I'm seriously considering. I currently have an 2016 alloy Kona Wo with a carbon fork that I ride with kids and in the winter. The differences between the bikes (as I see them) are as follows:

Spacing:
150 front, 197 rear - Wo
142 front, 177 rear - Beargrease
Any problems with future upgrades?

Tires:
5" front - both
4" rear - Beargrease (although salsa and others claim they can get up to 4.8" with "drivetrain modification")
5" rear - Wo
I run a 4.6" rear tire in the winter. This is maybe my biggest worry.

Seatpost:
31.6 - Wo
27.2 - Beargrease
I realize this limits me for droppers, but I haven't run one on my fat bike in the past.

HTA
68.5 - Beargrease
70 - Wo

STA
73 - BG
73 - Wo

Weight
25-26# - BG
29# - Wo

I'm mainly doing short rides but would like to do some bike packing in the future.

As I ride in the winter, the carbon seems like it would be more resistant to corrosion from road salts.

Thoughts?

Seth

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

[alewi11]

Buy a $400 chinese carbon frame and swap your stuff over? My biggest worry would be the 142/177 spacing.

[mntlion]

what problem with your old bike are you trying to solve?

[Iowagriz]

I have the beargrease and really like it as it performs similar to a regular mtb (fastish feeling, nice turn response). However, I'm also quickly seeing the limitations that it really is only a groomed snow race bike. I can do some of the lesser packed trails, but if you plan on doing more exploration, I'd get something with a wider footprint.

I'm hoping for more snow next year, the golf course grooms for xc skiing and allows fat bikes. I think that is the element for the beargrease. So more for fitness than exploration.

[Kootenai]

However, I'm also quickly seeing the limitations that it really is only a groomed snow race bike. I can do some of the lesser packed trails, but if you plan on doing more exploration, I'd get something with a wider footprint.

4” tires would be a deal breaker for me. We have some groomed, but a lot of our trails are multi use with snowshoeing, runners, postholers, etc. 4.8 bud and lou were game changers even just upgrading from spesh 4.6.

[gravitylover]

I can't imagine having a bike that looks like an adventure bike but actually isn't. IMO with fat bikes go big or don't go at all. If you want a quicker and more nimble groomed snow machine great get a set of wheels for that but there will be enough times where a true fatty is the right tool for the job and you'll be glad you have 4.6 or 4.8 tires.

[sethschmautz]

Thanks all. Opportunity is no longer there, but the concerns about tire size were at the front of my mind. The Geo was a little better and mtnions question is a good one - what problem am I trying to solve?

All in all, probably weight and a more relaxed HTA. The Wo is nice bike and I've enjoyed my time on it. Tire size is good. Weight is okay. I'll probably keep my eyes out for a frame rather than whole bike.

Seth

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

[Ski Donkey]

I like a smaller tire, I’ve found all i ride is packed groom snow, I ride a 2018 beargrease and I ride it like a summer bike. It all depends on what you’re looking to do. For me it’s perfect because I want to ride fast flow like summer, but it ain’t for everyone.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums