fat lover or hater,...
 

  You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more

[Closed] fat lover or hater, this looks good!

20 Posts
17 Users
0 Reactions
80 Views
Posts: 24332
Full Member
Topic starter
 

turner king khan
[img] [/img]
http://mbaction.com/home-page/first-impressions-turner-king-khan-full-suspension-fat-bike


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 7:59 am
Posts: 4643
Full Member
 

Gibber. Now where do I hide one of these?


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 8:04 am
Posts: 6734
Full Member
 

Not really understanding the need for suspension, but it does look pretty


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 8:04 am
Posts: 24332
Full Member
Topic starter
 

boxelder - Member

Not really understanding the need for suspension, but it does look pretty

i see what you are saying, suspension stops the "bounce" of the fat tyre over rough trails, such as cornering on brake bump riddled trail centre berms and rocky natural stuff. probably better off with a standard size tyre but then the amazing traction in the slop/snow etc would be lost


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 8:13 am
Posts: 251
Full Member
 

I can see a lot of advantages combined with runnign the new lighter fat tyres - the Schwalbes are about 1kg which is about the same as a magic mary I think?

The best thing about the fat bike tyres, ime, is that there's no 'stiction' when it comes to absorbing small stuff. On the sort of stuff where the suspension doesn't react the tyres just deform and roll over it. I think combined with the benefits of suspension for faster riding over larger obstacles it makes a lot of sense.

The thing is with fat bike tyres you do only have, at best, a couple of inches of undamped travel available on a fully rigid bike and when things get fast, steep and rooty they can tend to just start bouncing their way down things rather than sticking to the ground the way an FS bike would.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 8:19 am
Posts: 551
Free Member
 

Surely just a bit of front travel - 100mm say - is the best option for these Fat bike things


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 9:05 am
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 9:06 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Rich wins


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 9:07 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

ive only had my fat bike a couple of weeks and now it's total useless, damn you turner bikes.

more travel the better on a fat bike imo. you run into a rock garden fast with only 100mm of travel on a fatty and you know about it. its great to see fat bikes evolving so quickly. only a few years ago they were the domain of the pipe smoking, sowester wearing beach bunch. now they are becoming full sus monster trucks capable of destroying any trail at any time of year, and in any condition. bring it on.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 9:40 am
Posts: 4643
Full Member
 

I reckon something big and gnarly with slack angles would make a superb fat bike. Like an Alpine 160 but with a wider chassis.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 9:58 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I want the tyre naming job at Schwalbe.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 10:01 am
Posts: 1877
Free Member
 

Surely they can't employ a person for that? They must have a very simple/lazy alliteration generator machine that spits one out every time they have a new model.

I wish their name pool wasn't so safe...what would be wrong with a 'Jumbo Jesus' or 'Racing Rasputin'?


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 10:18 am
Posts: 65918
Full Member
 

That's really nice- funny, seeing that, makes me realise why I don't like how Turners look, they always seem a bit under-wheeled. Somehow that one makes the fat tyres look small.

What schwalbe for riding on fruit? The Jam Master Jay


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 10:37 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

im with hot fiat on this one, manufacturers need to grow some balls and slacken the angles a bit. my fat bike has a 68.5 % head angle and thats not slack enough, you can really feel the difference compared to the FS. might have a look for an angle set if i can find one for the bluto.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 1:23 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

might have a look for an angle set if i can find one for the bluto.

Try works components, my mukluk has a 44mm headtube so best i can do is 1 degree. If you have a taper headtube you can go upto 1.5 degree (even with taper steerer).


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 1:56 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

I quite like em, but only rigid. Something simple, clean, pure and dare I say it lythe. Then add some fat wheels and I think it looks all good. Puffins and the like I think are possibly the better looking fatties, this full suss fatties just look to enormous and hefty.

I'm still struggling with my conscience, should I get one or not.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 2:02 pm
Posts: 34376
Full Member
 

[i]Not really understanding the need for suspension,[/i]

**** it, who the hell cares? its a bike, for having fun. doesn't need explaining or rationalizing.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 2:02 pm
Posts: 43345
Full Member
 

[quote=boxelder ]Not really understanding the need for suspensionGenuine question - have you ridden a fatbike on really rocky terrain?


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 2:04 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

capable of destroying any trail at any time of year, and in any condition

I hope the purchase price of one of those Turners includes a sizable levy to be paid to the Benevolent Fund For Overworked Trail Fairies.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 2:26 pm
Posts: 3003
Full Member
 

I'd have trouble getting that to blend in with the current fleet 😉


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 2:51 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

without suspension when you ride over rock you just bonce with the big tyres, Mostly Balanced - figure of speech , too be fair they do much less damage than a standard trail bike in wet muddy conditions because the spread the load, it was one of the reasons I bought one, so that I could continue riding my favourite natural trail through the winter without rutting them up, keeping the trail fairies happy.


 
Posted : 05/12/2014 3:53 pm

6 DAYS LEFT
We are currently at 95% of our target!