The World's Fattest Man with no bike! aka - find hippy a new bike aka - Just get ( fill in blank )

Do Trek still make the Stache? There was a rigid option a while back.

I think someone won the Highland Trail 550 on a Chinese copy, and I've definitely seen a video of someone doing rad things (on the suspended version) somewhere big like Whistler.

They do but + tyres are generally no fun and the Stache is no exception. Fine steam rollering along in a straight line, crap for decent MTB trails.

Barelli hit Dirt Merchant on a CX bike but....

https://www.sigmasports.com/item/Trek/Stache-AL-Mountain-Bike-Frame-2021/RSVO

Looks like they do but it won't be near available under later in the year.

Barelli hit Dirt Merchant on a CX bike but....

That just sounds like random words

But...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvL1agpqwvE

All part of my ploy to get you to buy a Giant TCX???

(I don't even like them as CX bikes....)

I have the carbon version and really dig it, makes for a comfy flat bar (50mm rise) gravel bike. But it's not great for bikepacking: the fron triangle is tiny, on XL you can barely fit two small water bottles in. Also the stack/reach ratio makes it a bit short by modern standards, I have it set up with a 70mm stem.

Stooge > Stache for weird niche fatness

29+ is a dying breed. Most owners are stockpiling tyres given the rate at which they're being discontinued.

Have we settled down on 29x2.6" as the biggest practical size for now?

this site has an extensive list of steel bikes, manufacturers and builders:
https://stahlrahmen-bikes.de/mtb-29er-650b-fatbike-36er/mountain-bikes-aus-stahl-2020?fbclid=IwAR3Yj_aijCGaGQX1cf-9QBpWv9eWKj1-rXP3NXktx8LjFI-4-QTaSglmjms

also this:
https://sour.bike/candy-shop/bikes/pasta-party/
with a 120mm fork the headangle would be 68ish and its yellow!

Looks that way (for now)

35mm internal for a 2.8” 27.5 tyre?

That's about right. 35-40mm internal would fit nicely

Sweet. I knew my collection of 26" bikes would survive and indeed flourish during the zombie apocalypse.

They might survive, but you'll become an 'all everyone can eat' buffet

I think you'll find it's very much the other way around. I can't wait until the brexit buffet begins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0y6HRtJdz8&t=1

Fat tires, fat tubes, fat electric motor. Just needs a fat rider.

I reckon get a Chisel and a Stumpjumper.

https://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/CBOOBZ29SX/on-one-bootzipper-29er-sram-sx-mountain-bike

37 then?

1 Attachment

I'd choose 37mm over 30 for 2.8", as I've found 30mm spot on for 2.4-2.6" tyres. Wouldn't go a lot wider though

It all works to an extent, and 17mm rims with 2.3" tyres never killed me in the past, but there is certainly a benefit to the added width, as long as you're not adding ridiculous amount of weight, or overdoing it and squaring off the tyre

Thanks. I’ve been chatting to Adrian Carter and he (I thought interestingly) said he designed the 295 to be a mullet with the option of running as a 29er, rather than the other way around.

“ Yes developed the bke as a Mullet set up in the first instance and find in turns in a little faster, Is lower and slacker and also with a 2.6/2.8 can be run on low pressures for really good climbing grip.

There is a 2.8” DHR2 available so that might be the hot setup”

@hippy 's now wondering how the conversation subject has moved on to mullets

I wouldn't trust anyone who thinks a squishy 2.8 on the rear is a mullet set up. The whole point is that you can lead with front, steer with the rear. That ain't gonna happen with a 2.8 at 12psi folding under you. Plus tyres are crap unless you're riding soft snow or sand.

I guess I could borrow the 2.5 rear wheel from my girlfriends bike and try that.