Hill People Gear | Real Use Gear For Backcountry Travelers
888.464.1875 | info@hillpeoplegear.com Register | Login
Hill People Gear Forums
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsGeneralGeneralBackcountry bike suggestions Backcountry bike suggestions
Previous
 
Next
New Post
1/26/2017 11:27 AM
 

I am looking into getting a pair of new mountain bikes for Cheyvonne (Ctrow) and me.   I have picked SteamboatSystema's brain on this and hope he will chime in again with his suggestions and also input from others.   

We will be using the MTB’s for exercising the dogs/kids, scouting, and hunting.  The set up will need to be low maintenance and reliable.  We will not be doing any real technical or high speed riding. We just want comfortable, reliable, quiet transportation down two-tracks and logging roads.  We deal with plenty of mud and sand so a wider tire would probably be ideal. 

I think the 29 Plus size bikes would work best for us.  When would you want a Fatbike over a 29 Plus size?  Would there be any advantage going with a 27.5”?

Steel vs Aluminum frame? Ned recommended steel frames, Surly specifically, and I am looking at them.  Is there a reason steel frames seem to be quite a bit more expensive than an aluminum frame?  How much tougher are the steel frames over aluminum?  What other advantages do they have?

Hard tail vs. full suspension?  When is the comfort of a full suspension bike work the extra moving parts and $$$?  Possibly a full suspension (more comfort) for Cheyvonne and hard tail (simpler) for me? 

I have looked at sites like BikesDirect.com and they seem to have some good deals but I don’t know enough to be sure.  Or just pay the premium and buy from brick and mortar bike store in a big city?  

I know Craigslist and similar has some pretty good deals but we are hours from any major city and wouldn’t know enough to know what was a good deal or a rip off.

Comfortable, reliable, simple bike transportation in the backcountry.  Suggestions? 


Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
New Post
1/26/2017 2:13 PM
 
aluminum frames are stiffer, steel frames absorb some shock.

fatbikes are very limited in their practical applicability.

29er, done and done. If you can afford it, shimano deore or sram x5 component group. Don't get nicer than that, or you'll be sacrificing durability for decreased weight. Go lower than that, and quality and reliability will suffer. However, you can go one group below (shimano alivio / SRAM x4) and still end up with something very usable. I've ended up with Diamonback Overdrives with both HT 29ers I've gotten. Mine is the comp purchased for $900 because it was previous model year. Pretty sure you were riding that around one summer gathering. My daughter's was the standard Overdrive (with alivio component group) purchased on sale for $550. Both were outstanding values and completely serviceable bikes. Very efficient travel. On my Kokopelli Trail section ride (mostly roads, some more technical stuff), that Comp is the one I'm riding. Very efficient traveler. Everybody should have a hardtail 29er as an all around bike.

Once terrain gets technical, I do prefer my old FS bike, but to get similar quality the cost is nearly double.

We are fortunate in this matter that your conduct will be your marker and, thus, your reputation. The conduct of others on this forum has been, and will continue to be, their marker, and thus, their reputation. In the west, a person invests in one's reputation carefully. - 112Papa
 
New Post
1/27/2017 7:54 AM
 
What is your opinin of the Plus (+) size bikes? It looks like the 27.5 Plus is almost the same diameter at a standard 29" but with better coverage.

I went with a narrower 26 x 1.95" tire as a rear replacement on the 26" Trek and it was a huge step in the wrong direction. For the riding we do on two tracks and logging roads the wider tires is a definite advantage.

Several of the bikes I am looking at come with the Shimano SLX, I assume that is a step up from the Deore?

Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
New Post
1/27/2017 12:59 PM
 
My math may be a bit off but it looks a standard 29", a 27.5 Plus, and a 26 Fat bike all have about the same OD or clearance.

29 x 2.2" (standard) = ~29"
27.5 x 3.0" (plus size) = ~29"
26 x 4.5" (fat bike) = ~30"

It's my understanding that the fatbikes are considerably heavier and more sluggish do to the extra rolling weight but the 27.5 Plus is very similar to the 29 x 2.2 in handling.


Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
New Post
1/27/2017 4:22 PM
 

I forgot you had a bike to experiment with. Before buying two new bikes, I would experiment with tire widths on that one to answer your question. Right now, I'm running 2.3 front / 2.1 rear on both my HT and FS bike. There was a time on the FS that I was running 2.5 / 2.5. Then 2.5 / 2.3. Then 2.3 / 2.3. Then 2.3 / 2.1. Each one of those was a step up in mobility. But I haven't tried narrower than the current config.

I'd go right to 2.5 / 2.5 on your current bike. That's probably as fat as you can go on that frame. See if it feels like an improvement, or too much. If you like it and think you want fatter still, then the 27.5 plus is a contender. (what's the narrowest tire you can run on a 27.5+? another important piece of info). If 2.5 / 2.5 feels fatter than you want to go, then 29er (which tops out at 2.5) is the answer.

Something else to consider is PSI. Most MTBers try to run pretty low pressure which changes the dynamics quite a bit. I run 45psi on my hardtail and don't go lower than that. On the FS, I run 50. Both work well for me.

Component groups: http://www.bikeroar.com/articles/moun...

Like a lot of my opinions, my attitude about "higher end than deore is a step down in quality" is going to be controversial. A lot of people think that each step up is a step up in quality. The people in the business of selling components would certainly have you think so. My opinion was formed when there were 3 levels (something - maybe lx, deore, xt) and I had experience with deore and xt. The xt was noticeably more fragile than the deore and also broke more. It was arguably a tad bit smoother in operation. All I've really run since then has been deore and it has served me very well. Maybe SLX is what deore used to be. I'm not close enough to it to know. I recently upgraded the front brake on my FS. On the advice of the grizzled old bike mechanic I trust, I went with deore. He said the XT was a little lighter, but not particularly better, and much more expensive.

We are fortunate in this matter that your conduct will be your marker and, thus, your reputation. The conduct of others on this forum has been, and will continue to be, their marker, and thus, their reputation. In the west, a person invests in one's reputation carefully. - 112Papa
 
New Post
1/28/2017 10:06 AM
 

I recently bought my first mountain bike so I just went through many months of amateur research and went round and round about tire size as well.

Surlys might as well be engineered to appeal to people like me, so I did not look at many other brands once I settled on them. I'm too inexperienced to know if I actually like surlys or just like the IDEA of surlys, but I wasn't going to turn down a quick way to constrain my choices to a more reasonable number.

I was looking for a bike as a means of transportation and not really as a hobby in and of itself, I wanted a foul weather commuter (my '70s schwinn world tour doesn't like snow and freezing rain much) and to try my hand at bikepacking. I figure I might want to try a suspension fork down the road but in general I decided it was more fuss then I wanted and I would leverage youth for the time being. 

A lot of people recommended + bikes to me, and in bikepacking circles the Surly ECR and Krampus are popular rigs (both 29+) but I knew my bike would spend a lot of time on pavement and gravel roads despite my backwoods fantasies so I was fairly sure it wouldn't be the best fit for me. What finally sealed the deal was someone on the bikepacking reddit pointed out that the ECR in particular had such a low bottom bracket that if I did want to try normal 29er tires I'd probably have constant pedal strikes, whereas if I picked a bike made for normal 29ers with good clearance I could likely ride almost-29+ tires with the only compromise being sitting up a little higher.

I finally settled on a Surly Ogre, which the internet tells me I can cram a 3" tire on the front and a 2.5" tire on the rear. The one I bought came with 2.1 tires which after my road bike feel enough like monster truck tires that I am still resetting my frame of reference. My new-guy-overthinking-things plan is to have one set of fairly narrow tires to split the difference between pavement and trail, and a 27.5+ SS wheelset to get as much variance out of one frame as possible, and satisfy my curiosity about wider tires. 

Many people have told me in general that 27.5+ is becoming much more of a standard tire while 29+ will likely remain niche, and while surly is keeping their 29+ options they seem to be emphasizing some of their regular 29ers with 27.5+ compatibility. It is hard to deny the increasing popularity of 2.5< tire widths, but without more experience I have a hard time assessing peoples preferences in proper context.

From my year long craigslist prowling I can say confidently that a Karate Monkey is the easiest surly to source (several times I almost bought one for half of what my Ogre cost) and if my wife ever decides to join me off pavement that is very likely what I would buy her.

For now I am just riding my Ogre to work everyday and an occasional weekend jaunt to iron out the pesky saddle/pedal/bar details, once I have a little more confidence I'd like to try Kokopelli trail.


 

 
New Post
1/28/2017 10:47 PM
 
Evan and Fowler have both added some great info. The biggest thing Evan and I will differ on is tire size. I guess you'd say I come from a more performance/ racing oriented background where Evan is looking for a tool that will allow access deeper into the backcountry than would be available in the same time on foot. So take that for what it's worth.

For my "practical mountain bike" I've found tires in the 2.3-2.4" range to provide the best balance of weight, traction, rolling resistance, durability and availability. This is regardless of wheel size.

Strow you're pretty dead on with your observation of a 26"X4" tire being about the same OD as a 29"X2.3"(ish).

Fat bikes are good on packed snowshoe trails, and sand dunes, and that's about it.

For what you're doing 29ers are the answer, like Evan said. They just simply cover ground, especially dirt roads and similar, in a very efficient manner. Definitely worth experimenting with tire sizes in your AO to see what works best for you. I still think something in the 2.4-2.2 range will provide the most comfort and stability without being overly heavy. Also if the trails are really rocky a bigger tire will take more abuse than a smaller one. There are good tires available in sizes from 2.5-2.1 in 29" with a thousand different tread patterns. I'd recommend looking at ones that have a fairly low profile tread pattern with a round casing. I can give some more specific recommendations if you'd like.

I recommend steel for what you're doing for several reasons. They're going to be more durable than a comparable aluminum frame. Aluminum frames are stiff because they have to be, it has a lower fatigue life than steel and if they flexed the same way a steel frame does they'd crack much more often. There's obviously a ton of old AL bikes out there, but even more old steel. Steel also has a more damped and comfortable ride compared to AL. Aluminum frames are cheaper to mass produce than steel which is a big part of the price difference. I don't fully understand how that works since AL is a more expensive raw material and needs a higher skilled worker to weld it, but they've figured out a way to do it cheaper overseas somehow, economies of scale. Also thinking that you're in a pretty remote place, if the frame were to crack it'll be a heck of a lot easier to find someone that can weld steel than aluminum and do it right. Steel does rust, but you can get some spray to put inside the tubes that'll protect it (engine fogging oil works well) if you're really worried about it.

Surly makes just a great durable, relatively affordable, versatile bike. To put it one way, while I was working at Moots, one of the nicest frame builders out there, pretty much everyone that worked there had owned at least one Surly at one time or another. I had the 26" wheeled version of Fowler's Ogre for several years (until some jerk stole it) and it just worked. They usually give you lots of options to add racks or fenders if you ever had the need too which is nice. The Karate Monkey has been around a long time so they'll be pretty easy to find used. A lot of people have set them up single speed, which you won't want, gears are good don't fight the progress!

For components I'd honestly just stick with Shimano. Sram makes a great performance product, but in recent years the durability has been lagging behind. I had more than 2 full seasons on an XT rear derailleur, meanwhile I had buddies jokingly "renting" derailleurs from Sram they were having to warranty them so often. They did get them warrantied without question, but you don't work in a shop where you can just grab another one while waiting for a new one to get shipped. Deore level will work for sure, although they've shifted the focus of it more towards the touring crowd lately. SLX is considered the next step up in their line and is a solid choice. For brakes it's either Avid BB7 mechanical disc's, or Shimano hydraulic, anything else just doesn't work as well.

If you're pricing components I'd look at Chain Reaction Cycles, they're pretty much selling Shimano stuff for what shops used to get it at wholesale from distributors for. And if you spend more than $99 it's free shipping, from the UK.
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/shimano

"Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."
 
New Post
1/28/2017 11:01 PM
 
As the flip side to Evan's note on pressure in tires, it does make a difference. But I tend to be on the other end of the scale from him, I'm usually running 25-30PSI depending on the tire, rim width and trail conditions. There's some that go even lower but I haven't found that to work well for me, at least if I want my tire to stay attached to the rim or I don't want to smash rim on every rock. I also consider tires to be a disposable commodity anymore, they'd last longer if I rode slower, but that's not fun.

Think of it like when you're driving off road, if you want more traction do you air up or down? Same goes for when you're back on pavement. There's an ideal pressure for every tire, but rider weight, riding style, wheel size, trail conditions all play a factor in what that is. As you're playing with different tire sizes also experiment with PSI, 5psi one way or the other can make a huge change in how a tire handles.

Evan have you tried tubeless much or at all? I was reluctant to drink the koolaide but now that I have it's pretty dang good. I still ride with a spare tube, because stuff happens, but have way fewer flats than when I was running tubes. I think we've talked about running tubes with sealant at some point too.

"Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."
 
New Post
1/29/2017 9:25 AM
 
Thank you all for the replies! I am definitely out of my wheelhouse...

It looks like the 27.5+ and even fatbikes will take wheels from 26, 27.5, 27.5+, 29, and some 29+. Is this correct? Or if I got a plus size or fatbike I would give about any tire size and width a try?

The Surly Krampus and Karate Monkey (and a few others) come with solid front forks. How much would adding front shocks increase comfort?

Do the wider tires with appropriate tire pressure soften the bumps and lumps on the trail?

Again I have no intentions of doing anything technical with a pack and rifle on my back. I probably sit on the saddle a LOT more than I stand. I will be riding rutted out jeep trails, logging roads, and two tracks with plenty of soft dirt and sand. I usually have to get off and push the 26 x 2.2" through a lot of this when I would rather be riding. My speeds would probably be painfully slow for most recreational MTBers, I would guess.

Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
New Post
1/29/2017 10:39 AM
 
steamboatsystema wrote:
Evan have you tried tubeless much or at all? I was reluctant to drink the koolaide but now that I have it's pretty dang good. I still ride with a spare tube, because stuff happens, but have way fewer flats than when I was running tubes. I think we've talked about running tubes with sealant at some point too.

 

I recently switched my front tire to tubeless and just filled my back tube with Stan's. So far both have stayed inflated, but yesterday I pulled 10+ goatheads out of my front tire, two of which took a disturbingly long time for the Stan's to plug the hole. While the rear tire seems to be doing fine I will doubtlessly be running tubeless from here on out.

Can you comment on tire size vs price? I assume it is similar to buying tires for a 4x4, in that price goes up faster then size but I haven't done much shopping yet. Is there a sweet spot that usually gets the most for your dollar? 

 
New Post
1/30/2017 3:07 PM
 
I tend to run 45psi because the bike feels too sluggish at a lower PSI than that. Is there an inverse relationship between tire width and optimal PSI? If I was running wider tires would I want lower PSI? Dunno. I do know that if my PSI drops below 40, I feel a tremendous amount of drag and immediately know what the problem is. Get the air back where it should be and I'm off and running. Me with the pack I wear mountain biking comes out at 240lbs or more. That could be the difference.

The point of lower PSI is that it smooths out bumps some and gives you better traction. That's why I run higher PSI still on my full suspension bike. With nice suspension front and rear, I don't need the tires to be smoothing anything out. Let them roll.

I'm surprised tubeless tires is still a thing. From everything I've read, it just doesn't live up to it's billing and creates more problems than it solves. Around here, I run standard thickness slime tubes on my own bikes and extra thick slime tubes on the kids bikes. Works like a charm.

The soft dirt and sand thing does make me wonder. You might be happier on something in the 2.5" - 3" range. Just makes me cringe though because of the huge efficiency hit you're taking on every other surface.

Good suspension (both front and rear) is nice, but comes at a price, complication, and weight premium. I wouldn't go out of my way to get a fixed front fork. Fowler is right -- it's an age thing. Suspension saves your knees. It will also give you a lot more safety and control on rough descents. Suspension keeps the wheels in more constant contact which gives you positive control of the situation for steering and braking.

That Avid BB7 is a good heads up -- despite never having any issues, I'm still suspicious about hydraulic brakes from a reliability standpoint. I have one mechanical disc on my 29er now and would like to switch the other over to mechanical at some point. Yes, all of my shocks are spring not air as well.

If you're getting the feeling that my FS bike is my "trail" or "rock crawler" bike and my hardtail 29er is my general purpose "overlanding" bike, you're on track. If /insert apocalyptic scenario here/ came to pass, you'd find me traveling on that 29er with BOB trailer in tow. (BOB trailer beats hanging stuff off your bike by a mile)

We are fortunate in this matter that your conduct will be your marker and, thus, your reputation. The conduct of others on this forum has been, and will continue to be, their marker, and thus, their reputation. In the west, a person invests in one's reputation carefully. - 112Papa
 
New Post
1/30/2017 9:46 PM
 
Strow, yes a fatbike frame, built to take a 26"X4" or bigger will fit pretty much any other wheel+tire combo that's currently on the market. I'd stay away from that though because they also use a lot of other proprietary parts that are difficult to come by, mainly wider hubs and crank spacing. You don't want those headaches. 68/73mm threaded bottom brackets are still pretty much the gold standard, 100mm spaced front hubs and 135mm rear hubs are still probably the most common hub size ever. The industry as a whole is moving towards thru-axles with different spacing which has benefits from a safety stand point but there's a lot of BS marketing hype behind it as well, just don't concern yourself with it.

I'd suggest either finding something that has a suspension fork on it already, or figure on that being your first upgrade down the road. They help not only with comfort, but safety and fatigue as well. They take a lot of the vibration out from both your hands but also help smooth out the ride as a whole in my experience. I'll agree with Evan that coil spring forks tend to be more robust and reliable, air forks have come a long way but it still takes some effort to properly seal the air spring and that usually comes with more maintenance. A pre-load adjustment, to change how stiff the fork feels, and rebound, which adjusts how quickly the fork comes back to extension after an impact are the only adjustments I'd want on a bike built for what your intended use is.

Fowler, mtb tires seem to be priced more by "features" than size. A 2.3" width Maxxis tire of the same feature set will be the same price whether 26-27.5-29". The features can vary from casing construction, rubber compound, tubeless comparability, and the name printed on the sidewall. There's only about 6-7 companies that make mtb tires, most are in Taiwan and China, the three notable exceptions are Continental in GER and Hutchinson and Michelin in FRA making their high end products in house. If you want the most bang for your buck get the cheapest folding bead version of whatever tire you find yourself liking. Folding bead over steel bead simply because there's a significant weight penalty. Also if you're planning on some overlanding adventures on 2 wheels and want to bring a spare tire just in case they're a lot easier to stash in your gear.

Evan, for your setup at that trail weight 40-50 PSI may well be your sweet spot. At 240lbs you're about 20-25lbs over where I'm usually at on the trail so I'm not at all surprised you're running higher PSI. Like I said I'm even on the high-ish end of what's usually run for the type of riding I usually do. Bigger tires do usually require less PSI for the same amount of support, I'm sure somewhere there's a mathematical formula for the proportion of interior volume to amount of support provided. I run 30psi in a 2.3" tire, in a 4" tire 10psi is nearly rock hard. For PSI on a FS bike I still run in the same range, the tire is still the first thing to contact the ground and everything gets transmitted through them first. There's probably some experimentation that could be done as far as PSI's affect on suspension performance. There's even been at least one product to come out that mounts inside the tire claiming to enhance suspension performance. But I've heard mixed results and isn't something I feel falls inside the scope of this conversation.

Tubeless has come a long way in the past few years I think, specifically regarding user friendly-ness. It used to be near impossible to get a tubeless tire to air up and seat properly without access to a compressor. They're getting the rim to tire interface dialed in and many setups are now pretty easy to get going with a floor pump. The sealants are still required to work right but they also have the added benefit of sealing most punctures you're going to encounter in usual riding conditions. I do get fewer flats running tubeless which is nice, but still carry a spare tube because it's still difficult to fix trailside. I'd carry a spare tube anyway so not really a negative. I'm not trying to sway you, just giving my experience. If you're happy running tubes and sealant drive on, I used to run it on all my bikes as well and it does work very well. Also for people that aren't the tinkering type or mechanically inclined I think I'd still suggest that setup over tubeless. I choose it because I feel there's a performance advantage for me, but agree that it's not the "secret sauce" they make it out to be.

Rim width can also play a roll in how a tire feels. Rims have been getting wider for a few years now. 21mm inside used to be the norm, now anything less than about 27mm is considered a touring sized rim. Even the roadies are moving to a wider rim. It gives more support to the tire allowing the use of lower PSI without the tire feeling like it's going to roll of the rim. For knobby tires it also tends to "square" up the profile spreading the footprint of the tire out. But there's a limit to it's effectiveness, too wide for a given tire size and they start to have weird ride characteristics.

The BB7 is the only Avid/ Sram brake I'd recommend, their hydraulics are questionable at best. Plenty of stopping power, but not very reliable. Mechanical definitely require more effort to get the same amount of braking force which is why they've fallen out of favor for the general public. But they do offer an "idiot proof" disc brake solution. Also if you're ever in a pinch and your brake cable snaps somehow you can use your shifter cable as a replacement, not an option with hydros.

If I were building a bike with, insert apocalyptic scenario here, as a serious consideration I think our bikes would be very similar. Reliability and ease of maintenance are king when you've only got what you can carry to make repairs. I make certain (although small in my mind) sacrifices in those areas for my "trail" bike to get a certain level of performance from it.

"Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."
 
New Post
1/31/2017 1:23 PM
 
Thank you all again for the input. This is turning into more mental gymnastics and research than I planned…

27.5 plus with front suspension seems to be the direction I am headed...today at least.

Steel frames seem to mostly come from the boutique makers. Surly KM or Krampus ($1400-2000), Advocate Hayduke ($2500), etc.

http://advocatecycles.com/product/hayduke/

https://www.bikeexchange.com/a/hardtail-mountain-bikes/surly/mi/detroit/krampus/102020969

How much would it cost to put a front suspension on a Surly Karate Monkey or Krampus? Rock Shox Reba, Suntour Raidon? Where is the break over point in price? Or what 27.5+ forks would you recommend?

Motobecane 27.5+? Just how “value priced” (cheap) are they? The components look middle of the road in quality, I think. Is it ½ or ¼ the bike an Advocate or Surly is?

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/motobecane/fat-bikes/fat-bikes-fantom275-x9-plus.htm

Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
New Post
1/31/2017 3:14 PM
 
Again, hardtail 29er from a non-boutique maker, right around 1k with good (shimano deore) components. Easy, practical, done.

We are fortunate in this matter that your conduct will be your marker and, thus, your reputation. The conduct of others on this forum has been, and will continue to be, their marker, and thus, their reputation. In the west, a person invests in one's reputation carefully. - 112Papa
 
New Post
1/31/2017 10:47 PM
 
^^^^^^ What Evan said. I may have over complicated it a bit in the name of knowledge, but what Evan just said is where I was headed. I'd consider this the "Practical Mountain Bike" or "Practical Backcountry Bike". Things to look for are 29" wheels, disc brakes, suspension fork, clearance for at least a 2.3" tire with some room for mud. If you can hit those four points the rest are pretty negotiable.

"Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."
 
New Post
2/1/2017 8:46 AM
 
Yes, we went a little sideways from what Strow needs, but I learned some good things about the state of the art in MTBs and enjoyed the discussion.

We are fortunate in this matter that your conduct will be your marker and, thus, your reputation. The conduct of others on this forum has been, and will continue to be, their marker, and thus, their reputation. In the west, a person invests in one's reputation carefully. - 112Papa
 
New Post
2/1/2017 12:53 PM
 
All excellent information! It explains the context behind a lot of the recommendations.

We are headed into Flag next week and will stop at the LBS’s and REI. One has a Specialized FatBoy fatbike I may rent for the week just to try. It should be good for a laugh. 

What is everyone’s take on Brazons(sp) and the addition of racks and packs?

In the past I have just warn my pack while riding but that is problematic with a bigger rifle. I may try to rig a Kuiu But Cuff between the UTE/Connor combo and see if it is stable.

I may even try to take a deer while hunting off the bike with a RDS pistol from the Kit Bag if the opportunity arises this season.

Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
New Post
2/1/2017 5:24 PM
 
BOB trailer is the answer for carrying much on a bicycle. One method we've used for hunting is a rear rack with a vertical scabbard for the rifle and then a lumbar pack for the other stuff. Go beyond that and a BOB trailer is way more efficient than hanging stuff off your bike. Pretty much anywhere you can ride, you can pull a BOB. In some instances it will take you even more places because the weight on the rear axle gives you an amazing amount of traction. I do like dual water bottle cages in the main frame.

We are fortunate in this matter that your conduct will be your marker and, thus, your reputation. The conduct of others on this forum has been, and will continue to be, their marker, and thus, their reputation. In the west, a person invests in one's reputation carefully. - 112Papa
 
New Post
2/1/2017 10:17 PM
 
Yeah certainly not useless info. I don't keep up with all the "new hotness" now that I don't work directly in the bike industry, but new "standards" coming out every six months seems to have settled down for now.

I recommend everyone ride a fat bike at least once, they are good fun. I'm sure the shop will have trail suggestions too.

Braze on's are nice to have if you want to mount a rack, and racks on something like you're build would be beneficial I think. But like Evan said they're only good for so much. From the little bit of experience I've had with them 40lbs seems to be about the cutoff where I felt it was becoming awkward. A rifle scabbard and a bag about Lindi size would a good combo I think. My only trailer experience was hauling my dog to work on the bike path so I can't say much to off-road use. In my pack I don't like much more than 10-15lbs, just moves around too much for me. Which is usually water, food, some field repair items and maybe an extra layer if I think I'll need it. The DARK/HPG trauma kits will also be added to my pack moving forward, no excuse not to have one.

After I build my next trail bike I'll be looking to build another commuter/ gp bike and it'll be heavily influenced by this conversation.

http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b630/nkajko303/SchweizerArmeefahrrad640OS_zpsoy66k7td.jpg?t=1485928793

"Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children."
 
New Post
2/6/2017 5:07 AM
 
Well Fellas we are off to Flagstaff for a few days. One of the LBS has a Specialized Fatboy I am renting for a week. Some of us have to pee on the fence ourselves to see if it's hot. Then a 29er or maybe 27.5+.

Talk is cheap...lets compare fur checks.
 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsGeneralGeneralBackcountry bike suggestions Backcountry bike suggestions


Edward Curtis Canyon De Chelly
When humans first set foot in a new continent, they came in small groups under their own power, bringing only the gear they needed. Most simply called themselves The People. Over time, those who chose the rougher freer life of the up country came to think of themselves as the Hill People.
Hill People Gear