On One Fatty Fork: Update

Saturday's ride was the harshest test of the On One Carbon Fatty Fork I have had yet. (By the way- for more on this fork from me, follow this link) The Beverly Park trails are fast, technical in spots, and there are berms, steep climbs and descents, and copious fast directional changes. You'll need great brakes, and climbing legs for the short, steep grunts. All this put a bigger stress on the fork than anything I can get locally.

There were a few things on my mind as I loaded up the Snow Dog for this trip.

• How would the straight, carbon 1 1/8th steer tube do on this rigid set up?
• Would not having a through axle show up as unwanted flex or by having the brake rotate the axle out of the drop out?



Surly's Bud fits up front fine on a Rolling Darryl rim

• Speaking of braking- Would the fork have any strange behaviors under heavy front brake use? 

Since I had gotten the fork, I had swapped in a set of Rolling Darryl wheels with the Surly Bud 26 X 4.8" tire up front and the "no-name" tire out back I got recently which is only slightly smaller than the Bud. The One One Carbon Fatty clears this combination well. Out back is another story! It only just gets by, but that's another story.......
 
The fork's geometry matches up here well. The 55mm off set on the fork let me steer without any heavy, sluggish feeling from the geometry, and allowed me to have plenty of control over all that rotating mass. The fork also features forward facing drop outs, so hard braking doesn't rotate the axle out of the drop out, instead it forces it back into the drop out. Smart design.

The fork was surprisingly rock solid under cornering and braking. If having a straight, 1 1/8th steer tube is a detriment, I couldn't feel it here. Hard braking felt normal. No shuddering, and it just tracked really straight and true. The tire nor the rotor rubbed in any way, which I have experienced with other wheel/fork combinations. Climbing was no issue up front either. No wandering of the front end on slow climbs.

Overall, I am quite happy with the purchase of this fork. I gained a benefit with less weight, and an easy handling front end which clears big tires and handles hard riding well. Good stuff here.

On One Fatty Fork: Update

Saturday's ride was the harshest test of the On One Carbon Fatty Fork I have had yet. (By the way- for more on this fork from me, follow this link) The Beverly Park trails are fast, technical in spots, and there are berms, steep climbs and descents, and copious fast directional changes. You'll need great brakes, and climbing legs for the short, steep grunts. All this put a bigger stress on the fork than anything I can get locally.

There were a few things on my mind as I loaded up the Snow Dog for this trip.

• How would the straight, carbon 1 1/8th steer tube do on this rigid set up?
• Would not having a through axle show up as unwanted flex or by having the brake rotate the axle out of the drop out?



Surly's Bud fits up front fine on a Rolling Darryl rim

• Speaking of braking- Would the fork have any strange behaviors under heavy front brake use? 

Since I had gotten the fork, I had swapped in a set of Rolling Darryl wheels with the Surly Bud 26 X 4.8" tire up front and the "no-name" tire out back I got recently which is only slightly smaller than the Bud. The One One Carbon Fatty clears this combination well. Out back is another story! It only just gets by, but that's another story.......
 
The fork's geometry matches up here well. The 55mm off set on the fork let me steer without any heavy, sluggish feeling from the geometry, and allowed me to have plenty of control over all that rotating mass. The fork also features forward facing drop outs, so hard braking doesn't rotate the axle out of the drop out, instead it forces it back into the drop out. Smart design.

The fork was surprisingly rock solid under cornering and braking. If having a straight, 1 1/8th steer tube is a detriment, I couldn't feel it here. Hard braking felt normal. No shuddering, and it just tracked really straight and true. The tire nor the rotor rubbed in any way, which I have experienced with other wheel/fork combinations. Climbing was no issue up front either. No wandering of the front end on slow climbs.

Overall, I am quite happy with the purchase of this fork. I gained a benefit with less weight, and an easy handling front end which clears big tires and handles hard riding well. Good stuff here.

MRP Fat Fork vs On One Fatty Fork- Part 2

Part 1 can be seen HERE

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned..... And: Both forks mentioned were purchased with my own money. I am not being bribed, nor paid for this post. 

On One Fatty Fork on The Snow Dog

Okay, so as promised, here are my riding impressions on these fat bike forks suitable for 1 1/8th steer tube fat bikes with 470-ish millimeter axle to crown lengths.

On One Fatty Fork: 

This fork not only transferred over to the Mukluk with ease, it feels much like the Enabler fork it replaced in terms of handling. If you love your Muk's handling, this fork is the one to get.

It feels maybe a bit less harsh than the Enabler. I sometimes think it is smoother, then other times I think it is very similar. I can see the lower third of the fork legs really working over small chatter, so it is doing something. In terms of being "wowed" by carbon fiber? I don't see that here in terms of feel.

Obviously in the weight department this fork has a bigger impact, (no pun intended), on the overall feel of the Snow Dog. At approximately half the weight of an Enabler, the inertia in steering, making quick maneuvers, and in lofting the front end are all different feeling now. I don't know how that will also affect soft conditions handling because we haven't had much opportunity for that this Summer. The jury is still out there.

Tire clearance is obviously copious with 3.8" - 4.0" tires. I have stuck a 4.7" tire in here and if it had significant side knobs, I would be pushing the limits. This is with a Rolling Darryl, by the way, which is not pictured here. 100mm rims and Bud tires? A tight squeeze, most likely.

The MRP Fat Fork on the MukTruk

MRP Fat Fork:

So an aluminum fork? You've all heard the byline on aluminum a million times: Harsh, rigid, stiff, and unforgiving, right? Well, the MRP fork acts like aluminum really is, and that is flexible and not super rigid. It is a surprisingly smooth fork.

The Fat Fork hasn't been ridden with fat tires, just the 29+ wheels I have, so far. At some point I will be getting something built up that supports proper fat bike tires and rims, but till then, keep in mind this impression is with the 29+ set up.

That said, I feel that the higher pressures I have used with the 29+ Knards and the lower volume overall of those tires versus fat bike tires should ride slightly harsher than a full on fat biking set up. I can only guess now- but my opinion is that on a fat bike, this MRP Fat Fork would feel awesome.

The weight isn't terrible, but it doesn't approach the feathery weights that many of the carbon forks are coming out at. Still, it is metal, rides super smoothly, and should be an easy fork to live with in the rough stuff. Tire clearances look on par with Salsa Cycles Bearpaw Aluminum fork, so this should swallow a Bud on a Clownshoe easily. The trail figure that this fork will make your fat bike have will mean slower, more sluggish handling in drier conditions, but slow speed stability should be tops.

Conclusions: If you want to simply make a swap, ditch a lot of weight, don't mind futzing with carbon steer tube plugs, and won't miss triple boss mounts on your fork, get the Fatty fork from One One. It is cheap, but light, and seems durable. Yes....it would seem to break Keith Bontrager's Law. However; if you have an aversion to anything structural on your bike being anything but metal, love stability, and don't mind not being the cool kid at the trail head, get the MRP Fat Fork.

Obviously both of these forks don't support the all out adventure ethos that the Enabler fork espoused, so maybe you'd better hang on to that chunk of steel, just in case. But both of these forks will improve any early model Mukluk and provide you with certain benefits that an Enabler fork doesn't have. I can recommend both for different reasons.

Hope this was useful.

MRP Fat Fork vs On One Fatty Fork- Part 2

Part 1 can be seen HERE

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned..... And: Both forks mentioned were purchased with my own money. I am not being bribed, nor paid for this post. 

On One Fatty Fork on The Snow Dog

Okay, so as promised, here are my riding impressions on these fat bike forks suitable for 1 1/8th steer tube fat bikes with 470-ish millimeter axle to crown lengths.

On One Fatty Fork: 

This fork not only transferred over to the Mukluk with ease, it feels much like the Enabler fork it replaced in terms of handling. If you love your Muk's handling, this fork is the one to get.

It feels maybe a bit less harsh than the Enabler. I sometimes think it is smoother, then other times I think it is very similar. I can see the lower third of the fork legs really working over small chatter, so it is doing something. In terms of being "wowed" by carbon fiber? I don't see that here in terms of feel.

Obviously in the weight department this fork has a bigger impact, (no pun intended), on the overall feel of the Snow Dog. At approximately half the weight of an Enabler, the inertia in steering, making quick maneuvers, and in lofting the front end are all different feeling now. I don't know how that will also affect soft conditions handling because we haven't had much opportunity for that this Summer. The jury is still out there.

Tire clearance is obviously copious with 3.8" - 4.0" tires. I have stuck a 4.7" tire in here and if it had significant side knobs, I would be pushing the limits. This is with a Rolling Darryl, by the way, which is not pictured here. 100mm rims and Bud tires? A tight squeeze, most likely.

The MRP Fat Fork on the MukTruk

MRP Fat Fork:

So an aluminum fork? You've all heard the byline on aluminum a million times: Harsh, rigid, stiff, and unforgiving, right? Well, the MRP fork acts like aluminum really is, and that is flexible and not super rigid. It is a surprisingly smooth fork.

The Fat Fork hasn't been ridden with fat tires, just the 29+ wheels I have, so far. At some point I will be getting something built up that supports proper fat bike tires and rims, but till then, keep in mind this impression is with the 29+ set up.

That said, I feel that the higher pressures I have used with the 29+ Knards and the lower volume overall of those tires versus fat bike tires should ride slightly harsher than a full on fat biking set up. I can only guess now- but my opinion is that on a fat bike, this MRP Fat Fork would feel awesome.

The weight isn't terrible, but it doesn't approach the feathery weights that many of the carbon forks are coming out at. Still, it is metal, rides super smoothly, and should be an easy fork to live with in the rough stuff. Tire clearances look on par with Salsa Cycles Bearpaw Aluminum fork, so this should swallow a Bud on a Clownshoe easily. The trail figure that this fork will make your fat bike have will mean slower, more sluggish handling in drier conditions, but slow speed stability should be tops.

Conclusions: If you want to simply make a swap, ditch a lot of weight, don't mind futzing with carbon steer tube plugs, and won't miss triple boss mounts on your fork, get the Fatty fork from One One. It is cheap, but light, and seems durable. Yes....it would seem to break Keith Bontrager's Law. However; if you have an aversion to anything structural on your bike being anything but metal, love stability, and don't mind not being the cool kid at the trail head, get the MRP Fat Fork.

Obviously both of these forks don't support the all out adventure ethos that the Enabler fork espoused, so maybe you'd better hang on to that chunk of steel, just in case. But both of these forks will improve any early model Mukluk and provide you with certain benefits that an Enabler fork doesn't have. I can recommend both for different reasons.

Hope this was useful.

MRP Fat Fork vs On One Fatty Fork

The One One Carbon Fatty Fork

If you own one of the "first wave" fat bikes that have only an 1 1/8th compatible head tube, like I do, your fork options besides the stock fork that came with your rig, are limited. If you were like me, it was hard to find any good information on such forks, because most folks are all buzzing about "the next shiny object" and not some antiquated 1 1/8th steer tube fat bike fork option. Hopefully this will help correct that for someone out there......

So, before I get any further, here's my standard disclaimer, with an addendum...

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned..... And: Both forks mentioned were purchased with my own money. I am not being bribed, nor paid for this post. 

(sigh!)...Okay then, with that outta the way, here's the way I see these choices for your fat bike. First up, the On One Carbon Fatty. This fork is, as the name implies, carbon fiber and surprisingly enough, so is the steer tube. It comes in black or white and has some ridiculous clear coated graphics. Price from On One direct is $248.46, give or take a bit depending upon currency exchange rates. 

Specs:

• 470mm Axle To Crown length
• 55mm offset
• 590 grams cut to fit a Large Mukluk
• Rear Standard Brake Mount
• 10mm QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fatty fork is pretty much a direct replacement for an Enabler fork. Similar axle to crown length, offset, and brake mounting standards mean you just install the fork, swap over the brake and stem, and you are ready to ride. Well, that is if you have a carbon steer tube plug to take the place of a star nut, which cannot be used "no how-no way" on a carbon steer tube. (Or at least, it shouldn't be.) The Carbon Fatty does have a bit of a protruding "shelf" at the crown race seat, but this is so it matches up with the larger bottom part of On One's fat bike head tube. Mukluk owners will have to just put up with the eyesore. Note: You could use this on a fat bike with a tapered steer tube fork by replacing the lower head set with an 1 1/8th compatible reducer. This means the fork will swap over to your next fat bike too.

MRP's Fat Fork

The next contender is MRP's Fat Fork which is quite a bit different than the On One fork and has more options available. The MRP fork is the evolution of the White Brother's SnoPack fork. With the change in name of the company, the fork was dubbed the "Fat Fork" going forward. This fork is available in aluminum or aluminum crown, steer tube, and drop outs with carbon fiber legs. Both versions have 34mm diameter legs. The fork is also offered in two axle to crown lengths, and one would work with Pugsleys at 450mm. MSRP is $449.00 for the carbon legged versions and $339.00 for the all-alloy ones. 

Specs:

• 468mm Axle to Crown length
• 43mm Offset
• 990 grams cut with star nut (Carbon is 910gm uncut)
• Front Standard, post style brake mount
• QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fat Fork transfers over well to a Mukluk, but the fly in this ointment will be the front brake standard that MRP uses. While I have seen a creative kludge to adapt a rear standard brake mount front hub to a front brake standard fork, it isn't easy, and it isn't commercially available. Most will be best served by swapping over to a more "modern" front standard hub. Yes.....a new wheel build. But look.....everything going forward is front brake standard, so why not? The other thing of note is the offset, which is shorter. This means more stability. Well......theoretically it does, and it probably will in practice. What does this mean for you? A "slower" handling bike. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not. I like it for softer conditions. Note: This fork would also be swappable to another fat bike regardless of headset/head tube sizing with the correct head set. Front brake standard hubs are plentiful now as well. 

Comparisons: The On One fork seems to win on paper with its direct swap-ability, lighter weight, and lesser price. However; that is tempered somewhat since your hub choices are limited going forward and you need to deal with a carbon compatible pre-load plug to adjust your head set. (These can be a bit frustrating depending on the style, plus they cost more than star nuts do.) The MRP fork doesn't have hose guides, which is unforgivable in 2014. Both forks do not have any provisions for bottle cages or Anything Cages, which may be a negative for you. The MRP's price is 100 bucks more, and that's hard to swallow, but it does get you into the modern world when it comes to hub/brake standards, and it isn't carbon, which for some folks is all they will need to know to choose it. 

Okay, so how do they ride?  See Part 2 HERE.

MRP Fat Fork vs On One Fatty Fork

The One One Carbon Fatty Fork

If you own one of the "first wave" fat bikes that have only an 1 1/8th compatible head tube, like I do, your fork options besides the stock fork that came with your rig, are limited. If you were like me, it was hard to find any good information on such forks, because most folks are all buzzing about "the next shiny object" and not some antiquated 1 1/8th steer tube fat bike fork option. Hopefully this will help correct that for someone out there......

So, before I get any further, here's my standard disclaimer, with an addendum...

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned..... And: Both forks mentioned were purchased with my own money. I am not being bribed, nor paid for this post. 

(sigh!)...Okay then, with that outta the way, here's the way I see these choices for your fat bike. First up, the On One Carbon Fatty. This fork is, as the name implies, carbon fiber and surprisingly enough, so is the steer tube. It comes in black or white and has some ridiculous clear coated graphics. Price from On One direct is $248.46, give or take a bit depending upon currency exchange rates. 

Specs:

• 470mm Axle To Crown length
• 55mm offset
• 590 grams cut to fit a Large Mukluk
• Rear Standard Brake Mount
• 10mm QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fatty fork is pretty much a direct replacement for an Enabler fork. Similar axle to crown length, offset, and brake mounting standards mean you just install the fork, swap over the brake and stem, and you are ready to ride. Well, that is if you have a carbon steer tube plug to take the place of a star nut, which cannot be used "no how-no way" on a carbon steer tube. (Or at least, it shouldn't be.) The Carbon Fatty does have a bit of a protruding "shelf" at the crown race seat, but this is so it matches up with the larger bottom part of On One's fat bike head tube. Mukluk owners will have to just put up with the eyesore. Note: You could use this on a fat bike with a tapered steer tube fork by replacing the lower head set with an 1 1/8th compatible reducer. This means the fork will swap over to your next fat bike too.

MRP's Fat Fork

The next contender is MRP's Fat Fork which is quite a bit different than the On One fork and has more options available. The MRP fork is the evolution of the White Brother's SnoPack fork. With the change in name of the company, the fork was dubbed the "Fat Fork" going forward. This fork is available in aluminum or aluminum crown, steer tube, and drop outs with carbon fiber legs. Both versions have 34mm diameter legs. The fork is also offered in two axle to crown lengths, and one would work with Pugsleys at 450mm. MSRP is $449.00 for the carbon legged versions and $339.00 for the all-alloy ones. 

Specs:

• 468mm Axle to Crown length
• 43mm Offset
• 990 grams cut with star nut (Carbon is 910gm uncut)
• Front Standard, post style brake mount
• QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fat Fork transfers over well to a Mukluk, but the fly in this ointment will be the front brake standard that MRP uses. While I have seen a creative kludge to adapt a rear standard brake mount front hub to a front brake standard fork, it isn't easy, and it isn't commercially available. Most will be best served by swapping over to a more "modern" front standard hub. Yes.....a new wheel build. But look.....everything going forward is front brake standard, so why not? The other thing of note is the offset, which is shorter. This means more stability. Well......theoretically it does, and it probably will in practice. What does this mean for you? A "slower" handling bike. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not. I like it for softer conditions. Note: This fork would also be swappable to another fat bike regardless of headset/head tube sizing with the correct head set. Front brake standard hubs are plentiful now as well. 

Comparisons: The On One fork seems to win on paper with its direct swap-ability, lighter weight, and lesser price. However; that is tempered somewhat since your hub choices are limited going forward and you need to deal with a carbon compatible pre-load plug to adjust your head set. (These can be a bit frustrating depending on the style, plus they cost more than star nuts do.) The MRP fork doesn't have hose guides, which is unforgivable in 2014. Both forks do not have any provisions for bottle cages or Anything Cages, which may be a negative for you. The MRP's price is 100 bucks more, and that's hard to swallow, but it does get you into the modern world when it comes to hub/brake standards, and it isn't carbon, which for some folks is all they will need to know to choose it. 

Okay, so how do they ride?  See Part 2 HERE.

Forked: Part 2

The Snow Dog: Now with a higher carbon content!

About a week ago I posted here about my new On One Fatty fork for the Snow Dog. I've been cautiously riding it around a bit here for the past week, just trying to settle in the head set and mostly to get acquainted with the change. Big changes like adding a new fork like this to a bike I really was accustomed to kind of throws me for a loop sometimes. I guess it takes me a while to "warm up" to things while sometimes I can constantly change a bike and it never really seems to bother me. Whatever the reason, I just was very averse to jumping in the deep end with this fork until I got to know it better.

Well, I can say that yesterday was the first time I rode it and never really thought about it. It was becoming "normal" and the sensations of the bike were good. They never really were bad, per se', so that may be a bad choice of words, but I wasn't blown away by anything in particular either. In fact, I really cannot say anything is all that much different. It's all in my head, most likely. Obviously, the bike is somewhat lighter, but honestly- I cannot feel it when I ride the bike. The geometry must be very close to what it was with the Enabler, so there are no real quirks that I can sus out with how it steers or handles so far.

Fat bikes, in my opinion, seem to be very "wheel-centric" in every way. The wheels dominate the looks, the traction, the way the bike handles, and when it comes to weight, the wheels are the heaviest component by a much larger margin than they are on almost any other type of bicycle. It's all about those fat, ginormous, heavy wheels. Sure- you can nuance certain things about the fat bike by doing component swaps but the wheels are the biggest attribute and the biggest detriment to a bike like this.

That's why I feel that tubeless tires and rims, lighter rims, and lighter tires are well worth the money to upgrade to on these machines. The old maxim about how wheels are the best thing to upgrade on a bicycle? Times two on a fat bike. The difference on my switch from tubed Larry 3.8's to the Velocity Dually/tubeless Sterling set up was not just a little different, it was hugely different. Even when I initially set the Sterlings up tubeless on the Fatback wheels, the difference was so obvious it was laughable. That's why the fork is merely a slight to not noticeable change here. The wheels will make a bigger difference when I change them. It'll be good......

Forked: Part 2

The Snow Dog: Now with a higher carbon content!

About a week ago I posted here about my new On One Fatty fork for the Snow Dog. I've been cautiously riding it around a bit here for the past week, just trying to settle in the head set and mostly to get acquainted with the change. Big changes like adding a new fork like this to a bike I really was accustomed to kind of throws me for a loop sometimes. I guess it takes me a while to "warm up" to things while sometimes I can constantly change a bike and it never really seems to bother me. Whatever the reason, I just was very averse to jumping in the deep end with this fork until I got to know it better.

Well, I can say that yesterday was the first time I rode it and never really thought about it. It was becoming "normal" and the sensations of the bike were good. They never really were bad, per se', so that may be a bad choice of words, but I wasn't blown away by anything in particular either. In fact, I really cannot say anything is all that much different. It's all in my head, most likely. Obviously, the bike is somewhat lighter, but honestly- I cannot feel it when I ride the bike. The geometry must be very close to what it was with the Enabler, so there are no real quirks that I can sus out with how it steers or handles so far.

Fat bikes, in my opinion, seem to be very "wheel-centric" in every way. The wheels dominate the looks, the traction, the way the bike handles, and when it comes to weight, the wheels are the heaviest component by a much larger margin than they are on almost any other type of bicycle. It's all about those fat, ginormous, heavy wheels. Sure- you can nuance certain things about the fat bike by doing component swaps but the wheels are the biggest attribute and the biggest detriment to a bike like this.

That's why I feel that tubeless tires and rims, lighter rims, and lighter tires are well worth the money to upgrade to on these machines. The old maxim about how wheels are the best thing to upgrade on a bicycle? Times two on a fat bike. The difference on my switch from tubed Larry 3.8's to the Velocity Dually/tubeless Sterling set up was not just a little different, it was hugely different. Even when I initially set the Sterlings up tubeless on the Fatback wheels, the difference was so obvious it was laughable. That's why the fork is merely a slight to not noticeable change here. The wheels will make a bigger difference when I change them. It'll be good......

Forked

The old Dog is getting rather colorful these days!

Last Fall when I heard that the fertile mind of Brant Richards was designing a fat bike fork for On One, my interest was piqued. Would it be something I could make use of? I knew the prices through On One were reasonable, so I was hopeful.

I found out later that it was definitely something I could use. Straight 1 1/8th steer tube, rear brake standard for the fork, and all carbon fiber light. The availability was sketchy earlier in the Winter, so I waited until a new shipment dropped to On One and then I pulled the trigger. It took almost two weeks from the UK, but I think the wait was worth it.

The Snow Dog's original Enabler fork weighed in at 1050 grams and the replacement on One Fatty Fork weighs 590 grams before I cut the steer tube! That's some serious weight reduction right there. I have to dial in the front brake a bit more, but a quick ride showed me that this fork does have some compliance, so it promises a decent ride. Obviously, the front end feels a tad lighter, but the handling seems really good yet. We'll see once things get nasty and I have more time on this rig.

This isn't the end of upgrades though, just the beginning. Next up will be a drivetrain redo with a move to 10 speed and possibly one of those ginormous 42T add on cassette cogs so I can extend the range of the 1X set up. I don't see me going to a front derailluer anytime soon on this, maybe never. There will be a new crankset as well. Possibly something that fits a 30T or maybe one of those crazy SRAM cranks with a 28T drive ring. A clutch equipped derailleur is a must.

I'll live with the wheels for a while, but those will get replaced sometime with something lighter and nicer. No hurry there though. I've a feeling a ton of new options are coming soon that will satisfy that itch.

This will then become the all-year, all-arounder fat bike for me. The titanium bike is going to get upgraded as well. That bike will get detailed later, but it will become the "expedition" class fat bike in the fleet and will wear the "bigger shoes" of the two bikes eventually. Stay tuned.......

Forked

The old Dog is getting rather colorful these days!

Last Fall when I heard that the fertile mind of Brant Richards was designing a fat bike fork for On One, my interest was piqued. Would it be something I could make use of? I knew the prices through On One were reasonable, so I was hopeful.

I found out later that it was definitely something I could use. Straight 1 1/8th steer tube, rear brake standard for the fork, and all carbon fiber light. The availability was sketchy earlier in the Winter, so I waited until a new shipment dropped to On One and then I pulled the trigger. It took almost two weeks from the UK, but I think the wait was worth it.

The Snow Dog's original Enabler fork weighed in at 1050 grams and the replacement on One Fatty Fork weighs 590 grams before I cut the steer tube! That's some serious weight reduction right there. I have to dial in the front brake a bit more, but a quick ride showed me that this fork does have some compliance, so it promises a decent ride. Obviously, the front end feels a tad lighter, but the handling seems really good yet. We'll see once things get nasty and I have more time on this rig.

This isn't the end of upgrades though, just the beginning. Next up will be a drivetrain redo with a move to 10 speed and possibly one of those ginormous 42T add on cassette cogs so I can extend the range of the 1X set up. I don't see me going to a front derailluer anytime soon on this, maybe never. There will be a new crankset as well. Possibly something that fits a 30T or maybe one of those crazy SRAM cranks with a 28T drive ring. A clutch equipped derailleur is a must.

I'll live with the wheels for a while, but those will get replaced sometime with something lighter and nicer. No hurry there though. I've a feeling a ton of new options are coming soon that will satisfy that itch.

This will then become the all-year, all-arounder fat bike for me. The titanium bike is going to get upgraded as well. That bike will get detailed later, but it will become the "expedition" class fat bike in the fleet and will wear the "bigger shoes" of the two bikes eventually. Stay tuned.......

So, What Rhymes With Carbon?

I just built this one up yesterday. Another Carbon Beargrease XX1

In my post last week about Chinese sourced carbon fat bike frames, I mentioned how some industry folk believe that carbon fiber is the "material of choice" for the average bike in the future. They say it will replace aluminum as the most common bicycle frame material for the recreational cycling market.

Well, in road bikes, I can see that, and maybe in terms of mountain bikes, sure- that might happen, but would people really go to the extent of buying into the carbon fiber fat bike idea? I mean, a fat bike is sort of an odd deal yet. Maybe a "play bike" for someone loaded with bikes and that needs a diversion. I guess I was thinking your carbon fat bike idea might sell a few units, but this season has blown me away as far as how the carbon fat bike idea has taken root so quickly.

As I recall, it took at least 2G to build a Pugsley back five years ago, and that kept fat bikes out of my hands, and I am sure it deterred others as well. Then in late 2010, Salsa Cycles came out with that Mukluk and Surly quickly followed suit with their fully built Pugs option and suddenly you could buy a fat bike for under $1600.00 ready to roll.

Now this made sense to me. Now you could somewhat afford to dive in and take the chance to see what it was all about. Then several other companies started in with their own cheap options, which now have brought prices down to Walmart levels for a fat bike, (quite literally, with the Mongoose "Beast" fat bike. $200.00! ) Conversely Salsa Cycles started to push upward with a titanium offering and higher spec aluminum models. Then suddenly it seemed that everyone was talking carbon fiber fat bikes with crazy drive train set ups like SRAM's new XX1 stuff. (The cassette alone costs what TWO Mongoose Beast fat bikes do!) So, like........who is going to buy into that? Yeah, maybe a few, as I thought, but really.......not that many, right?

The slightly less blingy Carbon Beargrease X-9

Wrong! I have been soooooo wrong about this. It's blowing my mind everyday. I can't really explain it either. Yes- these are lighter by a fair piece than the aluminum Mukluks. (About 8lbs lighter in the case of a XX1 vs Muk 2) Yes, carbon is the premier material for frames in the road world and is quickly, (or already has), becoming the same in the mountain biking world. I guess fat bikes are falling in on the coat tails of this.

Is it really all about the weight? Maybe it is. I do know that the massive, almost cartoonish scale of the frame dimensions is amusing, but so far, I haven't seen any customers laughing, like I did when I first laid eyes on a Beargrease at Frostbike last February. So I don't know if that has anything at all to do with it. Is it the subversive blackness of the carbon frame? Maybe. Maybe fat bike customers are rebels that manifest their disconnect with traditional cycling by buying these outlandish looking steeds. "Look at me! I will crush you with my uber-light, ultra-black wheels of Death!

Or maybe this is the anti-Lance-effect bike. The bike that manifests the backlash against pro roadie drugged performances that has gutted the romance and idealistic dreams of the common cyclist who once played make-believe roadie when Lance was King. But it is still carbon fiber!

Or maybe these are just freaking cool bicycles that blow peoples minds to the point that they have to get one. But I don't know about that. Why didn't the same basic rigs in aluminum fly out the door like these have here then? Maybe aluminum isn't cool anymore. We're going to have to find a catch phrase for carbon like steel frames have. You know- steel is real  and all.  But what rhymes with carbon?

Well, whatever it is that is making this blow up, I can not say. All I know is that big, humongous boxes containing plasticky fat goodness keep appearing at the shop and I keep building them up. What happens after that is anybodies guess, I guess!

So, What Rhymes With Carbon?

I just built this one up yesterday. Another Carbon Beargrease XX1

In my post last week about Chinese sourced carbon fat bike frames, I mentioned how some industry folk believe that carbon fiber is the "material of choice" for the average bike in the future. They say it will replace aluminum as the most common bicycle frame material for the recreational cycling market.

Well, in road bikes, I can see that, and maybe in terms of mountain bikes, sure- that might happen, but would people really go to the extent of buying into the carbon fiber fat bike idea? I mean, a fat bike is sort of an odd deal yet. Maybe a "play bike" for someone loaded with bikes and that needs a diversion. I guess I was thinking your carbon fat bike idea might sell a few units, but this season has blown me away as far as how the carbon fat bike idea has taken root so quickly.

As I recall, it took at least 2G to build a Pugsley back five years ago, and that kept fat bikes out of my hands, and I am sure it deterred others as well. Then in late 2010, Salsa Cycles came out with that Mukluk and Surly quickly followed suit with their fully built Pugs option and suddenly you could buy a fat bike for under $1600.00 ready to roll.

Now this made sense to me. Now you could somewhat afford to dive in and take the chance to see what it was all about. Then several other companies started in with their own cheap options, which now have brought prices down to Walmart levels for a fat bike, (quite literally, with the Mongoose "Beast" fat bike. $200.00! ) Conversely Salsa Cycles started to push upward with a titanium offering and higher spec aluminum models. Then suddenly it seemed that everyone was talking carbon fiber fat bikes with crazy drive train set ups like SRAM's new XX1 stuff. (The cassette alone costs what TWO Mongoose Beast fat bikes do!) So, like........who is going to buy into that? Yeah, maybe a few, as I thought, but really.......not that many, right?

The slightly less blingy Carbon Beargrease X-9

Wrong! I have been soooooo wrong about this. It's blowing my mind everyday. I can't really explain it either. Yes- these are lighter by a fair piece than the aluminum Mukluks. (About 8lbs lighter in the case of a XX1 vs Muk 2) Yes, carbon is the premier material for frames in the road world and is quickly, (or already has), becoming the same in the mountain biking world. I guess fat bikes are falling in on the coat tails of this.

Is it really all about the weight? Maybe it is. I do know that the massive, almost cartoonish scale of the frame dimensions is amusing, but so far, I haven't seen any customers laughing, like I did when I first laid eyes on a Beargrease at Frostbike last February. So I don't know if that has anything at all to do with it. Is it the subversive blackness of the carbon frame? Maybe. Maybe fat bike customers are rebels that manifest their disconnect with traditional cycling by buying these outlandish looking steeds. "Look at me! I will crush you with my uber-light, ultra-black wheels of Death!

Or maybe this is the anti-Lance-effect bike. The bike that manifests the backlash against pro roadie drugged performances that has gutted the romance and idealistic dreams of the common cyclist who once played make-believe roadie when Lance was King. But it is still carbon fiber!

Or maybe these are just freaking cool bicycles that blow peoples minds to the point that they have to get one. But I don't know about that. Why didn't the same basic rigs in aluminum fly out the door like these have here then? Maybe aluminum isn't cool anymore. We're going to have to find a catch phrase for carbon like steel frames have. You know- steel is real  and all.  But what rhymes with carbon?

Well, whatever it is that is making this blow up, I can not say. All I know is that big, humongous boxes containing plasticky fat goodness keep appearing at the shop and I keep building them up. What happens after that is anybodies guess, I guess!

A Carbon Fiber Fat Bike Dream

On One carbon fatty one-off

Recently I posted about a one off carbon fiber fat bike being done for On One's Brant Richards. This has been a pretty popular post here of late. It got me thinking, "So.....if we're going to do fat bikes in carbon, let's dream a little, shall we?"

Here's my list and some reasons why I think the ideas are worthy....

• Carbon fiber is, or more correctly "can be", a great material to make a frame from if you maximize the material's unique properties. So, if On One, or any other company, wants to really make carbon worthwhile, it is good to know that some of us feel it has more than being "light weight" going for it. One of the best things about carbon fiber is that it can be shaped in ways metal can not be. Sometimes this is used as a stylistic cue by designers, but I think it could benefit fat bikes greatly. Another thing is that the material can be compliant where you want it to be, stiff where you want it to be, and strong as it needs to be without weight penalty. 
• Let's take on the shaping. There are a lot of things that could be done here to make carbon fat bikes a good thing. I think one of those things is in the area of tire clearances. Crimping stays is really the main way metal frames gain clearances, but that technique is limited in its effectiveness.  Carbon fiber is mostly free of those limitations. I could see a thin, tall right chain stay snaking around crank rings and tire with an asymmetrical left chain stay with a beefier profile, yet allowing for a good amount of clearance. The stays could "wrap" more around the wider part of a tire, and pinch in for heel clearances which metal would be hard pressed to accomplish. A built in direct mount for a front derailleur could be shaped so that it wouldn't be a "mud shelf", as an example.
• Frame compliance could be built in for the rider with a stiffer frame laterally which is always a nice thing. The biggest negative thing I feel on a fat bike is when it twists nose to tail on fast corners and on really rough terrain. Those big contact patches like to grip and exert forces on a frame which make steering a little weird at times. I wonder how a carbon frame might be tuned to help alleviate that situation. 
• If I were doing a carbon fat bike, there are a few "musts" I would insist on. One would be clearances for the big Surly tires on 130mm rims. Yes- I know that you can not get 130mm rims.......yet. So, that's why it needs clearances for that big a rim/tire combo. The second thing is that I would insist on a 170mm spaced front fork. I'm not sure I would ever swap wheels, but- ya know- these wheels and tires are so expensive, having versatility makes sense. Single speed capable wheel up front, cassette in back. Plus, I think a wider front hub would make a rigid wheel that would track even better. You would ease the big tire clearance issues as well. 
• That brings up the issue of single speed. I don't know how you get that accomplished unless you fit an EBB or someone's proprietary slider/swinger drop outs. I think a full on adventure vehicle needs to be able to do this though. (Go single speed, that is.)

Otherwise what is going on with fat bikes now is good. I'm not "all for a carbon fat bike frame", but if you're going to bother doing one, do something that pushes the boundaries and that makes sense. It's going to cost a truckload of money anyway, so why not?

Got some thoughts on this? Hit the comment section.....

A Carbon Fiber Fat Bike Dream

On One carbon fatty one-off

Recently I posted about a one off carbon fiber fat bike being done for On One's Brant Richards. This has been a pretty popular post here of late. It got me thinking, "So.....if we're going to do fat bikes in carbon, let's dream a little, shall we?"

Here's my list and some reasons why I think the ideas are worthy....

• Carbon fiber is, or more correctly "can be", a great material to make a frame from if you maximize the material's unique properties. So, if On One, or any other company, wants to really make carbon worthwhile, it is good to know that some of us feel it has more than being "light weight" going for it. One of the best things about carbon fiber is that it can be shaped in ways metal can not be. Sometimes this is used as a stylistic cue by designers, but I think it could benefit fat bikes greatly. Another thing is that the material can be compliant where you want it to be, stiff where you want it to be, and strong as it needs to be without weight penalty. 
• Let's take on the shaping. There are a lot of things that could be done here to make carbon fat bikes a good thing. I think one of those things is in the area of tire clearances. Crimping stays is really the main way metal frames gain clearances, but that technique is limited in its effectiveness.  Carbon fiber is mostly free of those limitations. I could see a thin, tall right chain stay snaking around crank rings and tire with an asymmetrical left chain stay with a beefier profile, yet allowing for a good amount of clearance. The stays could "wrap" more around the wider part of a tire, and pinch in for heel clearances which metal would be hard pressed to accomplish. A built in direct mount for a front derailleur could be shaped so that it wouldn't be a "mud shelf", as an example.
• Frame compliance could be built in for the rider with a stiffer frame laterally which is always a nice thing. The biggest negative thing I feel on a fat bike is when it twists nose to tail on fast corners and on really rough terrain. Those big contact patches like to grip and exert forces on a frame which make steering a little weird at times. I wonder how a carbon frame might be tuned to help alleviate that situation. 
• If I were doing a carbon fat bike, there are a few "musts" I would insist on. One would be clearances for the big Surly tires on 130mm rims. Yes- I know that you can not get 130mm rims.......yet. So, that's why it needs clearances for that big a rim/tire combo. The second thing is that I would insist on a 170mm spaced front fork. I'm not sure I would ever swap wheels, but- ya know- these wheels and tires are so expensive, having versatility makes sense. Single speed capable wheel up front, cassette in back. Plus, I think a wider front hub would make a rigid wheel that would track even better. You would ease the big tire clearance issues as well. 
• That brings up the issue of single speed. I don't know how you get that accomplished unless you fit an EBB or someone's proprietary slider/swinger drop outs. I think a full on adventure vehicle needs to be able to do this though. (Go single speed, that is.)

Otherwise what is going on with fat bikes now is good. I'm not "all for a carbon fat bike frame", but if you're going to bother doing one, do something that pushes the boundaries and that makes sense. It's going to cost a truckload of money anyway, so why not?

Got some thoughts on this? Hit the comment section.....